Kevin Rudd Apology

Only in recent years have we seen the recognition that the stolen generation deserves and the essential part it has play in the struggle of Aboriginal rights. Since the end of the stolen generation, numerous organisations and government agency has come out and said sorry for what happened for seventy years and as a result Aboriginal rights are becoming more apparent. The famous “I’m sorry” speech said by Kevin Rudd was the first Parliament apology to the Stolen Generation and was seen as a huge leap forward in the recognition of the Stolen Generation. The Bringing Them Home Report in 1997 was a strong campaign for The

Mr Rudd opened his speech in parliament with the words “We honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human history” (2012). It is true that Mr Rudd took the first step in reconciliation however he has not progressed as far as hoped. There has been little compensation made to the stolen generation. Was the apology a sincere one? Perhaps? His intentions were clear and precise. Rudd had said he would apologize and he did. He did not say he would compensate the Indigenous Australians in any form which would have gone a long way to begin the healing process. Especially due to the inconceivable horrors that were enacted against the Stolen Generations.

Kevin Rudd’s apology was to the Aboriginals; but in particular, to the Stolen Generations. From 1909-1969, the Australian Government forced a policy know as assimilation upon the Aboriginals. Assimilation is the forced integration of minority groups onto the dominant society. Inhumane acts were inflicted upon these proud people because of the ‘Aborigines Protection Board’ which entailed that the Australian Government had full rights to forcibly remove half-caste children from Aboriginal care without parental consent nor a court order.

Speeches are an iconic and widely used means of expression for our political leaders, particularly when discussing issues of importance such as Indigenous Australia. Paul Keating’s ‘Redfern Speech’ and Kevin Rudd’s ‘Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples’ are the two political speeches which I will be analysing in this paper.

Terra Nullius was once apparent in Australian society, but has now been nullified with the turn of the century. With the political changes in our society, and the apology to Indigenous Australians, society is now witnessing an increase in aboriginals gaining a voice in today’s society. Described by Pat Dodson (2006) as a seminal moment in Australia’s history, Rudd’s apology was expressed in the true spirit of reconciliation opening a new chapter in the history of Australia. Considerable debate has arisen within society as to whether aboriginals have a right to land that is of cultural significance and whether current land owners will be able to keep their land.

This paper will examine the healthcare of Indigenous Australian peoples compared to non-indigenous Australians. The life expectancy gaps between the two are a cause for alarm when statistics show Indigenous Australian peoples die on average 17 years earlier than non-indigenous Australians (Dick 2017). This paper will examine the social determinants of health to explore these factors and what interventions are in place to improve health status and life expectancy gaps for equality. The Federal Government has seen the implementation of the Northern Territory Intervention and the Closing the Gap Initiative. This essay will examine these two strategies and discuss the effectiveness of both policies. It will explain the differences, similarities and look at the success so far to

The inequalities in today’s indigenous communities are still strongly evident. Heard, Khoo & Birrell (2009), argued that while there has been an attempt in narrowing the gap between Indigenous and non Indigenous Australians, a barrier still exists in appropriate health care reaching indigenous people. The Indigenous people believe, health is more than the individual, it is

I would like to begin this speech by recognising the owners of this land, the true ancestors of the country we call ‘ours’. To the Indigenous peoples of Australia, I acknowledge you, I thank you and most of all I apologise to you for the deep suffering and remorse you are put through. I am ashamed of this country’s treatment towards you. Past and Present.

Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.

The poor health position of Indigenous Australians is a contemporary reflection of their historical treatment as Australia’s traditional owners. This treatment has led to Indigenous Australians experiencing social disadvantages, significantly low socio-economic status, dispossession, poverty and powerlessness as a direct result of the institutionalised racism inherent in contemporary Australian society.

After this time, many atrocities occurred, such as the fact that Aboriginals were often killed for sport, and massacres such as Myall Creek were occurring, where 28 Aboriginal men, women and children were murdered near Myall Creek Station in 1838. There was also the problem of the Stolen Generation, when Aboriginal children were forcibly taken from their homes to be raised as though they were white. It was only recently in 2008, that Kevin Rudd, the Prime Minister of Australia at the time, apologised for the actions that the government had undertaken. In another apologetic move, Prime Minister Paul Keating delivered a powerful speech regarding the fact that Aboriginal Communities were still segregated despite the fact that laws had been changed a number of years ago. This shows that the idea of atonement by Australia is quite a new topic. Does this prove the challenges that Aboriginal’s faced nearly 200 years ago are still present in today’s society? It was enough to force the Aboriginal men, women and children to begin act in support of their rights.

This article gives the reader an inequitable view of Indigenous Australians, defending Tony Abbot’s point of view and the audience is encouraged to agree with mainstream media in regards to whether or not Tony Abbott is racist. Article B from the Koori Mail condemns Tony Abbott’s viewpoint as not only racist but he is insulting the very culture that he is representing. Article B states that Tony Abbott does not understand Indigenous culture and how important land is to them “Connection to country is everything to Aboriginal people – defines Aboriginal people and sustains us in a cultural and spiritual sense and can play a vital role in building economic independence, self-determination and healing” (Greg Cromelin, Article B). With Article B the audience is encouraged to get angry at Tony Abbott’s comments and make him out to be racist.

The Stolen Generation has left devastating impacts upon the Aboriginal culture and heritage, Australian history and the presence of equality experienced today. The ‘Stolen Generation’ refers to the children of Aboriginal descent being forcefully abducted by government officials of Australia and placed within institutions and catholic orphanages, being forced to assimilate into ‘white society’. These dehumanising acts placed these stolen children to experience desecration of culture, loss of identity and the extinction of their race. The destructive consequences that followed were effects of corruption including attempted suicide, depression and drug and alcohol abuse. The indigenous peoples affected by this have endured solitude for many

It was a day to represent. It was one year after the the tabling of a report about the removal of Aboriginal children from their families and what they went through. 3. Those watching Kevin Rudd’s apology speech turned their backs on Brendan Nelson as he spoke was due to the fact that his apology did not seem pure. At times he seemed ‘bossy’, which reminded many of the indigenous people about their lives and how they grew up, as they have been bossed around their whole life.

Kevin Rudd’s speech gave a voice to the voiceless. He also detailed the history and culture of the Aboriginals groups, to help them heal. He says how this effects the child and their family, in the past, present and future. The speech didn’t silence or marginalise any aboriginal groups. He included all aboriginal people, and apologised to every single one. He has done this by using pronoun such as we and us, he told the story of Nungala Fejo, a member of the stolen generation. By saying; “Nanna Fejo's is just one story. There are thousands, tens of thousands of them: stories of forced separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander