7 Remember Me Report

“Remember Me”
Commemorating the
Tenth Anniversary of the
Bringing Them Home Report
Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

“Remember Me”
Commemorating the Tenth Anniversary of the
Bringing Them Home Report
Secretariat of National Aboriginal

and Islander Child Care
September 2007
‘Remember Me’: Commemorating the tenth anniversary of the Bringing Them
Home report.
Published by the Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care Inc.
(SNAICC),
Suite 8, Level 1, 252–260 St Georges Road
North Fitzroy VICTORIA 3068
Telephone: (03) 9489 8099
Fax: (03) 9489 8044
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.snaicc.asn.au
September 2007
The images, artwork and design of this publication are copyright © SNAICC 2007.
Copyright for text of articles published is retained by the individual authors unless
specified otherwise. Please seek permission from SNAICC before reproducing any
information published here.
This publication commemorates the tenth anniversary of the release of Bringing

Them Home, the report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families.
ISBN: 978-1-921174-11-7
Cover photograph by Tatiana Doroshenko, of a mural in North Fitzroy, Melbourne,

Victoria
Edited by Mark Lawrence
Designed by Heather Hoare, Pixel City Digital Design
Illustrations from artworks in SNAICC’s collection
Disclaimer
The views expressed in the articles are those of the individual authors, and do
not necessarily represent the views of the Secretariat of National Aboriginal and
Islander Child Care Inc. unless otherwise indicated.
The images and photographs in this publication are intended for illustrative
purposes only. No inference is intended or implied that the children or adults
depicted in the photographs are the subject of any issue(s) of interest to any child
welfare authority in Australia.
Join or subscribe to SNAICC

Please contact us if you wish to become a SNAICC member or subscriber.
Information about joining or subscribing to SNAICC is also available on our website.
Warning: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peopled are cautioned

that this publication may include images of people who have
since passed away.
Contents
Acknowledgments 2
Never again: Telling the truth ensures a better future 3

by Julian Pocock
SNAICC’s journey to the Inquiry: a timeline 6
Ten years of truth telling: What Bringing Them Home means to us all 8
by Muriel Bamblett, AM
Aranda instinct 12
by Brian Butler
Filling in the ‘blank spots’ of history: SNAICC’s role in the Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal 14
and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families
by Nigel D’Souza
The long road home: Karu Link-up, the NT Stolen Generations and the campaign for the National Inquiry 17
by Rosie Baird
A twilight of knowing: the Australian public and the Bringing Them Home report 20
by Professor Anna Haebich
Not one without the other: Human rights and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children’s well being 23
go hand in hand
by Terri Libesman
Aboriginal Organisation calls for Enquiry into “Stolen Children” 27

SNAICC media statement calling for the National Inquiry into the Removal of Aboriginal Children,
National Aboriginal & Islander Children’s Day, 4 August 1991
Human Rights Commissioners meet with SNAICC 28

Report first published in SNAICC Newsletter, June 1995
Some listen, some won’t hear: the legacy of the Bringing Them Home report 29
by Professor Larissa Behrendt
“This story’s right, this story’s true...” 32

by Jim Brooks
“Imagine seeing us come home”: Reflections on the impact and legacy of the Bringing Them Home report 35
by Tom Calma
Journeying back to healing: The promise of the Bruce Trevorrow case and Tasmanian compensation 38
by Dr Peter Lewis
The launch of Bringing Them Home: the Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal 41
and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families – Speech given on 26 May 1997
by Professor Mick Dodson, AM
SNAICC Values Statement: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children 46
1
“Remember me”: Commemmorating the tenth anniversary of the Bringing Them Home report 1
Acknowledgments
SNAICC expresses its sincere appreciation to the authors amazing banner for the SNAICC contingent to the 1988
who contributed their time and energy in writing their Bicentenary protest march. We also acknowledge Ray
essays for this publication commemorating the tenth Thomas, who designed ATSIC’s 1998 NAIDOC poster
anniversary of Bringing Them Home’s release. They featuring the theme ‘Bring Them Home’, which we’ve
are Rosie Baird, Muriel Bamblett, Larissa Behrendt, Jim reproduced here.
Brooks, Brian Butler, Tom Calma, Nigel D’Souza, Anna A special thanks is due to SNAICC’s former Chairper-
Haebich, Peter Lewis, Terri Libesman, and Julian Pocock. son, Brian Butler, and SNAICC’s former Executive Officer,
They delved into their memories, and their archives, Nigel D’Souza, who oversaw SNAICC’s campaign for, and
and drew on their intimate knowledge, experience and involvement in, the National Inquiry into the Separation
expertise of the National Inquiry and its report to allow of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Their in-
us to reflect on this important process and publication, depth knowledge and advice on this history was invalu-
and what they hold for our future. Without them, this able in making this publication happen.
publication would not be possible. We also thank the SNAICC staff who worked on this publication also
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and deserve thanks, including Mark Lawrence, who developed
Mick Dodson for giving SNAICC permission to republish the proposal for the publication, liaised with contributors
Mick’s speech from the 1997 launch of Bringing Them and edited this publication, Kim Werner, who oversaw the
Home, and Kym Walker for her permission to republish project’s progress and spent time delving into SNAICC’s
her poem, which was originally published in SNAICC’s archives for documents to help piece more of the history
Newsletter back in 1993. together, and Julian Pocock, whose leadership helped in
We also acknowledge the artists whose original the conception and development of this publication.
artworks were used in SNAICC’s National Aboriginal Finally, but in no way least, SNAICC thanks all those
and Islander Children’s Day posters in 1992, 1995 and who struggled long and hard to have the experiences
1997 that are reproduced here. They are Clive Atkinson, of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who
Isobel Coe and Heather Kemarre Shearer respectively. were, as children, forcibly removed from their families
The 1988 poster was the result of the collective work acknowledged and recorded, and who worked long and
of the SNAICC National Executive who put together the hard for healing and renewal. And we acknowledge
the Stolen Generations, whose resilience and strength
in sharing their personal stories and creating renewed
futures for themselves are an inspiration to us, and renew
our efforts on behalf of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander children and their families.
1988: Stop the Cultural Genocide
In 1988, SNAICC produced the first National Aboriginal &

Islander Children’s Day poster, featuring a photograph from
the Bicentenary protest march in Sydney. SNAICC highlighted
the detrimental impact of placing Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander children with non-Indigenous families after these
children had been removed from their families by welfare
authorities. Describing this as a form of cultural genocide,
SNAICC advocated that to deny children their culture was a
form of genocide.
2 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

Never again: Telling the truth ensures a better future
By Julian Pocock, Executive Officer, Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care
It is hard to believe that it has been ten years since HREOC is that in 1997 Bringing Them Home provided an
completed its National Inquiry into the Separation of opportunity to connect the truth of our nation to a
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their reconciliation process that was searching for a way
Families with the release of its report, Bringing Them forward. When Bringing Them Home was silenced, so
Home. was the truth and at that point our national process of
Sadly the launch of the report was overshadowed reconciliation faltered.
by the extraordinary events at the opening of the 1997 SNAICC is an organisation with a long and proud
Australian Reconciliation Convention when audience history and a capacity to reach out to our predecessors
members stood and turned their backs on Prime Minister and those who lived this history, and so we are able to
John Howard. As one of those audience members I felt reach back into our collective memories to recall what
compelled to turn away from a Prime Minister that having the National Inquiry actually involved and what
was acting in a manner that showed no regard for the the release of its report signalled for us. SNAICC has
countless Australians – black and white – who had produced this publication commemorating the tenth
committed to the reconciliation process. If Mr Howard’s anniversary of the release of Bringing Them Home to
aim was to make an impression he certainly succeeded. remember SNAICC’s efforts in calling for and participating
Reflecting now I have some regret for turning my back, in the Inquiry, to commemorate the tenacity and hard
as it’s probably better to look at the faces of those we work on this matter of those who came before us, and
have some disagreement with if we are serious about to refocus public attention on why this process was so
reconciliation. important to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
When the report was released at the convention, and what people hoped and dreamed it could deliver for
I remember talking with a delegate from the Victorian Australia as a whole.
Aboriginal community who commented that “never Before Bringing Them Home shook the foundations
again” could people say they didn’t know the truth. Sadly of Australian history and society, the practice of the
some have sought to discredit and diminish Bringing removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Them Home. The report brought the story of the Stolen children from their families had already shaken every
Generations out of the shadows and into the centre of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community to the
Australia’s consciousness. It was only able to do so due to core. You could say the history, experiences and legacies
the dignity and bravery with which families and people of the Stolen Generations defined the very purpose
affected by removal policies told their stories. of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community
Another speaker at the 1997 Reconciliation organisations working in health, legal services, and child
Convention, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, spoke of and family welfare. Families were broken and children’s
the Truth and Reconciliation process in South Africa, experiences of removal had led to much trauma – to the
established to document the truth about apartheid and extent that this legacy permeates nearly every aspect of
reconcile a nation savagely divided on racial grounds. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander disadvantage to this
It struck me then that our own nation’s process of day.
reconciliation was deficient. We didn’t start with the Naming, coping with and healing the legacy of
telling of the truth. My family, like any I suppose, places colonialism and child removal was the driving force
importance on telling the truth. When we do something that spurred the formation in the late 1970s of the first
wrong, telling the truth and saying sorry helps us heal Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child welfare
and move on. Bringing Them Home was where the truth agencies, the AICCAs, and of SNAICC, the peak body
of this nation’s history was told. The 1997 Reconciliation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and
Convention was our opportunity to connect truth with families, in 1981. While our members were dealing with
reconciliation – an opportunity lost. the continuing practices of child removal by ‘the welfare’
Since 1997 many have argued that the process of and trying to bring healing to members of the Stolen
reconciliation has stalled. Arguments have been put Generations and their families, it became clearer and
that the Howard Government’s approach of ‘practical’ clearer that this unacknowledged aspect of Australia’s
reconciliation has diminished the reconciliation history needed to be exposed and dealt with in order
process while failing to deliver enough of the practical to speed the healing so urgently required. This was the
improvements in living standards promised. My view “blank spot” in Australia’s history that SNAICC wanted
filled in, as former SNAICC Chairperson Brian Butler and community – and we have been calling on all state,
former SNAICC Executive Officer Nigel D’Souza remind us territory and federal governments to provide the full
in their respective essays in this publication. and necessary support to communities to enable them to
In 1991, SNAICC was the first national Indigenous achieve these.
organisation to publicly call for a national inquiry into What is clear is that in wanting to pursue
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child removal. This improvements in these areas, the federal government has
became a long and difficult journey that consumed our failed to value Aboriginal and Torres Islander culture –
purpose for six years, as we worked to make the inquiry and by this meaning the breadth of cultural experience
happen, ensured that the framework for the inquiry would and practice, including spirituality, connection to land
meet the needs of the Stolen Generations and the wider and sea, language, heritage and identity – as if it were
an obstacle to improving well being and quality of life.
Culture has been viewed as something that sets Aboriginal
and Torres Islander peoples apart – economically,
We are able to reach back into our collective socially, politically, and from the rest of the nation – and
memories to recall what having the National Inquiry as part of the problem, rather than the solution. Those
actually involved and what the release of its report that took children from their families in generations past
signalled for us. made the same mistake – they failed or refused to see the
value of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture to a
child’s well being.
Culture cannot be separated from communities’
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community – and capacity for renewal and strength in health, education,
of justice – and supported our member organisations in economic participation, livelihoods, housing or well
making their submissions to the inquiry when it got rolling. being. As SNAICC Chairperson Muriel Bamblett points
At the time, many of us believed that the Human out in her essay here, these were interdependent with
Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission’s National culture in early Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Inquiry, and the findings and recommendations made communities, and they remain so today. Cultural
in its report, Bringing Them Home, had finally opened freedom, strength and pride enable communities to
the floodgates of witnessing and healing – forever. We engage more fully in improving their quality of life
were confident that the “blank spot” in Australia’s history and well being, just as they are central to supporting
was finally and indelibly filled in, that the connection communities’ capacity to form strong, confident, capable
between the truth and reconciliation had been made, and and supportive families that raise children in strength,
that this could lead to lasting healing for Aboriginal and proud in their culture, and safe from harm. As SNAICC
Torres Strait Islander people and reconciliation with non- pointed out through our theme for this year’s National
Indigenous Australia. Aboriginal and Islander Children’s Day, on 4 August,
What we soon realised is that lessons have to be ‘Raising Children Strong in Culture’ creates many
learned over and over again and some just don’t want pathways of healing and revival for communities and
to learn. Just as the public debate got bogged down over families.
whether the Prime Minister should say ‘sorry’ and the Yet, this year’s public commemorations of the tenth
fears of what it would mean regarding compensation anniversary of Bringing Them Home’s release have
and reparation to the Stolen Generations, so too has the reminded us that the ongoing trauma experienced by the
reconciliation and healing process been stymied. Prime Stolen Generations and the Prime Minister’s reiterated
Minister Howard insisted that symbolic gestures, such as refusal to say ‘sorry’ are gaping wounds that remain
a formal national apology, would make no difference to unhealed. There is still unfinished business that holds us
the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, back as a nation.
and rejected the National Inquiry’s recommendation In a process of national consultation via SNAICC’s
that reparation – including monetary compensation – be previous national conference, in 2003, SNAICC
made to the Stolen Generations. formulated the Seven Priorities for Aboriginal and
In questioning ‘practical reconciliation’ SNAICC does Torres Strait Islander Children, our policy platform that
not question the importance of improving Aboriginal and outlines the key policy priorities for advancing the well
Torres Strait Islander children’s and families’ health and being and rights of the children in our communities. A
well being, their experiences of early childhood care and National Apology to the Stolen Generations is identified as
education, their capacity to participate in the nation’s one of the seven key priorities:
economy, the quality of their livelihoods, and their
access to shelter that’s more than just liveable. Aboriginal A National Apology, which acknowledges the
and Torres Strait Islander people have a right to these harsh injustices of past child removals, and
as a matter of course – as do the rest of the Australian the ongoing impact of these on the health,

happiness, and parenting skills of current alerted Australia to the fact that contemporary child
generations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait protection practices continued to lead to unacceptably
Islander people, is a foundation upon which the high levels of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
success of many other initiatives will depend. children being removed from their families and placed in
When we fail to recognise how the past lives on, out-of-home care. In 1997, the Inquiry found that the rate
we allow the injustices of the past to continue.1 of Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander child removal was
six times higher than the number of non-Indigenous in
out-of-home care. Unfortunately today the rate has gone
To this day, SNAICC still expects – and calls for – a up rather than decreased: in 2005–2006, Aboriginal and
National Apology from the Australian Government, for Torres Strait Islander children were seven times more
the same reasons as stated in 2003. This is despite many likely to be in out-of-home care than non-Indigenous
in Australia – both non-Indigenous and Aboriginal and children3.
Torres Strait Islander – now saying that the time for a It must be heartbreaking for members of the Stolen
National Apology has passed and that it’s time to ‘move Generations, and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
on’ to more pressing or vital matters. Yet SNAICC is community generally, that this situation continues. What
used to calling for something that is both unpopular or can we say to them about what we learned from their
presumed unimportant in the Australian community – just stories shared so bravely during the National Inquiry? Are
as we did when we called for a National Inquiry into child we to say to them, and to the children, that our hopes and
removal and it felt as though we were “shouting in the dreams for the National Inquiry were also stolen – but
wilderness,” as Nigel D’Souza recounts in his essay here. that we did nothing?
We do so because we know it is right, and it is needed. When in doubt, return to the truth. Bringing Them
The journey of healing that began with the National Home remains as powerful and important today as in
Inquiry was interrupted, and the process of reconciliation 1997 because it tells the truth. It provides the starting
has faltered. As Muriel Bamblett has insisted this past point for a national process of truth and reconciliation.
year, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families and And in looking back to the Prime Minister’s angry address
communities still require the healing and restoration at the 1997 Convention, I hope that, like me, he may
necessary to allow them to sustain their culture, raise feel some sense of regret for the events of that day and
their children in strength and forge renewal for their remembers, as his parents no doubt taught him, to say
communities. A key to this succeeding is facing up to the sorry.
truth and saying sorry.
What is also apparent, as some of our contributors’
assessment of how Bringing Them Home was received
Julian Pocock has been SNAICC
in Australia, is that so many of its recommendations
Executive Officer for nine years.
have yet to be fully implemented – particularly in the Before he came to SNAICC, he
area of child protection. Ten years after the National had worked in the youth and
Inquiry first made such recommendations, SNAICC is still education sectors for many years,
calling for all state, territory and federal governments to and was the Executive Officer
implement a National Action Plan to stop child abuse and for AYPAC, the national peak
neglect that is developed, implemented and monitored body for young people. Julian’s
via the Council of Australian Governments, for national research into child abuse and
monitoring of how the Aboriginal Child Placement neglect in Northern Territory Aboriginal communities,
Principle is implemented in all states and territories, and State of Denial, published by SNAICC in 2003, was a
for government support for greater Aboriginal and Torres groundbreaking study of the NT government’s failure
to deal with the issue and led to urgent reforms of
Strait Islander community control of child protection, out-
the child protection system in the Territory. Through
of-home care and family welfare and support services.2
SNAICC’s current work, he continues to push for long
These are so central to SNAICC’s ongoing work that we term, effective measures to stop child abuse and neglect
have identified them as priorities for Aboriginal and that work with Aboriginal communities in the NT, and
Torres Strait islander children that all political parties throughout Australia, not against them.
should adopt for the next term of federal government. He lives in Melbourne with his wife, Fiona, and three
It has been ten years since Bringing Them Home children, and is a vocal Collingwood supporter.
1
SNAICC, 2003, Seven Priorities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children, SNAICC Policy Paper 2003.
2
SNAICC, 2007, Priorities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander Children for the Next Term of Government, SNAICC Briefing
Paper 2007
3
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), 2006, Child Protection Australia 2005–06, Child Welfare Series Number 40,
Canberra.
SNAICC’s journey to the Inquiry
89 90 91
November 1989 February 1990 April 1990 August 1991
SNAICC writes to ABC The SNAICC Annual SNAICC Chairperson Brian SNAICC’s National Aboriginal
television presenter Peter General Meeting in Butler presents a paper at and Islander Children’s Day
Couchman following his Brisbane resolves “That, the 1990 Australian Child theme for 1991 is ‘The Stolen
programme on the removal as a result of conclusive Protection Conference, Generation – Demand an
of children from the British evidence highlighted in and calls for a national Enquiry into the removal
Isles. In response, Couchman various research, reports inquiry into the removal of of Aboriginal and Islander
agrees to do a programme and recommendations in Aboriginal children. Children’. Through its
on the removal of Aboriginal child welfare practices media release for Children’s
and Torres Strait Islander and policies, the Executive Day, SNAICC becomes the
children, with SNAICC investigate the possibility first national Indigenous
assisting in organising of SNAICC calling for an organisation to call for a
members of the studio enquiry into the effects that national inquiry into the
audience, which screens in these polices have had on Stolen Generations.
February 1990. Aboriginal communities.”
95
April 1995 June 1995 August 1995
SNAICC Chairperson Brian The President and comm- The theme for Aboriginal and Islander Children’s day in 1995
Butler is part of a delegation issioners of the Human is ‘Never again… Break the Chains’, referring to the past and
of Aboriginal people from Rights and Equal Opportunity current practice of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child
Darwin who serve a writ Commission meet with removal.
on the Commonwealth SNAICC representatives Brian
government in relation to Butler, Wanda Braybrook, Brian Butler’s speech at the Twentieth Anniversary of the
the removal, as children, of Sharon Slater, and Nigel Australian Law Reform Commission reiterates SNAICC’s 1991
six Aboriginal people from D’Souza at SNAICC’s Fitzroy call for the upcoming national inquiry into child removal
their families in what is to offices to discuss issues to investigate whether the removal policies fell within the
be the first major Stolen related to the establishment definition of genocide under article 2(e) of the Prevention and
Generations High Court case. of a National Inquiry into Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Act 1949.
the Removal of Aboriginal
SNAICC’s Executive Officer Children. Attorney-General of Australia Michael Lavarch formally
Nigel D’Souza publishes an requests HREOC to inquire into the Separation of Aboriginal
article, ‘Call for a National and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families. He had
Inquiry into the Removal of originally requested the Inquiry in May 1995, but later re-issues
Aboriginal Children’, in the his call for the Inquiry with extended Terms of Reference.
ACOSS journal Impact.
6 “Remember me”: Commemmorating he tenth anniversary of the Bringing Them Home report
– a timeline
This timeline represents some key events and initiatives in SNAICC’s work
to bring about the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families. It is not intended to be
a definitive representation of all developments along this journey.
92 93 94
August 1992 August 1993 October 1994
National Aboriginal and In his contribution to SNAICC supports member

Islander Children’s Day in the special edition of the organisation Karu AICCA
1992 continues the focus Australian Institute of Family and other Northern Territory
on the Stolen Generations Affairs journal, Family Stolen Generations groups
with the theme ‘My family… Matters, marking the to organise The Going
Where are you? Enquiry into International Year for the Home Conference, the first
the removal of Aboriginal World’s Indigenous Peoples, major conference of Stolen
and Islander Children’. Brian Butler outlines the Generations people.
history and rationale of
SNAICC’s campaign against
child removal policies. The
publication increases the
profile of SNAICC’s call for
the national inquiry.
96 97
November 1995 May 1996 May 1997 .
SNAICC’s Chairperson, Brian SNAICC holds a national The Human Rights and Equal
Butler, and Executive Officer, workshop in Uluru, Northern Opportunity Commission
Nigel D’Souza, are appointed Territory, to discuss the releases Bringing Them
as SNAICC representatives progress of the National Home, its report from the
to the Indigenous Advisory Inquiry. National Inquiry into the
Council of HREOC’s National Separation of Aboriginal and
Inquiry. August 1996 Torres Strait Islander Children
from their Families, at the
December 1995 SNAICC presents its written Australian Reconciliation
submission to the National Convention in Melbourne.
SNAICC Chairperson Brian Inquiry.
Butler presents SNAICC’s oral August 1997
evidence to the Inquiry at
Wybalenna, Flinders Island, National Aboriginal and
Tasmania. Islander Children’s Day
focuses on the release of the
Inquiry’s report and calls for
the full implementation of its
recommendations with the
theme ‘Bring Them Home’.
“Remember me”: Commemmorating he tenth anniversary of the Bringing Them Home report 7
Ten years of truth telling: What Bringing Them Home
means to us all
By Muriel Bamblett, Chairperson, Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care
(SNAICC)
This year has seen many important anniversaries for affirmation that the ’67 Referendum represents was too
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in soon diminished when we as Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Australia: the tenth anniversary of the release of the Islander people sought to not only be citizens but to enact
Bringing Them Home report, the fiftieth anniversary our rights as citizens and seek land justice and wage equity.
of NAIDOC and the fortieth anniversary of the 1967 The wave of sympathy and apologies from state and
Referendum that gave de facto recognition of the territory governments, churches, community welfare
citizenship Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. groups, and ordinary citizens that followed the public
What does this year of anniversaries mean for release of the Bringing Them Home report was washed
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who forty away in the wake of Prime Minister John Howard’s denial
years ago didn’t count for anything and didn’t even count of the extent of the injustices experienced by the Stolen
on the national census? What does it mean for the Stolen Generations and his refusal to offer an official national
Generations who had their trauma and pain displayed for apology to them. The Prime Minister’s response set the
all to see before the sometimes sympathetic but at times tone for what was to be known as the ‘culture wars’. A
doubting eyes of governments and many in the community? legion of denialist conservative commentators disparaged
What does it mean for a nation whose Federation specifically the findings in Bringing Them Home, questioned the
excluded the First Peoples of Australia? extent of child removal practices, and denigrated the
As a nation, we live amongst these remembrances experiences of the Stolen Generations. These so called
and contradictions concerning our national character. ‘debates’ over the Stolen Generations created confusion
As Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people we and doubt amongst the Australian community and wore
have, since invasion, defied our oppression and found down the nation’s appetite for reconciliation.
Even the enthusiasm of the Reconciliation Walks of
2000 and the spontaneously shared joy over Cathy’s win
were not enough to reverse the tide of racism, ill-will and
As we mark the tenth anniversary of the release of distrust that continues to demean our culture and deny
Bringing Them Home, we need to remind ourselves our human rights.
that it not only told us the previously untold stories As we mark the tenth anniversary of the release of
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who Bringing Them Home, we need to remind ourselves
had been removed as children. It also spoke of a that it not only told us the previously untold stories of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who had
national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led
been removed as children. It also spoke of a national
framework to address present day issues of child Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led framework
protection and family welfare. to address present day issues of child protection and
family welfare. It reminded us that contemporary
child protection systems are still removing more of our
children from their families than non-Indigenous children
meaning in our resilience and our resistance. The battles from theirs. To tackle this ongoing over-representation
fought, the bodies broken by dispossession, the so-called of our children in care, the report supported an approach
protection, assimilation, and the separation of families of community development and de-colonisation – of
have bloodied us but never defeated us. The hope of trusting and supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait
the ‘Spirit of 67’, the Mabo Decision, the Reconciliation Islander families and communities to look after their own
Walks and the national spirit of celebration and unity that children.
emerged when Cathy Freeman won her Gold Medal at the However, contrary to the advice of the Bringing
Sydney Olympics have given us a different vision of what Them Home report, state and territory governments
we could become as a reconciled nation. continue to retain their tight control over child
Too often in the past we have had our hopes welfare systems. Meanwhile the federal government
raised, only for them to be dashed. The overwhelming promotes a punitive response and seeks to discredit

self-determination when responding to the situation of (including financial responsibility), for their welfare.
children in the Northern Territory. Just at the time the effects of colonisation were being
The Whitlam era, and to a lesser extent the Fraser understood through the Royal Commission into Black
era, was a time when human rights were treated seriously Deaths in Custody and Bringing Them Home reports,
as the motivation and tool for policy development and as the inherent racism at the foundation of this nation
implementation. It was a time when Aboriginal and Torres was being revealed in the Mabo decision, as Prime
Strait Islander community controlled organisations such Minister Paul Keating’s 1992 Redfern Speech launched the
as SNAICC and its members established and flourished, a International Year for the World’s Indigenous Peoples in
time when land rights and self-determination seemed to Australia, and the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation
be mainstream government policy. Process was beginning, we faltered and lost faith. We
Unfortunately self-determination was poorly elected a federal government in 1996 whose commitment
resourced, with little thought put into building the capacity to human rights and self-determination was limited and
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to conditional. As a community we failed to maintain our
exercise their self-determination. In the child welfare field, rage about the Stolen Generations and the break up of
small Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child welfare families. We failed to push ahead with reforms to child
agencies were established in over thirty places across protection guided by the principles of self-determination
Australia and then expected to deal with the fallout of and the recommendations of Bringing Them Home.
generations of family poverty and disadvantage, the forced We need to have faith in the policy of self-determination
removal of children and child neglect. and return to the spirit of truth-telling embodied in Paul
Self-determination effectively became an ‘out’ Keating’s Redfern Speech. Critical to the future well being
for governments. They hand-passed responsibility for of our children is recognising the critical importance of
children in care from state institutions to Aboriginal and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander self-determination and
Torres Strait Islander community organisations, with cultural connection for our children and families.
no corresponding shift in funding. In a short period we Fortunately there are new ways of working starting
went from governments assuming they had unfettered to emerge that more closely match the wisdom contained
control over the welfare of Aboriginal and Torres Strait in the Bringing Them Home report.
Islander children to assuming they had no responsibility
1991:The Stolen Generations

– Demand an Enquiry into the
Removal of Aboriginal and
Islander Children
In 1991 National Aboriginal & Islander

Children’s Day focused on the issue of
the Stolen Generations, as SNAICC
demanded a national inquiry into the
forced removal of Aboriginal and Tor-
res Strait Islander children from their
families. The poster featured a photo-
graph taken in the 1930s of Aboriginal
children removed from their families and
placed at the Bomaderry Infants Home
in New South Wales. Barbara Cum-
mings had given SNAICC permission
to use the image from the cover of her
book, Take this Child... about about the
Kahlin Compound and the Retta Dixon
Home, for the poster. SNAICC was the
first national organisation to call for an
inquiry into the Stolen Generations and
the NAICD poster was instrumental in
bringing the Stolen Generations out of
the shadows and into public view.
An example is the Victorian Children, Youth and families and all our children, young people, mothers,
Families Act 2005. This law acknowledges the principle fathers, aunties, uncles, nannas, pops and Elders.
of self-determination for Aboriginal and Torres Strait When we look at the issue of services to children and
Islander people as a framework for children services and families we need to begin by looking at the centre of that
clearly embodies a deep understanding of the stories told system – children and their families. There is much talk
in Bringing Them Home . This law tells the children and these days about the problems of welfare dependency and
family services sector – what we used to call with fear and some people at the national level are trying to promote a
loathing, the welfare – that it is in the best interests of an punitive approach to that issue. But for us at SNAICC, the
Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child for their culture issue has more to do with restoring capacity for family
and their connection to family, kin and community to be functioning and that requires a strengthening rather than
maintained and supported. All agencies in Victoria who a weakening approach.
provide children and family services to Aboriginal and Our work involves creating strategies to enable
Torres Strait Islander children now have to demonstrate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families to look
cultural competence or they may be de-registered. This is after and educate their children by focusing on how to
the approach we would like to see resourced in every state ‘keep house’. Interestingly, the word ‘economics’ has
and territory and by the federal government. its origins in Greek and means ‘house management’,
In order to prevent the next Stolen Generations or in other words, ‘house keeping’. Too often we begin
we need commitments by state, territory and federal with the big picture – macro-economics – and let its
governments to strengthen the resource base of theoretical abstractions obscure our vision of the little,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander agencies to deliver local economies or households that economics is actually
the culturally-embedded child and family programmes about. Keeping house is about looking after the people
that we know work for our people. in the house, not just making the people in the house
We are seeking funding from governments and the useful components in a vast system of production and
general public for state-of-the-art Aboriginal and Torres consumption. Keeping house is about recognising how
Strait Islander family centres so that we can address the each member of the house supports each other according
needs of our families in the face of the disadvantage and to their rights, roles and responsibilities. If we can get the
racism they face every day. We want to create a future by households right, the larger economy will follow.
building family centres which will celebrate and embrace Traditional Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, our households and communities had a very different

economy to the one which dominates all our lives today. self-determining rights have far better health outcomes.
In general terms it would be fair to say that Aboriginal In terms of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
and Torres Strait Islander economies were holistic – culture, it is more than just a question of recognising our
politics, law, culture, land and economic activity merged right to be different. In the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
with a spiritual dimension to maintain life in community. Islander service sector we find that embedding culture in
Each person had their role, each person had their rights our services creates the best outcomes.
and responsibilities. The economic was not separated We are not consumed by the past. We want to learn
from the spiritual. Work was a spiritual act, subject from the past so that the future of our people – whether
to the ancient laws and traditions established by the they have been Stolen, lost, broken or not – will be one
creator spirits, and not just an economic act of survival. that sees the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
Traditional economies also had another feature different of these lands and waters given their rightful place of
from economies today – there was no poverty. And honour in the nation. A future built on words like ‘sorry’,
there was no poverty because there was no wealth other just processes such as a National Healing Commission
than the wealth of living together in community under for Stolen Generations and investments by the general
the guidance of our spirits and in harmony with the community to resource positive, culturally-based child
land. Apart from ecological catastrophes, the absence of and family services and programmes.
poverty was the norm – unlike in modern economies. If we are truly to be a nation, and even more of a
The ‘social investment’ had already been made by nation than the writers of the constitution imagined, we
the creator spirits and the spirit of the land. Those spirits need to stand together black and white, in respectful
invested in my people and made us custodians. By basing listening, in the small glimmering candle-light of hope
the rhythms of our economies on the rhythms of the land, – not only for the Stolen Generations, not only for
economic security was assured. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but for who
From our perspective we begin with an understanding we want to be as a nation.
that good ‘house-keeping’ or good economics should not be Let’s live according to that future – an Australia that
separated from just relationships and social justice, which acts honourably and justly to the Stolen Generations
in turn encourages family functioning. and all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, an
For us colonisation created the conditions for social Australia that honours and treasures its Aboriginal and
and economic dysfunction, causing our local households Torres Strait Islander past and its Aboriginal and Torres
and economies to become fragmented. The economy was Strait Islander future. An Australia full of apologies,
changed by land being cleared for the use of sheep and healing commissions and even treaties. An Australia
cattle and crops. Our laws were ignored and our land reconciled.
treated as a terra nullius that the colonisers could treat
as a blank slate to divide and parcel up.
In order to create the conditions for positive social Muriel Bamblett is a Yorta
engagement for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Yorta woman who is the
children and families, there needs to be a human rights Chairperson of the Secretariat of
based social investment framework which: National Aboriginal and Islander
Child Care. Muriel has been the
· recognises that colonisation has impacted Chief Executive Officer of the
negatively on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Victorian Aboriginal Child Care
social and economic capacity, Agency since 1999. From 1997–
99 Muriel was the Chairperson
· builds on the strengths of Aboriginal and of VACCA. Muriel is active on many boards concerning
Torres Strait Islander culture and children, families and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
· respects the self-determining rights of Islander community. She is a Member of the Victorian
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities Children’s Council, a Committee Member of the
in order to re-build capacity. Victorian Ministerial Council for Vulnerable Children and
a Ministerial appointed representative on the Australian
Human rights enables self-determination and self- Council for Children and Parenting.
determination enables our communities to have the Muriel has been the recipient of a number of
capacity to embrace and enact our responsibilities. awards, including the 2003 Robin Clark Memorial Award
If governments treat us on the basis of our self- for Inspirational Leadership in the Field of Child and
determining rights as peoples instead of treating us as Family Welfare; and was awarded an AM (Membership
passive recipients of welfare as client communities, the in the General Division) in the 2004 Australia Day
debilitating effects of poverty can be overcome. You Honours for her services to the community, particularly
only need to look overseas and compare life expectancy through leadership in the provision of services for
statistics to see that self-determination is good for our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and families.
health. Indigenous peoples who have treaties and various
Aranda instinct
By Brian Butler, former SNAICC Chairperson
I have often been asked what drove me to pursue the children who had been taken away.
Inquiry into the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait When I was fifteen, I abandoned my apprenticeship
Islander children from their families. It is a difficult as a boilermaker and joined the ships so that I could
question for me to answer because there was no single travel to other cities in Australia. In each place I went
thing that did this. You may as well ask me why I came to I made contact with the local Aboriginal people.
into being as Brian Butler, an Aranda Aboriginal man. Everywhere I went the story was the same. I gradually
My earliest memories of this issue, which I only much developed a picture of what was happening nationally.
later rationalised as connected to the policy of removing When I returned to South Australia in the sixties, I
children, was when we were told as adolescents, in early made Port Augusta my home. I joined the State Public
puberty, chasing girls that we should be careful who we Health Department, motivated by my eagerness to get
went after. No explanations were given. access to information about the children who were
My own experience of being sent down to Adelaide being removed. Some years later I joined with others
with other young boys of my mob, people like Charles in the community to set up the Aboriginal Social Club
Perkins and Gordon Briscoe, in the fifties to St Francis’ of Port Augusta, which gave birth to other community
House meant I too experienced some of the hardship of organisations such as the medical service, preschool
separation. I know now that I too am a product of the programme, parks and gardens and an earth-moving
assimilation policies of those times. I grew up learning enterprise. Our success was measured by the absence
Aranda language until I was forbidden to speak it as I of Aboriginal people from the unemployment benefit
was hundreds of kilometres away from my mother and queues.
the rest of the clan and more importantly because non- In the seventies, I moved to Adelaide where I worked
at the Wakefield Street Community Centre, run then by
John Austin who originally hails from Victoria. Through
John, I was introduced to Mollie Dyer and eventually I
We had great hopes for the Inquiry, but with a paltry made a trip across to Melbourne and stayed with Mick
budget and indifferent governments it was not going Dodson who was here at the time working at the Victorian
to meet our expectations. Nevertheless, the issue is Aboriginal Legal Service. During my time in Melbourne
now household knowledge and no longer the ‘blank I observed the work that Mollie and Graham Atkinson
spot’ in Australia’s history that we once called it in were doing at the Victorian Aboriginal Child Care Agency
1991. (VACCA). Graham took me on field trips into rural
Victoria. I returned to Adelaide strengthened by ideas
prompted by the good works of VACCA in stemming the
flow of Aboriginal children into the wilderness of what
Aboriginal fathers used to beat their kids for speaking was then known as ‘welfare’.
their language. My father, who was non-Aboriginal, cut Soon after that trip we set up the South Australian
his Aboriginal wife – my mother – and children out of ACCA (Aboriginal Child Care Agency) and our primary
his life even though he continued to come in and out of task was finding appropriate foster care arrangements
our lives. He was ashamed of us and didn’t know how to for Aboriginal children. Just as important was the work
continue living in a racist, white outback community of of reuniting children and families, of tracking down the
pastoralists and others, many of whom also had parallel children who were lost in the child welfare system and
lives with Aboriginal women and children, yet who of linking-up older children and adults with the families
ostracised you for having these relationships. they were removed from.
As a young boy in Adelaide I soon came across others It was not long after, in 1981, that we formed the
who had been removed. We learnt how to distinguish national organisation, SNAICC (the Secretariat of National
children from other parts of the country – especially Aboriginal and Islander Child Care). SNAICC embodied
those who came from our part of the world and further the national aspirations of our communities across the
north to Darwin. We saw many others whom we couldn’t continent. It also was the recognition that the personal
place, but knew were ‘lost’. lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
We were also regularly asked by our families in the and their families had also to be addressed in a political
Centre whether we knew of the wherabouts of other fashion, especially the issue of the removal of children.

It was many years later, after the slow and steady In my time, I have been approached by many
accumulation of evidence and after building strategic people for help in looking for their families. I have acted
alliances with sympathetic individuals and organisations, as counsellor, surrogate family, advocate and family
that we were able to convince politicians that a different tracer for many of the children who were desperately
approach was needed. But the piecemeal approach of seeking to put the pieces of their lives back together.
convincing and converting individuals was too slow. I know there are many Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Too many broken people were despairing without any Islander people who did and continue to do the same.
support or assistance. By having an inquiry into the As a result of the Inquiry our work was made a little
removal of children, we knew we could grab the attention easier although our collective task is as yet unfinished.
of the public. We were also convinced that everyone, no Bringing Them Home was a good start that set off social
matter what their background, could imagine in a small and cultural developments that are beginning to make
way how traumatic it could be to have a child taken a real difference in the lives of many people. We had
from them. It was only a matter of revealing this side of great hopes for the Inquiry, but with a paltry budget and
Australia’s history. indifferent governments it was not going to meet our
The Inquiry lifted the lid on a part of our history that expectations. Nevertheless, the issue is now household
non-Indigenous Australia only talked about in whispers. knowledge and no longer the ‘blank spot’ in Australia’s
Non-Indigenous families may have been ashamed of history that we once called it in 1991.
this whispered past and brushed it under the proverbial
carpet – just as my father was ashamed of his ‘mixed
blood offspring’. I never could be party to this conspiracy Brian Butler is interim
of silence. I couldn’t deny my own identity even if others Chairperson of the National
tried to deny me and my brothers and sisters. Indigenous Disability Network
Ten years on and I still firmly hold the view that Working Party and State
we were right to call for the Inquiry, regardless of Representative of the Aboriginal
Disability Network. Brian, as
the shortcomings of the federal Liberal government’s
he is known by all, is the proud
response. It is also worth reminding people that eldest son of Emily, and belongs
although a Labor government established the Inquiry, to the east Aranda and Loritja
the integrity of its commitment should be judged by the people. He is the grandfather of 33 children and five
paltry $1.5 million it gave to the Human Rights and Equal great-grandchildren. Brian served as of the Secretariat
Opportunity Commission (HREOC) to conduct the Inquiry. of the National Aboriginal Islander Child Care
I really do believe that the lack of interest in this issue (SNAICC)’s Chairperson for 13 years, and oversaw
was bipartisan. The real force behind it was the people of SNAICC’s campaign calling for a National Inquiry into
Australia – Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non- the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Indigenous – who often shared the experience through Children from their Families. When the Inquiry was
different but connected paths. formed, he served on its Indigenous Advisory Council.
There were many people who made the Inquiry Brian is currently the Aboriginal Advocate within
the Age Rights Advocacy Service in South Australia,
happen. A number played their part but weren’t
responding to Elders of our community who need
around to see it happen. I must pay particular tribute support in achieving justice and rights to services.
to Mrs Margaret Tucker and Mollie Dyer, both Yorta Brian’s advocacy work in a variety of capacities included
Yorta women, who led the way. There were also many being SA Zone Commissioner with ATSIC, Chair
Aboriginal people who added their strength to the of the Aboriginal Housing Board of SA, Member of
SNAICC membership over the years, some were Executive the Aboriginal Elders Council, and Member of the
Members – they all made the Inquiry happen through United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Rights.
their support at a national and local level. Two in Brian continues to campaign strongly for human
particular – Isobel Coe and Heather Shearer – contributed rights for Indigenous peoples at the local grass roots,
their artwork to SNAICC’s National Aboriginal and statewide, nationally and on the international stage.
Islander Children’s Day posters with themes related to Brian campaigns for zero tolerance against racism,
the Stolen Generations (in 1995 and 1997 respectively). I discrimination, and abuse towards Elders and children.
cannot forget Barbara Cummings from Darwin, a tireless
worker for the rights of the Stolen Generations, who
was on the SNAICC Executive for many years. Barbara
wrote a book about her experiences in the Retta Dixon
Home called Take this child... and allowed us to use the
image on the cover of her book for the 1991 Children’s
Day poster – the first time SNAICC called for the National
Inquiry.
Filling in the ‘blank spots’: SNAICC’s role in the
Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Children from their Families
By Nigel D’Souza, former SNAICC Executive Officer
It is almost ten years since I was last employed by SNAICC. I part of the Australian consciousness, whether or not our
left after fifteen years of frenetic activity that left me feeling prime ministers choose to apologise for their commission.
burnt out and rudderless. After years of clear direction From the day in 1990 in Brisbane that SNAICC called
through passionate commitment to a cause, nothing else for an inquiry, there was no guarantee that it would
could take its place. That is why when SNAICC asked me to happen or that it would solve all the problems that the
write an essay to commemorate the tenth anniversary of removal policies caused. Calling for the inquiry did,
the Human Rights Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal however, harness the pent-up anger and grief within
and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, I Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
had no hesitation in saying yes. The intervening years have The nineties saw a number of legal cases against state
enabled me to distance myself from an organisation that I governments and one notable High Court action in
relation to the removal of Aboriginal children. The
experiences for all those litigants, whose cases inevitably
failed, were of compounding trauma through denial and
The Bringing Them Home report has a life of its own, rejection by the state. It was obvious that the legal system
not just because many of the people in its pages was not going to provide redress to many people and
are still alive today... It has become the baton that subjecting them to the adversarial method of denying
their claims was only going to damage them emotionally.
SNAICC picked up when it was formed.
On top of this, the time and effort it took to mount a case
was discouraging. There had to be another way.
When it eventually came about in those weeks in
1995, it all happened so quickly. In reality there were
was part of and was part of me. This distance allows me to many times along the way I thought we were shouting in
now make a more dispassionate assessment of some of the the wilderness. It was nevertheless a major achievement
issues I worked on. for SNAICC. One that was recognised by the President
There were many things we did that turned out to of HREOC, Sir Ron Wilson, when, late in 1995 after
be wrong, or that may be regarded by some as wasted the announcement of the National Inquiry, he led a
effort. One, however, stands out as SNAICC’s crowning delegation of all seven Human Rights Commissioners to
achievement and it was our constant and unrelenting meet with the Chairman of SNAICC, Brian Butler, and
focus throughout in bringing public attention to the myself at our Melbourne office in Fitzroy.
removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children This meeting was a recognition of SNAICC’s central
from their families and communities. The day SNAICC role in bringing about the National Inquiry. But as
resolved to launch a campaign for a national Human Brian Butler had always pointed out and continues to
Rights Commission inquiry into the removal of Aboriginal do so, SNAICC was merely carrying the baton. In Linda
and Torres Strait Islander children was a day that changed Briskman’s history of SNAICC, he says:
Australian history. It was this demand that called on
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to propel There are a whole lot of people. I mean this
their private and personal histories and experiences into didn’t just happen when the ACCAs and when
the political sphere and lodge their claims about this SNAICC were born. All ACCAs and SNAICC did
form of genocide. When the stories were made public in was carry on from what our grandmothers and
Bringing Them Home they spoke to all Australians in a grandparents had already started years before.
way that no amount of lobbying on the part of SNAICC In those days they didn’t have a telephone to go
or any other organisation could. These were human to, they didn’t have the mail services, they didn’t
experiences, tragedies, and abuses of children that we can even have anyone to talk to when their children
all relate to. They could no longer be denied and are now were being taken away. 1

There were many people around the country who Here is something of a chronology of significant
had devoted their lives to achieving justice in relation to events as I recall them. While the dates maybe slightly off,
this matter. Those who rose to prominence in the course the events happened and I note them because from my
of the HREOC Inquiry may forever receive the accolades, perspective they made a significant contribution to the
but in the pages of the report the unidentified stories are momentum that led to the National Inquiry in 1995 and
the great strength and the real reason it all happened. that drove us as an organisation. I feel very privileged to
have played a small part in it.
1982 Lousy Little Sixpence, a documentary about the removal of Aboriginal children based on the
autobiography of Aunty Marj Tucker, is released. This was one of the few mass-media format
documentaries at the time that started to lift the lid on the removal policies.
1983–1984 Coral Edwards and Peter Read form Link-up in Canberra.

Peter Read’s pamphlet The Stolen Generations is published by NSW Aboriginal Affairs. This pamphlet set
the die as far as my own understanding of the removal policies is concerned. The cruelty of the removal of
hundreds if not thousands of children from their families and the way they were treated afterwards was
seared indelibly on my heart and mind from that moment onwards.
Ironically, I only slowly discovered that my colleague, Bill Bellings, the first SNAICC Executive Officer, had
himself been removed and adopted by a white family in the northern suburbs of Melbourne. I say slowly
because rather than relate his life story to me, his story was revealed to me through my travels with him,
during which I met some of the significant people in his life. Bill was a brilliant man who died too young
but nevertheless gave a great deal towards the formation of SNAICC and to Aboriginal child welfare in this
country.
Late 1980s The campaign for an inquiry into the death in custody of John Pat becomes the national campaign for a
Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody.
Russell Moore, adoptive name James Savage, is sentenced to death in Melbourne, Florida. After this
shocking news travelled back to Melbourne, Australia, and Fitzroy in particular, the local Aboriginal
community mobilised and sought to provide support to his family here. Later on a delegation including
expert witness support from Aunty Mollie Dyer and Peter Read flew to Florida for James’s appeal. James
had been adopted by a Salvation Army family named Savage who returned to the US to live.
James Savage’s case made the removal policies local, personal and contemporary. This was not just a
matter of historic interest. It was becoming clearer to all what sort of impact the policies were having on
Aboriginal people as a lived issue.
1990 The publication of Aboriginal Child Poverty by the Brotherhood of St Laurence (BSL) in association
with SNAICC was a watershed event for SNAICC. The report was part of the BSL series on child poverty in
Australia prompted by Prime Minister Bob Hawke’s statement about “no child living in poverty by 1990”.
It gave the organisation national exposure and credibility in the mainstream community, in the sector and
amongst policy makers. The late Mum Shirl launched the book at the Aborigines Advancement League in
Melbourne. It is hard to gauge the impact of this report although the BSL did say that it was the best seller
in the series. From SNAICC’s point of view it opened doors to strategic relationships that were going to be
very important in bringing about the National Inquiry. These included organisations such as the Australian
Council of Social Services and the Australian Institute of Family Services amongst a number across the
nation.
1990s The documentary Lost Children of the Empire and studio discussion hosted by Peter Couchman was
broadcast by the ABC. I wrote to Peter and his Executive Producer highlighting the irony of a documentary
about British children being removed when the very thing happened right here in Australia. Soon after I
wrote the letter I met with Peter Couchman and his Executive Producer and we discussed the possibility
of have a Couchman Show on the subject of the Stolen Generations. The SNAICC Executive agreed to a
studio discussion on the subject of the Stolen Generations to coincide with SNAICC’s national conference in
Brisbane. Amongst the studio audience present that day were Aunty Mollie Dyer, Stan Grant from Link-Up,
Heather Shearer and many others.
90s Marjorie Thorpe (former VACCA Program Director and eventual Co-Commissioner of the Human Rights
Enquiry into the Removal of Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Children) and Jane Mckendrick publish
results of research into Aboriginal people seeking psychiatric services through the Victorian Aboriginal
Health Service that found a large number of them had been removed from their families.
Barbara Cummings’s book, Take this child.., about the Kahlin Compound and the Retta Dixon Home in
the NT, is published. Barbara gave SNAICC permission to use the front cover of her book as a National
Aboriginal and Islander Children’s Day Poster in 1991, the first calling for a National Inquiry into the
removal of Aboriginal Children. Subsequent years when we had this theme included 1992 with Clive
Atkinson’s design and 1995 with a painting by Isobel Coe.
1991 The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody report shows almost half of those who died in
custody were removed from their families. The Royal Commission was the only show in town when it was
on. It absorbed a lot of resources in terms of time, money and people but I believe it explored many issues
in great detail and examined the deaths of individuals with thoroughness.
1992 Paul Keating’s famous Redfern speech is delivered on the eve of the UN International Year of Indigenous
Peoples, acknowledging the official removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. This was a
positive sign for the campaign to establish the Inquiry.
1993 During the United Nations Year of Indigenous Peoples Brian Butler is invited to make a keynote speech at
the ACOSS Congress in Melbourne. Also, the Australian Institute of Family Studies publishes an issue of its
journal, Family Matters, entirely devoted to Aboriginal children and family issues.
1994 The Stolen Generations Group in the Northern Territory launch High Court action against the
Commonwealth to say it exceeded its authority in giving public servants the power to remove Aboriginal
children. The High Court eventually found against the claimants.
The Going Home Conference is held in October of this year with a reunion of many of the former
residents of the Retta Dixon Home and the Kahlin Compound.
The Inquiry punched well above its weight and certainly Nigel D’Souza moved to
above the $1.5 million it was given to conduct the entire Australia in 1982 and cadged a
national process. The Bringing Them Home report has a lift up to the Commonwealth
life of its own, not just because many of the people in its Games protests in Brisbane.
pages are still alive today – literally and metaphorically. While in Brisbane he made
Today there are Bringing Them Home and Sorry Day contact with Koories from
Victoria and soon after
groups all around the nation. It has become the baton
organised a cricket match in
that SNAICC picked up when it was formed. The work
Melbourne between the Fitzroy
is a long way from being finished but the landscape is Stars and a rag-tag team of players from various parts
unrecognisable when compared to 1990. of the Indian sub-continent. This match became an
annual affair for a number of years. In 1983 he was
recruited by the National Aboriginal and Islander Health
Organisation (NAIHO) to travel to Kintore in the NT to
assist the community in establishing its first community-
controlled health organisation. After completing his
work there he was invited to work for SNAICC and
did not leave them for another fifteen years. Nigel has
two children with his wife Lata and lives a quiet life
in Melbourne. He has a Degree in Economics from
Manchester University and a Masters in Social Policy
from RMIT University.
1
Briskman, Linda, 2003 The Black Grapevine: Aboriginal Activism and the Stolen Generations, The Federation Press, Sydney, p.68.

The long road home: Karu Link-up, the NT Stolen
Generations and the campaign for the National Inquiry
By Rosie Baird, Karu Aboriginal Family Support Agency
This time-line covers my recollections of the involvement them in tracking down and being reunified with
of Karu Aboriginal Child Care Agency’s Link-up their families. I commenced in the position of Link-up
Programme in highlighting the Stolen Generations in the Co-ordinator in March 1995 and have seen since then
Northern Territory, our involvement in the ‘Going Home the expansion and allocation of enhancement funding
Conference’ and the progress of the recommendations to Link-up services. The increased funding, training and
from the Bringing Them Home report. provision of a national Link-up forum enabled the Link-up
The events leading up to and after the National Inquiry services across the country to deliver a national service
into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander for the benefit of our clients.
Children from their Families were very exciting ones for During those earlier years, because of a lack of
us. We watched and anticipated massive changes in policy funding and a national Link-up forum, we relied on
and funding allocations, which was so important in the SNAICC as our national peak body to bring our issues
Northern Territory where the Stolen Generation groups were to the national level and to force changes to assist our
demanding what they saw as their social justice. community. We acknowledge the past Chairperson of
This chain of events and the vision of Australia
acknowledging the Stolen Generations was born even
before the Northern Territory (NT) achieved self-
The saying we used was “Are you getting on the
government in 1978. It is a story of vision, commitment,
dedication and community development under Karu’s Bus?” or “You’ll miss the Bus,” as we all laughed
Link-up Programme. excitedly that our families and people finally had the
Before self-government, the NT consulted with opportunity to discuss the Stolen Generations at a
the Aboriginal community about the creation of the National Forum of NT Stolen Generation people.
Community Welfare Act to deal with child welfare and
the placement of children. In these consultations it was
anticipated that a new Aboriginal agency would be set up
to advise on the placement of children taken into care due SNAICC, Brian Butler, who presented a paper at the 1990
to child protection issues. It was also envisaged that such Australian Child Protection Conference, representing
an agency would provide much needed support to families SNAICC’s members, the Aboriginal and Islander Child
whose members had been removed under past government Care Agencies. The paper was titled ‘Aboriginal Child
policies of separation and placed in ‘half-caste institutions’ Protection’ and stated “We also want an Inquiry into the
on island missions and gazetted reserves – those who were removal of Aboriginal children. For too long this issue has
now alone and isolated and struggling, trying to live in the been kept under wraps”.
major urban centres of the NT. In the NT the issue of removals was being discussed
During these consultations it became clear that the NT widely by the community, with the research into child
would not be providing any form of support services as removal by Barbara Cummings being completed and
they believed that the Stolen Generations were the result published in 1990. Barbara, a founding member of Karu,
of Commonwealth legislation and policy. However, such launched her book in Darwin at the Bagot Community
a community controlled Aboriginal organisation - Karu on NAIDOC day. I bought a raffle ticket and was lucky
Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Child Care Agency, was enough to win a copy of the book Take this Child...
established. It was incorporated in 1985 after the passing from Kahlin Compound to the Retta Dixon Children’s
of the Community Welfare Act 1983, which included in Home.1 This was my first meeting with Barbara and I have
Section 69 the first Aboriginal Child Placement Principal. since enjoyed our connection and learned much through
From day one, Karu (which is now incorporated it about the value of community development.
as Karu Aboriginal Family Support Agency) took on Barbara’s book “includes detailed analysis of
programme delivery of Foster Care Placement and, the social and political forces which resulted in the
because of community demand, provided Link-up displacement of part-Aboriginal children in the Northern
services – that is supporting those who had been Territory”. It set the train in motion for the 1994 ‘Going
removed from their families as children and assisting Home Conference’ held at Kormilda College in Darwin.
The NT mob never used the word train because Darwin of Aboriginal children from their families. It is a credit to
didn’t have a train, but the saying we used was “Are you all those who participated in the Conference that by the
getting on the Bus?” or “You’ll miss the Bus,” as we all time the Minister left Darwin, the National Inquiry into
laughed excitedly that our families and people finally had the the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
opportunity to discuss the Stolen Generations at a National Children from their Families was informally in progress.
Forum of NT Stolen Generation people. Excited, they A natural progression from the Conference was a
returned to the Top End to meet up with each other again. test case for NT Stolen Generation members in the High
By 1991 the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Court – Kruger & others v. the Commonwealth of
Deaths in Custody was in progress. The report found that Australia. Sadly, the High Court ruled in favour of the
“43 of the 99 deaths of Aboriginal people investigated Commonwealth and this decision stalled and created
were those with a background of removal and adverse publicity for the Stolen Generations’ aspirations
institutionalisation.” Recommendation 53 enabled Karu to for recognition of their history of removal, a national
receive funding to deliver Link-up services to our region apology, repatriation and compensation.
and this platform was used to progress social justice issues In progressing formal pathways for assisting our
for Stolen Generation people. The 1994 International Link-up clients, Karu was an important stakeholder in the
Year of the Family, under the leadership of Social Justice consultations with the NT Government in the opening of
Commissioner Mick Dodson, provided the politically ideal the Northern Territory Adoption Register in 1994.
time for the rights of Stolen Generation people to be heard. The ripple effect of the “Going Home Conference’
The ‘Going Home Conference’ was hosted by Karu resulted in the NT record holders giving Link-up access to
under the Link-up Programme with the leadership and records for Stolen Generation families requesting family
guidance of Chairperson Barbara Cummings and the tracing and unification.
professional expertise of our Consultant Ms Jacqui Katona. In progressing access to records I was invited to
On the agenda for group discussion and workshopping were: present a paper ‘Researching the Displaced Children’, at
the Australian Society of Archivists National Conference
· Access to Archives;
in Alice Springs in May 1996. This forum was a way
· Rights to Land; forward to exchange knowledge and understanding on
· Social Justice – Social & Economic disadvantages; both sides. It was also an opportunity to progress the
· Compensation and Counselling. recommendations that were vital for providing assistance
in family tracing. The NT Stolen Generation Inc., the NT
The outcomes of the Conference are documented in
Link-up Services and National Australian Archives signed
the publication The Long Road Home and copies can be
a Memorandum of Understanding giving access to records
obtained from Karu.
in March 1997. This document was signed one month
In the community consultation period leading to the
before the release of the Bringing Them Home Report.
Conference, I was privileged to be nominated to represent
This was followed by a Memorandum of Understanding
the Garden Point members who were institutionalised on
between the stakeholders and the NT Archives Service
the mission on Melville Island. During group discussions
giving Link-up access to all relevant records held by NT
we encountered all sorts of emotions, from denial as
Government Agencies.
some thought we were attacking the Church and mission
As a member of the SNAICC National Executive and
workers, to confusion as people came to understand the
holding the Families portfolio, I had the opportunity
Government policies that enforced their removal from
to highlight Stolen Generations’ issues as a speaker
country and family for the purposes of segregation and
for the workshop on Indigenous removals at the 1998
assimilation. A process we now understand as Genocide.
International Conference, ‘Asia Pacific Forum on Families:
The Conference was a great success after months
Will Australia’s Involvement make a Difference?’. I
spent sending out letters of awareness and invites
was able to convey to a wider audience an Indigenous
to every politician and person of importance. The
perspective on the effects of removal.
Government Archives were invited to present and
As the SNAICC representative, and because of my
to progress access to records for family tracing. Mr
involvement with Link-up and the Stolen Generation
Galarrwuy Yunupingu, Chairperson of the Northern Land
members, I was nominated to the’ Bringing Them Home
Council, was invited to discuss the issue of Land Rights for
Pilot Project National Library of Australia Advisory
Stolen Generation people and their families and was met
Committee’ to help oversee the oral histories pilot project.
with some hostility and bad feeling. The Church leaders
The purpose of this project was to provide “a rounded
were invited to speak and came along a bit dubious and in
history” of removals in Australia from an indigenous and
defence mode.
non-indigenous perspective and it ran from 1 July 1998 to
The then federal Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Mr
30 June 1999.
Robert Tickner, presented at the Conference and stated
Following the National Inquiry, changes occurred
at its opening that there was merit in a comprehensive
across Australia. The Link-up services received enhanced
study being done on the former practice of the removal

funding for upgrades of resources, reunion funds, In the Northern Territory our organisation is still a
staffing positions and reviews of salaries. The Link-up member of SNAICC, with our Director, Natalie Hunter, on
services were able to regularly meet at national forums the SNAICC National Executive, and I continue to work in
and adopted a memorandum between services working Link-up. Sadly, many of our Stolen Generations members
together across state and territory boundaries. Western have passed away. Ms Barbara Cummings is an advisor
Australia negotiated an agreement to fund several Link- to Karu and with Ms Jacqui Katona responded to Senator
up services across the state. The Australian Institute of Bartlett’s draft Bill by forwarding an Information Paper in
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies provided support of monetary compensation.
training in family tracing and provided a free-call 1800 We all continue to wait, but will also continue to
telephone number and a Link-up contact position. make changes through community development.
Funding was distributed through the National Aboriginal
Controlled Health Organisations to resource the
Emotional & Social Well Being services. Rosie Baird was born, educated
The ripple effect continued and spread to records and raised in Darwin, Northern
holders. The National Australian Archives commenced Territory. She is currently the
indexing Indigenous records. The churches indexed their Link-up Co-ordinator at Karu
records and made them available for family tracing. Aboriginal Family Support
Agency in Darwin. Rosie was
Tracing aids were published and the work of tracing
previously a representative on
families became just a little bit easier with everyone the SNAICC National Executive
working together. holding the portfolio of Families.
In 2007 the Tasmanian Government passed the Bill She was a Community Representative of ‘The Going
to compensate the Stolen Generation people of Tasmania. Home Conference’ in 1994, representing the Garden
The elderly NT Stolen Generation members now hold Point people. She is presently completing her Batchelor
their breath in anticipation and hope that the Draft of Arts (Social Science).
Stolen Generation Compensation Bill 2007 by Senator
Bartlett of the Australian Democrats is progressed through
Parliament and enacted.
1
Cummings, Barbara, Take This Child… From Kahlin Compound to the Retta Dixon Children’s Home, Aboriginal Studies Press,
Canberra 1990
“ “The impact of intervention in the lives of Aboriginal

families has been partially addressed in the Royal
Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. The
Royal Commission found that 43 out of the 99 whose
deaths it investigated had some history of child
removal. While it registered this fact it did not follow
through this finding by establishing the legacy of the
removal practices. Anecdotal and some research
evidence suggest that the fragmentation of families
resulting from these practices has had far-reaching
consequences which persist in the form of fragmented
families today. Other notable effects of this policy
are mental ill-health, confusion of identity, inability
“
to develop social relationships, inadequate parenting
skills amongst those affected.”
SNAICC’s Report to the National

Child Protection Council Regarding
the Development of a National Policy
for the Prevention of Child Abuse
and Neglect in Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Communities, 1993.
A twilight of knowing: the Australian public and the
Bringing Them Home report
By Professor Anna Haebich, Griffith University
The Bringing Them Home report was destined between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and
for controversy. As an official document, it was other voters, of using it to play the race card. Whatever
unprecedented in the power that it gave to Aboriginal his political intentions, his response allowed debate to
and Torres Strait Islander testimony to tell the truth descend into acrimonious mudslinging and character
about the nation’s past. Its findings of cultural genocide assassination of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
and the legacy of trauma were confronting, to say the leaders and their supporters.
least. Couching its findings and recommendations in It is normal for issues to run their course on the
the language of international human rights was like a media fast track and for the fickle public to shift its
red rag to a bull for a parochial nation. The report also attention to other compelling matters – in this case
prompted profound public anguish, with waves of shock, asylum seekers and the threat of terrorism. The Stolen
shame, grief, sympathy and support spreading across the Generations issue slipped from the radar screen fanned
nation epitomised in the image of the then Leader of the on by the oppositional nature of debate that encouraged
Opposition, Kim Beazley, weeping openly as he addressed public questioning, frustration and, finally, fatigue.
federal parliament. “Who is right?”, “How can I ever know?”, “What can I do
Shocked by the report’s revelations, many about it?” and finally and tragically, “Well, who cares?”.
Australians claimed to have known nothing about the Adding to the confusion and sense of helplessness were
Stolen Generations – this sort of thing simply did not sensational media reports of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
happen in a nation where the family is sacrosanct and Islander families in crisis with high levels of domestic
children and parents are separated only as a last resort violence, substance misuse, child abuse, rates of child
and in the children’s best interests. In response to the removal, juvenile incarceration, and adult imprisonment.
Bringing Them Home report a new people’s movement Further fogging the issue was the federal government’s
emerged, expressed in the celebration of Sorry Days, shameless intransigence in rejecting repeated demands
Sorry Books, Journeys of Healing, Reconciliation Marches by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders for an
with ‘SORRY’ written in the sky, and so on. But there were apology and compensation for the Stolen Generations
others who questioned the report or claimed that they linked to a comprehensive package incorporating self-
were not guilty for what happened in the past. Few on determination, sovereignty, a treaty, proper recognition
either side could contemplate the concept of genocide in of native title, economic development, health, education,
Australia, nor were they ready to endorse compensation housing, and so on. Instead Howard offered the lean
that threatened to billow out into millions of dollars of backdoor meal of practical reconciliation and shared
taxpayers’ money. responsibility agreements.
When the public looked to the federal government It may seem hardly surprising then that, despite the
for leadership on the issue they found a culture of denial initial charged emotional response to the Bringing Them
that claimed the Stolen Generations had never happened Home report, many Australians dumped the issue into
and a hard-hearted refusal to apologise. Instead, in 1998 the ‘too hard for me basket’ and let it slide back into the
the federal government offered a $63 million package to twilight zone unresolved. I say ‘back into the twilight
government agencies to address family separation and zone’ deliberately because this was by no means the first
its consequences over a four-year period. Aboriginal and time the issue had been publicly aired only to disappear
Torres Strait Islander stakeholders and organisations off the radar screen. Research for the Bringing Them
were effectively cut out of the loop. In 2000 a Senate Home report and for my book Broken Circles clearly
Committee inquiring into the implementation of the demonstrates that evidence about Aboriginal and Torres
Bringing Them Home report’s recommendations found Strait Islander child removal circulated openly in the
that the government had failed to provide the necessary public arena from early colonial times to the present. It is
leadership or supervision and recommended the creation true that until recent decades few members of the public
of a reparation tribunal, a national memorial, a national could have known the full extent and systematic nature of
apology and a national summit – none of which ever removal practices. However, there was certainly sufficient
eventuated. At the time Prime Minister John Howard evidence out there to expect some public awareness
was accused of capitalising on the issue to drive a wedge of what was happening to Aboriginal and Torres Strait

Islander families. It was therefore puzzling to hear so was just how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
many Australians exclaiming on hearing the disclosures lived and also how they had to be treated ‘for their own
of the Bringing Them Home report, “I’m sorry, I just good’. In the process their treatment became normalised
didn’t know”. to the extent that it became unremarkable, irrelevant and
So what was happening when people said “I’m sorry, almost invisible to white Australians. Indeed, all was as it
I just didn’t know,” when the government removal of should be – there was nothing remarkable or exceptional
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children was so to notice or to question and in the rush of life’s events
widespread and was never a ‘state secret’? Following such things were overlooked and ultimately forgotten.
the Second World War, Albert Speer – Hitler’s principal Now let’s apply the argument to the forcible removal
architect and close collaborator – asserted that he was of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. From
unaware of the Nazi’s Final Solution of Jewish genocide. the late nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century,
In coming to terms with this outrageous claim Speer’s most states and territories introduced discriminatory
biographer Gitta Sereny pondered whether it was regimes for dealing with Aboriginal and Torres Strait
possible for people to operate in “a twilight between Islander families that stood in marked contrast to
knowing and not knowing” when it comes to the ways of treating white families. These incorporated
inhumane treatment of racialised groups in their midst. discriminatory legislation, networks of institutions, rigid
In his 1968 Boyer Lectures, the Australian anthropologist state control of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
WEH Stanner spoke of a peculiar kind of public blindness families and the removal of children. These practices of
– what I call a twilight of knowing and not knowing – child removal became accepted as the norm and, indeed, as
amongst Australians concerning Aboriginal and Torres unremarkable, in official practice and in the public domain.
Strait Islander issues over the years, so that what began While some members of the public may have sympathised
as a “simple matter of forgetting of other possible views with the grief of the mothers, most — if they thought of it
turned under habit and over time into something like a
cult of forgetfulness practised on a national scale.”
Consider this argument. There is an easy slippage
between a mind-set that promotes the distancing White Australians drift in a twilight of knowing and
and dehumanising of groups targeted on the basis of not knowing so that we fail to see, fail to register,
race, age, gender and so on and the acceptance and fail to retain the enormity of what is happening
normalising of their unequal treatment. In the process in relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
their discriminatory treatment becomes normalised people around us.
to the extent that it is rendered unremarkable and
virtually invisible to the wider society, even as it may
assume increasingly harsh forms. Large numbers of
people can tacitly support these processes without fully at all — accepted that separation from their families was
acknowledging the meaning of what they are doing. in the children’s best interests. Indeed, the state’s duty of
They are operating in a twilight state of knowing and care, education and training of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
not knowing. This is not peripheral to what is happening Islander children became synonymous with taking them
but is an integral part of the oppression to which they from their families and subjecting them to ‘civilising’ regimes
contribute directly or indirectly. This state of knowing in institutions or white homes. It was for the children’s own
and not knowing is powerful and obstinate, persisting in good.
the face of circulating knowledge, observable evidence, Here we see a fundamental flaw in our national public
personal encounters and even public protests. understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Let’s apply this to the Australian context. Settler issues. White Australians drift in a twilight of knowing
Australians have a long history of discriminatory attitudes and not knowing so that we fail to see, fail to register, fail
and behaviour towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait to retain the enormity of what is happening in relation to
Islander people. This has encouraged acceptance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people around us. At
processes that dehumanised and distanced Aboriginal the same time we contribute to what is happening through
and Torres Strait Islander people. They were forced our actions and inattention. Aboriginal and Torres Strait
off their land and left to survive in conditions of abject Islander issues surface into public consciousness for a time
poverty that threatened their very survival. They were and arouse outpourings of concern but then subside back
subjected to official policies of protection, segregation, into the twilight zone often unchanged to be forgotten
absorption and assimilation that were embodied in and left to worsen until some event brings them back into
punitive systems of legislative and administrative control. the light again. This remains powerful today. How else to
This discriminatory treatment was observable and explain the public inattention to the Stolen Generations
acceptable to most white Australians. In their minds this issue over the last few years or indifference over present
escalating rates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Anna Haebich is Professor and
child separation? And what of the sudden ‘exposure’ of the Director of the Centre for Public
‘crisis’ in Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory? Culture and Ideas at Griffith
Will this follow the same fate as the Stolen Generations and University, Queensland. Her
slip back into that twilight of knowing and not knowing multi-award-winning book Broken
before real positive changes have been made for Aboriginal Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous
Families 1800–2000 was the first
and Torres Strait Islander people?
national history of the Stolen
Generations. Anna is co-editor of
References Many Voices: Reflections on Experiences of Indigenous Child
Anna Haebich 2000, Broken Circles Fragmenting Indig- Separation, co-author of The Stolen Generations: Separation
enous Families, Fremantle Arts Centre Press, Fremantle. of Aboriginal Children from their Families (1999), producer
of the video WA’s Stolen Generations, and author of
Gitta Sereny 1996, Albert Speer: His Battle With Truth,
For Their Own Good: Aborigines and Government in the
Random House, London.
South West of Western Australia. Her next book, due
WEH Stanner 1969, After the Dreaming: Black and White out in early 2008, is Spinning the Dream – Assimilation in
Australians – an Anthropologist’s View, 1968 Boyer Australia.
Lecture, Australian Broadcasting Commission, Sydney. Anna brings to her research her personal
experiences of Nyungar community life through her
husband Darryl Kickett and her stepchildren and
grandchildren and extended family. She has worked for
various Aboriginal organisations in Western Australia.
1992: My Family Where Are You –

Enquiry into the Removal of Aboriginal
and Islander Children
The Children’s Day theme and poster for

1992 once again called for the national
inquiry into child removal and highlighted the
experiences of the Stolen Generations. The
poster featured a strong image and design by
Clive Atkinson. The theme also highlighted
the search by so many Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander people for their families – adults
who had been removed as children were
now seeking their parents and extended
families, while mothers, fathers, grandparents,
siblings, and other relatives were seeking family
members who had been removed from them
as children.
22
Not one without the other: Human rights and
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children’s well being
go hand in hand
By Terri Libesman, University of Technology, Sydney
On 21 June 2007 the Sydney Morning Herald carried out Islander organisations and the numerous reports with
the following online reader’s poll: respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children’s
needs, and their failure to recognise the importance of
Howard’s intervention in Aboriginal child abuse:
cultural safety as an essential aspect of these children’s
Was the PM right to take such tough measures in the and communities’ well being. These requirements are
Northern territory? recognised and addressed in international human rights
Yes: It’s a huge and tragic problem that needs decisive treaties such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
action which Australia is party to, and in the recommendations
of national reports such as Bringing Them Home, the
No: Aboriginal rights could be set back decades report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their
This poll was referring to the federal government’s well Families.2
publicised intention to utilise the Australian army to take The pervasive media coverage of the most horrible
over approximately 60 Aboriginal communities in the and sensational incidents of abuse in Indigenous
Northern Territory, following a year of intense media communities contributes to a perception of Aboriginal
coverage with respect to sexual abuse of children in the and Torres Strait Islander communities as outside of civil
Territory’s Aboriginal communities. This poll could be society and lawless. Within this distorted framework
interpreted as suggesting that you either support child the emergence of asimilationist ideas is able to take
protection and the prime minister’s ‘tough’ measures hold. This kind of denigration is not only destructive of
or you support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander the creative and successful efforts that Aboriginal and
rights. At the Australian Social Policy Conference held in Torres Strait Islander organisations and communities
July this year a speaker, in the context of discussing the have made, the self image and identity of Aboriginal and
Northern Territory ‘emergency’ response, suggested that Torres Strait Islander people, but also fuels the racist
the Bringing Them Home report deterred child welfare fear that supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
interventions with respect to Aboriginal and Torres law, culture and communities is implicitly supporting
Strait Islander children. These examples are provided to child abuse, corruption and failed initiatives. However,
illustrate two common and related misconceptions that successive state, territory and federal governments have
have made it uncomfortable for many people to criticise failed to respond to reports and recommendations with
the harsh and extreme measures being taken by the respect to violence and child abuse in Aboriginal and
Australian Government in the Northern Territory. They Torres Strait Islander communities, many researched or
have also contributed to a view that to support the human advocated for by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
rights approach to addressing Aboriginal and Torres organisations, over the last 20 years3.
Strait Islander children’s contemporary needs advocated Governments have failed to implement the two-
in Bringing Them Home, and by many Aboriginal and tiered recommendations with respect to Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous organisations Torres Strait Islander children’s welfare recommended by
nationally and internationally, is to neglect these Bringing Them Home, which will be discussed below,
children’s safety. and governments have failed to address the structural
This article suggests that the failure to address inequality and poverty which so many Aboriginal and
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children’s needs Torres Strait Islander communities face. At the heart
is not to do with denial on the part of Aboriginal and of safe communities are communities whose laws
Torres Strait Islander communities but rather a failure and culture create an environment of order, stability
by successive governments to address the enormous and security. Disorder and despair are by products of
inequality in services and resources available to environments where culture has been eroded, and where
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities1, poverty and structural inequality is pervasive4.
their failure to respond to Aboriginal and Torres Strait
in nine communities across the country, a consistent
message was that there is an ongoing perception of
child welfare departments as failing communities
and an ongoing lack of trust or faith in child welfare
departments6. This is an important and disturbing finding.
Over a decade after the release of Bringing Them Home,
child welfare departments have failed to shift perceptions
about them or their role within Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander communities. Governments have also
failed to implement recommendations 43 and 44 of
Bringing Them Home, which are key recommendations
with respect to current child welfare made by the Inquiry.
These are discussed below.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children
continue to be over represented in their contact with
all child welfare departments with the greatest level of
over representation in out of home care7. At the same
time Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children,
families and communities face structural poverty and
systemic inequality. Peak Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander organisations have called for national legislation
and a national approach with respect to child welfare
in their communities. While the need for a national
approach to addressing these children’s well being has
Governments’ failure not been heeded, the federal government, on the fortieth
anniversary of the 1967 referendum, is unilaterally
It is disturbing that on the tenth anniversary of responding to child sexual assault in the Northern
Bringing Them Home key findings with respect to Territory in a manner which defies international human
the welfare and well being of Aboriginal and Torres rights law, the rule of law and national and international
Strait Islander children have not been addressed by research with respect to Indigenous children’s well
Australian governments. While communities told the being8. It is timely to reflect on the recommendations
National Inquiry about their need for effective child of the National Inquiry with respect to Aboriginal and
protection services, not a single submission from an Torres Strait Islander children’s well being, which place
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisation saw their welfare in a framework of equality, democracy and
welfare department intervention as an effective way international human rights.
of dealing with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
child protection needs. The National Inquiry noted that Bringing Them Home’s recommendations
There are two fundamental matters which need to be
addressed with respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Over a decade after the release of Bringing Them Islander children’s well being. The first is addressing
Home, child welfare departments have failed to the structural poverty and inequality that so many
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities face9.
shift perceptions about them or their role within
The second is addressing the cultural safety and identity
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. of children and communities10. Both these issues are
essential for securing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
children’s fundamental human rights including their
child welfare departments will need to be completely safety, dignity and security. Bringing Them Home’s
overhauled. While legislative reviews have taken place in two-tiered recommendations with respect to child welfare
each state and territory, and some constructive reforms enable both these needs to be addressed. The Inquiry
have been implemented with respect to Aboriginal and noted the desire by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Torres Strait Islander children, they fall far short of the organisations to exercise greater control over their own
recommendations made in Bringing Them Home or children and young people. The Inquiry also recognised
reforms in other jurisdictions such as Canada, the US that different communities have different levels of
and New Zealand5. In recent focus group meetings with capacity and aspirations with respect to controlling
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents and carers child welfare. The Inquiry recommended that national

legislation be negotiated and adopted between Australian in any court proceedings, that decision makers
governments and key Indigenous organisations, that ascertain if a child is Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander
this legislation bind Australian governments, that it when a child comes to the attention of any statutory
facilitate formation of binding agreements including organisation14, that accredited Aboriginal and Torres
either the partial or complete transfer of jurisdiction for Strait Islander organisations be consulted at each stage
child welfare to communities, that adequate funding and of decision making with respect to that child, and that
resources be provided to support the measures adopted legislative recognition be given to the Aboriginal Child
by communities and that the human rights of Aboriginal Placement Principle, including the order of priority for
and Torres Strait Islander children be protected regardless the placement of children and wherever possible their
of whether an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ongoing contact with their family15.
or non-Indigenous organisation is responsible for These recommendations develop minimum standards
departmental and other functions11. for the immediate protection of Indigenous children and
The Inquiry also recommended that legislation that a longer-term framework for addressing underlying and
established minimum standards for the treatment of all structural problems. This two tiered approach recognises
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young that immediate reform is necessary but that there also
people, irrespective of whether they are dealt with by needs to be a longer term commitment of resources and
government or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander that a process is required for capacity building within
organisations, be developed. This legislation was to be communities. These recommendations are founded
negotiated by the Council of Australian Governments on fundamental human rights including the right to
(COAG) and peak Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander equality, cultural identity, safety, and the civil protection
organisations12. The Inquiry also recommended that a of the rule of law. This is in stark contrast to the federal
system for accreditation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait government’s approach in the Northern Territory which
Islander organisations which perform child welfare proposes the discriminatory confiscation of Aboriginal
functions be established13, that bench mark standards property, the discriminatory withholding of social
be established for defining the best interests of the security payments based on race and place of residence
child, that requirements be established for consultation rather than any other neutral criteria, and the arbitrary
with accredited Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander application of laws to Aboriginal peoples in the prescribed
organisations, that children have separate representation communities, which is in breach of the rule of law.
“ It begins, I think, with the act of recognition. Recognition

that it was we who did the dispossessing. We took the
traditional lands and smashed the traditional way of life.
We brought the disasters. The alcohol. We committed
the murders. We took the children from their mothers.
We practised discrimination and exclusion.
It was our ignorance and our prejudice. And our failure

to imagine these things being done to us. With some
noble exceptions, we failed to make the most basic human
response and enter into their hearts and minds. We
failed to ask – how would I feel if this were done to me?
As a consequence, we failed to see that what we were

“
doing degraded all of us.
Then Prime Minister of Australia, Paul

Keating, in his ‘Redfern Speech’ to launch
the International Year for the World’s
Indigenous Peoples, 10 December 1992.
Conclusion Terri Libesman is a Senior
Lecturer in the Faculty of Law
The 1967 referendum afforded the Commonwealth the at the University of Technology,
opportunity to make laws for Aboriginal and Torres Sydney. Terri has worked with
Strait Islander peoples. The campaigns to amend the SNAICC and researched in the
Constitution were in the context of calls for political area of Aboriginal and Torres
and civil equality. It is a great irony that on the Strait Islander children’s well
fortieth anniversary of the referendum, and the tenth being for over a decade. She has
anniversary of Bringing Them Home, we are witnessing conducted research for a number
interventions by the Commonwealth, in the name of of public inquiries including the Royal Commission
child welfare, which derogate from Aboriginal and Torres into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and the National
Strait Islander peoples’ rights. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Children from their Families. She has
Islander children’s well being will be served by engaging
researched and published in the areas of national and
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in
international legislation and policy which better serves
reforms and processes to attain equality and cultural Indigenous children and families and international human
safety for their children. rights law with respect to Indigenous children and
The myth of a choice between Aboriginal and Torres families.
Strait Islander human rights and the safety of children
is founded on the false premise that Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander rights are not directly connected
to the safety and well being of children and that the
Commonwealth has championed Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander child safety in the context of a silence
on this issue from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
organisations. The tenth anniversary of the Bringing
Them Home affords the opportunity to respond to these
myths and to renew calls for legislation and policy that
supports equality and cultural security for Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander children and communities.
1
Australian Government Productivity Commission, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2005 (July 2005).
2
HREOC (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission) Bringing them home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, 1997. Referred to as Bringing them home in this article.
3
See for example Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce, Breaking the Silence: creating the future; addressing child sexual assault
in Aboriginal communities, Attorney General’s Department, NSW, 2006; Robertson, B., The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Women’s Task Force on Violence Report, Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Development, QLD, 2000; Atkinson, J,
Trauma Trails: recreating Song Lines, Spinifex press, Melbourne, 2002.
4
Bamblett, Muriel, ‘Stop the abuse of our children’s culture,’ SNAICC News, August–September 2006.
5
For an overview see Bell, T., and Libesman, T., Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Protection Outcomes Report, DHS Victoria
and SNAICC, November 2006
6
SNAICC and Libesman, T, Building Resilience in Australian Indigenous Communities, Secretariat of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Child Care, forthcoming.
7
Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision, Report on Government Services (2006), Chapter 15. The rate of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in out-of-home care is more than six times greater than the national rate of non-Indigenous
children in out-of-home care arrangements.
8
See press release 21 June 2007, The Hon Mal Brough MP, Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
9
ABS, National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Survey, 2002.
10
Chandler, M and Lalonde, C, ‘Cultural continuity as a hedge against suicide in Canada’s First nations’, Transcultural Psychiatry, 35(2):
191-219 1998; SNAICC and Libesman, T, Building Resilience in Australian Indigenous Communities, Secretariat of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Child Care, forthcoming.
11
Recommendation 43, HEREOC 1997 (Ibid).
12
13
14
15

Aboriginal Organisation calls for Enquiry into
‘Stolen Children’: SNAICC media statement calling
for the National Inquiry into the Removal of Aboriginal
Children, issued on National Aboriginal & Islander
Children’s Day, 4 August 1991
The national umbrella organisation of Aboriginal Child psychiatric disorder to be higher amongst adults who
Care Agencies in Australia, the Secretariat of National were removed from families or institutionalised as
Aboriginal and Islander Child Care (SNAICC), issued a call children. We have also found many of the children
today for a national public enquiry into past government Aboriginal Child Care Agencies deal with are the children
policies of removing Aboriginal and Islander children of adults who experienced childhood separation or
from their families. institutionalisation. It is also no coincidence that the
Literally thousands of Aboriginal adults live with the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody
trauma caused by these removal policies. Many of the found that half of the deaths it investigated were of
mothers and fathers who had their children taken away people who were of this group of ‘stolen children’.”
are guilt and grief stricken. Their children are traumatised “This issue is a ‘blank spot’ in the history of Australia.
by the thought that they were unwanted. Identity conflicts The damage and trauma these policies caused are felt
rage in these children – now adults – who have lived every day by Aboriginal people. They internalise their
most their lives as non-Aboriginal people,” Mr Brian grief, guilt and confusion, inflicting further pain on
Butler, the Chairman of SNAICC, commented. themselves and others around them. It is about time the
The call was made to coincide with this year’s Australian Government openly accepted responsibility for
National Aboriginal and Islander children’s Day, held their actions and compensate those affected.” Mr Butler
every year on 4th of August. called for a Human Rights Commission Enquiry into the
Although very little ‘hard’ data is available on the removal of Aboriginal children.
numbers of children that were removed, Dr Peter Read “We want an enquiry to determine how many of our
of the History Department at the Australian National children were taken away and how this occurred. We want
University has estimated that at least 5000 were taken the enquiry to hear from Aboriginal people about how they
away in New South Wales alone. have been affected and what must be done to compensate.
Dr Read has said that one in six Aboriginal children were “We also want to consider whether these policies fall
removed from their families, leaving no family untouched. within the definition of genocide in article 2 (e) of the
“Two recent studies on mental illness in the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.”
Aboriginal community have shown the incidence of
Human Rights Commissioners meet with
SNAICC, June 1995
First published in SNAICC Newsletter in June 1995
SNAICC representatives, Brian Butler, Wanda Braybrook The vacancies for the Enquiry unit will be advertised
and Nigel D’Souza, met with the President and five in national papers, A & TSI media and will be circulated
Commissioners of the Human Rights and Equal through the HREOC mailing list.
Opportunity Commission (HREOC) on June 9th to discuss Apart from the staff of the Enquiry, the Commission
issues related to the establishment of the National Enquiry is keen to appoint a part-time Commissioner to hear
into the Removal of Aboriginal Children. evidence and assist the Enquiry. The Commission has not
The President of the Human Rights and Equal made a decision about this matter as yet.
Opportunity Commission, Sir Ronald Wilson, said the The HREOC will also be appointing a number of
meeting with SNAICC was acknowledgment that SNAICC people to an advisory committee for the Enquiry. SNAICC
had been pressing for this enquiry for a number of has been asked to suggest appropriate people for this
years. He added that he would be meeting with other Committee. It is expected that SNAICC will have a place
peak organisations because he was keen to ensure that on this Committee.
Aboriginal people feel they “own” this Enquiry. He said After hearing about the structure of the Enquiry
that the HREOC had already done some talking about SNAICC representatives raised a number of concerns.
the structure of the Enquiry but wanted frank responses The establishment of the Enquiry has raised
to the proposals. The HREOC President also said that the expectations that it would assess compensation for those
Enquiry would be a Human Rights Commissions Enquiry affected by the removal policies. The President of the
which would involve all the Human Commissioners. Sir HREOC, Sir Ronald Wilson, said that it was not within
Ronald then asked the Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander the terms of reference of the Enquiry to look at this as
Social justice Commissioner to outline the plans of the it could be in contempt of court in relation to the cases
Commission. brought by Aboriginal people in courts around Australia.
Commissioner Mick Dodson began by saying that Compensation also needed to be addressed according
he expected there to be many occasions like the meeting to individual cases. The courts, Sir Ronald added, would
with SNAICC during the course of the Enquiry. He said decide the matter of monetary compensation.
no money had become available for the Enquiry as Asked whether these court cases being brought by
yet from the Federal Government. He expected this to Aboriginal people would be affected by the Enquiry,
be provided in the new financial year. The HREOC has the HREOC President and the A & TSI Social Justice
appointed one of it’s own staff – Jason Field – to work Commissioner replied with a categorical “no”.
on the Enquiry at this stage. Commissioner Dodson said The meeting closed with a commitment from SNAICC
that there was a lot of interest in the Enquiry. He said that Chairman, Brian Butler, that SNAICC would support
there is an abundance of existing materials on this subject the Enquiry to ensure a successful outcome. Mr. Butler
both locally and overseas. Because of the insufficient also stated that he felt that the amount allocated for the
funds available it was important to make the best use Enquiry was inadequate. This was underlined by SNAICC
of the dollars available. He did not want the Enquiry to Executive member, Wanda Braybrook, who also said this
“reinvent the wheel”. It would need to conduct a good Enquiry had the potential to be as big if not bigger that
audit of the literature and the research available. the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody.
Commissioner Dodson said that he expected She said that money should not be a consideration in the
the HREOC to employ six people to run the Enquiry. planning and running of it.
This would include the head of the Enquiry unit, who The full SNAICC Executive will be meeting with
would be expected to be highly qualified to handle the HREOC in Sydney in August to discuss matters further.
administration and coordinate the writing of the final The HREOC does not expect the Enquiry to get off the
report. All the six positions would be Commonwealth ground before August. Aboriginal people will be kept up
classifications and would have the standard A & TSI to date with developments in the Enquiry through an
criteria attached to them. The Commission is keen to Enquiry newsletter.
target Indigenous people for the available positions.

Some listen, some won’t hear: the legacy of the
Bringing Them Home report
By Professor Larissa Behrendt, University of Technology, Sydney
When I was growing up, I came to understand the impact Most insidious was its attack on the report where it
of the policy of removing Aboriginal and Torres Strait said that the practice only affected one in ten children
Islander children from their families as I came to learn (a controversial figure that is disputed by the experts).
about the history of my own family and the policy’s By referring to and embracing a cold hard statistic, the
impact on them. My grandmother was taken away from government was rejecting and silencing the voices and
Dungalear Station, my father was raised in an institution narratives from within the report. And it was silencing
and we didn’t find our family until I was 11 or 12. I went not just the stories of the one in ten who were taken away
to a high school where my brother and I were the only but also silencing the stories of all those who were left
Aboriginal children and it used to make me angry that my behind.
classmates knew nothing about the policy that impacted The federal government’s attack on Bringing Them
on every Aboriginal family that I knew. It was a policy Home, its rejection of the recommendations and its
that explained all of the issues that my community dealt
with, all the issues that the other students at my school
didn’t understand.
I had thought then that if people understood the I thought that these stories about human suffering
stories about the Stolen Generations, knew the way that would at least help Australians understand why it is
it impacted on the people who were taken from their that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people face
families, institutionalised and exploited, and knew the the issues that we do and why we have the political
way that it broke the hearts of the mothers and fathers, agenda that we have.
brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles and grandparents
who were left behind, they would begin to understand
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people better. I
thought that these stories about human suffering would at dismissal of the powerful stories that the report contained
least help Australians understand why it is that Aboriginal were representative not just of its stance on the Stolen
and Torres Strait Islander people face the issues that we Generations but an indication of its general rejection of
do and why we have the political agenda that we have. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander history and culture.
When the Bringing Them Home report was first The same attitude of trying to silence Aboriginal and
released, I thought that this was that moment in which Torres Strait Islander accounts of Australian history that
the country would begin this education. The report was would emerge in the federal government’s support of the
so powerful because, amongst all of the reports that have public commentators who would engage in what would
been done about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander become known as ‘the history wars’.
people, it included the stories of the people who were These ‘wars’ will also attack the ‘black armband
taken away and the people they were taken from. And view of history’, dismiss the idea that massacres occurred
they were powerful stories. on the frontier, and would generally reject the oral
The official response to the report was a lesson histories of Aboriginal people. This was a ‘war’ that
for me. Rather than the report being the moment I had the government would rage through some of the key
always imagined – a point where Australians knew the national cultural institutions by appointing those who
true history of the Stolen Generations in a most powerful shared their ideological pre-disposition to everything
way – the federal government sought to dismiss the from the National Museum of Australian to the Australian
report and its recommendations. It claimed that the Broadcasting Commission.
report was overly emotive because of its use of the word Although academics and social commentators called
‘genocide’ to describe the practice of systematically these debates a war about ‘Aboriginal history’, I think that
removing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children was misleading. There was not one Aboriginal and Torres
from their families. It also claimed that many of the Strait Islander person whose view of their own history
children were removed for their own good or with the was changed through the semantic debates about whether
best of intentions. the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
children amounted to ‘genocide’ or how many people Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander housing is under-
were killed on the frontier. These were not debates about funded by over $2 billion a year in the Northern Territory
‘Aboriginal’ history. They were debates about non- alone, money set aside for the government’s proposed
Indigenous identity and about the story white people panacea of ‘home ownership schemes’ remains unspent
wanted to tell about their own history. because Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are
Bringing Them Home appeared at the beginning of not in a position to take the offer up. From the failure
what would not just be the start of the Howard era, it was of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) trial
accompanied by the rise of conservatism in Australia. The sites to the silent move away from shared responsibility
rejections of the recommendations in the report coincided agreements, there is overwhelming evidence that
with the announcement by Howard that his government government policy on Aboriginal and Torres Strait
would reject the ‘rights agenda’ and instead focus on what Islander issues has been an abject failure.
it called ‘practical reconciliation’. Howard claimed that So while ‘practical reconciliation’ has failed to
this meant that they would deal with ‘real’ issues such as produce results for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
housing, health, education and employment. people, we have also lost momentum on the rights
Now, over eleven years into the Howard era, it agenda. It must also be remembered that the protection of
is clear that ‘practical reconciliation’ did not result in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights does not occur
policies that improved Aboriginal and Torres Strait in a lineal progression. There is often an assumption that,
Islander socio-economic conditions. In fact, Access as time goes by, rights protections will gradually improve
Economics has estimated that basic Aboriginal and Torres – that even if we take one step back, we will eventually
Strait Islander health needs are currently under-funded take two steps forward.
by over $460 million. Despite budget surpluses, this Recent experience in Australia should highlight the
deficit has not been fixed and this year there is evidence fact that rights that have been recognised in the past –
that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs native title and heritage protection – can be extinguished.
portfolio is underspent by over $600 million. While So it is more accurate to view Aboriginal and Torres
1995: Never Again … Break the

Chains
For Children’s Day in 1995, SNAICC again

highlighted the experiences of the Stolen
Generations and made the link to con-
temporary child removal practices. The
theme follows the subject of the painting
by Isobel Coe, chosen for SNAICC’s Chil-
dren’s Day poster that year. The paint-
ing, originally entitled Kidnapped, shows
Aboriginal children being forcibly removed
by the juvenile justice authorities. The
painting depicts a practice that has been
occurring for many years and that began
as the infamous practice of forcible
removals. The theme and the poster
link this practice with the contemporary
experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander children being removed. Aborigi-
nal and Torres Strait Islander children are
over-represented in child welfare and ju-
venile justice figures, suggesting a continu-
ation of the old practice of intervention
and social control of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander family life.

Strait Islander rights – and indeed rights in general – as · There needs to be a better understanding of how
something that has high and low watermarks. It is an inequalities have become institutionalised, allowing
important observation in terms of strategy as it means ‘formal equality’ to become a tool that maintains an
more diligence must be exercised in the way that gains in unequal status quo and perpetuates injustice.
protection are made at moments of increased support for
· There needs to be a thorough understanding of
these issues.
what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander political
Crushing the debate about rights – rather than
aspirations are and an exploration of how those
seeking to reinvigorate it – will mean an impoverishment
aspirations can be accommodated within Austra-
of the rights agenda the next time we reach a sympathetic
lia’s institutions. This means understanding what
moment. It is for this reason that we should be asking the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people mean
questions: what should the relationship look like? What
when we say we want our ‘sovereignty’ recognised
do you want in a treaty?
and we want to be ‘self-determining’.
The challenge to those of us who embrace a rights
agenda is the need to focus more intently on the economic Legal victories need to be coupled with attempts to
rights that can and should be promoted within such a change public (mis)perceptions about Aboriginal and
framework. Better links need to be formed between the Torres Strait Islander Australians. These changes need to
rhetoric, substance and form of rights protection and be coupled with changes to Australia’s institutions.
the placing of food on the table, better health, clean To counter the impacts and legacies of colonisation,
water, suitable housing and access to educational and there needs to be a holistic approach to the protection of
employment opportunities. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights. This means
Until the relevance of the rights framework becomes that the either/or tension that has developed between
clear to those who need its protection the most, the ‘practical reconciliation’ and the rights framework needs
changes needed will not gain the support required to be rejected and replaced by strategies, initiatives and
to implement them. Without that support, we will be policies that seek to develop a better understanding about
unable to implement the changes that will go to the the relationship between policy, economics and rights.
heart of overturning the psychological terra nullius still These must also find a better balance between effective
pervasive in our Constitution, laws and policies. short-term solutions and the longer-term aspirations
The situation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities
Islander people in Australia demands a resolution that contained in the concept of ‘self-determination’ as we
considers the desirability of socio-economic equality, have defined it.
the importance of inclusion and the demands of political And most importantly of all, we must continue to tell
and cultural recognition. That is, it needs to embrace a our stories and not let anyone silence us.
concept of substantive equality, a notion of equality that
is measured by results and impacts rather than by the
formal application of the same rules. The way forward Larissa Behrendt (Eualeyai/
is one that moves away from the zealous embrace Kamillaroi) is Professor of Law and
of neo-liberal economic policy and instead seeks to Director of Research at Jumbunna
match economic sustainability with the protection of Indigenous House of Learning,
University of Technology, Sydney.
fundamental rights. It is a model that measures quality
She is a practicing barrister and
of life by considering and valuing non-economic factors
a Land Commissioner on the
such as cultural heritage and environmental protection Land and Environment Court.
alongside the economic factors that are taken as Larissa is an award-winning writer
indicators of our performance. whose novel Home (UQP) was inspired by her family’s
The challenge of improving rights protection needs to experience with the policy of removing children.
be approached by broader strategies than piecemeal court
wins and band-aid welfare measures. Finding a better
approach to the protection of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander rights is a multifaceted process that must include
the following:
· There must be acknowledgment of past wrongs
committed against Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander people. This includes recognition of the
failure to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander sovereignty.
“This story’s right, this story’s true...” 1
By Jim Brooks
In this article I plan to describe some aspects of what the Opportunities Commission office in Castlereagh Street,
National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Sydney, accompanied by a cousin or friend, wearing a
Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families was face set with resolution and deep anxiety as she glided
like from an insider’s perspective, and to reflect on the through the marble foyer to tell her story. Such visits
release of the report and some aspects of its effects. were often unannounced and a staff member would make
The Inquiry was set a task of breathtaking size and arrangements to record what that person had to say, and
complexity: to note the documents produced – usually some brief,
stern and high-handed government letters, or desperate
· to examine past laws, practices, and policies;
correspondence from a family member. Second, during
· to consider the need for legislative change to ad- public hearings someone might present themselves and
dress the needs of those affected; harangue staff about the pointlessness of the Inquiry.
· to consider compensation for those affected; and They would angrily and noisily disparage the Inquiry’s
process, day after day. Then on the last day of hearings in
· to examine current Indigenous child placement that city, he would confront a staff member and demand
laws, policies, and practices. (This term alone would that his story be recorded then and there.
have warranted a stand-alone inquiry and report.) Third, rosters of people who wanted to tell their
The context for the Inquiry was difficult, and many stories would be established and staff members were
factors required management or affected the process, allocated to record them privately, simultaneous with
including: public hearings involving government representatives,
churches, or welfare organisations. The resources
· tension between the progress of certain civil actions available to the Inquiry and the timeframe set for
against the Commonwealth and the Inquiry process; completion were excruciatingly short. Frequently those
· the short time frame between selection of Secre- wracking stories of grief, loss, sexual abuse and emotional
tariat staff and commencement of public hearings; and psychological damage were poured out to a tired
Commissioner or staff member doing their best in a
· concern by a major stakeholder about the appropri-
cramped meeting room or a staffer’s motel room.
ateness of Sir Ron Wilson’s role in the Inquiry given
There was little support for those who told their
his association, through the Uniting Church, with
stories, other than that which could be provided or
Moore River Children’s Home;
arranged by the local Aboriginal health service. Staff,
· a tragic death by suicide of a respected Indigenous generally, were not trained in counselling. Joylene
activist and personal sufferer of abuse at the com- Koolmatrie’s valuable assistance as a Indigenous social
mencement of the public hearings in Perth; worker was not secured until the Inquiry’s hearing
· disruptive state elections and the change of federal process was well under way. There was a risk that
government; the process could be dangerous for people telling
their stories, as traumatic memories and events were
· reconciling questions of individuals’ confidentiality recalled from years before. Those telling their stories
with the aim of publicising the policies and prac- were not guaranteed support, and the staff and Inquiry
tices of removal; Commissioners listening to them were not professionally
· establishing appropriate processes for storing confi- prepared or supported.
dential material; Despite these constraints, the process of telling
and being listened to by – as Sir Ron Wilson described it –
· identifying support for people who came forward “someone in authority or who seemed to be in authority”
with their life stories, which frequently involved seemed generally to be positive, particularly when that
experiences of physical and sexual abuse. listener was empathetic and understanding of the teller’s
The Inquiry process provided validation of Aboriginal experience.
and Torres Strait Islander experience. Typically, I recall being impressed by the extraordinary
individuals presented their evidence to the inquiry in one skill and integrity of Mick Dodson, the Aboriginal and
of three ways. First, it was not an uncommon experience Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner who
for an individual to appear at the Human Rights and Equal shared the workload with the indomitable Sir Ron

Wilson, but on whom a huge personal responsibility a willingness by the parliament to actually document
fell. Mick didn’t actually say this – and anyone who (through budget papers, for example) the atrocious
understands his modesty and the gruff grunting Mick disadvantage experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait
passes off as conversation would not expect him to – but Islander people, and there was an acknowledgement by
it seemed to me that a disproportionate burden for the the prime minister of brutal dispossession and non-
Inquiry’s process and outcomes was forced upon him as Indigenous peoples’ responsibility for the consequences.
an Aboriginal person in a high profile position within the However, the report’s release coincided with the
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. election of the Howard government and the beginning
The skills and abilities of the Indigenous Co- of retelling the story of this country’s occupation
Commissioners, women who – often at short notice – and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’
proved themselves great listeners, and great contributors dispossession. The country’s new leader quickly
to the drafts of the report, were remarkable and crucial characterised acceptance of the policies and practices of
to the success of the hearings. Members of the Indigenous removal as a ‘black armband view of history’. Ridiculous
Advisory Council who provided direction, reviewed the claims and counter-claims were made in national media
draft report, and shaped the report’s recommendations, about who was and who wasn’t ‘stolen’, and what they
were hugely valuable. l noted the willingness of might have become if they had or hadn’t been. In the
Indigenous people repeatedly to take more than their fair process, the experience of people who were traumatised
share of responsibility for exploring our mutual history
and providing ways forward.
The social climate was right for the release of the
report. Whenever the issue arose at that time on a bus,
Even people who show no interest in Aboriginal and
in a taxi, around a school, or on talk-back radio, most Torres Strait Islander issues, or who find land rights,
Australians would express disapproval of the policies native title, or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
of forced removal. And they still do. Even people who health issues too difficult or too confronting, hold
show no interest in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander strong views against taking kids from their families.
issues, or who find land rights, native title, or Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander health issues too difficult or
too confronting, hold strong views against taking kids
from their families. That opinion seems to me to be borne singly and collectively was belittled and doubt was cast
of a strong, innately humanistic position: that the best upon the veracity of the Stolen Generations’ experiences.
place for kids is with their families; that the cold care of Upon release of the report media interest focussed
institutions can never replace a loving family; and that on whether John Howard’s government would say ‘sorry’
families should be supported to care for children. The to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people for those
report, by reproducing fragments of experience, added past policies. Howard quickly indicated that he would
detail and personality to vague events most Australians not, and claimed that there would be potential liability
regard as repugnant and regrettable. for compensation if he did. The question of liability
The political climate, however, was all wrong for flowing from an apology was explored during the Inquiry
the release of the report. The process of establishing process. The issue was canvassed in public hearings
the Inquiry had not been undertaken with bipartisan with state governments, all of whom have subsequently
support. The significance of this fact later became clear. effected parliamentary apologies and not collapsed under
John Howard’s newly elected government had not the weight of compensation claims. Sydney solicitor
expressed support for the Inquiry (though individual Desmond Sweeney wrote an excellent paper designed for
members were instrumental in it coming about). The new inclusion in the report as a stand-alone piece. The effect
government refused to participate in the public hearings of Sweeney’s paper was to rebut the anticipated response
and demonstrated no commitment to implement the from the Howard government that an apology on behalf
recommendations. The Howard government’s public of the Commonwealth government might expose the
relationship with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander taxpayers of Australia to financial risk. Sweeney’s paper
people began in a confrontational way, and the Human was not included in the final report for reasons of space.
Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission was perceived The smokescreen of liability was thrown up over the issue
as a likely early target for cost-cutting and reform. of an apology at the first opportunity by the government,
Under the Keating government, the concept of and media concern with the apology drew attention
reconciliation seemed to be broadly accepted. Despite away from exploring the government’s willingness to
its inadequacies, the package associated with the Native implement the other recommendations, which were
Title Act introduced at the end of 1993 reflected, amongst practical, measurable, and consistent with what the
other things, parliamentary acceptance of a right to government later defined as a commitment to ‘practical
compensation for loss of native title rights. There was reconciliation’.
The Inquiry concluded that the policies of removal found each other as adults. After years of deliberation,
were genocidal. The definition of genocide reflects they set off to visit their mother’s community, far from
an intentional eradication of a people. The aim of their capital city upbringing. The bus on which they
assimilation guided the policies. It seems to me that the travelled set them down, and they squinted around in the
arguments publicly advanced in support of those policies harsh sunlight, suddenly unsure of their next step. They
are not far removed from the arguments advanced at approached some old ladies who were sitting in the shade
present in support of drastic, uniformed intervention of a nearby tree. Before the travellers could speak, the old
in remote communities in the Northern Territory. Then, ladies stood and hugged them. “Oh,” the old ladies said,
those arguments attracted the interest of the churches “we have been waiting for you!” That story spoke to me
who eagerly facilitated the process of removal and about resilience, the strength of family and social ties,
institutionalisation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait and love.
Islander kids. Justification for the policies was based
then, as now, upon expectations of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander parents, their access to and use of Jim Brooks was the Secretary
alcohol, amoral influences, and gambling, and the rights of the National Inquiry into the
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander kids to education Separation of Aboriginal and
and health care, and to lives free from abuse. Torres Strait Islander Children
Yet the current government quickly declared – in from their Families from late
1995 until early 1997.
response to fears expressed within those Territory
Jim is a lawyer who has
communities – that removal of children from their
worked with Aboriginal Legal
families is not on the agenda this time around. We
Aid, as Regional Director of the
could conclude that Australia’s government has learned
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission/Anti-
from the past. We need to ask ourselves why though,
Discrimination Commission, as Regional Manager of the
if the government holds the interests of Aboriginal
National Native Title Tribunal, and as General Manager
and Torres Strait Islander children paramount, why is
of the Cape York Land Council.
there no energetic effort to address the documented
He currently specialises in mediation, facilitation,
socio-economic disadvantage of urban Aboriginal and
native title/land negotiations, and discrimination matters.
Torres Strait Islander people? Will current and future
programmes of action deliver a real and enabling
economy to remote communities? Why is there no
support for traditional owners to secure and enjoy native
title, for the benefit of the children?
And time will tell whether the hidden cost of this
‘helping hand’ for Aboriginal kids in NT this time around
is the loss of the last of their land.
I recall, at a NAIDOC rally after the release of the
Bringing Them Home report, being asked whether the
Inquiry heard any positive stories. After an achingly long
time I recalled one. I could have mentioned:
· the resilience of individuals who have forged good
lives and loving relationships despite the shattering
experiences of their youth;
· the genuine efforts of the odd church or govern-
ment employee who did their best within the mis-
sion environment, and loving foster parents; or
· the extraordinary thoughtfulness and effort
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communi-
ties have shown in grappling with reintegration of
people who were removed or their descendants.
But I remembered instead one story that I recall hearing
in a beige motel room. Three siblings, whose mother was
taken from her remote community, and who themselves
were scattered through foster homes and institutions, had
1
Archie Roach, ‘Took the children away’, Mushroom Records, 1990.

“Imagine seeing us come home”: Reflections on
the impact and legacy of the Bringing Them Home report
By Tom Calma, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Human Rights
and Equal Opportunity Commission
When you read about our mothers losing Indeed, the feeling that HREOC ‘was letting them down’
their children – forever, perhaps you mirrors a sentiment that still exists within the Aboriginal
should take that to heart… 1 and Torres Straits Islander community today. For while
the moral imperative of the recommendations is clear,
For many in our community who belong to the the government’s responses have been characterised by
generations of children forcibly removed from their initial denial and ongoing inaction.
parents, the event of their removal has become a defining The Australian Government’s resistance to a number
element of their personal history. For the broader of the recommendations of the Bringing Them Home
Australian community, the National Inquiry into the report has impeded progress toward community healing.
Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander While every state and territory government issued
Children from Their Families, and the subsequent motions of apology following the publication of Bringing
Bringing Them Home report by the Human Rights and
Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC), have ensured
that the experiences of the Stolen Generations are now
accepted as part of our collective history. One of the most abiding impacts of the Bringing
When the Inquiry’s report was first published in Them Home report for our community has
1997, one of the darkest aspects of our nation’s history been the public acknowledgement of our
was finally exposed. The fact an inquiry was initiated
experiences of removal and loss of culture.
at all owes much to one man, HREOC’s then President,
the late Sir Ronald Wilson. His reflections as the co-
However, there are also many for whom the
Chairperson of the Inquiry are telling of the personal and Inquiry and the report reopened emotional
professional impact of that experience: wounds without providing the opportunity for
healing.
In chairing the National Inquiry into the removal
of Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander children
from their families, I had to relate to hundreds
of stories of personal devastation, pain and loss.
It was a life-changing experience. An apology Them Home, the present federal government’s refusal to
begins the healing process. Apology means apologise to the Stolen Generations over the last decade
understanding, a willingness to enter into the continues to be particularly divisive. Many Australians
suffering. It implies a commitment to do more.2 have not forgotten that in 2000, the then federal Minister
for Indigenous Affairs, John Herron, went so far as to
As Sir Ronald’s words suggest, the journey of healing claim there was no such thing as a stolen generation.3
initiated by Bringing Them Home presents enormous Despite this stance by our political leadership,
challenges to Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander Bringing Them Home has continued to influence
and non-Indigenous Australians alike. Governments, Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander social policy and
the Churches and other parties have also struggled to advocacy across a wide range of issues. These include the
come to terms with their responsibility for developing, need for reparations, child protection and placement, and
implementing and enforcing the policies of child removal financial support for Link-Up organisations and public
for almost a century of our nation’s history. archives. As a result, many Aboriginal and Torres Straits
For the many Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander Islander people have benefited from the responses to the
people who came forward to tell their stories, the report’s recommendations over the past decade.
experience was painful and difficult. Sir Ronald noted The Inquiry’s recommendation that compensation
that the time taken for HREOC to get the Inquiry under be paid to the Stolen Generations as part of a broader
way was frustrating for those becoming impatient to reparations package has proven a particularly
make Australians aware of their personal histories. controversial issue.
In 2006, the first Stolen Generations compensation thoughts of Australians on the unfolding history of the
scheme was established in Tasmania, setting aside $5 Stolen Generations were inscribed on the Australian
million for Aboriginal people who were removed from Memory of UNESCO’s World Register4 in the same year.
their families between 1935 and 1975. Although the And National Sorry Day and Reconciliation Week have
scheme was ten years in the making, it is the first and the become fixtures in the Australian calendar.
only scheme of its kind in Australia. Bringing Them Home has also shaped the work of
Bringing Them Home was also the trigger for successive Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social
achieving legislative reforms that organisations such as Justice Commissioners over the last decade. One of the
SNAICC had been advocating for many years. Notably, key initiatives occurred in 2001, when the Human Rights
the Indigenous Child Placement Principle, which seeks and Equal Opportunity Commission and the Public
to place Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander children in Interest Advocacy Centre brought members of the Stolen
foster care with other Aboriginal or Torres Straits Islander Generations together to explore reparations models and
families, is now incorporated into every state and make recommendations to Australian governments. It
territory’s legislation as a matter of priority. was indicative of the commitment among civil society
One of the most abiding impacts of the Bringing in Australia to ensure Bringing Them Home does not
Them Home report for our community has been the become another report about the need for social justice
public acknowledgement of our experiences of removal that is left on the shelf to gather dust.
and loss of culture. However, there are also many for For me, Bringing Them Home has highlighted the
whom the Inquiry and the report reopened emotional critical need for Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander
wounds without providing the opportunity for healing. Australians to access holistic healing programmes that
This is not to down-play the value of services that are grounded in our cultures. It has fed into my work
have been established to allow many members of the to revitalise and integrate Aboriginal and Torres Straits
Stolen Generations to trace their personal histories and Islander customary laws and authority structures into
often, to reunite with surviving members of their families. the mainstream legal system. Similarly, the connection
Organisations such as Link-Ups, which previously between the forcible removal of children and the
operated without financial support or recognition, have disproportionately high rates of incarceration for
been able to obtain ongoing funding to better serve the Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander men, women and
needs of the Stolen Generations. Unfortunately I believe juveniles remains an ongoing focus of my work.
we are still waiting for the full suite of support services I am also very conscious of the link between the
needed to remedy the continuing grief and trauma that is unresolved grief and trauma still carried by the Stolen
borne by the Stolen Generations and their families. Generations and their families as a result of removal
Healthy families and emotional well being remain policies, and the scourge of family violence and child
great unmet needs in our communities and it is an urgent abuse in many of our communities. The Australian
challenge for all governments to ensure appropriate and Government’s emergency response to Aboriginal child
ongoing services are provided. The lack of funding and abuse in the Northern Territory will need to confront
infrastructure in areas such as mental health, drug and this reality. As the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
alcohol rehabilitation and family services perpetuate the Social Justice Commissioner, I am committed to working
adverse intergenerational effects of removal policies. No collaboratively with governments around Australia to
government should be under any illusion about the direct ensure that the necessary resources, infrastructure and
link between the lack of access to these services and the long-term support services are put in place to ensure that
level of disadvantage and dysfunction in many Aboriginal every Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander Australian
and Torres Straits Islander communities. It is a problem can enjoy their human right to live free from violence.
that must be remedied in order to provide meaningful Another ongoing responsibility of HREOC is to ensure
and lasting healing and reconciliation. that future generations of Australians learn about the
Fortunately the inaction of governments in this Stolen Generations and how this chapter of our history
respect does not reflect the sentiment of the Australian has shaped us as a nation. Some years ago we developed
people. In the year 2000, hundreds of thousands of an education module for secondary school teachers
people walked across bridges around Australia in support based on the Bringing Them Home report, and this has
of reconciliation. It was a very welcome act of solidarity consistently been one of our most popular human rights
and a much-needed affirmation of the place of social education resources.
justice in the Australian psyche. Sir Ronald commented in 1998 that, “the history of
In 2004, a memorial was established to the stolen generations continues to be of concern not
commemorate the Stolen Generations at Reconciliation just for Indigenous people, but for all Australians”.5 The
Place in Canberra – the nation’s capital and seat of findings of the report, and the experiences of which it
government. Over 400 ‘Sorry Books’ recording the told, are as relevant today as they were in 1997. They

are findings that are tied up with our national identity Tom Calma is an Aboriginal
– an identity built on a faith in social justice and equal elder from the Kungarakan tribal
opportunity, an identity that does not sweep injustice group and the Iwaidja tribal
aside. group whose traditional lands are
south west of Darwin and on the
When you read about out mothers losing their Coburg Peninsula in the Northern
children – forever – perhaps you should take Territory. He has been involved
that to heart. Imagine that you come home, like in Indigenous affairs at a local,
she did, but this time a whole race of people had community, state, national and
disappeared. And imagine you search, just like international level and worked in the public sector for
she did. But no matter what you do, you cannot over 30 years.
find us. And no matter how hard you try, you Until his appointment on 12 July 2004 as Aboriginal
cannot get us back. and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner
and acting Race Discrimination Commissioner, Mr Calma
Imagine that you will never, ever see us again. managed the Community Development and Education
Branch at Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Services
Imagine that loss. (ATSIS) where he worked with remote Indigenous
Or imagine seeing us come home…6 communities to implement community-based and driven
empowerment and participation programs. In 2003, he
was Senior Adviser of Indigenous Affairs to the Minister
of Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs and
from 1995 to 2002 he was a senior diplomat in India
and Vietnam.
1
Dodson, M., (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner), Report Launch Speech of the National Inquiry into the
Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families, Speech delivered at the Australian Reconciliation
Convention, Melbourne, 26 May, 1997.
2
Wilson, R., available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/special/rsjproject/sorry/sirrw.htm accessed 13 July 2007.
3
In 2000, Senator John Herron on behalf of the Australian Government made a submission to the Senate’s Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Committee that called into question the term ‘stolen generation’. Senator Herron’s submission argued that there simply weren’t enough
children taken to warrant the use of the word ‘generation’. See http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/stories/s115691.htm accessed 13 July 2007.
4
The World Register is part of UNESCO’s programme to protect and promote documentary material with significant historical value.
5
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Interview with Sir Ronald Wilson, President of the Human Rights and Equal Opportu-
nity Commission (Sydney, June 1998).
6
Dodson, M., (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner), Report Launch Speech of the National Inquiry into the
Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families, Speech delivered at the Australian Reconciliation
Convention, Melbourne, 26 May, 1997.
“ Without a doubt this Inquiry is and will be regarded as one

that has delved into the very soul of this country and society.
While there are many who regard this Inquiry as one that
concerns Aboriginal people only, nothing could be further
“
from the truth. The Inquiry has revealed the complicated
web of relationships that developed – good and bad –
between Aboriginal children and their families and non-
Aboriginal state authorities, social workers and families.
SNAICC, Report to the National

Children’s Services Forum, August 1997
Journeying back to healing: the promise of the
Bruce Trevorrow case and Tasmanian compensation
By Peter Lewis
Ever since the public release of the Bringing Them live with his natural mother. Prior to Bruce’s removal,
Home report in 1997, the Stolen Generations, not to the South Australian Government had even received
mention the truth, have been the casualties of the so- legal advice that it did not have the authority to remove
called History Wars. The denialists have been prominent Aboriginal children unless the correct processes had been
in the mainstream media and in the federal cabinet and undertaken – which they weren’t in his case. The removal
have held back the opportunity for the nation to come to and fostering of Bruce was without statutory warrant or
terms with the non-Indigenous community’s big ‘shame legal authority. The State breached its duty of care and so
job’ – the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander owes Bruce compensation relating to his unjust treatment
children from their families, culture and communities. and the trauma caused by his removal.
Well perhaps the denialists have had their day. And, of course, Bruce’s case is not an isolated one.
The decision in Bruce Trevorrow’s case in the His story is just one example of how the policies of
South Australian Supreme Court has turned the tide and removal have impacted on generations of Aboriginal and
provides another opportunity for the nation to face one Torres Strait Islander children and families and how the
blind cruelty of governments have traumatised Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander communities in every state and
territory of Australia under the name of assimilation.
The Bringing Them Home report recommended So where to next? The South Australian Government
a compensation process.The Tasmanian fully expects more Stolen Generations cases like
Government has shown the way with their $5 Bruce’s. But the courts, with their drawn out adversarial
million compensation scheme that other states and processes, are unlikely to be appropriate places of healing
territories, so far, are unwilling to follow. for the Stolen Generations. The Bringing Them Home
report recommended a compensation process. The
Tasmanian Government has shown the way with their
$5 million compensation scheme that other states and
of the deep wounds in its soul. The missing records and territories, so far, are unwilling to follow. The Australian
legal technicalities that have plagued other attempts Democrats’ Queensland Senator, Andrew Bartlett, has
at proving the case for just compensation for Stolen introduced a draft Stolen Generations Compensation
Generations individuals in the non-Indigenous court Bill that he is currently seeking comment on. Many
system were neatly overcome in the Trevorrow case. This advocacy bodies, such as the National Sorry Day
time the lack of the required documented ‘facts’ did not Committee, the Stolen Generations Alliance, the Human
get in the way of the truth – in fact, the facts were there Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, the National
in abundance. The paper trail was undeniable and so the Council of Churches and Australians for Native Title and
legal pathway to naming the truth was clear. And now the Reconciliation have called for, and continue to call for, a
nation has heard – if it chooses to listen – that the Stolen National Healing Commission or Tribunal.
Generations not only exist, but their pain and trauma is In November 2000 the Senate Legal and
real and compensation is both morally just and legally Constitutional References Committee, in its report
required. Healing: A Legacy of Generations, made ten
So what did the South Australian Supreme Court recommendations including one concerning the
decide? establishment of a reparations tribunal. Eighteen
Bruce Trevorrow brought an action against the State months later, the government tabled its response to the
of South Australia claiming “misfeasance of public office, Committee’s recommendations, and once again expressly
false imprisonment, breach of duty of care and breach rejected the notion of reparations.
of fiduciary and statutory duties”. In 1957 Bruce, then In 2001 the Executive of the National Council of
aged 13 months, was taken to hospital and subsequently Churches in Australia (NCCA) affirmed the Bringing
was removed from hospital and placed into the care of Them Home report and its recommendations. It adopted
a foster family by a statutory board and the relevant the following statement after consultation between
government department. In 1967 he was returned to national heads of churches and the NCCA’s Aboriginal and

Islander Commission in consultation with the National must try to understand what happened from
Sorry Day Committee: the perspective of the Christian faith. As
church leaders, we commit ourselves to reflect
Australian governments of the past adopted laws theologically on the trauma experienced by the
which gave warrant to practices resulting in Stolen Generations and by the nation as a whole,
many Indigenous children being inappropriately and on our calling to be bearers of reconciliation.
and forcibly removed from their families.
· In consultation with the Stolen Generations, we
It was a complex tragedy. But the fundamental will help educate the churches on their involve-
truth of the stories of the Stolen Generations, and ment in the history of the Indigenous child
their pain, cannot be denied. As representatives removal,
of the churches, we call on our people, and the
nation at large, to acknowledge the validity · make church and agency records accessible,
of the Bringing Them Home report and its · identify ways of supporting Indigenous groups
recommendations. working with removed people, and
The harm experienced by Indigenous people, · address instances of alleged abuses, particularly
and the healing that has been too long delayed, in church-related institutions.
cry out for attention by governments, by
others involved, by all Australians. Christians Many churches have offered apologies and taken
steps towards reconciliation. Reaffirming these
1997: Bring Them Home
The National Aboriginal and Indigenous

Children’s Day poster for 1997 advocated
that governments provide a full and proper
response to the Bringing Them Home report.
This included reparation for those directly
affected and a complete overhaul of the
current child protection systems, which
continue to remove Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander children at over five times the
rate of other children.
The painting for the 1997 poster was
by Heather Kemarre Shearer and it tells
a story about the journey home for the
Stolen Generations. She says, “The hand
in the picture belongs to the person who
is coming home. The colours of the hand
change from concrete grey, (representing
the confusion of identity and environment
to those who do not know who they are
or where they are from), to black ochre
(representing the reconnection back to
the reality of or identity), to yellow ochre
(representing the turbulent times of change
within ourselves and those around us)
and finally to red earth, which represents
our coming home to mother earth and
our family. Once the person has come
home, you then find our family connections,
which criss-cross the land. The colour of
the background represents the diverse
environments from desert to coast.”
initiatives, recognising the pain and trauma of the The scars on all our souls, Aboriginal and Torres
Stolen Generations, we advocate the establishment Strait Islander and non-Indigenous, need to be healed –
of a healing commission. The churches stand ready for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities
to participate in such a commission in whatever way who suffered from the perpetration of this evil and
may be appropriate. the non-Indigenous community whose humanity is
diminished as perpetrators, the children of perpetrators
Further, the churches support the establishment by or just people who did nothing when a monstrous
the Council of Australian Governments of a national injustice was revealed. And that moral stain on character
fund, as part of the healing process. We call on all will continue if the non-Indigenous community remains
Australian governments, whose predecessors legislat- unmoved and inactive. The lessons of the Bringing Them
ed for laws which gave warrant to practices leading Home report will remain unlearned if prime ministers
to the Stolen Generations, to contribute generously to continue to speak of the need for Aboriginal and Torres
the fund. Because all Australians were represented by Strait Islander communities to be ‘absorbed into the
those governments, all Australians and all agencies – mainstream’.
including church agencies – which cooperated with Such ‘absorption’ is nothing more than a return to
such practices are urged to contribute to the fund. the colonial blindness of the past that led to the cruelties
Our churches will continue to pray and work for the of child removal. Research here and from overseas
healing of the nation. points to the importance of self-determination and
connection to culture to overcome generations of trauma
The churches’ statement is not only important because of and disadvantage. That is true for Aboriginal and Torres
its stated support for a healing fund and process, it also Strait Islander children today and for the generations
acknowledges the fundamental truth of the stories of the of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who are
Stolen Generations and the churches’ responsibility as still seeking that return home. The hope is that, because
collaborators in the process of removal. of the perseverance of people like Bruce Trevorrow, we
So in 2007, as in 2001, there is another opportunity are journeying back to a healing pathway for the Stolen
to lobby for a Healing Commission – both federally and Generations and the nation as a whole. It will continue to
state by state. The federal government, in its response be a bumpy journey, with false trails on the way, but we
to the release of the Urbis Young Report into Stolen will get there. And the truth will set us all free.
Generations services, has not denied the issues of
trauma faced, even though federal Health Minister Tony
Abbot’s announcement of merely another 22 counsellors After working as a secondary
for Stolen Generations members is demonstrably school teacher and then a Uniting
inadequate. With the success of Bruce Trevorrow and the Church Mission Field Worker in
amount of the damages awarded, there is now further international and remote issues,
impetus for reconsideration by governments of a proper Dr Peter Lewis spent six years
as the National Director for the
compensation process. The damages bill and legal costs
Reconciliation Agency of the
for the thousands of other possible cases provides a
Uniting Church in Australia. Since
financial incentive for governments, who will no doubt be 2004, Peter has been the Senior
doing their risk management sums. Policy Officer and now Manager – Policy, Research
But a Healing Commission should be about more and Communications with the Victorian Aboriginal
than money. Too often, non-Indigenous people think Child Care Agency (VACCA). In this capacity he has
that financial benefit is the only consideration when it written policy documents, submissions and speeches
comes to compensation. How do you calculate the value representing the needs of Aboriginal children and young
and importance of maintaining connection to family, people within the Victorian context, and has contributed
culture and community? What is the dollar value of to a number of committees run by state government
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage? and by VACCA.
More importantly, a Healing Commission would address Peter has also served on a number of committees
the unfinished business of the Bringing Them Home that have reflected his commitment to working for
report, not only for individual members of the Stolen social justice in relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Generations, not only for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, including as Chairperson for Australians for
Islander communities who have been damaged by the Native Title and Reconciliation in Victoria (ANTAR –
process of child removal, but also for the whole nation. Victoria) (2000–2004), Convenor of Defenders of
It would need to be another truth-telling process and Native Title in Victoria (1997–1998) and as a member of
one that asks the broader community to acknowledge its the National Sorry Day Committee (1999–2006) and
responsibilities to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander of the Stolen Generations Victoria Sorry Day Working
people. Group (2000–).

The launch of Bringing Them Home: the report of
the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families
Speech given by Mick Dodson, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner,
at the launch of the Bringing Them Home report at the Australian Reconciliation Convention,
Melbourne, 26 May 1997
How much indignity, Mr Howard? report about finance or industry or trade relations. We
are not making recommendations that will affect banking
How much loss?
transactions or the budget deficit.
The story in my hand is the saddest of all stories. It is the This volume holds the truth about people just like
story of children taken from their mothers and fathers you and me and all the politicians in Parliament House.
and families. It is the story of mothers and fathers and It holds the stories of the lives of our brothers and sisters
families who lost the most precious thing in their lives – and mothers, and your fellow Australians. It holds the
their children. anguish of adoptive parents when they learned that their
In my life I have seen my people face hostility and child’s parents were not dead, as they had been told.
rejection and cruelty on more occasions than I would care And its recommendations are directed to lessen the
to recall. But nothing, nothing could have prepared me
for the days I spent with my co-commissioners listening
as people spoke the truth of their lives for the first time: of We can give back to Aboriginal and Torres Strait
being taken from their mothers at three weeks of age; of
Islander families and communities the capacity and
mothers waiting a lifetime to see their babies’ faces again.
They came before this Inquiry, and they told us the power to do what is surely their right – to bring
of being sent to institutions ‘for their own good’ – up their own children.
institutions without the loving arms of aunties and
grandmas, but rather cat-o-nine tails and porridge with
weevils and frightening adults who came into your room hurt people have suffered at the hands of our own nation.
at night. This is not someone else’s history. This is all of our
They recalled being told that their parents had given history. I am glad that the prime minister has spoken
them away because they did not love them. And they told publicly of his personal sorrow. But that is simply not
me what it was like to be taught to hate Aborigines and enough, Mr Howard. As leader of this nation, you must
then turn that hate against your own history, your own speak for this nation.
mother and yourself. Some told me that they had tried to We cannot turn away from what this nation did to
go home – but no one was alive any more. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. We cannot
Early this century, the local protector in Western refuse to listen to people who have for so long held their
Australia wrote: pain in silence. We cannot ignore the atrocities that have
I would not hesitate for one moment to separate any happened in our own life times and in our own country.
half-caste from its Aboriginal mother, no matter how This report demands our nation’s compassion. It also
frantic her momentary grief might be at the time. They demands justice. Five or six generations of Aboriginal and
soon forget their offspring.1 Torres Strait Islander people were affected by removal. We
At times I wonder how much has changed. are talking about up to one hundred thousand Australians.
Don’t you think we feel pain and loss just like This nation is proud of its rule of law, proud of its
everyone else? Stop for a moment – and imagine this had sense of justice and a fair go. One of those laws is that if
happened to you. you steal something, and you are caught, you have to give
Fifty-seven years ago Mrs Howard took her baby son it back. This nation has stolen. From parents and families
John home from hospital. On the same day, an Aboriginal and communities, it has stolen children. From children
woman was told that her baby had died and went home it has stolen love and family; language and culture; land
alone. and identity.
Yes, this is a very personal remark – but this is It committed a grievous crime – a crime against
personal. It could not be more personal. This is not a humanity. It is time to pay for that crime.
There is nothing complicated or unusual or One thing missing from this report are the mothers’
controversial about trying to make up for the hurt one stories – but then how could a mother possibly bear to tell
has caused. Imagine if I was entrusted with one of your of her loss?
children, and I hurt them. Surely you would demand that Many of those who spoke to the inquiry told us that
I acknowledge what I had done. Surely you would expect the telling was itself healing – particularly telling and
me to say ‘sorry’ and do everything in my power to make knowing that you were being heard by an official body.
up for it? We feel that everyone affected by removal should have
Why should Australia as a nation be exempt from that a similar opportunity – both for their own healing, and
simple moral obligation – to make up for the hurt one has because this is a part of our nation’s history that must not
caused, to say ‘sorry’. To do everything that you can to be lost. So our first recommendation is that governments
give back what has been lost. should fund Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
This Inquiry was charged to examine the laws and organisations to record and preserve testimonies.
polices and practices that resulted in and continue to We also tried to find out and explain the effects
result in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children that separation had on the children, their families and
being separated from their families. It does so in communities. Again, my few words can barely begin to
meticulous detail. It traces the repugnant pseudo-scientific convey what we saw and heard: the incessant emotional
justifications. It details the elaborate bureaucracies pain and the attempts to dull that pain with alcohol and
developed to execute the laws and policies. It recounts the drugs; the enormous anger and the explosion of that
cruelty inflicted on families as their children were taken anger in violence and self abuse; the loss of self esteem,
under compulsion, duress and undue influence. the self hatred; the withdrawal and incapacity to engage
It portrays the lives of those children in institutions, in the world socially or professionally; and the inability to
in adoptive and foster families and in the houses trust or be intimate with other people – worst of all with
and properties where they were sent to work. What your own children.
43 of the 99 Aboriginal people whose deaths in
custody were investigated by the Royal Commission had
been separated from their families. How many more of
But my greatest fear is not just that our government those children are now in prison, on medication, without
will reject the recommendations of our report. It is education or employment and unable to find a way out of
that the inhumanity and discrimination that we now that cycle of despair? Are they the people you walk past in
see in our past will continue to underpin our nation’s the gutter?
policy. In the face of this evidence, certain people continue
to insist that some of our leaders owe their success to
removal policies. This view is not only repugnant – it is
also wrong. The vast majority of those removed were
happened to them there is a matter of the greatest shame. placed in institutions where they received minimal
Remember, these children were ‘removed for their own education and were sent straight into the most menial
good’. employment. If some have risen to achieve great things,
Could you look one of those people in the eye and it is a testament to their own strength of spirit. Quite
tell them that a metal cot was an improvement on their frankly, I think we should all be in awe that any of those
mother’s arms? children are still standing. In fact, as horrendous as the
Can you convince yourselves that educating those effects have been, the overriding impression I take from
children to the level of a ten-year-old and then sending this Inquiry is not the damage, but the strength.
them out as unpaid labour was an opportunity? Ladies and gentlemen, the truth is now on the table.
Where is the benefit in punishing a child who dares The defence of ignorance is no longer available. Nor is the
even to whisper to her little sister in their mother tongue? defence that ‘it was not us’. These children were removed
Is there anyone willing to convince me that turning as a matter of national policy – the policy of our nation.
these children into the working poor of white Australia Just as the current government must take
was giving them a superior culture? Superior to the responsibility to address the budget deficit it says it
culture their ancestors had formed over thousands of inherited – so too it must take responsibility for the laws
years just to place in their hands? and policies that left a black hole in these Australian
Can you even speak the phrases ‘for your own good’ families. Government is an ongoing institution. It inherits
and ‘systematic sexual and physical abuse’ in the same the achievements, the responsibilities and the mistakes of
breath? its predecessors.
We have sat with hundreds of those children – now The obligation to pay a pension to Second World
grown up – as they told me those things. And we know War veterans did not dissolve with the government in
that there are hundreds who could not speak. power at the end of the war. Nor do we think that the

Germany of today can absolve itself of what was done by
the Germans fifty years ago. Governments take up that
inheritance all over the world, all the time.
Just last week the President of the United States
apologised to the black men who were victims of
government-run scientific experiments sixty years ago. He
said, and I quote:
What is done cannot be undone, but we can end the
silence … we can stop turning our heads away, we can
look you in the eye and say, on behalf of the American
people, what the United States government did was
wrong and I am sorry.
That is what this is all about. Not turning away.
Trying to restore justice. Individual Australians are not
guilty for what happened to our families. But if you fail
to respond to what you now know, you will be guilty. If
you do not help to ease the pain, you will be guilty. And
we can certainly be held responsible for the harms we are
inflicting in the present.
Removal is not something in the past – it is still
happening to our people as I speak. We consider
contemporary removal an issue of such gravity that
we have devoted about a third of our report to it. As
heart wrenching as the issues of past removals are, our
feelings about the grown-up children must not swamp our
ATSIC’s 1998 NAIDOC Week poster featuring
responsibility for the children being taken today.
artwork by Ray Thomas also highlighted Bringing
Sure, the state does not claim automatic guardianship
Them Home
of all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, as it
once did. But given the number of our children who are
in care or in juvenile detention centres, we are not far off. give back to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are six and communities the capacity and the power to do what
times more likely than other children to be removed for is surely their right – to bring up their own children.
welfare reasons and 21 times more likely to be removed The final part of the report provides extensive
to juvenile justice centres. guidelines about how juvenile justice and welfare
The state is still undermining our right to bring up systems could operate to ensure that systematic and
our own children, and to have a say over the course of discriminatory removal is really a thing of the past. This
their lives. Welfare and judicial systems still discriminate report is not a raking over the past for its own sake. It is
against us and view our family cultures as somehow directed to healing and reconciliation for the benefit of all
pathological. They still deny our children the right to Australians.
grow up within their own culture. With all that we know The first two parts of the report recount the laws,
about the long-term effects of removing Aboriginal and practices, policies and effects of removal. They are part
Torres Strait Islander children from their families and of the telling, the listening, the understanding and the
communities, Australians cannot allow this to continue. acknowledgement that Sir Ron spoke about.
If anything, we are more culpable because we have The second two parts are about what we ought to be
the knowledge and the tools to do things differently. doing for people affected by removal and the practical
We know that supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait steps we can take to repair the injustice and ease their
Islander families and communities to find their own pain.
solutions to their children’s problems works better than We believe that ‘reparation’ is the correct response.
removal. We know that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Reparation is a broader concept than compensation. It
Islander children should be placed with Aboriginal or means trying to repair the damage caused by removal,
Torres Strait Islander families wherever possible. We trying to give back what was taken and lost, trying
know that strengthening families and communities is far to make up for the hurt. It is, of course, impossible to
better than punishing their children. reconstruct a life that has been so radically altered. But
Perhaps we cannot give back the children who were experience in other countries and the international
removed fifty or thirty years ago. But we can give back guidelines on the right to reparation for victims of gross
the children who are being removed today. And we can
human rights violations provide us with some guidance. governments little but will make a huge difference.
We suggest that reparation has five parts, and for The fourth component is rehabilitation. As I said
each we have made specific recommendations. earlier, removal has had an enormous impact on peoples’
First is acknowledgment of the truth and apology, mental and physical health, their relationships, their
which Sir Ron spoke about in some detail. All parenting and their ability to get by in the world. In
Australian parliaments must officially acknowledge the our view mental health services for people affected by
responsibility of their predecessors and extend apologies. removal must be grounded in an understanding that
I should make it clear that personal expressions of sorrow health for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is
are welcome. But they are not a substitute for institutional inseparable from our social, cultural and emotional well
apologies. We also recommend that all Australian police being.
forces, churches and non-government organisations that The fifth and final component is compensation. You
played a role in removal give similar acknowledgment cannot, of course, bring back the years of childhood.
and apologies. Monetary compensation is a recognition that restitution
Many churches have already taken that step. I praise in kind is impossible. All those who were removed should
them for their leadership. be paid a minimum lump sum monetary compensation.
The second component of reparation is the guarantee Compensation should also be paid for particular harms
against repetition. As a nation, we must do all that we can such as physical, sexual and emotional abuse, economic
to make sure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander loss and pain and suffering.
families and communities need never fear that their The suggestion of compensation seems to cause a
children will be removed again. All school children, great deal of difficulty for some people. I would simply
and all those working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait point out to them that most of the categories of harm
Islander people should be taught about the history for which people would be claiming compensation are
of removal. The government should also legislate to already grounds for compensation under Australian law.
implement the Genocide Convention so that it has full We are not inventing anything new in compensation law.
effect within Australia. We are simply saying that justice demands that the stolen
The third component is restitution. That is, trying to children are treated equally by the law.
re-establish the situation that existed before the violation Already the government has responded by ruling out
occurred. We have looked at what people have lost, and compensation, saying that it will be divisive. What type of
how those things might be returned. For example, helping Orwellian double-speak is that?
people to return to country and reunite with family and Our prime minister has told us that the family is the
community. To that end we suggest improving access to core of our society.
records, and training Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander What could be more divisive than breaking up
archivists, genealogists and historians to help people with families?
the searches. Isn’t it divisive to have one set of laws for Aboriginal
We heard some particularly distressing evidence of and Torres Strait Islander families and one set of laws for
people finding their families, but being so wrought with everyone else?
emotion that they are unable to have the meeting they all Isn’t it divisive to say that you can claim
so desperately needed. The gap of time, guilt and pain is compensation for emotional pain, for arbitrary
just too much. deprivation of your liberty, for abuse, for loss of land,
This is one of the areas where a simple response, like for loss of culture and for loss of opportunity – but not if
funding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander run family those things happened because the governments of this
tracing and reunion services can make an enormous country took you away because of the colour of your
difference to peoples’ lives. skin?
We also received a great deal of evidence about the There is nothing divisive about compensation.
loss of language and culture – about people finding their Compensation is part of reparation - and reparation
mothers and being unable to speak to them, or hear means recognising and repairing what has been broken.
their words. We believe that Aboriginal and Torres Strait As Sir Ronald said, it is not just peoples’ lives and peoples’
Islander language, culture and history centres are best communities that have been broken. It is the relationship
suited to bringing people home in a cultural and linguistic between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.
sense. Repairing that relationship is anything but divisive.
People also told us of that part of their way home But my greatest fear is not just that our government
was tracing the files that plot their lives and those of their will reject the recommendations of our report. It is that
families. As long as those records are not theirs or even the inhumanity and discrimination that we now see in
accessible to them, they feel that they are not fully free our past will continue to underpin our nation’s policy.
of institutional control. Again, this is one of the areas Another phrase for genocide is extinguishing a people.
where simple bureaucratic and legal changes will cost It seems that extinguishment is a bit of a theme in this

country. Extinguishment leads to extinction. I think that Professor Mick Dodson,
is something all the people of this nation really need to AM is a member of the Yawuru
contemplate. peoples, the traditional Aboriginal
If you take our land, you take the ground of our owners of land and waters in the
culture. If you take our children, you take the future of Broome area of the southern
our culture. If you keep on taking, there will be nothing Kimberley region of Western
Australia. He is currently
left. We can no longer equivocate. This is not history.
Professor and Director of the
When we are gone, you won’t be able to bring us back. It
National Centre for Indigenous
will be too late. Studies at the Australian National University in
Think about the stark permanency of a person’s Canberra. Mick Dodson was Australia’s first Aboriginal
death. Extinction is the death of a people. When you and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner
read about our mothers losing their children – forever – with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
perhaps you should take that to heart. Imagine that you Commission. He served as Commissioner from April
come home, like she did, but this time a whole race of 1993 to January 1998, and was co-Commissioner for the
people has disappeared. And imagine you search, just like National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and
she did. But no matter what you do, you cannot find us. Torres Strait islander Children from Their Families.
And you no matter how hard you try you cannot get us Born in the Northern Territory township of
back. Katherine, Mick was educated in Katherine, Darwin and
Victoria. He has been a prominent advocate on land
Imagine that you will never, never, see us again. rights and other issues affecting Aboriginal and Torres
Imagine that loss. Strait Islander peoples for many years.
Or imagine seeing us come home. He has been appointed to the United Nations
That is what this report is about. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues for the period
2008 to 2010. Mick has for over a decade participated
Republished with permission from HREOC and Prof. Mick Dodson. in the crafting of the text of the Draft Declaration on
© Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission 1997 the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the United Nation
http://www.hreoc.gov.au/speeches/social_justice/stolen_ Working Group on Indigenous Populations and in its
generation_launch.html
more recent consideration by the Working Group of
the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.
1
James Isdell, quoted in HREOC, Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait islander Children from Their Families, 1997, p. 104
“ …there were times when we first demanded a national

Inquiry that we were a lone voice with barely a response
from government to our call: however, we persevered and
succeeded in achieving our initial objective. This Inquiry is
the second stage. The third will be the final report of the
Inquiry and the implementation of the recommendations
and I make this commitment on behalf of SNAICC: Given
the emotional, mental, physical and spiritual effort that has
been put into this Inquiry by hundreds of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people as well as many other non-
Aboriginal people, we will be just as tenacious in pursuing the
implementation of the recommendations. This time however,
“
there will be many more of us.
Never again... Break the Chains, Submission by the

Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander
Child Care to the National Inquiry into Separation
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children
from their Families, August 1996
SNAICC Values Statement
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children
Preamble
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures are living 2. SNAICC believes Aboriginal and Torres Strait
cultures that survive through our children. Our children’s Islander children:
cultural identity must be respected in accordance with
· are a community’s present and future
our ancestral ways, family and cultural traditions and
community values. This can be done by providing · achieve their full potential when they enjoy access
a setting of loving, caring and safe families with to optimum health care, early childhood support,
opportunities for children’s growth, development and self developmental opportunities, cultural knowledge,
empowerment. For our children to be healthy our culture education and economic security
must be healthy. · should be taught to respect their Elders, other fam-
The innocent spirit of our children must be ily members and the broader community
protected by listening, having faith in children, giving
them opportunities to develop their self confidence · enrich their family and community from the mo-
and supporting them to contribute to their family and ment they are born and make a positive contribu-
community. tion as members of the community when supported
It is our responsibility to support our young people to to do so.
understand and follow our cultural ways and become role
models and mentors for the younger generations, thus 3. SNAICC believes Aboriginal and Torres Strait
ensuring the continuation of our culture. This involves Islander families have the primary responsibility to
trusting and empowering young people, allowing them raise their children well by nurturing and protecting
to learn from their mistakes and having faith in them to them, developing their cultural identity, explaining
ensure the survival of the oldest living culture in history. to them their place within their family, teaching
them to understand limits and act responsibly and
1. SNAICC believes Aboriginal and Torres Strait placing children’s needs and interests ahead of their
Islander children have the right to: own.
· be kept safe from physical and psychological harm
· live in communities that are safe and free from
violence
· identify as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander
Australians
· be proud of their history, cultural beliefs and prac-
tices
· maintain connections to their lands, community,
family and kinship systems
· learn and practice their Indigenous language
· freely develop, express and enjoy their own spiritu-
ality
· life long education that strengthens their cultural
identity
· be taught their cultural heritage and obligations by
their Elders
· benefit from the knowledge of their Elders to guide
their journey in life.

Mothers and Fathers are crying
Mothers are grieving

Fathers are Searching
For the children that were created
from their spiritual love for one another
The children that mirror the spiritual beauty
Of our Mothers land. In her virgin state
Before she is raped and abused by the hands
of the strangers who take their children
Mothers are crying

Fathers are screaming
In desperation and frustration
Asking where have you taken them?
Sending the children’s names floating upon the spirit of the wind
As she glides across our Mothers land calling
the children back home
Mothers are trembling

Fathers are embracing
As the children who have been stolen return home
Finding their identity and discovering where they belong
Standing united with our people as one
in the struggle of the recognition of
Our Mothers land and the injustice done to our people
© Kym Walker, first published in SNAICC Newsletter Issue 6 1993

7 Remember Me Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7 Remember Me Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7 Remember Me Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“Remember Me”

Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

Secretariat of National Aboriginal

This publication commemorates the tenth anniversary of the release of Bringing

Cover photograph by Tatiana Doroshenko, of a mural in North Fitzroy, Melbourne,

Join or subscribe to SNAICC

Warning: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peopled are cautioned

Never again: Telling the truth ensures a better future 3

SNAICC’s journey to the Inquiry: a timeline 6

Aboriginal Organisation calls for Enquiry into “Stolen Children” 27

Human Rights Commissioners meet with SNAICC 28

“This story’s right, this story’s true...” 32

SNAICC Values Statement: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children 46

1988: Stop the Cultural Genocide

In 1988, SNAICC produced the first National Aboriginal &

2 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

4 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

National Aboriginal and In his contribution to SNAICC supports member

8 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

1991:The Stolen Generations

In 1991 National Aboriginal & Islander

10 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

12 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

14 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

1983–1984 Coral Edwards and Peter Read form Link-up in Canberra.

16 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

18 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

“ “The impact of intervention in the lives of Aboriginal

SNAICC’s Report to the National

20 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

1992: My Family Where Are You –

The Children’s Day theme and poster for

24 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

“ It begins, I think, with the act of recognition. Recognition

It was our ignorance and our prejudice. And our failure

As a consequence, we failed to see that what we were

Then Prime Minister of Australia, Paul

26 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

28 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

1995: Never Again … Break the

For Children’s Day in 1995, SNAICC again

30 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

32 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

34 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

36 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

“ Without a doubt this Inquiry is and will be regarded as one

SNAICC, Report to the National

38 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

1997: Bring Them Home

The National Aboriginal and Indigenous

40 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

42 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

44 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

“ …there were times when we first demanded a national

Never again... Break the Chains, Submission by the

46 Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care

Mothers are grieving

Mothers are crying

Mothers are trembling