http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-aussie-rules-806956.html

Leading article: Aussie rules

Thursday, 10 April 2008

We were looking forward to Kevin Rudd's term as Australia's Prime Minister, and so far we have not been disappointed. On the contrary, with his plain speaking, his firm principles as a politician and – a bit of a luxury, this – his fluent Mandarin, Mr Rudd has not only met our expectations, but inspired not a little envy as well.

He has just been in Britain, where he held bilateral talks and delivered a packed lecture at the London School of Economics. Given Australia's geographical position, his past as a diplomat in China and the coincidence of the shambolic passage of the Olympic torch through London, he was bound to be asked for his views.

This is what he said. On the torch: "We will not be having Chinese security forces or Chinese security services providing security for the torch when it is in Australia... We, Australia, are providing that security." On China and Tibet: "It's very difficult... you still have problems on human rights." On Beijing's refusal to meet the Dalai Lama: "There have been such contacts in the past – they need to be resuscitated." As for the Olympics, he said he opposed a boycott but had not yet decided whether to attend in person.

As it happened, Beijing was his next stop. Preceded by a diplomatic demarche over remarks on Tibet he made in Washington, Mr Rudd was undeterred. He gave a huge hall of students some unpalatable home truths; what is more, he did it in their own language. On human rights in China generally, in Tibet in particular, and on the need for dialogue, he was bang on message – his own. The world needs more leaders like this; we hope he has started as he means to go on.

Comment: If you're like me, and had never heard of "demarche", it means " A diplomatic representation or protest."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23205437-601,00.html

KEVIN Rudd has delivered his historic apology to the Stolen Generations on behalf of the parliament, witnessed by thousands of indigenous people in Canberra.

A packed Parliament House rose to its feet, applauding and whistling at the end of the Prime Minister's half-hour speech delivering the motion. Mr Rudd in turn clapped the public gallery.

And hundreds of indigenous people camped outside Parliament House gave a standing ovation and hugged each other after the long-awaited apology.

Thousands of people have watched the proceedings at special events and on big screens in cities around Australia.

However, several Liberal MPs appear to have boycotted the historic apology. 

After loudly reciting the Lord’s Prayer, WA Liberal Wilson Tuckey walked out of the chamber and fellow WA Liberal Don Randall is also not currently present.

NSW Liberal Alby Schultz, who also told The Australian Online yesterday that he was reserving his right not to attend, was not present. And Victorian Liberal Sophie Mirabella was also not in the chamber.

Mr Rudd offered a broad apology to all Aborigines and the Stolen Generations for their "profound grief, suffering and loss" in a carefully worded statement that has divided indigenous leaders.

Mr Rudd, who last night tabled the 360-word apology, used the word "sorry" three times in the motion read to parliament.

"We reflect on their past mistreatment," he said. "We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were Stolen Generations, this blemished chapter in our nation's history."

The apology also looks forward, heralding a renewed and united effort to close the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians in "life expectancy, educational achievement and economic opportunity".

Mr Rudd then delivered a longer address speaking to the motion, and is now being followed in support by Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson.

The father of reconciliation, Pat Dodson, has described the apology as a "seminal moment in the nation's history".

But Stolen Generations member John Moriarty criticised the Government for failing to go far enough.

Some indigenous leaders feared the apology would mean an end to claims for compensation for Aboriginal children removed from their homes under previous government policies.

Others argued that Mr Rudd had left the door open to payments for past injustices.

Mr Dodson said the apology was a courageous statement after a decade of denial by the government of John Howard and went "beyond what I thought they might say".

"It is a seminal moment in the nation's history," he told The Australian. "And one that, I think, instils confidence that we're capable of rising to those issues that we know are still before us."

But Mr Moriarty - the first Aborigine to play soccer for Australia and chairman of the Jumbana design studio behind the indigenous art used by Qantas - said it did not go far enough.

"It doesn't tell what the Stolen Generation really is," he said. "I'm questioning the cultural genocide aspect. I think it's an appeasement in the sense that it's saying sorry, but it doesn't get down to the real crux of the issue, in my view, that people like me were taken away from their full-blooded mothers to breed out the culture. It doesn't come to that. It doesn't hit home with me."

The Opposition, which was given the text about two hours before Mr Rudd tabled it, will support the apology. But some Liberal MPs were last night still reserving their right to boycott the apology by not turning up to parliament today.

The Greens will today move a motion to include compensation as part of the apology.

Senior lawyers said last night that the form of words chosen by Mr Rudd, while more effusive than apologies made by the state governments in the late 1990s, would have no legal effect on the ability of Aborigines to claim damages in court.

They said the statement admitted no act of illegality or negligence and would, as a result, expose the commonwealth to no potential liability.

The Stolen Generations refers to the victims of government policies that ordered the removal of many thousands of "half-caste" children from their families between 1910 and the 1960s.

Thousands of Aboriginal Australians have descended on Canberra to watch the historic apology, which is being televised around the nation and shown at special outdoor settings in remote indigenous communities.

NSW Premier Morris Iemma, Tasmania's Paul Lennon and ACT Chief Minister Jon Stanhope will be present in Canberra.

"We apologise for the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians," the apology reads.

"We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country.

"For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry. 

"To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.

"And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry."

The apology declares that a new page in Australia's history can now be written.

"We today take this first step by acknowledging the past and laying claim to a future that embraces all Australians," it says. "A future where this parliament resolves that the injustices of the past must never, never happen again.

"A future where we harness the determination of all Australians, indigenous and non-indigenous, to close the gap that lies between us in life expectancy, educational achievement and economic opportunity.

"A future where we embrace the possibility of new solutions to enduring problems where old approaches have failed. A future based on mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility.

"A future where all Australians, whatever their origins, are truly equal partners, with equal opportunities and with an equal stake in shaping the next chapter in the history of this great country, Australia."

Mr Rudd's apology, which he largely wrote himself, does not undermine European settlement of Australia, which was more fully explored in former prime minister Paul Keating's famous speech in the Sydney suburb of Redfern in 1992.

In the speech, Mr Keating said: "Imagine if ours was the oldest culture in the world and we were told that it was worthless. Imagine if we had resisted this settlement, suffered and died in the defence of our land, and then were told in history books that we had given up without a fight.

"Imagine if non-Aboriginal Australians had served their country in peace and war and were then ignored in history books. Imagine if our feats on sporting fields had inspired admiration and patriotism and yet did nothing to diminish prejudice. Imagine if our spiritual life was denied and ridiculed".

West Australian Children's Court magistrate Sue Gordon, who is chair of the intervention in Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory, said she was concerned that today's apology would not end the Stolen Generations issue because many people would still seek compensation.

"I'm worried that there will be a next step, which is to push for compensation when the Prime Minister has been adamantly against it," she said.

Another member of the Stolen Generations, 46-year-old Michael McLeod, said Mr Rudd's words were moving. "I never expected to hear that in my lifetime. Personally this is part of my healing process - just the recognition on that level," he said. "It's moving and it's hit me."

The National Aboriginal Alliance welcomed the wording of the apology, with spokesman Michael Mansell saying Mr Rudd had deliberately framed the motion to leave the door open to compensation for the Stolen Generations.

Mr Mansell said the reference in the text to the Government wanting to right the wrongs of the past suggested Mr Rudd was not ruling out compensation.

"We look forward to working with the Prime Minister and the Government on working out the terms of the compensation package if that's what his words mean," Mr Mansell said. "The fact that these words are used in the text does indicate that the door is open for negotiations."

Asked why he could form this conclusion when Mr Rudd had ruled out compensation, Mr Mansell said there had been a huge shift during the Prime Minister's short time in power and it was possible he was open to compensation but not willing to indicate this in the text of the apology.

He said the one thing missing was an explanation for why indigenous children were targeted for removal from their parents. But despite this the alliance was totally behind the Stolen Generations in accepting the apology.

http://news.smh.com.au/statess-agree-to-infrastructure-plan/20080123-1nq8.html

States agree to infrastructure plan

The states and territories have agreed to work with the federal government to overcome Australia's infrastructure problems.

Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese secured the agreement at a meeting with high-level state, territory and commonwealth officials.

The meeting came just two days after Prime Minister Kevin Rudd revealed a plan to set up an agency to boost national output by removing infrastructure bottlenecks.

The new agency, Infrastructure Australia, will determine where public and private money should best be spent to increase the nation's productive capacity.

Mr Albanese said the meeting was successful, with all agreeing on a timetable for reforming the way infrastructure is planned, financed and delivered.

"Today's meeting was extremely constructive," Mr Albanese said in a statement.

"There is tremendous goodwill from the states and territories, as well as the commonwealth, to end the blame game and advance the infrastructure agenda."

The working group agreed that the federal, state and territory governments will provide Infrastructure Australia with any information necessary for an audit by 30 June 2008.

The group will meet again ahead of the next Council of Australian Governments meeting and the draft laws to establish Infrastructure Australia will be introduced to parliament next month.

From crikey.com.au

7. New leaders: The normal way is down

Richard Farmer writes:

Perhaps it would have been nicer if we had not learned about it, but Kevin Rudd serving meals at a Canberra homeless centre on Boxing Day was consistent with the views of a man whose Christianity appears real and deeply felt. Our Prime Minister went off to perform his act of charity without any accompanying cameras and I don't know whether the references that did appear in the press at the time were planted by his staff, but I prefer to think they were just inevitable disclosures when a prominent person does something in a small city. However, that we got to know of it does not change my admiration for a leader who practices what he preaches.

For the record, here is the happy snap taken by someone at the centre as proof that Australia actually did have a Prime Minister who could stand the heat in the kitchen.

This Labor Leader really has performed admirably during his first months in office. He has shown the enthusiasm Australians hoped for in a new Prime Minister without a trace of arrogant recklessness. The experience of working as the chief aide to Wayne Goss when he became the new Labor Messiah in Queensland back in the 1990s has clearly helped Kevin Rudd avoid the kind of mistakes that are common when a party takes the reins of government after a long time in opposition.

It would be hard to fault Mr Rudd's priorities since he won the election. Perhaps going to the climate change conference in Bali was not what a Prime Minister would normally choose to do, but Mr Rudd turned that into an opportunity to show the head of government of Indonesia, our closest neighbour, the importance which Australia under his administration will continue to put on good relations. Calling in on East Timor on the same trip was another impeccably correct decision, as was paying respect to Aboriginal leaders in the Northern Territory by meeting with them on the way home.

Having the New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark to an informal lunch at his Brisbane home was another act of an Australian Prime Minister who understands the region where our country's best interests really lie.

The pre-Christmas visit to Australian troops in Iraq and Afghanistan was as much out of the text book for a new occupant of The Lodge as the decision to give the staff Christmas Day off that I referred to yesterday. Toss in the wonderfully self-deprecating appearance on the cricket commentary from the Melbourne Cricket Ground and you just have to reach the conclusion that this has been a most impressive Prime Ministerial debut.

Which perhaps makes it a bit churlish of me to refer to what happened to previous Australian election winners. The harsh reality is that the only way for a new leader appears to be down.

Since 1949 when Australia has had contests between a Liberal Party/National (Country) Party Coalition and the Labor Party, government has changed on five occasions. On every occasion the winner has had a lower vote at the subsequent election than it had when winning.

At the election just held, Labor ended up with 52.6% of the two party preferred vote. A result like that which happened to John Howard in 1998 would see Kevin Rudd lose his Prime Ministership.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22626292-12377,00.html

Coalition's odds weaken following debate

1. John Howard introduced Workchoices.

    Kevin Rudd will get rid of Workchoices.


2. John Howard refuses to sign the Kyoto Protocol and set emission targets.

    Kevin Rudd will sign the Kyoto Protocol and has set emission targets.


3. John Howard wants to use nuclear power.

    Kevin Rudd is against the use of nuclear power.


4. John Howard supports the invasion of Iraq and refuses to bring Australian troops       home.

    Kevin Rudd does not support the invasion of Iraq, and will bring the troops home.


5. John Howard refuses to say sorry to aboriginals for past injustices,  and commits to reconciliation a whole three days before the election is called.

    Kevin Rudd will say sorry to aborigines and will move towards meaningful reconciliation.

6. John Howard is anti republic

    Kevin Rudd is pro republic.

7. John Howard wastes a million dollars a day on taxpayer funded self promotional advertising right up to the day he announces the election.

    Kevin Rudd will ban taxpayer funded advertising three months before an election.

8.  John Howard's door is always open to sects such as the Exclusive Brethren who don't vote, but refuses to consult with organisations representing workers, such as trade unions.

     Kevin Rudd consults with all Australians including trade unions.