NationStates Jolt Archive

The Rudd Labor government will formally say sorry to members of the indigenous stolen generation when federal parliament resumes in Canberra next month.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd will deliver the apology on February 13, more than 10 years since the Bringing Them Home human rights report recommended the government say sorry for the policy of removing indigenous children from their parents.

It will be the first item of business for the new parliament.

An Aboriginal welcome to country ceremony will take place as part of the opening proceedings for parliament the day before.
http://news.theage.com.au/govt-plans-aboriginal-apology-on-feb-13/20080130-1p00.html
I personally agree with it, although given the Howard legacy I doubt it will ever become a bipartisan issue.

I personally agree with it, although given the Howard legacy I doubt it will ever become a bipartisan issue.

I'm not so sure. There may be enough people within the Libs that want to distance themselves from Howard for them to back it. I reckon there'll be some within the party that fight it all the way though (Abbot, Tuckey, etc).

If nobody's getting kicked in the ass with a giant boot, then it's not a real apology. *nod*

If nobody's getting kicked in the ass with a giant boot, then it's not a real apology. *nod*

lol, but personally if it stops at the apology then fine but now the SGA has demanded a large amount of things from the government http://http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=373887 (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=373887) they want all Australians to feel guilty for something other people did. Give them an inch and they will take a mile

They have to announce that they're going to make an apology? They can't just do it? That is bloody asinine.

They have to announce that they're going to make an apology? They can't just do it? That is bloody asinine.

If they don't announce it then the press might not be there.

lol, but personally if it stops at the apology then fine but now the SGA has demanded a large amount of things from the government http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=373887 they want all Australians to feel guilty for something other people did. Give them an inch and they will take a mile

there that link should work now

They have to announce that they're going to make an apology? They can't just do it? That is bloody asinine.

Perhaps you should ask yourself why they need to announce it, instead of making uneducated assumptions. The answer is fourfold (at least). First, it was an election pledge. Second, the government will be bringing Aboriginal representatives to Canberra so they can be present for the apology. Third, the wording of the apology is widely considered to be of the utmost importance, and requires consultation with Indigenous communities. Fourth, given that people have been waiting over a decade for this, it's loaded with huge symbolic importance; to make an off-hand, unexpected apology with no sense of gravity and ceremonial would be... odd, and inappropriate.

Regarding the other issue raised, many prominent members of the Liberal Party have openly supported the apology (including Costello and Malcolm Fraser).

lol, but personally if it stops at the apology then fine but now the SGA has demanded a large amount of things from the government http://http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=373887 (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=373887) they want all Australians to feel guilty for something other people did. Give them an inch and they will take a mile

Not going to happen.

How can you "plan" an apology?

How can you "plan" an apology?
You phrase it just right so that it can't be used later on in compensation cases to justify financial claims.

lol, but personally if it stops at the apology then fine but now the SGA has demanded a large amount of things from the government http://http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=373887 (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=373887) they want all Australians to feel guilty for something other people did. Give them an inch and they will take a mile

Not the point, it's about having a mutual acceptance of the crimes done against Aboriginal people in the past, it's not about guilt in any way, and personally if you and others can't handle your emotions it's not our problem. For many Aboriginals the Stolen Generation is deep in their consciousness and any meaningful reconciliation cannot come until their is this mutual acceptance of the SG.

I personally hope the racist paternalistic attitude of the Howard years will wear off, he has done I suspect near permanent damage to the reconciliation process and Aboriginal relations generally.

They have to announce that they're going to make an apology? They can't just do it? That is bloody asinine.

You see, governments don't make apologies in the same way I would apologize to you for shooting your cat or something. They make a political statement that is supposed to resemble an apology, but no one actually feels remorse.

You see, governments don't make apologies in the same way I would apologize to you for shooting your cat or something. They make a political statement that is supposed to resemble an apology, but no one actually feels remorse.

And why would we feel guilty? That's not the point, it's just a recognition of the crimes committed in the past, so that we can move forward.

As long as the government words it right, and gets some kick ass lawyers to stop the inevitable compensation cases in their tracks, then I'd say this is the most awesome thing ever.

Not the point, it's about having a mutual acceptance of the crimes done against Aboriginal people in the past, it's not about guilt in any way, and personally if you and others can't handle your emotions it's not our problem. For many Aboriginals the Stolen Generation is deep in their consciousness and any meaningful reconciliation cannot come until their is this mutual acceptance of the SG.

I personally hope the racist paternalistic attitude of the Howard years will wear off, he has done I suspect near permanent damage to the reconciliation process and Aboriginal relations generally.

Sure it is hence why they want all Australians to be continually bombarded with it in the schools and no it is not merely a topic where kids will be taught about it but one where the kids will be taught about it in a way where the kids will be made to feel guilty and personal remorse for the actions of others, this is already happening somewhat in the schools and is part of the reason why the number of students wishing to do history is falling. Rather than just accepting an apology and letting it go they want us to continue to feel remorse over the actions of overs

Sure it is hence why they want all Australians to be continually bombarded with it in the schools and no it is not merely a topic where kids will be taught about it but one where the kids will be taught about it in a way where the kids will be made to feel guilty and personal remorse for the actions of others, this is already happening somewhat in the schools and is part of the reason why the number of students wishing to do history is falling. Rather than just accepting an apology and letting it go they want us to continue to feel remorse over the actions of overs

Sweeping generalisations much?

A completely ridiculous idea. Pathetic.

You phrase it just right so that it can't be used later on in compensation cases to justify financial claims.

On the issue of compensation... Out of curiosity, if a white Australian child were kidnapped, held against their will, and possibly raped during captivity, suffering profound emotional trauma, would you say that child has a right to go to court to obtain some form of compensation for what's been done?

I'm not saying compensation is an easy issue. But I do find it intriguing that some people take the view that no Aboriginal should be compensated, in cases where they would clearly support compensation if the victim were white.

On the other hand, I do agree (cautiously) with Rudd that it's important not to muddle the issues. An expression of sorrow and compassion, the apology should not be muddled with issues of compensation. It should stand apart from that.

However, in individual cases where an Aboriginal person is proven to have suffered through past policies, as in the case of Bruce Trevorrow, what earthly reason could there be for that person not to be awarded some form of compensation - not specifically as an Aboriginal, but as an Australian citizen, a human being, like any other human being?

Sure it is hence why they want all Australians to be continually bombarded with it in the schools and no it is not merely a topic where kids will be taught about it but one where the kids will be taught about it in a way where the kids will be made to feel guilty and personal remorse for the actions of others

You just keep telling yourself that. Never mind the fact that everyone involved (Aboriginals, government) has insisted time and time again that no Australian should feel guilty. Why is it that some people keep on insisting that they're being "told to feel guilty"? They're not. How come some people just can't seem to grasp the difference between guilt on the one hand, and sorrow and acknowledgement on the other? It seems to me that, on the whole, there are two types of cases: people who are genuinely not smart enough to understand the difference, and people who actually do not want to, because they prefer to fall back on a knee-jerk reaction against anything that makes them feel uncomfortable.

Will the aboriginals finally apologise for being in the way...

Will the aboriginals finally apologise for being in the way...
Friendly advice: when you're new, people might not recognise whether you're being sarcastic or not.

Will the aboriginals finally apologise for being in the way...

Damn straight!!

You just keep telling yourself that. Never mind the fact that everyone involved (Aboriginals, government) has insisted time and time again that no Australian should feel guilty. Why is it that some people keep on insisting that they're being "told to feel guilty"? They're not. How come some people just can't seem to grasp the difference between guilt on the one hand, and sorrow and acknowledgement on the other? It seems to me that, on the whole, there are two types of cases: people who are genuinely not smart enough to understand the difference, and people who actually do not want to, because they prefer to fall back on a knee-jerk reaction against anything that makes them feel uncomfortable.

That is why the government is assuring that when K. Michael Rudd does apologise that it is written in such a way so as not to try and place guilt on any one, hence why they keep saying it is being carefully worded. And you know what the leaders of those two groups are saying that to try and talk down any fears of this guilt issue. If they didn't want Australians to feel guilty than why do they want more than just the apology refer to the link I posted earlier, I had to deal with a curriculum during my time at school and yes we were taught in a way that we should feel a sense of guilt over the issue.

Friendly advice: when you're new, people might not recognise whether you're being sarcastic or not.

Advice noted, but people can choose themselves how they interpret sayings...

Advice noted, but people can choose themselves how they interpret sayings...
And many people will. Once you get the feel of another poster's politics, though, it's much easier to get it right.

Welcome to NSG, by the way.:)

On the issue of compensation... Out of curiosity, if a white Australian child were kidnapped, held against their will, and possibly raped during captivity, suffering profound emotional trauma, would you say that child has a right to go to court to obtain some form of compensation for what's been done?
You should know me better than that. Race isn't an issue for me - the individual is.

If there are still people around who were actually taken from their families, of course they would be entitled to sue for compensation. It's unfortunate that my tax money ends up being used, but I suppose it's no less unfair a use than to hand it to people who didn't suffer at all just because they happen to be unemployed. The big "but" however is that their children can't be eligible.

The same issue is coming up with Holocaust compensation, you keep getting people who want money because they claim their homes were broken because of what happened to their, now dead, parents during WWII. But that's idiocy: there are plenty of broken homes where no parent was ever in a camp and there are plenty of people from broken homes who did okay in the rest of their lives.

As the case of Mr. Trevorrow shows, this apology isn't needed to make compensation claims for actually affected individuals work. The danger is that collectivists types will try to turn it into "communal responsibility" and you end up getting Aboriginal nations rather than individuals claiming compensation, which would be big load of bull.

Since all of them have been plundered and conquered a hundred times over, I wonder if any European nation has ever asked for or received an official apology for things that happened in the past? The Irish suffered for far longer than aboriginals, yet I've never heard them crying about apologies and compensation after the fact.

Or is this just a whitey is the devil thing as apologies of this sort have been in the US.

Or is this just a whitey is the devil thing as it has been on the US.
I think that

a) what other people do or have done doesn't affect the gravity of this particular deed in the least

b) it's been rather more recent than anything comparable in Europe, with the exception of the Kosovo conflict

c) unlike in most other cases, here we actually have two sides willing to do the right thing in principle.

I don't know. 60 years ago is recent enough for me. I know we entered the politically correct age about 40 years ago, but this was before then too.

Modern people apologizing for things that happened in past generations is ridiculous. It's also a slap in the face to all the brave people who built Australia into a modern power. It's regressive really.

Isn't it the same as Germany now would apoligize to the jews? A young German nowadays had nothing to do with it...
Or do I make a mistake?

Then u could say it's a good thing because people then remember it or something.

Isn't it the same as Germany now would apoligize to the jews? A young German nowadays had nothing to do with it...
Or do I make a mistake?

Then u could say it's a good thing because people then remember it or something.

Germans already tried to apologize, by building the Jewish Museum. Don't know if they can ever apologize for the Holocaust, but the museum rocks.

I will certainly say that the chance of a second Holocaust on German soil is pretty much nil.

Sure it is hence why they want all Australians to be continually bombarded with it in the schools and no it is not merely a topic where kids will be taught about it but one where the kids will be taught about it in a way where the kids will be made to feel guilty and personal remorse for the actions of others, this is already happening somewhat in the schools and is part of the reason why the number of students wishing to do history is falling. Rather than just accepting an apology and letting it go they want us to continue to feel remorse over the actions of overs

More 'they' and 'us' isn't welcome... If you feel remorse then that's your emotions, it's not about that it's about an acceptance of the truth of this historical crime, and an acceptance that it was wrong. I think bringing such things openly into the public domain, rather than sweeping it under the carpet and never speaking of it again, is a far more healthy way to start the reconciliation process. It's not about guilt or the personal responsibility or anyone.

Also, is it just me or are you copying Brendan Nelson's stance almost verbatim?

I think that

a) what other people do or have done doesn't affect the gravity of this particular deed in the least

b) it's been rather more recent than anything comparable in Europe, with the exception of the Kosovo conflict

c) unlike in most other cases, here we actually have two sides willing to do the right thing in principle.

That about sums it up, yes.

I don't know. 60 years ago is recent enough for me. I know we entered the politically correct age about 40 years ago, but this was before then too.

No it wasn't. These policies ended in the 1970s. That's less than 40 years ago. And it has absolutely nothing to do with "political correctness".


Modern people apologizing for things that happened in past generations is ridiculous. It's also a slap in the face to all the brave people who built Australia into a modern power. It's regressive really.

But this isn't past generations. Stolen children are still alive today. What happened still affects people living right now.

As for your last comment... Utter and complete rubbish. What you're saying is that, in order to honour "all the brave people who built Australia into a modern power", we must deny the truth. That's not honouring anyone; it's insulting them. What you're saying is that facing the truth would mean we (well, you Australians) could no longer honour anyone. That's nonsense. It's so mind-bogglingly illogical that I can't believe you actually wrote it. Recognising the truth of the many horrific and shameful acts committed in the recent past does not, in any way, prevent anyone from also recognising acts which are commendable and praiseworthy. Our minds are not so ridiculously simple and limited that we cannot cope with the complexity of a multi-faceted reality.

First of all, there is countless more people still alive today from the WW2 conquest era than Aboriginals. And I don't hear the Czechs wanting apologies for something that happened before the current generation.

And who said anything about denying the truth? I'm asking why anyone should feel ashamed for their ancestors risking their lives and doing what's necessary for you to live how you are today. Why apologize to the Aboriginals for defeating them? That's illogical and it's weak.

First of all, there is countless more people still alive today from the WW2 conquest era than Aboriginals. And I don't hear the Czechs wanting apologies for something that happened before the current generation.

And who said anything about denying the truth? I'm asking why anyone should feel ashamed for their ancestors risking their lives and doing what's necessary for you to live how you are today. Why apologize to the Aboriginals for defeating them? That's illogical and it's weak.

It's the idea of "defeating" them that gets me upset... they were here first, we showed up and completely disrupted their way of life, and then we go and meddle in their affairs by breaking up families, sometimes for proper reasons but also sometimes for completely bogus reasons. Why shouldn't the government apologise for these mistakes so we can move on?

First of all, there is countless more people still alive today from the WW2 conquest era than Aboriginals. And I don't hear the Czechs wanting apologies for something that happened before the current generation.

And who said anything about denying the truth? I'm asking why anyone should feel ashamed for their ancestors risking their lives and doing what's necessary for you to live how you are today. Why apologize to the Aboriginals for defeating them? That's illogical and it's weak.

Lol, this post has honestly flabbergasted me, so much so that I am tempted to sig;)

Germany: We will not apologize to the Jews for defeating them, it is illogical and weak!!!!

Lol, this post has honestly flabbergasted me, so much so that I am tempted to sig;)

Germany: We will not apologize to the Jews for defeating them, it is illogical and weak!!!!

Heh, it was a struggle for me to respond with kindness and seriousness... so much so that my brain was strained to the point of needing to use the term "bogus" for the first time in yonks.

More 'they' and 'us' isn't welcome... If you feel remorse then that's your emotions, it's not about that it's about an acceptance of the truth of this historical crime, and an acceptance that it was wrong. I think bringing such things openly into the public domain, rather than sweeping it under the carpet and never speaking of it again, is a far more healthy way to start the reconciliation process. It's not about guilt or the personal responsibility or anyone.

Also, is it just me or are you copying Brendan Nelson's stance almost verbatim?

I actually don't feel remorse at all as I did not have anything to do with this and to a certain extent as the state of rural aboriginals has fallen since the intergration policy was stopped yes I know you will say that it was assimalation that is absloutly true but that was stopped in 1967 by the Federal Government and guess which party it was? The Liberal party with Mcmahon as PM, as I was saying I was being forced to feel remorse if you bothered to read my post properly.

Actually Nelson wants to see the wording of the apology before making a decision on wether to support it or not.

I actually don't feel remorse at all as I did not have anything to do with this and to a certain extent as the state of rural aboriginals has fallen since the intergration policy was stopped yes I know you will say that it was assimalation that is absloutly true but that was stopped in 1967 by the Federal Government and guess which party it was? The Liberal party with Mcmahon as PM, as I was saying I was being forced to feel remorse if you bothered to read my post properly.

Actually Nelson wants to see the wording of the apology before making a decision on wether to support it or not.

No what I am saying is that no one is forcing you personally to feel guilty, that's your own emotions.

Also, just to confirm, it's not the 'people' of Australia apologizing, it's Rudd apologizing on the behalf of the current government for what the government of Australia did in the past to the aboriginals, as part of it's policy of forced removals (SG) etc.

Just to toss in some cynicism here...

"Apologies don't cost money, and they make people happy, so you'd think weasels would be handing them out like candy. My policy is that I'll apologise for anything bad that has happened to anyone, including in prehistoric times, parallel universes, hallucinations, acts of nature - you name it."

- Scott Adams

Sure it is hence why they want all Australians to be continually bombarded with it in the schools and no it is not merely a topic where kids will be taught about it but one where the kids will be taught about it in a way where the kids will be made to feel guilty and personal remorse for the actions of others, this is already happening somewhat in the schools and is part of the reason why the number of students wishing to do history is falling. Rather than just accepting an apology and letting it go they want us to continue to feel remorse over the actions of overs
Oh, it will be like that. I'm at school in the UK and the schools are full of marxist teachers, particularly history teachers who like to use the lessons to wallow in the white guilt trip.

I BEFRIEND CHESTNUTS;13419190']Oh, it will be like that. I'm at school in the UK and the schools are full of marxist teachers, particularly history teachers who like to use the lessons to wallow in the white guilt trip.
Well, I've gone through school in the UK and can honestly tell you that that's BS. Hell, I've taken history to degree level and found that not to be true.

No what I am saying is that no one is forcing you personally to feel guilty, that's your own emotions.

Also, just to confirm, it's not the 'people' of Australia apologizing, it's Rudd apologizing on the behalf of the current government for what the government of Australia did in the past to the aboriginals, as part of it's policy of forced removals (SG) etc.

Gee you are more of an idiot than I thought, what I am saying is that certain sectors of the community are wanting us to feel guilty, as I said I have no remorse for the issue.

Lets just see what the wording of the apology is before you make that sort of statement shall we

Well, I've gone through school in the UK and can honestly tell you that that's BS. Hell, I've taken history to degree level and found that not to be true.

Lucky you not having to put up with left wing crap and bias from teachers

Will the aboriginals finally apologise for being in the way...

How dare those aboriginees take our land before we were here to claim it!

How dare those aboriginees take our land before we were here to claim it!

The arrogance!!!:mad:

Gee you are more of an idiot than I thought, what I am saying is that certain sectors of the community are wanting us to feel guilty, as I said I have no remorse for the issue.

Lets just see what the wording of the apology is before you make that sort of statement shall we

'Certain sectors of society'.... Please elaborate.

More good news: the Liberal Party now supports the apology.


It is the clearest sign yet that the era of former prime minister John Howard has been consigned to the past.

Last night, after a lengthy and passionate party room meeting, Coalition MPs agreed to offer in-principle support for the Federal Government's proposed apology to the Stolen Generations.

"I, on behalf of the Coalition, of the alternative government of Australia, are [sic] providing in-principle support for the offer of an apology to the forcibly removed generations of Aboriginal children," Federal Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson said.

[...] Before yesterday's party room meeting, Dr Nelson met with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

But he says he was not provided with any of the details surrounding the apology.

"It is very important that every Australian - particularly if you are going to vote in support of a resolution - that you have the opportunity to see what it is that you are proposing to support," Dr Nelson said.

"Yes, we support in-principle - and strongly support in-principle - the apology that is to be offered.

"But to this date, Mr Rudd has not made available to me - and more importantly, the Australian people - the wording that he proposes to put into the Parliament."

The Opposition spokesman on Indigenous affairs, Tony Abbott, has also come a long way on the issue.

"It is a terrific outcome," Mr Abbott said after the party room meeting.

"I think this has been a difficult issue over the years and I think we have come to a very sensible conclusion."


(link (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/07/2156526.htm))


Also, just to confirm, it's not the 'people' of Australia apologizing, it's Rudd apologizing on the behalf of the current government

It's now expected to be on behalf of Parliament, since there is now bipartisan support for an apology.

Another little tidbit of news; Howard isn't going to show up. :p

Howard will not attend apology
Friday Feb 8 17:38 AEDT
Former prime minister John Howard will not travel to Canberra for the parliamentary apology to the Aboriginal stolen generations.

Mr Howard, who refused to issue a formal apology during his more than 11 years as prime minister, will not be in federal parliament on Wednesday despite a call from former Liberal PM Malcolm Fraser that all former PMs attend.

Asked if he would be there, Mr Howard said: "I won't be in Canberra next week."

He declined to answer further questions.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=103475

yur i'am going to stop what i'am doing to see this happen on TV,yur right

As long as the government words it right, and gets some kick ass lawyers to stop the inevitable compensation cases in their tracks, then I'd say this is the most awesome thing ever.

One of the many issues raised in the apology is this idea of compensation. People don't seem to realise that members of the Stolen Generation have been able to claim compensation since the Bringing Them Home report of 1997. It's ridiculous to assume that compensation shouldn't be claimed for these acts, as the Government cannot be prosecuted for them due to them being legal at the time. People confuse the compensation issue with the invasion of Australia.

... yes I know you will say that it was assimalation that is absloutly true but that was stopped in 1967 by the Federal Government and guess which party it was? The Liberal party with Mcmahon as PM...

Hmmmm, pity McMahon was Prime Minister from 1971-1972, not 1967.

I think its an awesome idea and about time we apologised.

For those asking about compensation, the government has committed to not giving out compensation themselves. This means that any compensation claims must be sought through the court system.

Since 1997 compensation claims have been able to be lodged to the Australian Court system. These claims are each judged individually on merit and EVIDENCE. An apology from the government does not constitute any more evidence in terms of someones personal suffering. Nor does it open for a wave of claims, as that door was opened in 97.

So there is no way this can increase the number of successful claims. What it might do, is convince people with claims who havnt come forward before to come forward and lodge these. Is it such a bad thing that people with legitimate claims be allowed to pursue these? They will still be judged as to wether or not they are valid.

Howard not showing up is pretty poor show, especially after Malcom Fraser's little thingy calling on all former prime ministers to be there.

I think its an awesome idea and about time we apologised.

For those asking about compensation, the government has committed to not giving out compensation themselves. This means that any compensation claims must be sought through the court system.

Since 1997 compensation claims have been able to be lodged to the Australian Court system. These claims are each judged individually on merit and EVIDENCE. An apology from the government does not constitute any more evidence in terms of someones personal suffering. Nor does it open for a wave of claims, as that door was opened in 97.

So there is no way this can increase the number of successful claims. What it might do, is convince people with claims who havnt come forward before to come forward and lodge these. Is it such a bad thing that people with legitimate claims be allowed to pursue these? They will still be judged as to wether or not they are valid.

Howard not showing up is pretty poor show, especially after Malcom Fraser's little thingy calling on all former prime ministers to be there.

What this guy said.

I think its an awesome idea and about time we apologised.

For those asking about compensation, the government has committed to not giving out compensation themselves. This means that any compensation claims must be sought through the court system.

Since 1997 compensation claims have been able to be lodged to the Australian Court system. These claims are each judged individually on merit and EVIDENCE. An apology from the government does not constitute any more evidence in terms of someones personal suffering. Nor does it open for a wave of claims, as that door was opened in 97.

So there is no way this can increase the number of successful claims. What it might do, is convince people with claims who havnt come forward before to come forward and lodge these. Is it such a bad thing that people with legitimate claims be allowed to pursue these? They will still be judged as to wether or not they are valid.

Howard not showing up is pretty poor show, especially after Malcom Fraser's little thingy calling on all former prime ministers to be there.

Win. Very impressive first post. Welcome to NSG.

Actually in the long run it would be alot cheaper for the government to have a compensation system rather than having the people taking it too the courts, in which case they don't decide the amount and they have to pay legal costs as well, many victims of the SG have already done this.

Also, just to confirm, Tasmania (the state) has already set up their own compensation system for the SG quite a while ago, it might be best just to let the other states follow suit rather than having a federal scheme which isn't likely to happen.

I think its an awesome idea and about time we apologised.

For those asking about compensation, the government has committed to not giving out compensation themselves. This means that any compensation claims must be sought through the court system.

Since 1997 compensation claims have been able to be lodged to the Australian Court system. These claims are each judged individually on merit and EVIDENCE. An apology from the government does not constitute any more evidence in terms of someones personal suffering. Nor does it open for a wave of claims, as that door was opened in 97.

So there is no way this can increase the number of successful claims. What it might do, is convince people with claims who havnt come forward before to come forward and lodge these. Is it such a bad thing that people with legitimate claims be allowed to pursue these? They will still be judged as to wether or not they are valid.

Howard not showing up is pretty poor show, especially after Malcom Fraser's little thingy calling on all former prime ministers to be there.

Nice post!

It doesn't surprise me that Howard won't be there. He was always very strongly opposed to an apology. I would think it would be humiliating for him, particularly so soon after his complete downfall. It would show grace & magnanimity from him, which are not traits I associate with him at all.