The Commonwealth may be agreeable to divide the NT into …

Comment on Partition off Darwin to fix NT’s urban bias: Professor by Paul Parker.

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.

Recent Comments by Paul Parker

Alice town camps need not be places of misery
The tern “traditional owner” is past is past use-by-date, much like the early colonial government’s various introduced systems of “protective” reserve areas.
All are of little benefit in terms of use and occupancy, effectively without rights and responsibility, other than through a confusing accountability maze to where management hides.
In 1860 South Australia legislated for a first Chief Protector appointed to watch over interests of Aboriginal people.
In December 1907, soon after Federation, Prime Minister Alfred Deakin and South Australian Premier Tom Price executed a formal agreement to transfer the Northern Territory to South Australia.
The South Australian Parliament passed the Northern Territory Surrender Act 1908.
The Commonwealth in 1910 re-introduced its Northern Territory Acceptance Bill, it eventually passed, enabling the Commonwealth to assume responsibility and authority from January 1, 1911.
All relevant South Australian legislation and regulation remained in force within the Commonwealth Northern Territory until it was changed by the Commonwealth.
The South Australian “protective” rules were accepted, maintained, enforced by the Commonwealth.
The Commonwealth Aboriginals Ordinance 1911 and successive Commonwealth legislation made the Chief Protector the legal guardian of every Aboriginal child under the provisions of this Ordinance.
The Chief Protector was replaced by the Director of Native Affairs with passing of the Aboriginals Ordinance 1939.
We are still claiming legal guardianship over all Aboriginal children, still usurping authority of parents, still subjecting all to near-total control over their lives, still maintaining their denial of basic legal rights as Australians.
The Commonwealth claims it held NO legal authority to protect Australians of Aboriginal descent.
Yet at the same time the Commonwealth claims legal authority to regulate, to deny equality of rights, to manage apartheid upon fellow Australians, using the racist term Aborigine.
Racism in Australia, since Federation, is mostly product of Commonwealth racist actions and in-actions.
Racism within Australia since Federation is contrary to specific intent of Australians voting for their Constitution.
Their opposition to racism, apartheid, upon fellow Australians, was even more clearly re-expressed in 1967.
Today the Commonwealth still uses subterfuge, confusion, to qualify, to deny, to Australians their equality of rights, responsibility, accountability, and thus equality of opportunities for better lives.
The Commonwealth still segregates, still separates, Australian families using racial identification as its measure.


Alice town camps need not be places of misery
The 1960s campaigns were to achieve equality of rights, equality of responsibilities, and equality of opportunities.
It is clear obstructive forces still delay this.
There was, there is, and shall continue to be recognition, consideration, to descendants of those who lived here before western society arrived.
When Captain Arthur Phillip established government his instructions were to recognize, to support, to defend, ongoing use and occupation by “native” populations of their respective lands, with their rights to continue living traditional lifestyles, with exception where those “native” customs and practices clashed with laws of the Crown.
This egalitarian approach traces back to 1066 AD when William Duke of Normandy conquered England. Later came perhaps more significant advances upon the customs and laws in the history of the UK.
The Mabo and other judgments by the High Court reflect ongoing concerns for egalitarianism.
Prior to establishment of the Commonwealth various Australian state legislatures enacted requirements for youths, eventually all youths, to be educated.
Government(s) regularly fail to ensure all Australian youths obtain education at least to where each can learn further themselves. The governments blame the families.
There remain far too many believing it is not appropriate to require Australians with “Indigenous” ancestry to be educated to read, write and count, to enable them to achieve their potentials within our wider Australian community. They are forces of darkness.
Is not helpful to suggest individuals identified by racial tags can achieve their potential, can rehabilitate or develop themselves, develop their living culture upon their own lands, on their own terms, without their achieving wider understanding of our shared wider Australian society, our entire world and universe around us.
Bilingual education was not to promote mono-lingual education.
Bilingual education was to ensure each student commences their learning to read, write and count using language they understand.
Bilingual education at same time was to teach each student to speak, read, write, confidently express their views with Australia’s primary English language, for that a necessity for individuals to truly advance.
Some still believe “Indigenous” are zoo exhibits, limiting their opportunities, obstructing their becoming part of our wider egalitarian Australian community.
Segregation and obstruction deny opportunities, showing the fallacy of claims residents are in charge of planning, building these towns, able to build better lives.
Corporate Land Trusts using Commonwealth’s ongoing apartheid maintain these communities, the residents, not as landowners making using of their own resources, rather as addicted suckers from the public monies purse.


Zoning: Racial segregation can start in primary school
Zoning encourages class level approaches, to advantage or disadvantage schools, rewarding wealth as a filter on education. The wealthy are able afford to do better, disadvantaging those who cannot.
David Gonski’s recent report promotes a move to individual learning paths for all students.
This will assist many Australian students who fail to reach their potential at school.
That is changing focus from year-level progression, to school focus, so each student advances towards their maximum potential advance in learning each year.
Gonski with Turnbull Government support expects teachers to use the online assessment tool to diagnose accurately levels of literacy, numeracy, and subject knowledge, each student actually achieves.
They expect all of them to advance.
This even more important where students start with reduced oral and written English competence.
Our focus on education needs be continuous, real-time measurement of each student’s individual achievement, with support where they fail to progress, to ensure each progresses from their own efforts.
Schools need to prepare us all for ongoing learning. Education does not end when we leave school.
The NAPLAN tailored online test will present different questions for each student, questions determined by answers they provide. This is disruptive, reduces benefit from rote learning test questions to raise average school scores.
Our focus shifts to actual student understanding controlling their progress.
Education shifts from the class focus, to each individuals progress focus.
Improved internet access is required.
Which, if any, NT schools currently lack required internet access?
To improve internet access for individual schools, the NT needs address improved internet access to all NT communities, for students, their families, and so all those who left school can continue to interact, participate and learn.


Top cop must go, says Congress after stabbing death
Re: Jenny, Posted April 26, 2018 at 7:08 pm.
Yes, do agree.
Re: Ginnia, Posted April 26, 2018 at 8:39 pm.
I do accept the government in the NT has failed to advance; However NT’s failure largely results Commonwealth’s ongoing racist blinkered approach to policy, with abusive usage of racial filters, mostly IMHO to avoid addressing real known problems.
In particular the Commonwealth’s gross failure to ensure for ALL Australians an equality of responsibility, an equality of accountability, and an equality of opportunity.
Re Heather Wells, Posted April 27, 2018 at 10:32 am.
May be possible to create a reasonable limit on volume by amending legislation to set a particular take-away volume as a “commercial” quantity, as this is done with cannabis.
BTW may not be effective. Example: A dozen people all purchase their daily limit then go off together to consume.


Top cop must go, says Congress after stabbing death
The Congress’s Donna Ah Chee complains police are not concentrating on ensuring full lock down of bottle shops and names this as the key cause of potentially preventable alcohol related violence. This, in simple terms, is rubbish.
At best it is a cheap, prejudicial, political rhetorical pretence this “real action” is being taken.
In Feb 2018 the takeaway alcohol point of sale checks were 58,058 of which 195 resulted in No Sale.
Ordering Police to wait there to catch 0.3% (0.2% for all of NT) is a waste of police resources.
At each point of sale the licensees need to exercise their responsibility as “The Licensee” to prevent unlawful sales and to maintain the peace.
When “The Licensee” fails then immediately suspend their licence.
If such licensee failure re-occurs, then seek the court to declare their license cancelled.
Passing licensee responsibility to the police reduces time for police to investigate and prosecute other offences.
The NT legislation enables Donna Ah Chee, and others concerned, to lodge their own complaints about anti-social drinking in most locations, including private places like homes, where regular alcohol related incidents occur. The law enables them to apply for consumption of alcohol to be banned, enables them to apply for persons to be banned from possessing, enables them to apply for persons to be banned from attending licensed locations, enables them to apply for persons to be banned from attending other specific locations, all this with particular attention to when restricted persons are intoxicated.
“Turning the taps off” as policy is better known as prohibition. History shows this ensured growth of unlawful liquor distribution and so many other criminal activities.
Congress needs apply more effort to encourage everyone in the community, particularly higher risk individuals, to use what is available within the legislation.


Be Sociable, Share!