The Canberra Times
Letters (extract)
Friday, 2 June, 2000
Sorry? Forget Howard: he's just irrelevant
THOSE calling for John Howard to say "sorry" on behalf of all
Australians are asking too much of him. Though I agree with their
sentiments, the Prime Minister should not pretend to speak for all
Australians on any issue. He is head of the Government, not head of
state. His strategies and speeches on the topic of reconciliation are
politically motivated. He has chosen not to say sorry to avoid any
possibility that his Government may be held legally accountable,
because he thinks that it is the popular stance and, quite possibly,
because he is a mean-spirited individual. The fact that it is a
political
game to him was made glaringly and embarrassingly obvious when he
grinned broadly on being invited to say "that one small word" at the
Corroboree 2000 ceremony at the weekend. It is our head of state
who should speak for all of us but our head of state is British. Would
we accept her speaking on our behalf (in the unlikely event that she
chose to do so)? Her representative, the Governor-General, has
behaved in his usual exemplary manner in the matter of Aboriginal
reconciliation but, as usual, is constrained by the fact that he is the
Queen's representative and is constantly having his role usurped by
the PM. Let's not worry about what John Howard says: on the grand
scale he is largely irrelevant.
MIKE O'SHAUGHNESSY
Spence
What we need is to fix problems
I HAVE appreciated the series of articles and letters by Peter Howson,
eg, "Aboriginal hopes rest with a new vision" (CT, May 18, p.9). He
rightly rejects Sir Ronald Wilson's Bringing Them Home report as a
basis for reconciliation or future progress. The attempt by Professor
Alice Tay, Chris Sidoti, Dr Bill Jonas and Susan Halliday (Letters, May
22) to discredit Howson's facts does not convince me: this is not a
group from whom I would expect an objective opinion. Australia's
considerable programs to improve Aboriginal health and welfare are
obviously failing. The substantial sums of money spent are clearly not
reaching many of the people whose need is daily brought to public
notice. I believe that we are in danger of creating a well-funded
permanent grieving industry rather than a process that can fix
problems.
W. HUGH OLDHAM
Curtin
A memorial to the Aboriginal fallen
I CAN understand your reservations about the federal Government's
proposal to create a reconciliation square in the Parliamentary
Triangle, especially if it involves removing the Aboriginal embassy
against the wishes of its occupants (Editorial, May 25). Mr Howard's
proposal is a step in the right direction, but a very small one and
rather too easy to make. I think many Australians, both Aboriginal and
non-Aboriginal, would be more impressed by the suggestion of the
Anglican Archbishop of Canberra and Goulburn and others that a
memorial to all the people killed in Australia's colonial war of
occupation be erected on Anzac Parade. For some time now scholars
have been in agreement that approximately 20,000 Aborigines and
2500 Europeans died violently in what was almost certainly the first
large-scale war on Australian soil. A memorial of appropriate design
and dimensions on Anzac Parade would be an open and healing
recognition of a long-repressed aspect of our mutual past. It would
certainly be a much more profound and courageous gesture towards
Aboriginal reconciliation than simply renaming a few square metres in
the Parliamentary Triangle.
GEOFF PAGE
Narrabundah
The tragedy of the missing person
ON SUNDAY morning, as I joined the reconciliation march in Canberra,
I walked with de-facto leaders of Australia in their thousands. Many
many others marched in other cities throughout our country, and they
too would have marched with the same quiet certitude I sensed on
Sunday. So many people know that so much has been wrong, and
that so much needs to be done to right this wrong. But they have no
doubt that whatever needs to be done should be done, and they have
no doubt that the way to begin is with a quiet, simple, heartfelt
apology. The tragedy is that the one person who should have been
leading us was not walking, here or in Sydney. But I was proud to walk
with the thousands who took his place.
PETER DARK
Queanbeyan, NSW
What were they?
SENATOR HERRON said on the Harbour Bridge that the Prime
Minister could not attend the Reconciliation Walk because he had
important engagements. Is anyone asking what they were? I am.
KATHERINE BEAUCHAMP
Turner
What could be more pressing?
I FIND IT amusing that our PM, who refuses to live in Canberra, found
it expedient to "hide out" here on Saturday while hundreds of
thousands of Australians demonstrated their heartfelt solidarity with
the Aboriginal people by walking across Sydney Harbour Bridge. I
would venture to say that each person who walked represented
thousands of others who could not walk. What business could the PM
possibly have that was more important than this most vital and
pressing of issues? Dispossessed of their land, their culture
systematically demolished, slaughtered by direct Government action
and later by cruel neglect, their children ripped from their arms, we
do
have a responsibility towards the Aboriginal people to administer the
healing oils of apology with much compassion. I am sorry sorry sorry,
for the actions of my ancestors towards the Aboriginal people. I, and I
am sure most Australians, were taught as children that the simple
word "sorry" could melt the heart and heal the hurt of a thousand
wounds. I was also taught that "sorry" was just the first step towards
a
process of healing and negotiating a different way to behave and
communicate by both parties. Saying sorry does not necessarily mean
that you are taking on all of the blame or even that the other side
have themselves never done anything hurtful and needs to make no
changes in attitude. Saying you are sorry shows that you have a heart
towards change, a heart of compassion for your and your side's
actions regardless of any other issue regardless even of a bad
reaction!
LORESE DAVID
O'Connor
An extraordinary unity of spirit
THE CLAIMS about a mandate for reconciliation which might be made
in the political arena may or may not have any foundation. As one who
was part of the walk across the Harbour Bridge on Sunday, I can only
record the fact that it was an extraordinary demonstration of unity of
spirit. There was there, as also in the Canberra walk, a wonderful
mood amongst a huge crowd which alone was worth the trip to
Sydney. I would also add that anyone there also knows that the
number of people involved was way in excess of the 150,000 quoted
by Mr Cooper (Letters, May 31). As part of an answer to Mr Cooper's
question, "What exactly is reconciliation?", I would offer the
following.
Reconciliation is about respecting other people and avoiding the use
of language which is patronising and demeaning of the other.
DAVID GARRATT
Dickson
--
**********************************
'Click' to protect the rainforest:
Make the Rainforest Site your homepage!
http://www.therainforestsite.com/
**********************************
------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
from the
copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
