INTERNAL bickering has broken out among senior Tasmanian Aboriginals as they scramble to rescue a treaty with the island’s Liberal State government.
The treaty, which aims to recognise harsh treatment of Aboriginals during early settlement, risks being derailed by racial confusion.
- False identification has resulted in “palpable resentment, anger and frustration among many Aboriginals”.
- The first step towards a treaty must be determining who is “eligible” as Aboriginal for treaty purposes.
There is growing “resentment” the treaty will recognise people who have no historical claim to indigenous status.
The number of Tasmanians who self-identify as Aboriginal has increased by 65,000 per cent since the mid 1960s. (From 36 in 1966 to 23,572 in 2016).
RESENTMENT
This has resulted in “palpable resentment, anger and frustration among many Aboriginals”, according to a State government report.
According to the report, written by former State governor Kate Warner and war crimes advisor Tim McCormack, the first step towards a treaty must be determining who is “eligible” as Aboriginal for treaty purposes.
Chairman of the Aboriginal Land Council of Tasmania, Mr Michael Mansell, said there was a danger the treaty could be side tracked.
“There are people who are not accepted as Aboriginal but who want to use this process to establish their credibility,” he said.
Tasmanian Regional Aboriginal Communities Alliance spokesman, Mr Rodney Dillon, however, said Aboriginality was not for any one group to decide.
“You can’t have one group deciding who’s who in the zoo,” he said.
“A series of treaties with different groups would allow the use of returned land and resources to create jobs and self-sufficiency.“
Mr Dillon said treaties must evolve over time.
“We can’t have one treaty for the past 230 years and say ‘that’s fixed it and it’s all okay”.
Liberal premier Peter Gutwein, who supports a treaty, has side-stepped the division saying he would reveal his government’s next steps when parliament resumes in March.
“The government is currently considering the report and engaging with stakeholders,” his spokesman said.PC
I have a desire to contribute more than just one comment. My view of the entire Aboriginal / First Nation topic has been so distorted over time that it is now being deliberately and falsely portrayed to enhance the standing of Indigenous descendants across Australia.
Please include me in any work to produce a proposition for all Australians to push back against this sham. I would like to communicate with you in this endeavour.
The so called “welcome to country” is the most classic example of dividing people. There is no inclusiveness in this, only false acknowledgement of a race of people that supposedly came first to this land. For that the remainder of our population has to thank this race and worship them and their graciousness in allowing us all to walk on THEIR LAND.
This is not the way to build a NATION of people from all parts of the world.
A democracy must be equal and fair in every way to the all the people of the nation, all of the time.
DNA test anyone claiming to be Aboriginal . Time to stop this scamming . ATSIC ripped by its own (people) to the tune of $2.5 billion. MABO= Money Available Blacks Only . Enough is enough . The French and Dutch were eyeing Australia off as well but it was the British who settled and colonised it first . My father fought for it in WWII and what did he get in return ? PTDS and when he died his wife was widowed and had five children to raise what did she get ? ZIP nothing . I know a Aboriginal Land Council (Leader ) who cashed cheques in a pub I worked at so his wife could play poker machines ( Land Council Cheques) .
There is already a fool-proof test for aboriginality:
“In Commonwealth v Tasmania, the High Court considered the definition of an ‘Aborigine’ for the purpose of s 51(xxvi) of the Constitution, in relation to laws with respect to ‘the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws’. Deane J applied the three-part test, stating:
By ‘Australian Aboriginal’ I mean, in accordance with what I understand to be the conventional meaning of that term, a person of Aboriginal descent, albeit mixed, who identifies himself as such and who is recognised by the Aboriginal community as Aboriginal.[19]”
But grifters are going to continue to grift based on being aboriginal which brings with it lots of goodies.
Sad and disgusting sorry to hear of your experience
Take care
Be strong
People recognised as having aboriginal or Torres Islander connections enjoy many privileges some with financial benefits – these should not be available to people without proof of the connection. Otherwise it seems to me that what starts as possible fraud, ends up with stealing.
We have the means to identify who is and who isn’t an Australian aborigine. It’s called DNA testing! That would weed out the fakes for a start. In Hawaii they have privileges for those native Hawaiians who have a particular percentage of native Hawaiian in their family heritage. Any less and you are part if the general population with no special rights or privileges. Maybe we could adopt a similar scheme here.
Who cares? 1000, 2000 or 60,000 per cent aboriginality. As long as they back the national cause. Who cares?
From memory, Michael Mansell once aligned himself with Tripoli’s Col. Gaddafi to overthrow Australia. He may have spent time in Libyan terrorist camps. How times have changed.
Excuse me. We’re all Australians. It’s time to stop all this BS and get on with nation building. If only Scott Morrison had an ounce of Howard’s wisdom.
Morrison has no conviction but should be convicted for his part in the Scam Demic.