Sorry’s not enough
Whenever someone had an occasion to apologise to me for some error I would always say” Don’t go on about being sorry for what you did, just tell me what you are going to do to ensure we don’t arrive at this set of circumstances again. When I had to apologise to Army superiors I would, in my more mature years at least, admit to stuffing up and quickly follow up with an outline on what steps I had taken to ensure it wouldn’t happen again.
Disarming and constructive.
I would like to think Rudd would have done something similar with his apology in the house. If he had spent one paragraph saying sorry and the rest of the ninety minutes outlining what he is going to do to prevent a re-occurrence then there would have been some merit in the occasion.
Unfortunately, that didn’t happen happen. It turned into a frenzy of wailing and teeth gnashing with a song and dance act choreographed for TV. I’m also afraid that some of the factors that have lead us to this frenzy will be reestablished in the not to distant future as the left gain ascendancy in the ALP.
The Sorry business is being handled poorly. I would want a Task Force, an enlargement or follow up to Mal Brough’s plan, to move into the areas and clean it up in all the interpretations of the word. Swamp the problem – overkill ..gives kids with new medical, health and education degrees HECS payback for one or two years commitment. Call on the Grey Nomads (look at that huge source of experience) Call for volunteers to help – I would put my hand up, but lets not go back to the land rights, sit-down money, isolated outstations, no education, no discipline, access (hide the problems) by permit only, noble warrior bullshit of the Left.
As a matter of interest, how are we going to handle the fact that hundreds, if not thousands of kids need to be removed from their dysfunctional families right now – today. Should we set a date in our calendars, say twenty years hence, to apologise to them?
And who actually should be apologizing and to whom?
David Moore ex chief of staff to former Liberal Aboriginal affairs minister Mal Brough expands on this;
The confusion starts at the top. Last week Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said we needed an apology before we could tackle the problems. But the people to whom he is apologising are a small proportion of the Aboriginal community. The majority weren’t part of the Stolen Generations and they have entrenched problems. The assumption that an apology to the minority will fix the entrenched problems of the majority is misplaced.David thinks a lot of other people should be apologising and I can’t help but agree with him. Every Premier for not providing infrastructure; every Education Minister for not insisting black kids have an education; every Attorney General for not applying the law equally to all; the Hawke Keating government for handing the problem over to the dysfunctional ATSIC and the Whitlam and Fraser governments for burying the issues in outstations and hiding them with permit-only entry. Not to mention the Left wing academics for screaming every time governments tried to do something constructive and the public service chiefs who allowed the circumstances to exist where abused kids were not removed from dysfunctional families due to fear staff had of being accused of starting another Stolen Generations. Go ahead, have your warm and fuzzy day. You mob in the suburbs who have never been west or north and seen the real problem, roll around in an ecstacy of righteousness but for Christ’s sake, tomorrow, let’s get on with fixing the problem. As an aside, how would you like to be the first person who recommends, post Sorry Day, in the face of overwhelming evidence of child abuse, that a child be removed from the parents care, or lack of it?
Facebook
Twitter
Pingback: Education » Sorry’s not enough
We each have our own unique view of today’s apology to the Stolen Generations.
I saw it as long overdue, but in the end a very simple process. The media hype has been over the top, which was I suppose to be expected.
I was able to watch the direct telecast. At the risk of offending some of my veteran colleagues, I will say that it reminded me (viewing it on the small screen) of the “Welcome Home” march in 1987.
What these two events had in common was their symbolism, the recognition of a small but very identifiable group by the wider community, and the deep emotionality of each occasion. Australians are not prone to mass displays of emotion, so when they do occur, they’re noteworthy.
The most significant theme of each activity was a quest for reconciliation. This quest is of critical importance, because without reconciliation we won’t move on. Largely, goodwill was evident yesterday, with the exception of the ill-considered back turning and Iron Bar Tuckey’s on-camera tantrum.
This extract from a report in The Age (August 23, 2003) provides background that goes some of the way to explain Wilson Tuckey’s behaviour –
‘Genial WA Labor MP Graham Edwards, a disabled Vietnam veteran well respected on both sides of the chamber, says that Tuckey is the only MP in Parliament to whom he will not speak.
“Mate, I think he’s a disgrace,” Edwards says. “As far as I’m concerned, he’s just a bloody big coward. Anyone who makes a name for himself on the basis of having someone else hold a person down while you hit them is, in my books, a dingo.
“He’s exactly the sort of bloke who I would expect to use his position in order to advance something for his family.”
The “coward” reference relates to charges Tuckey reportedly faced in 1967 for beating an Aboriginal man with an iron bar, allegedly while the man was being held down. Tuckey was convicted of assault and fined $50.’
well, 1967… that’s…
18 years before i was even born!
if they have to go back to 1967 for dirt, it cant be that bad.
Shame on you Tuckey for having a different opinion!
“it reminded me (viewing it on the small screen) of the “Welcome Home” march in 1987.”
Back to the future again 17 – well it reminded me of the Life of Brian – or was it Jabawocky, anyway it reminded me of a slapstick comedy every which way.
Rudd: You’re all individuals!
17 et al (in unison): Yes! We’re all individuals!
Rudd: You’re all different!
17 et al (in unison): Yes, we are all different!
PeterW: I’m not…
17 et al: Shhh! You splitter… (you lack courage and honesty)”
Jordan
His more recent form is entirely consistent with his earlier behaviour.
In 2003 he tried to get his son off a traffic fine by heavying the South Australian Police Minister, Patrick Conlon, and then lying to parliament about it on more than one occasion.
He also defended James Hardie – the building products company which was embroiled in controversy over its failure to make proper reparations to pay compensation to victims of its asbestos products.
And despite the fact that he routinely sledges the National Party, it’s a fact that he ran as a Nationals candidate in the 1974 state election for the seat of Gascoyne.
He has been described in the past by fellow Liberals – including the ex-Prime Minister – as a “fool” and “an embarrassment to his colleagues”.
He makes an art form of sledging female opponents – calling Julia Gillard “electively barren”. The epithet “Dingo” is entirely appropriate.
Tuckey uses smear and intimidation as a matter of course, and is an exponent of the politics of hate and fear.
At least now he’s on the opposition benches, so his capacity to wield power is diminished.
Graham Edwards was right – he’s a pimple on the arse of the body politic.
Kev
Tuckey is well described by Paul keating as a “loopy piece of criminal trash”!
And Keating was what – a paragon of virtue and quick with polite and clever repartee?