Some Australians support, promote and practice racism. Most Australians support, promote …

Comment on First Nations want a ‘Voice’ enshrined in the constitution by Paul Parker.

Some Australians support, promote and practice racism.
Most Australians support, promote and practice equality of opportunity, equality of rights and equality of responsibility.
Policies of racist’s usually about benefit for themselves based upon who their ancestors were.
Racist approaches to resolving past differences similar to various fundamentalists like the Taliban/ISIS.
Australians at Federation, then again in 1967 voted for equality of opportunity, equality of rights, equality of responsibilities, all these to be without racial testing of Australians.
Compensation for past racism, does not require racism continue.
The Uluru meeting IMHO is more about ensuring ongoing racism, by trickery upon Australian’s Constitution, thus is to be rejected.
The ongoing failures to thrive in communities is due the focus upon, the decisions to operate with, racist approaches.
Many communities still need change to reject their use of racist approaches, stop hiding behind racist legislation.
This particularly for communities with the label “Indigenous”, for they are disadvantaged by such.
Many communities in the NT have control over what they can do, yet fail to accept their own responsibility to improve things for themselves.
Those who apply self-help, accept responsibility for what they achieve, and where they fail to achieve, can do better.
Constantly blaming others, particularly historical events, for what is or what happens today, discourages support.
Equality of opportunity does not guarantee equality of results, though to deny equality of opportunity ensures failures.

Recent Comments by Paul Parker

Mantle of mental health care withdrawn
Once again the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory president Marty Aust claims people on custodial supervision orders are almost always housed within prisons because nowhere else is suitable for them.
Is my opinion the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory wears racist blinkers on this.
The Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory’s attack upon the NT Government ignores simple facts.
Decisions to provide leases to provide suitable housing placements for these mentally disadvantaged individuals within or closer to their communities rests with their relevant corporate Land Trusts.
Have these relevant corporate Land justs provided the relevant long term leases?
If not, why not?
What efforts and what successes achieved by the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory towards obtaining relevant required leases to accommodate these individuals?
At this time the NT Government is unable to resume land, despite Constitutional requirement for payment of “just compensation”.
Are these really needed sites?
The sounds far to much like pass the buck.


Make Oz Day a celebration of the future, not the past
The logical and legitimate historical relevance is that Australia became an independent self-governing Commonwealth nation with Federation on January 1, 1901.
Our formal functions need to stick with the first Federation timetable, nothing before noon, as logical to enable majority recover from their New Year celebrations in time to attend and enjoy.


Australia Day: Alice’s role in it
Fit as well for Northern Territory to lead promotion to replace 26 January with 1 January which is anniversary the establishment of our Commonwealth of Australia.
IMHO requirement we would need to ensure NO ceremonies before noon to ensure all recover from their New Year celebrations in time to attend.


NT and SA amalgamation: Would they have us?
A treaty proposal as little more than a promotion of permanent racism, a promotion of permanent apartheid, a promotion of the ongoing disadvantage of many, within Australia.


Miners are spreading myths, says environmentalist
Re: Alex Hope Posted January 22, 2019 at 11:23 am
Perhaps Alex can explain what each Land Trust as corporate land-title-holder and owner, actually spends building and maintaining housing being used by their shareholders “traditional owners” who do live on their land-title-held land ?
Perhaps Alex can explain what each Land Trust as corporate land-title-holder and owner actually collects as rent to be spent building and maintaining housing used by their shareholders and “traditional owners” who do live on their land-title-held land?
Perhaps Alex can explain the Commonwealth and NT Government financial contributions to benefit each land-trust-titled area?
Please include also the dollars per resident.


Be Sociable, Share!