I don't need to read the report, Scott. I read the summary page....

I don't need to read the report, Scott. I read the summary page. That's what they're for. Anything that isn't on the summary page isn't worthy enough in the eyes of the researchers to report as a finding. That's what it's for.

If you don't think the summary page is a valid document, then why did you link the summary page and not the report itself? Didn't you READ the summary page Scott? If you have something in the 375-page report that you think contradicts the finding on the summary page of said report, post it or stop telling lies.

The only reference to indigenous neglect paints a very different picture to the one you were asking Hot Copperians to swallow. Contrary to your own seemingly grossly inaccurate assertion, Indigenous children are SEVEN times more likely to be abused or neglected than non-Indigenous children. That's not ambiguous, Scott, and it's not nuanced. It's a big fat fish across the face. Indigenous kids get way more abused and/or neglected than non-Indigenous kids. This is YOUR link, Scott.

Which bit of the report do you think contradicts that FACT? Or were you just telling lies and hoping nobody would open it?