The "APY" lands

or. more accurately, the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara lands, are a vast area of land in this state on which a sparse but diverse group of "indigenous" people live.

They have been variously run by this group and that group and this organisation and that organisation over many years. Millions upon millions of dollars  have been poured into programs designed to assist those involved. Nothing has worked.

Recently the government stepped in again, took over the administration, and appointed yet another person to try and sort out the issues surrounding domestic violence, child neglect, housing, health, employment and more. Yesterday my good friend M... told me the new "manager", just six months into the job, had been "sacked" by the "board" which is supposed to be responsible. They claim they had the right to do this because there had been fifty-five complaints levelled against him. He claims he has been trying to prevent the unauthorised use of public money intended for the people who are intended to benefit from it.

M... knows a great deal more about this sort of thing than I do and he is of the opinion the manager has uncovered more than one thing the board would like to remain hidden. This sort of problem is nothing new. It is not just poor management but a multitude of other things too. 

Years ago now an indigenous woman I knew was awarded a large sum in compensation following a road accident. The money was intended to be used to turn a small home for her into an accessible one in which she could live independently. She was hoping to be able to go back to work as a result of this. Her legal team was helping. 

They did not take into account her extended, very extended, family. They descended. They arrived at the house. She had housing? Of course she had to share it. She had money? They wanted a share. This was how things worked if you are indigenous. You are expected to "share" any "good fortune".  

The reverse is not true. Her very extended family had no intention of helping her. They simply moved in. She came to a meeting about other issues in absolute despair. How was she going to make them leave so that she could actually use the house? The police could do nothing. A court order would simply be ignored. 

What happened in the end was something which should not have needed to happen. She asked the Public Trustee to take care of the money she had been awarded so that she had no control over it herself. Then her government based employer moved in and transferred her from the country region she lived in to the city where she was moved into a tiny but accessible unit. She went back to work but the move was made at the cost of her ties to her family. How dare she keep the compensation to herself? This was family. She was supposed to look after them.

When I have told people this they simply do not believe me. It is the same when other people who knew her do the same. Others simply do not want to believe this is "how things work", that ideas about "sharing" are not the same as most of us have been brought up to believe. 

This is the sort of thing that administrators in the APY lands and elsewhere are up against. Nobody is willing to question such ideas because they are considered to be "cultural". If money is being misused in the APY lands then this is not the way they see it. It will be considered reasonable by some. It is there. It is to be used. If some benefit more than others then it is because they have some sort of status or power within their community. They do not see this as wrong. It is simply the way things are intended to be. 

Administering money in the APY lands according to our values is something which would harm what is left of their languages, their cultural practices and their community. How do you manage that?   

Victimhood is wonderful

if you can get people to side with you and tell you how awful it is that people "hate" you for being "A" or "X" or "something". It gets you so much attention. People feel sorry for you. They tell you that. You might even get some money for  your "hurt" feelings.

I had a good friend here yesterday. She was upset because someone had just said something very nasty to her. Yes, she was hurt but she is also a sensible person.

I know her well enough to leave her to make her own cup of tea while I went on line to see if the book she wanted was available on any second-hand site. I found the book. I asked if she was prepared to pay what the seller was asking and ordered the book. She wanted to pay me there and then. I told her no. 

"I trust you," I told her. I do trust her. She will pick up ten cents and look around to see if someone has dropped it. If there is nobody around she will put it in the charity box. She is that sort of person.

We sat at the table for a bit and talked. She has family in Israel and family in Ukraine. Her children were born here. They have never been to either place. They are not likely to go at present.

"I am not sure they will ever go," she told me sadly. "I would like for them to see but not to live. This is the best country for them."

And for her? It is so much harder. She will not see her home countries again. Her accent tells everyone she is an incomer. She and her late husband worked eighty hour weeks in the business her two sons now run. They never made themselves out to be "victims" when they came with no more than the clothes they were wearing. The problem is that she is Jewish and that is apparently some sort of sin. It is an even greater sin because they succeeded, through hard work, in owning a successful business. Her house is "nice". It is in a "good area". For anyone else this would be "success" but she is Jewish and it is somehow "wrong". Why? 

I know there is a stronger "antisemitism" movement here than many people want to recognise. There are people I know who have surprised me at their views. When I have tried to tell them that by no means all Jews, especially Jews here, support what the Israeli government is doing they just shrug and tell me "they are all the same" and "they feel entitled". Really? 

The person who came to see me yesterday is Jewish but she had just finished her regular time in a Christian charity shop which does a great deal to support Muslim refugees.  The person who berated her was of a different faith who sees themselves as a victim because they could not have something for nothing.  

Think about that.

Men can get pregnant?

 I am reeling from this. Really? Is it actually possible? This is seismic!

According to our "Sex Discrimination Commissioner" this is possible and biological men need to be protected from "potential discrimination" because of it. 

Like Senator Cash I obviously missed out on a vital lesson or two at school. I had no idea it was possible for men to become pregnant and be the victims of potential discrimination because of it. 

No, this is not a joke. I heard the verbal exchange.  

I have had dealings with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission in the past. These have been in relation to disability discrimination. I have found HREOC of little help but they have not stooped to this level of absurdity. 

There is plenty out there in the media about this story. It has "gone viral" as they say. I leave it up to you to chase the story. I have better things to do with my time than listen to Dr Cody repeat this sort of nonsense.

Actually I need to catch up on what did not get done yesterday because the trike had a front wheel flat. I was stuck waiting for an and a half for an Access Cab to get it to the bike shop. The driver was very nice about it. The bike shop man was even nicer because he said, "I'll do it straightaway. I know you need it." 

Now if HREOC could be as sensible and efficient as the man in the bike shop we might get somewhere.   

Voting in local council elections

closes on November 11 this year. The process begins much earlier than that. 

We need to be on the electoral roll for the council by the 31st of July and nominations need to be in by the 8th of September. Information about the candidates will come a little later.

I am wondering if our current Mayor will stand again. It is almost certain she will. In the past she has tried to use her position as Mayor as a springboard into a seat on North Terrace - the location of the state government. It did not succeed. She has had to satisfy herself with being the president of the state's local government organisation instead. 

It is still a rather powerful position. Being Mayor is quite a powerful position too. It is particularly so in an area where people are can afford to be "environmentally conscious" and concerned with issues which are not the direct concern of local government. 

Under the leadership of our current Mayor there has been a dramatic shift to the left. Concerns about "rates, roads and rubbish" have given away to other concerns. Money has been spent on

(1) renaming areas with what are said to be the names used by local tribes and

(2) running classes in what is said to be the local indigenous language and

(3) sessions on how to play a didgeridoo and

(4) classes in traditional basketry.

All these were "indigenous" initiatives which, along with the proposed donation to the Voice to Parliament referendum, have been intended to bring about some sort of "reconciliation". The renaming of areas has been expensive and there is no evidence that the names being used are correct. People find them difficult to remember. The library complex in the hills is consistently referred to by the name of the suburb, not the indigenous name. The supposed local indigenous language is a modern invention built out of what was believed to be used by a small group of plains people before white settlement. The languages spoken in the hills behind me were not the same. The didgeridoo was not known here. It comes from an entirely different part of the country. Traditional basketry comes from an area more than one hundred kilometres away and well outside the council area. All these things cost money, money collected from rates, but they sound good.

The Mayor has also claimed credit for the solar power initiatives and the battery scheme. It has cost taxpayers a great deal but is said to be in line with claims about climate change and the moves to net zero. It is the sort of move which is popular among those with two incomes and children at school. Our Mayor also went off to the climate change conference in South America at our expense. 

These are just a few of the things for which the Mayor has managed to get councillors to vote. I have no doubt we will hear more about these "initiatives" and how "successful" they have been. 

I saw the previous Mayor in the shopping centre a short while back. He doesn't think he will try again. He has failed to win back the position twice now. He knows he is up against a powerful cohort of the Mayor's supporters. They tend to be left wing zealots. They will tell us that "roads, rates and rubbish" are important but they believe that "educating" people about "indigenous culture" and "the environment" are more important. Their streets are being repaved and their footpaths are being repaired. When the community bus does not run through lack of volunteers to drive it then the elderly can "get a taxi". They have views about the proposed housing development on the land owned by the organisation which runs sheltered employment. For them it is simply a matter of those who live there now finding rental accommodation "somewhere else". 

Our country is outrageously over governed. We do not need pseudo-indigenous names and activities. We need help for the intellectually disabled who will have nowhere to go in the area they know. We do not need to rename roads. We need roads without potholes.                                                                                                                

 

 

"Open discussion and the respectful sharing of ideas"

are what universities are about if the quote from a deputy vice-chancellor of one of our local universities is correct.

I beg to differ. This is not what our local universities are about. They may have been once but they are no longer. 

The deputy vice-chancellor in question was speaking about an upcoming "Festival of Democracy and Human Rights". It should be an event to applaud. What it would appear to be is something quite different. 

If the reports are to be believed this event is apparently an attempt to provide an "antidote" to the "far right" through prescribing "trade union membership". The organisers are apparently concerned that one in four voters voted for the "far right" One Nation party in the state's Legislative Council. They like to forget there was nowhere near this percentage of voters in the lower house who were voting for the same party.

I imagine their concern is more that there is polling to suggest that One Nation voters could bring about a seismic shift at the next national election and suddenly be a serious opposition. Yes, polling suggests that. More people are openly suggesting they will vote for One Nation. 

What the government and the current Opposition are not doing is addressing the reasons there is growing support for One Nation. Much of the support is around the demand for lower levels of migration, a different tax structure and the "net zero" debate as well as a different approach to housing, health and small business.

The government is not listening to any of this. The Opposition is apparently not prepared to change their policies. The media keeps suggesting that the fiery red head who leads One Nation is some sort of dangerous renegade, another Trumpian. 

The reaction and the claim by the vice-chancellor interests me because I am well aware that there are real issues with "open discussion" at universities here. There is little "respectful sharing of ideas" in many areas. Students are not free to argue alternative views if they want to pass. I talk to students. I read their essays.

"Do you believe this?" I will ask them, "Or are you just regurgitating an idea you have been given?"

"It's what we have to say," I am told. Or, "It's what the lecturer told us." 

This is what university is now about? Follow the "correct" version if you want to pass?

Across the way from me is a mature age student in his final year. He is no fool. He had a responsible role in industry before the business he was in went into liquidation and, along with many others, he found himself unemployed and unemployable. He is working to change that but he finds himself having to write one thing while he believes another. He started out trying to raise opposing points of view in his area (counselling) and found that, while he was being given a pass mark it was just that. When he provided the acceptable answers he was given distinctions. He wondered if there was something wrong with his previous work. Yes, there was. He was not following the acceptable way of thinking. 

This man is old enough, mature enough and experienced enough to realise what is being done. He will go through the last year of his course without "rocking the boat" in order to get the piece of paper he needs. After that he can apply commonsense and world experience to whatever role he manages to get. Younger students cannot do that. They are captured. They are impressionable.

I suspect universities have always been something like this but there are other factors now at work. "Open discussion" is "the wrong sort of social media" now. The "respectful sharing of ideas" is not possible when the law moves in and prevents anything which might "harm" someone.  It doesn't happen when you get marked down for having an alternative view, or for even just raising an alternative view.

We need genuine open discussion done with genuine respect. It isn't happening here. I just hope there is more of it elsewhere.  

The growing rise of One Nation

here and Reform in the UK is causing alarm among the more "traditional" parties in politics.

"One Nation is dangerous," I was told yesterday. This came from a resident in these units who apparently has strong political views. I listened. I said nothing. I was thinking about psychology, not politics. Why do we "believe" things?

As children we believe in Father Christmas or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny or the "tooth fairy" or participate in "Elf on the Shelf" or something equally unlikely. I knew full well who "Father Christmas" was at age three but I also knew it was wise to "believe" in it and not say anything to those children who did believe. I now wonder whether there were not a few more children like me. Country children know milk does not simply come in a bottle or calves from holes in the ground so why should they believe in Santa Claus? They have other "magic" right around them. 

When I was small other things were magical too. They were rare. We did not have doors which slid open. I remember the first time we came across one and my brother insisted on going through it three times. We thought travelling in a lift (elevator to you North Americans) was fun. They were often operated by a man in uniform. We thought it would be a fascinating job to do that all day! 

There were traffic lights and pedestrian lights - both unheard of out in the rural areas we lived in - and the way "the Man in Blue" site worked at the railway station so you knew where to go and catch your train. (There was no Platform 9 and 3/4.)

I thought of all these things and more, of how I believed not so much in them but in the magic of them.  Watching people interact with them was fascinating. 

Perhaps now it is the same for many adults. There is a fascination with the new politics of One Nation. People want something different. For some it is perhaps a return to the past, to a time when things seemed more certain. For others there is a desire to believe in something akin to Father Christmas and the tooth fairy.  

Dual citizenship is a

surely a curious idea. How can you have allegiance to more than one country?

It has come up in relation to migration and government benefits recently but it is something I have often come across when talking with people who are migrants. Some of them want "citizenship" of this country and others do not. For some it is a matter of not being able to hold dual citizenship and for others it is something they simply do not feel strongly about. There are other reasons too for not wanting to become a citizen but I will leave it at that.

As a child at school I was required to "salute the flag". This ceremony happened every Friday morning at "assembly". The whole school would be lined up in the schoolyard. We faced the flag (lowered and raised every day by "flag monitors") and repeated the "I am an.... I love my country...and so on." 

I have no idea what other children thought but the way we often had to repeat it more than once "to say it as if you actually mean it" was something I quite simply found of no interest at all. I had no sense of any pride in my country. It is unlikely I understood what it meant at age four when I started school. At age fourteen (and we still did it) it was simply embarrassing. I reached a point where I was mouthing the words but not actually saying them. All these years later nothing has changed. I have no sense of being a citizen of this country. I feel no sense of "national pride". For me the "national anthem" is like a dirge. 

I shock people when I say this. "But how can you feel like that?" they ask me. They often go on to tell me "it is the best country in the world" and how "lucky" I am to live here. Is it a good country to live in? Yes, it is. It is an exceptionally good country in many ways but, like the Senior Cat, I am also aware of a sense of "isolation". Migration from other countries has not changed that. "Multiculturalism" has not changed that. It may be that those things have even increased my sense of isolation. In recent years it has become much harder. All too often I am being told I am living on "stolen" land, that my Celtic heritage is not something to even be acknowledged, that other ethnic groups can celebrate the national days of the countries they (or their ancestors) come from but I cannot. 

The world is an extraordinary place. The diversity is so great nobody can hope to understand it. I do not want to be restricted to the idea that one country with a tiny population on a large land mass is more important than anything else. I do not want to believe that my allegiance should be to that and that alone.  Is that wrong?