.


2008/10: Should the federal government pay compensation to the Stolen Generations?





Introduction to the media issue

Video clip at right: Redfern Park, Sydney, in December, 1992, saw the then Prime Minister Paul Keating deliver what has been called one of the landmark speeches of Australian politics. Although Mr Keating has recently said that compensation is of less significance than the "national emotional response", the Redfern Speech is often referred by proponents of compensation for the "stolen generations". If you cannot see this clip, it will be because YouTube is blocked by your network. To view the clip, access from home or from a public library, or from another network which allows YouTube clips.

What they said ...
'An apology without any attempt at atonement is a meanly given thing. Damaged lives and destroyed families ... can draw little solace from an apology alone'
Andrew Lynch, the director of the Terrorism and the Law project at the Gilbert and Tobin Centre of Public Law, University of New South Wales

'The most important thing is the sorry. The most important thing is the national emotional response. I don't believe that these separations or that sadness will ever be settled in a monetary sense'
Paul Keating, former Australian Prime Minister

The issue at a glance
On February 13, 2008, the day after the first sitting of the new parliament, the new federal Government, led by Kevin Rudd, issued a formal apology to the estimated 13,000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who were forcibly removed from their parents as part of a policy of assimilation followed by successive governments up to the 1970s.
The federal Government, however, specifically stated it did not intend to establish a national compensation plan to go with the apology. Instead the Government has pledged to develop practical policies to improve Aboriginal wellbeing in the areas of health, housing and education. These policies will, it is claimed, place a special focus on children.
However, there remain those who believe that this is insufficient and that an apology loses value if it is not accompanied by a compensation scheme for those affected by being removed from their families.