Shame that Australia has so many politicians believing is important …

Comment on Former gallery advisor scathing about its planners by Paul Parker.

Shame that Australia has so many politicians believing is important they waste tax-payers monies so they feel useful.
They fail to understand importance attached to real public discussion, bringing wider community together to support programs they all will feel committed to.
A community working together can cost less than numerous consultants trying to second guess needs of both community and their paymasters.

Recent Comments by Paul Parker

Aboriginal gallery: rushed business case yet immediate start?
Re Matthew Langan Posted December 4, 2018 at 7:49am.
Grog remains a symptom of ongoing failures in health, housing, education and employment across Central Australia. These are direct results from the Commonwealth’s ongoing managed racist apartheid approach to public policy.
There is ongoing harm to Australia’s wider cultural history and families in Central Australia.
Australian voters in 1967 clearly declared Commonwealth’s racist apartheid approach had no place in Australia.


Black money
James T Smerk Re: Posted November 26, 2018 at 1:06 pm
The Commonwealth, rather than seriously address significant disadvantage issues, consistently practices and promotes racism by its concentrated use of racial filters.
Either persons in need satisfy clear needs criteria without requiring their racial identification, or the policy is racist.

.


No cops, no clinics
Alex Nelson Re: Posted December 1, 2018 at 12:48 pm
Care to identify some remarkably consistent patterns ?
Most easily to accept are possible various disruptions of services in regional / remote communities may be part of a deliberate policy to move a population.
Many suspect governments make considerable effort to avoid providing details, which reinforces conspiracy theories.
Frequently there are other reasons, like late submissions, essential details missing.
Like most assumptions, to actually prove them requires far more detail, which requires more open governments.


Reverse discrimination: Views differ in the NT and the US
The Commonwealth promotes and practices racial apartheid.
There is a lack of correlation between “special measures” and claimed past injustices.
On occasion it is rational, simpler, perhaps cheaper, to make a decision to provide entire groups a single compensation for past injustices many of them shared.
Such compensation(s) for equity are best divided and shared to ensure each individual deemed suffering the “past injustices” may use their share in manners decided by them.
Changing how we live is a decision each individual makes, with or without consideration of consequences.
Each needs accept responsibility for their own stupid decisions.


No cops, no clinics
Haasts Bluff is part of a privately owned rural fiefdom.
Being a privately owned fiefdom responsibility to provide services rests with the corporate owner, in this case the Haasts Bluff Land Trust.
The shareholders (aka Traditional Owners) of Haasts Bluff Land Trust with their private corporate ownership must accept that their shared ownership means it is their responsibility to provide their services.
Australians are entitled to certain levels of support.
Levels of support depends on population and levels of need.
Private landowners like Haasts Bluff Land Trust first need service themselves, using their own resources.
They may seek support for some services. Such support is assessed in terms of need, proportionally shared contributions.
If Haasts Bluff Land Trust, as a private property owner, is not prepared to provide basic services itself, nor provide reasonable security of tenure and leases, is unlikely there should be much support, whether from private or public moneys.
With clear security of tenure, and access, service providers determine levels of support they may then provide, as deemed appropriate to need and cost-benefit requirements.
Can John Paterson and AMSANT explain the levels of support they seek with clear comparisons to equivalent services received in similar sized communities around Australia?
Can the corporate owners of Haasts Bluff Land Trust, and their corporate realty agent, the Central Land Council, explain what they are doing to provide themselves these basic services ?
Around Australia most small towns equivalent in size to Haasts Bluff private village, neither have nor need permanent police presences. Their police often several hours away.
Indeed when we organised our move from Papunya to Kintore we knew our nearest police were several hours away.
Are John Paterson and AMSANT implying an excessive level of crime is occurring in the privately owned closed corporate village of Haasts Bluff?
Can John Paterson’s explain why lack of a police presence makes providing health services at Haasts Bluff fail to comply with occupational health and safety laws?


Be Sociable, Share!