Our corporate land owners – the Land Trusts, with their …

Comment on Thanks for more ‘us and them’, Ms Macklin and Mr Snowdon by Paul Parker.

Our corporate land owners – the Land Trusts, with their agents the Central Land Council, do NOT require exemptions from being held accountable as landowners, landlords, and agents for the shoddy housing.
They need be held accountable.
All landowners and landlords need be accountable to protect their tenants, even shareholder tenants.
Aboriginal Land Rights (NT) tenants, including “Traditional Owners” need recover their basic human rights as Australians, currently denied them through Commonwealth support for abuse of these exemptions.
Failure to provide equality of rights, responsibility and opportunity, condemns our communities be labeled “Fail To Thrive”.

Paul Parker Also Commented

Thanks for more ‘us and them’, Ms Macklin and Mr Snowdon
Problem is less Centrelink’s processes – though even a reasonable English ability can find them difficult to follow. It is the ongoing failure of government to ensure these individuals obtained basic education and understanding of their programs, procedures and requirements. Like pointing to one of several signs then asking blind person to read it.
Many of older generation were pushed to learn and did, with schooling compulsory. Activists then persuaded Government to drop this basic education requirement, to not enforce compulsory attendance at school, and not to concentrate on ensuring all learned basic English. Our result is lost generations.
Some room for teaching “Traditional” culture and history, as long as we retain the primary task for primary and secondary educators to ensure all achieve literacy, numeracy and oral English, so all have wider choices for their own futures.
Read: A remote community where all adults work and kids go to school. By KIERAN FINNANE.
http://www.alicespringsnews.com.au/1610.html


Thanks for more ‘us and them’, Ms Macklin and Mr Snowdon
Similar poor health statistics found around the world, almost everywhere “hunter-gatherer” cultures are adapting to cope with “post-cultivator” and “post-industrialized” modern suburban cultures.
Welfare / Centrelink / Rights:
Receipt of welfare / Centrelink required the providers agreement signed by recipients, not that recipients understood fully the agreement.
The Equal Rights campaign did NOT force people onto welfare. The ongoing Equality of Opportunity campaign forced Commonwealth stop excluding applicants with racial tests, forced Commonwealth cease their racist disqualification of home locations.
Recipients frequently still fail to understand agreements they sign.
Alcohol:
Around world is recognition that alcohol supply laws relate to over-consumption, that over-consumption statistically relates with injuries to people’s health and welfare.
Particularly so within poorer or lower educational standard communities.
Raising education standards, and employment opportunities, reduces alcohol related problems.
Availability of alcohol created problems in the NT, with decades of consumption away from legal and social behavior controls.
There are no quick fixes, and prohibition failed. Reducing problem drinker culture needs established social lounges where both consumption and behavior are controlled to reduce intoxication. Social desire to join others and consume in such places changes drinker culture slowly.
Over-consumption remains a problem as youths approach drinking age, without a clear social message that an alcoholic drink is not the problem, becoming intoxicated is the problem.
This being addressed, certainly with improvements required.
Leases:
Few valid “conventional leases” exist for housing within Central Australian Aboriginal Land Rights (NT) communities.
Soon to expire leases arranged by the Commonwealth (Mal Brough), managed by Territory Housing, only allowing refurbishments: These leases are deemed not sufficient to provide tenants a sub-lease.
Still “being negotiated” are “valid leases” for tenants of the various ALR(NT) Land Trust with their Commonwealth appointed agent, the Central Land Council.
Decades on we are yet to see leases, even in draft form.
Will these leases comply with NT standards for leases and registration of leases, or other?
Until leases resolved and issued for the communities, land ownership, dwelling ownership, and access, remains firmly controlled by the relevant ALR(NT) Land Trust and their agents the Central Land Council.


Thanks for more ‘us and them’, Ms Macklin and Mr Snowdon
The Central Land Council was appointed by the Commonwealth to act as agent for various Aboriginal Land Rights (NT) Land Trusts.
The Central Land Council and the Haasts Bluff Land Trust claim “Traditional Owners” have no right to live in a house.
The Central Land Council and the Haasts Bluff Land Trust claim “Traditional Owners” have no right to receive visitors in their homes.
The Central Land Council and the Haasts Bluff Land Trust claim “Traditional Owners” must obtain a lease granting these rights IF they seek right to have family or friends visit them in houses on Land Trust property.
Amendments to ALR(NT) apparently allow visitors on roads to drive to front of most houses, however to enter visitors must obtain permits through the Central Land Council, or the tenant must have this right in their lease.
Racism with apartheid attitudes from Commonwealth and others the only explanation for why our corporate landowners created under Commonwealth ALR(NT) are exempted – so NOT held accountable.
Consistent refusal by Land Trusts and their agents the Central Land Council to issue standard leases to their tenants in their houses on their land is because providing tenants leases gives them rights.
These same rights elsewhere regarded as basic human rights requiring judicial approval to qualify.
The Commonwealth restricts legal challenges through restrictions upon legal assistance, to maintain their racist apartheid and segregation policies upon Australians.


Recent Comments by Paul Parker

The APY saga: Evidence suggests dysfunction
These consequences flow from ongoing governments’ racist division achieved with local support for apartheid approaches to policy.
Government’s response thus remains “government only does this to help you …”
Clearly this not true, or else far more improvements should be visible.
Consider more how the local supporters for these racist apartheid approaches provide so little improvement, leaving the APY little room to argue and negotiate.
The best path to achieving equality of opportunity, and better measurable results, is for APY to join the rest of Australia and dump these out-of-date apartheid feudal approaches.

.


Partition off Darwin to fix NT’s urban bias: Professor
The Commonwealth may be agreeable to divide the NT into even more separately organized kingdoms as suggested by Professor Gerritsen.
His proposal to partition Darwin off from the rest of the Northern Territory suits longer term partitioning of the NT into various separate fiefdoms, per Commonwealth’s Aboriginal Land Rights (NT).
I doubt the NT achieving better fiscal equity is a priority to those involved.
It appears more like ownership and control without accountability and responsibility.
The Commonwealth is still working to partition NT into separate, self-governing, legal kingdoms, all done in accordance with various Commonwealth racist apartheid legislation guidelines.
Elsewhere Amos Aikman recently wrote of lease difficulties to do with the case before Justice Stephen Southwood involving the Commonwealth’s ALR(NT) racially segregated and partitioned community at Santa Theresa, concerning issues around housing, rentals, repairs and leases – or lack of them, affecting tenants living there.
This appears a repeat of Amoonguna housing issues covered earlier by the Alice Springs News, neither appear resolved.
[Q: Did Commonwealth quietly provided required funds to repair the private corporate land-owner’s houses?]
I admit wondering why they are suing the NT government, when the pot of gold for these is in Canberra, while in this case NT appears to act on behalf of, on instructions from, the Commonwealth, within limitations of Commonwealth’s racial segregationist policies set out in the ALR(NT), or flowing from same, makes this case more complicated than most property / tenancy cases.


Surprising conservative on council: Jacinta Price
Racial tags remain racist tools.
Racists aim to shift debates, use racial tags to move focus so racial membership becomes the issue.
The 1967 Referendum campaign and the overwhelming result was to stop, to eliminate, government use of racial tags as legislative filters to eliminate, or to qualify, our shared legal rights and legal responsibilities as Australians.
Almost every use of racial tags supports racists’ cause.


Street kids: No Protective Custody but Care Orders
CORRECTION Re: Paul Parker Posted August 15, 2017 at 12:40 pm

My error, it should read:

I certainly hope “departmental spokesperson” and others put more effort into funding and the providing of single bedroom units affordable on Centrelink to house those 16 to 18 (and older).

.


CAAMA, Imparja reluctant bedfellows
Re: Ralph Posted August 9, 2017 at 4:51 pm
Why do Aboriginal / Indigenous Corporate bodies require greater standards of accountability than other corporate entities ?
IMHO the Commonwealths Aboriginal / Indigenous entities exist to protect positions, reputations, and control, of Ministers and governments not purported beneficiaries.
Racism includes application of different standards to businesses where directors, shareholders, or beneficiaries, are qualified by racial identification.
Government financial assistance, even contracting, benefits many businesses under the Corporations Act.
While the majority of businesses in Australia are small, they make up around 97% of all businesses, with around 60% businesses failing in first three years.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics report into corporate insolvencies for 2011-2012 found 44% of businesses suffered poor strategic management, 40% inadequate cash flow or high cash use, and 33% suffered from trading losses.
Directors and employees, from smallest to largest corporations, subject to judicial accountability for corporate negligence.
Many successful in business advise trying to understand why they were failing, or they failed, is what enabled them to succeed later.
The need is to encourage those in business to seek and obtain advice from others sooner without racist measuring.


Be Sociable, Share!