|
Ten years ago when I first started researching the activities
of the Queensland government's Aboriginal Department I had
several aims: to acquire for myself a knowledge of government
operations during the twentieth century; to do a thorough
job in accessing the widest possible range of information;
and to come up with new ways of conceptualising practices
such as exile to reserves, separation of children from their
families, and forced labour. In particular, I wanted some
sense of how Aboriginal families experienced these and other
aspects of a century of 'care and protection.'
I started off as a middle-class middle-aged woman researching
for a PhD thesis and ended up, after reading hundreds of
files and thousands of documents, sitting in a room surrounded
by paper and thinking: What if this had been me? How would
I have coped? What does it mean that I now have this knowledge?
The complexity of this suffocating system of controls, the
scope and depth of unbelievable deprivation, absolutely
beggars belief.
Since the turn of the nineteenth century, in Queensland
and around Australia, each of the states gave itself total
power over Aboriginal lives. As settlement appropriated
all the fertile land, Aboriginal families were deported
even from dry areas; it was claimed their presence near
waterholes or rivers frightened the cattle. Carted off to
missions and settlements according to the provisions of
carefully crafted 'protection' laws, people died of diseases
and starvation because the institutions were invariably
located on useless land and the government refused to provide
funds sufficient for survival. People who escaped to look
for food and work were hunted down and returned in chains.
On reserves, work was compulsory and unpaid until the late
1960s, rations and housing condemned as pathologically substandard,
and the whole sorry mess handed to Aboriginal community
councils in the late 1980s. And now these conditions are
largely blamed on poor council administration and misplaced
ATSIC priorities.
Every employed Aboriginal in Queensland was contracted by
the government for 51 weeks out of 52, with or without his
or her family. To refuse such separation was to be beaten
or banished, usually to Palm Island. Some never saw or heard
from families again. On the backs of this workforce of between
4000 and 5000 men, women and children, the Queensland pastoral
industry developed and prospered. Surveys showed that Aboriginal
workers were often regarded as more skilled than whites,
but a gentlemen's agreement struck in 1919 between government
and pastoralists set Aboriginal pay at 66% of the white
rate for the next 50 years. That was the stated procedure.
But in some years workers actually received as little as
31%, and never, during its control of private wages that
only ceased in 1970, never did the government ensure that
even this money was received by the worker. The government
maintained a system blighted by fraud; it extracted levies
from pitiful earnings; it misused and mismanaged trust funds;
it seized around 80% of private savings to generate revenue
for the state on the facile pretext that the money was 'idle'
and 'surplus to needs'. Account holders, some with considerable
finances of which they were kept totally ignorant, lived
and died in grinding poverty. Now we begin to understand
the despair and destitution of today.
What most appalled me was the sheer bloody mindedness and
perversity as, decade after decade, power compounded power,
entrenching a punitive system for the sake of maintaining
controls, in the face of mounting evidence of outcomes patently
contrary to publicly stated aims. What I found most offensive
was the realisation that during all of these years, when
the causal factor was so clearly the pernicious system itself
and the men who implemented it with such dogmatic determination,
it was the people who were blamed, misrepresented, maligned
and discounted as the root cause of their own damnable circumstances.
As is still so often the case today.
If you are driven from country which has sustained you for
generations, if you are denied access to rental housing
or casual accommodation, if those of you in work are denied
the cash you are earning, if you are thereby struggling
in shanties without the clean water, sanitation, shelter,
food, clothing and schooling that is mandated for all other
Australians how does it feel to be told it is your
failure to provide a good home environment that alerts authorities
to the need to 'rescue' your children from your negligence?
How does it feel to know, from experience, that you might
never see your little ones again? To realise, from the cold
hard facts of your position, that you can't afford to follow
to be near them? To know, from bitter experience, that the
authorities will neither listen to your protests nor respect
your heartache? What does it mean for ourselves as Australians
to know now, as surely as I know from the evidence, that
these children who were taken into government 'care and
protection' and the adults they became were trapped,
across many generations, in conditions as bad, and often
worse, than those from which they were deemed to have been
'rescued'?
Here are some sketches of conditions on government settlements.
On Palm Island in the 1930s nearly every baby died who was
not breastfed, because the only alternative was arrowroot
and condensed milk. Here the doctor asked head office whether
it was 'worth while trying to save them' by providing vitamin-enriched
formula. At Cherbourg, the government's showpiece institution,
the walls of the dormitory were described as 'literally
alive with bugs
beds, bed clothing, pillows and mattresses
are all infested ... all pillows were filthy because the
previous matron withheld pillowslips to save washing'. In
the 1950s malnourished dormitory children succumbed to tuberculosis
because, as the expert reported, they slept several to a
bed in overcrowded and badly ventilated barracks. The government
was warned that the encaging of large numbers of children
and unmarried women behind barbed wire and locked doors
was artificial, unnatural and pernicious, but dormitories
continued to be used, even into the 1970s, as places of
detention.
For around 70 years, the Queensland government simply ignored
its own law requiring every child to be given a regular
education. As early as 1905 the Chief Protector had obtained
advice from the crown solicitor that Aboriginal children
were not exempted from this basic right. Yet the government
had no intention of providing standard teachers, classrooms
or learning resources for these wards of state. Until the
1950s, lessons were limited to a half-day so children could
work in the afternoons; they had to make do with cast off
and outdated materials from the white schools, with unpaid
native monitors as teachers. Only in the last few decades
has orthodox schooling been provided. Yet the public was
told Aboriginal children were intellectually backward. And
in the wider community it was the atrocious conditions on
the Department's own reserves, where basic amenities were
deliberately vetoed on the grounds that they might encourage
people to reside there, that were reported, time and time
again, as the sole grounds that children were refused access
to local schools.
The Department even denied local councils permission to
erect necessary amenities, and dismissed white lobbyists
as socialist meddlers. From the 1960s, in the name of assimilation,
it sanctioned the eviction of families and the destruction
of their huts 'on health grounds' conditions for
which the Department was itself responsible when
it knew that no alternative accommodation was available.
In the 1970s, as federally-funded low-rent houses proliferated,
families trying to help each other out risked eviction as
Departmental agents warned against overcrowding and 'unsuitable'
visitors.
I am horrified and ashamed to read the machinations of this
pitiless system. I am ashamed to know that many families
with large bank accounts had to go cap in hand to ask permission
to make small withdrawals, permission that was frequently
refused. Shame turned to disgust now I know that the government
knew of, was consistently warned of widespread frauds by
both employers and police, but always refused to implement
the simplest check namely that people see some record
of what was being done to their own savings. Disgust turned
to anger now I know that the government itself was taking
money from savings for trust accounts it misused and purloined,
it engineered 'consent' for deductions to pay for improvements
on Departmental reserves, it seized the bank interest and,
in the late 1950s, it simply wrote itself a regulation so
it could invest hundreds of thousands of pounds of those
savings in development projects of regional hospitals when
Aboriginal patients were dying of cross infections in the
under-resourced and inadequately staffed equivalents.
I am horrified and ashamed to have lived oblivious to such
calculated inhumanity. I am also diminished. My sense of
myself as a member of a just society is fractured as surely
as if I had stepped on a landmine. I am horrified at how
late it was in life that I came to learn the terrible realities
endured by Aboriginal families at the hands of governments.
And this knowledge is very confronting: because I'm one
of the millions of Australians who have never gone hungry,
I have never been cast adrift from my family, I have always
had a roof over my head, a warm bed, my wages in my hand
to spend on my needs.
It's not just a case of 'adding in' this untold history.
This evidence cannot be characterised as a few awkward last
pieces to be fitted in to an almost-completed national jigsaw
as our Prime Minister seems to suggest. This is not
simply a matter of adjusting the colour and contrast of
a two-dimensional representation of our 'development' from
the primitive to the modern. What this evidence reveals
is a submerged operational dynamic within our national psyche.
The diminishment and degradation of Aboriginal agency in
Australian history is the diminishment and degradation of
us all. Knowing only part of our history, our identity is
open to manipulation and distortion. If we could embrace
the true content and outcomes of government management of
Aboriginal lives, much of the 'whiteness' of our identity
would be replaced by the multi-colours of reality. White
explorers did not, like conquering heroes, 'open up' the
outback and pave the way for 'civilisation'; they were watched,
guided and often rescued by those whose country it was,
those who knew it infinitely better, those who moved and
endured lightly on the landscape. White miners, stockmen
and settlers did not 'pioneer' life in the bush; most remote
properties and towns were dependent on the labour of thousands
of Aboriginal men, women and children, with more than 1000
working full time by 1880 in Queensland alone. Time and
time again in the twentieth century pastoralists stated
they could not survive without cheap black labour.
These facts are indicative of more than history untold;
they also represent debts unpaid. Debts of acknowledgment,
debts of regret and, in practical, accountable terms, financial
debts. In Queensland alone, calculations show that Aboriginal
labour, unpaid and underpaid in the pastoral industry and
in developing the communities, is more than a billion dollars
in today's value - calculating only from the 1940s. In Queensland
today the state admits it has profited from this forced
labour; but while this profit amounted to around half a
million dollars annually the state is currently offering
about $55 million, 'in the spirit of reconciliation' as
they put it, 'so we can move on.' That's $4000 for some
workers and half that for others. For decades of work.
This is not some unfortunate blight on our past to be 'whited
out' with an amount the Departmental budget can comfortably
accommodate. My argument is that their wages and savings,
denied or missing or misappropriated, are their legal right;
they are not within the province of the government to bestow
'in the spirit of reconciliation.' These workers helped
build each state. Aboriginal workers, Aboriginal families,
are integral to our nationhood, not a late addition. It
would seem, in our present political climate, that we have
a fight on our hands to reclaim this dynamic our
multi-coloured past and present. Well, so be it. History
is far too important to leave to the whims of temporary
politicians.
This is a good fight, a purifying fight, a fight to claim
truth for our nation and our identity. My personal belief
is that it is also a unifying fight. We can stand together
and work for truth in our history, for the expansion rather
than the contraction of our knowledge, for the inclusion
rather than the ostracism of our brothers and sisters. We
can demand acknowledgment and dignity for those denied it
by our forebears and, sadly, by many of our peers; we can
be enriched by their stories, their experiences, their culture.
And I have found, without question, that I also am empowered
through this fight to disseminate knowledge and to win justice.
I am still only five foot one; but I am taller, stronger,
and richer through my friendships and this shared struggle.
I am fighting because to know is to be indelibly implicated:
the choice is to walk away or to take action literally,
for truth and justice. My reward is to look my children
and grandchildren in the eye and say Yes, I learned
of it; Yes, I am ashamed and disgusted; and Yes, I am doing
all in my power to change it.
Dr Rosalind Kidd's recent publications include The
Way We Civilise (St Lucia: University of Queensland
Press, 1997) and Black Lives, Government Lies (Sydney:
UNSW Press, 2000). (A version of this article was
presented at the Unfinished Business Conference in Melbourne
in June 2002.)
|