It only took two days ...

[HAL]

My brain uses AIML to format responses to your inputs, but I don't have one for that.

[Dave The Man]

[David]

Thanks Member.

[nomadjack]

Spot on Culprit. You could add to that billions of dollars of taxpayers money in 'drought aid' without a friggin quibble or blink of an eye. Yet when a relatively small number of Aboriginals want fair compensation for having their lives destroyed for nothing more than being born with the wrong coloured skin, their just 'carping blacks'.

Did you bother reading any of the report DTM or do we need to put a set of tits on the cover and a centrefold in the middle for you?

[stui magpie]

If people are going to sue, what will the ground be?

Will they have to prove that they were taken from their parent(s) for reasons other than their safety?

I understand that claims have failed in the past because there hasn't been proof of intent and that there was proof of either consent or neglect on the part of the carers.

In the case of this bloke, being taken away at less than a year old, he'd hardly be in a position to say whether he was being neglected as a child or not.

If the claim for compensation is purely about being raised apart from his aboriginal culture, then I have issues with that. If a child is removed from the family because of neglect and placed into foster care/orphanage because of that neglect and because the child was in danger, surely the health and welfare of the child is more important than the culture they're raised in?

[Morrigu]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23146298-661,00.html

Stolen generation victim wins $250,000 more

He was 13 months old when on Christmas Day, 1957, he was driven from his Coorong home southeast of Adelaide to Adelaide's Children's Hospital with stomach pains.

Two weeks later, under the authority of the Aborigines Protection Board, he was given to a woman who became his foster parent, without the permission of his parents. About six months later, Mr Trevorrow's mother wrote to the board asking when she could have her son back.

"I am writing to ask if you would let me know how baby Bruce is and how long before I can have him home?" she wrote in July 1958.

"I have not forgot I have a son in there."

The court heard the hospital lied, telling her the baby was making good progress and needed to stay for treatment.

Mr Trevorrow never again saw his father, who died eight years later.

His foster family told him he was white, even as children taunted him with slurs such as "boong" and "darkie".

Rather have my taxes used to pay compensation for folk like Bruce - than dished out by the thousands to all irrespective of their financial status every time they have a bloody baby!

[stui magpie]

I read that story. I'll assume the court decided that the part you quoted there was factual and that would then have played a large part in him getting a settlement.

If his parents were negligent, they should have been told. The fact that they weren't told (assumption) and were lied to is wrong and he deserves compensation.

[David]

Very interesting report Member, and it's a shame it's taken this long for me to get around to reading it.

I guess the most relevant thing to note is that Paul Hasluck, for example, was trying to solve a problem that to this day is far from resolved. Although I disagree with the forced removal of children from their parents, I agree with a lot of his basic ideas... and I am sure many of you will be aware of my theories from other discussions on this issue. It's no good to look back on these decisions of the past as 100% wrong, unless you are willing to suggest viable alternatives.

The report confirms what I previously thought, however. There is no evidence of deliberate 'genocide' at play here from Neville and co, simply a weighing up of facts (as considered at the time) and a desire to reach the best solution for the country and all the demographics involved. The trouble is, these projects were playing with real human lives, lives which were obviously not valued nearly as highly as they should have been. That, I suppose, is the real tragedy of this whole thing.

[Proud Pies]

it's not the first claim! Have you forgotten the man in South Australia that was awarded over $500K last year?

Tasmania and Western Australia have a fund set up and have had for years, for compensation to the stolen generations.

People have always been able to claim

[Alec. J. Hidell]

[Zakal]

I have absolutely no problem with those entitled to compensation receiving it. Just like anyone else who suffers a civil wrong.

But on that basis, the successful claims will be few and far between given the limitation period will have well and truly expired in most instances. The cases that succeed (like that guy from SA) will have to have peculiar circumstances that result in the limitation period not having yet expired, or their being some recognised exception.

For instance, the time usually only begins to run in a civil matter from the time the cause of action arises. And in the majority of these cases it will be the time they were removed. Though there are provisions to extend where that person is under a 'disability' to 6 years from the removal of the disability. So perhaps extending from when they turned 18 (if that could be considered a disability rather than simply a lack of capacity), till they were 24.

Which means you would have had to be taken in the 80's give or take. It will be interesting to see how many are able to get around this restriction, but either way it wont be the first time a limitation period has prevented a thoroughly deserving complainant from getting compensation.

[nomadjack]

Such limitation periods, the difficulty of tracking down documentary evidence, and the short life expectancy of indigenous people (meaning most people stolen prior to the mid 1950s are no longer alive) make a mockery out all the redneck claims about thousands of massive compensation payouts.

[Alec. J. Hidell]

[Alec. J. Hidell]

[Alec. J. Hidell]