olly, I agree with much of what you say.I can not how the act as...

First 87 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
simplesimone

2,560 Posts.

1

07/08/14

11:28

Post #: 13782970
Share

Originally posted by Olly ↑

It is about the real ramifications of 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act and not the noise created because of a high profile figure or whether Bolt is LNP by default. The case has set a dangerous precedent for future debate and has further clouded the ability to talk honestly and frankly about subjects such as rights to Aboriginal Welfare or surrogate appointments based by Aboriginality.

Aboriginal Welfare has a combined government figure of approx $3.5B per year. You might be surprised by the monolith of government funded agencies that have established over the past four decades. These agencies are predominantly controlled by “Aboriginal” people. When you travel beyond the outskirts of the city you will also see most of this money is not actually reaching those in most need.

Jack Waterford from the Canberra Times;
“..... government spending on indigenous Australians has reached, in average, about $250,000 per Aboriginal family a year.”

It is not only the bureaucratic system that absorbs much of this figure in delivery but the vast number of agencies that receive money to deliver services. This is where the “white Aboriginals” are in control and is where Bolt provided a critique of their ongoing behaviour. Geoff Shaw was a classic case.
Aboriginality is currently tested albeit very ambiguously.
There is a threefold test;

- being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent
- identifying as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander
- being accepted as such by the community in which you live, or formally lived

Point 2 & 3 provoke too much conjecture and is subjective to the individual feelings or the group in which they associate. The only real test is lineage. This is where we need to proceed to produce a line for the benefit of specific (discriminative) government assistance.

Expand

olly,
I agree with much of what you say.I can not how the act as it stands restricts any debate on any issue.

We have gone around in circles.....probably a dozen times ....probably over a number of years.
I guess in the end it is subjective.

You seem to agree Bolt did break the law as it is currently written

Lets agree to disagree on weather the act itself is counter productive.......I say nay and you say yay

cheers
1 Upvote

Reply

Top Stories

SNG

Siren Gold boosts antimony resource by 66% to 14.5Kt at Auld Creek, NZ

PTR

Petratherm adds $1.6 to the piggybank ahead of SA titanium drilling program

ALR

Altair Minerals hits high-grade copper and gold at Wee MacGregor, QLD

WMG

Western Mines identifies 2 high-grade zones at Mulga Tank in WA

WR1

Winsome scoping study proposes low-cost operation for Adina lithium project