not too much

As to the Government's recent moves to try to end abuse of children in remote Aboriginal communities, I entriely agree with the Australian Financial Review in its Editorial of 25 Jun 07

Bold move to address a national disgrace

There are certain events had crossed the line for John Howard. One was the Port Arthur massacre. A decade on it is the sexual abuse of Aboriginal children. In each case he has acted with surprising passion -- the first driven by shock, and the latest by impatience.

The Prime Minister plans sweeping legislation for remote Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory that bans alcohol and pornography, requires medical checks for children and lifts the police presence. Half of welfare payments for families may be retained for food and household needs, and the permit system that restricts entry of non-indigenous people into about 60 remote communities will in large measure be scrapped as the Commonwealth unilaterally takes a five-year leasehold over the sites. Indigenous Affairs Minister Mal Brough harnessed Mr Howard's energy so well that the ALP was co-opted in its wake. Mr Rudd has proposed a bipartisan "war cabinet" to achieve a rapid result on the chronic issue of Aboriginal social dysfunction in remote communities, which has meant childhood assault, rape and neglect are commonplace. Jibes that the plan is racist and undermines customary law miss the wood for the trees.

Neglect of Aboriginal health is a national disgrace that must be worn by government's current and past, state and federal, Labor and coalition. Well-meaning policies have allowed dithering to replace action. So-called self-determination has largely delivered bureaucratic neglect instead of empowerment. And the resultant chaos has spawned a generation of people without motivation and personal responsibility. One of the PM's mantras, mutual obligation, has been further popularised by Cape York Aboriginal leader Noel Pearson.

But there are many risks in delivering this still-embryonic venture. Removing alcohol from communities doesn't cure a addiction. Requiring school attendance demands that schools be properly resourced. Without careful assistance some communities will banish through urban drift, and layers of poverty and disadvantage will be multiplied. And the communities themselves must be engaged. The activity and goodwill generated by this policy shift must not be allowed to be diverted into either frenzy or a nanny state, but into practical applications that could aboriginal children and childhood.

Exactly so. I have a few things to add.

1. Some of the communities are worried about loss of autonomy and lack of consultation. In my view, a community -- no matter how disadvantaged, no matter how under resourced -- that cannot protect its children from rape and abuse by its own people, no longer merits recognition as an autonomous community. If that means paternalism, so be it.

2. Regardless of whether one is from a privileged background or a member of a deeply oppressed people, no excuse can be accepted for abuse of children -- none, not any.

3. Culture is not a god. And if it keeps people in poverty and allows the rape of children, it is a demonic idol, worthy of being smashed. If one's culture is a bondage, then change the culture, or walk away from it.

4. I worry that, as he did with the Port Arthur incident and the Tampa incident, Mr Howard may take the high ground of moral outrage all the way to an undeserved election victory.