The Alp are apparently changing their policy to try to bridge the gap between their traditional focus on the “Rights” agenda and the more practical focus that we have seen from the Howard government under the present indigenous affairs Minister Mal Brough.
It seems to this pundit that we are being served yet another lite beer from the ALP. Because they are incapable of offering any kind of a brew that does not retain the pernicious aspects of their previous policy.
Under the draft platform, a Rudd government would continue many of the Howard Government’s programs. These include the push for legal reforms to allow indigenous people to own homes in indigenous communities rather than relying on welfare housing.
Labor is considering a mechanism to give Aboriginal communities access to “equitable standards of services, amenities and infrastructure as non-indigenous people”. But Ms Burney, the newly installed NSW Fair Trading Minister, said symbolic issues, such as saying sorry to the stolen generation, would always be emphasised by the ALP.(source)
I invite you to consider how this so called policy shift contains on one hand the empty platitudes about improving services whilst still maintaining the meme that indigenous children were removed for racist reasons. So not much is actually changing here in the ALP position.
But the real kicker is their commitment to reintroduce our own version of apartheid by reviving the curse of ATSIC.
The draft platform retains Labor articles of faith such as the need for greater spending on indigenous education and community infrastructure. And it commits the party to making a formal apology over the stolen generation. Despite the controversy over the former ATSIC model, Labor remains committed to establishing a national representative body.
“Labor will empower indigenous Australians to hold all levels of government to account through this national body and regional structures,” the draft platform says.
And the party endorses “the importance of economic development in increasing self-reliance” and furthering the aim of self-determination. Rather than relying on welfare housing and other traditional approaches, the draft platform argues that government is “best placed to act as an enabler, investor and monitor” in indigenous affairs. .(source)
Sadly on indigenous issues the ALP is a captive of its own far left; and it is the far left that have the least grasp of the realistic solutions to the very real problems of indigenous Australians. There seems to me to be a terribly patronizing view from the ALP Far left that sees too much of the noble savage and not enough of the humanity of our fellow Australians who come from our oldest migrant group. We need to get away from a vision of victim hood and a culture of complaint that has bedeviled indigenous issues in this country and the ALP’s new policy platform, should it get up at the party conference will not achieve that.
The curse of light beer is that it does not give the desired buzz but it does make you have to visit the toilet just as often, like this policy shift it is rather piss weak.
Iain Hall's SANDPIT 
Your comments are full of the usual misinformation.
Why you continue to parrot Andrew Bolts lies, after all the discussion both here and on other sites showing his ‘stolen generation’ denial as black proper gander, I just fail to understand.
You repeat Bolts rubbish as if it were fact.
Grow up Iain, Bolt is only saying the crap he does to satisfy his un-thinking audience. His stuff is designed to be ENTERTAINMENT not real factual journalism.
The ALP is not “captive of its own far left”, these policies are supported by the majority of Australians (see the polls) and your own argument about Rudd being a lite version of the far right Howard is correct. This puts the ALP under Rudd to the right of centre.
But go ahead and spin away, ignore all the arguments that prove Bolt wrong and continue to follow your extreme right religion with its racist over tones. No point in repeating old arguments with you when you refuse to learn anything new.
Craigy are you sure that you don’t want to rephrase this? Because there are a few grammatical errors and it makes YOU look a little foolish.
*A real male Goose; the word you were looking for is propaganda
Your point about Rudd being right of center is probably correct in terms of the spectrum of ALP opinion but my point here is that when it comes to indigenous Issues the ALP is still under the spell of its own far left ideologues.
Oh and your claim that Bolt had been proven wrong about the stolen generation is far from correct, Robert Manne could not name even ten people who can be shown to have been “stolen”…and he had a great deal of time to make the attempt.
Yeah I was wondering whatever happened to Manne and his evidence, I first heard of it last year and lost track of it after waiting so damn long. Didn’t he say that he would produce the evidence?
Has he produced even 5 Iain?
Iain,
Should people in glass houses throw stones? Fair enough if you want to criticise peoples typing (and I am first to admit I don’t spell check everything and send through typo’s) but when you criticise Craigy’s spelling at least try to make sure you have no typo’s in your own same article beforehand, hmm?
Indegenious Policy and the ALP,or have another Lite beer
Cheers,
PKD
.
MK
I Think he failed abysmally at the debate he had with Bolt on the matter and we are still waiting.
PKD
I was not so much criticizing Craigy for his spelling mistake but the almost incomprehensible nature of his sentence. Knowing him as I do I can discern what he actually intended but no one else would have the same inside line to the meaning and remember that my discussion of Craigy’s comment was couched in the form an invitation for him to revise rather than as a straight out denouncement.
Thank you by the way for pointing out my own typo I keep wanting to put that extra “I’ into that word no matter how hard I try not to, the fingers make particular sequences almost on their own.. .Sigh 😦
Because there are a few grammatical errors and it makes YOU look a little foolish.
I didn’t see any grammatical errors, I saw a spelling error, but that’s forgivable. I have to overlook probably three or four spelling, punctuation and, occasionally, grammatical errors in each one of your posts. Normally I wouldn’t care; I’m intuitive enough to get the point. But since you took Craigy’s typo to task, I thought I’d retort.
And PKD, I believe indegenious was meant to be a pun on ‘genius’ and, of course, ‘indigenous’. Unfortunately, the stresses of the two words are incompatible with each other and the words are therefore not highly conducive to this sort of glomming.
But, spelling ain’t the issue here.
Robert Manne
“Trying to get Andrew Bolt to agree to a debate was surreal. Before being willing to debate me Bolt demanded first either “ten” or “one hundred” or even “a few hundred” names of stolen children. I asked him for his definition of a stolen child. He refused to reply. I asked him who was to determine whether or not I had satisfied his pre-condition. Again he refused to reply. Eventually, I sent him some 250 names. After a silence, Bolt agreed to the debate.
Bolt has a Herald Sun blog-site. He appealed on it for help in discrediting my first 12 names. There was no mention of the other 230-plus. Bolt presented the results of his research assistants at last Sunday’s debate. The omissions and distortions took my breath away.”
http://www.theage.com.au/news/robert-manne/the-cruelty-of-denial/2006/09/08/1157222325367.html
Iain, I suggest you read this article from Manne in the Melbourne Age. You may not have seen it.
I suggest you read it carefully and then tell me if you still think Bolt ‘won’ the argument.
It looks like it’s open season on your spelling again Iain, well… you asked for it!
““Labor will empower indigenous Australians to hold all levels of government to account through this national body and regional structures,” the draft platform says.”
yadayadayada..Yaaaawn.
More of the same old crap. Which doesn’t mean a damn thing.
I have covered the “stolen Generations” topic in my blog on quite a few occasions Craigy and I see no new evidence that supports the claims that it is factually true that children were taken for “racist” reasons; Manne certainly does make the case with that rather self serving piece in the age.
As for spelling as I said before that was not really what I was chipping you for at all, although your use of the words “proper gander” was inadvertently rather amusing. And while I have no shame in acknowledging my own short comings at least I did not present a statement like Yours which I will now analyze .
Why you continue to parrot Andrew Bolts lies,
As I have said before my opinions are my own and you make the usual leftist mistake of characterizing opinions that you disagree with as a lie. A lie is a deliberate falsehood that is knowingly told so this is just a personal attack, made without substance.
after all the discussion both here and on other sites showing his ’stolen generation’ denial as black proper gander*
Your assumption here is that the case has been conclusively made against Bolts position. Which is the case if you are a “stolen Generations” true believer, as it is an article of faith to you, but if you actually require a higher standard of proof, as we more normal mortals do, then the evidence, such as it is, would not make the case even on the “balance of probability” let alone “beyond reasonable doubt “ as a number of court casers have demonstrated.
Your use of the term “black propaganda” seems to me to be entirely wrong what exactly did you mean here? Because you seem to me to be suggesting that Bolt is putting forth propaganda for the “black” story of the “stolen Generations” But it can’t mean that because you have previously argued the exact opposite.
So are you beginning to see why I offered you the chance to rephrase your comment?
, I just fail to understand.
Well I agree with this because you certainly do “fail to understand”
Jangari
It was Typo on my part, and as amusing as your explination is you are clearly guilding the lily to read that much into it.
Cheers
Iain, the ‘proper gander’ was the fault of my spell checker.
For Black Propaganda see;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_propaganda
“Which is the case if you are a “stolen Generations” true believer, as it is an article of faith to you”
So I should ignore the facts that Manne puts up, and believe a hack and some of his fans on his Blog who do his ‘research’?
I think that it is you who is persuing a ‘faith’ Iain.
pursuing not perusing…bloody spell thingy…
“Your assumption his is that the case has been conclusively made against Bolts position.”
BTW; what the f***
I think that makes us pretty even on the spelling mistake front Eh Craigy?? 😀
Iain, you know that long bit you wrote above, you might do this already, but in case you don’t, just save that somewhere, because we both know you’ll need to repeat it again for certain folks. 😉
“And it commits the party to making a formal apology over the stolen generation.”
By the way craigy, are you ‘sorry’ over the treatment of aboriginals back in the day?