The cause of the Wave Hill Walk-Off had started almost one-hundred years before the protest began. Prior to 1883, the Gurindji people had owned their land for tens of thousands of years and then suddenly, the Colonial Government grants almost 3,000 square kilometers of Gurindji land to explorer and pastoralist Nathaniel Buchanan (Morelli, 2016). The next step of the cause was the Vestey brothers buying the cattle station in the Northern Territory in 1914. As a cruel money-making tactic, the brothers put the Gurindji people to work with a very poor pay rate and terrible work conditions. Between 1914 and 1966 many other events attributed to the cause of the walk-off such as; a report that exposed the working conditions of the Gurindji, the North-Australian …show more content…
Workers Union argued for aboriginal rights and the Vestey brothers refusing to increase the wages of the indigenous workers. These events finally lead to Vincent Lingiari in 1966 leading the walk-off with 200 aboriginal community members to protest their working conditions and the terrible pay rate but mainly they wanted their land back.
2.Why was the Walk-Off so significant? The outcome of the walk off was a great piece of aboriginal history in Australia. Throughout the nation, majority resisted the idea of giving back the land to its traditional owners, the aboriginals (Lawford & Zillman, 2018). In 1967, a referendum was taken for making the Federal Government make laws and rules for the indigenous Australians. In the combined six states of Australia, 90% of non-indigenous Australians voted yes meaning the Federal Government would make laws for aboriginals. This was the first significant event during the strike years of the walk-off and was terrible from the Gurindji’s perspective. The second event started by the Australian-Labor-Party (ALP) …show more content…
coming to power (1972-75), a focus of theirs was the aboriginal land rights issue. After a process, the ALP had a small amount of land in Wattie Creek granted to the Gurindji people, this was partially caused by the significance of the walk-off. The third significant event caused by the protest in 1972 was the Whitlam government brought the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Land Rights in the Northern Territory, headed by Justice Woodward. The Royal Commission wanted financial support for the making of reserves administered by land councils or aboriginals. The final significant event which in my and most people’s point of view had the greatest impact on Australia and aboriginals in a positive way and the event was Aboriginal Land Rights Act. Because of the recommendations of the Woodward Inquiry, the Whitlam government drafted the Aboriginal Land Rights Bill. The legislation was not passed by parliament prior to the Whitlam government's dismissal in 1975. The Aboriginal Land Rights Act was declared on 9 December 1976 (Wikipedia, 2018). All of these significant events where impacted even in the slightest way by the Wave Hill Walk-Off. 3. What where the perspectives of different groups of the aboriginal land rights? There were several groups that would have had different perspectives on the Wave Hill Walk-Off but the main groups perspectives where; the Gurindji people and aboriginals all over Australia, The Vestey brothers and the rest of Australia.
At the time the land of the Gurindji was taken, the Vestey brothers obviously weren’t around but the Colonial Governments perspective of the situation was to take their land because they didn’t matter. They didn’t at all care about the aboriginal lives they were affecting because they were extremely racist, had no respect for aboriginals and didn’t mind taking their land, the Gurindji would’ve obviously known that this move was unfair. At the time of the walk-off, from the perspective of the Gurindji, the unfair pay and the problem of their land being taken would be resolved in a lesser amount of time than it was. Only a small percentage of Australians caught on and started to care about the unfair ways the aboriginals were treated due to the walk-off. The Vestey brothers were hoping the unfair treatment of the aboriginals would stay mostly a secret to governments and the rest of Australia. The Aboriginal Land Rights Act allowed aboriginals to claim land rights based on traditional occupation (Wikipedia, 2018), so from the Gurindji’s perspective, they had finally gotten what they wanted, deserved and originally owned so originally, they would have been excited but in reality, they should have had this all
along.
The 2014 Walkley Award winning documentary, "Cronulla Riots: the day that shocked the nation" reveals to us a whole new side of Aussie culture. No more she’ll be right, no more fair go and sadly no more fair dinkum. The doco proved to all of us (or is it just me?) that the Australian identity isn’t really what we believe it to be. After viewing this documentary
The Calder Case was the spark that led to the Canadian government recognizing Aboriginals and their rights. Firstly, the aboriginals used the Calder Case to inform the government that they were taking away their rights. The Calder Case was launched after the Attorney General of British Columbia declared “that the Aboriginal Title, other wise known as the Indian Title, of the Plaintiffs to their ancient tribal territory...has never been lawfully extinguished.”1 The statement made by the government claimed that the Aboriginal Title did not exist in the eyes of the law and before the Calder Case, it allowed them to ignore Aboriginal land rights all over the country. In addition, The Calder brought the issues the Aboriginals were facing with land claims to the attention of the Canadian government. “According to Kainai Board of Education The case made it all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada where the court ended up rejecting the native's claims after being split on it's validity. However, the Supreme Court of Canada's recognition required new respect for Aboriginal land claims.”2 The Supreme Court of Canada's recognition of the Calder Case benefited the Aboriginals as the government was...
In conclusion, as a cornerstone of Australia legal system, the Mabo case had profound effects on protecting Aboriginal people. After twenty-five years of development, the situation is getting more and more better. However, the government can still have more powerful and forceful measures to improve those people’s
The 1964 Australian Freedom Rides were conducted by Sydney University students who were a part of a group called Student Action for Aboriginals (SAFA), led by none other than Charles Perkins— a man who would be the first Australian Aboriginal University graduate and was, at the time, a passionate third year arts student when he was elected leader of the SAFA.— Despite the name, the freedom rides took place on the 12th of February in 1965, the 1964 title refers to when SAFA banded together to organise the rides and insure sufficient media coverage was had. The students’ aim was to draw attention to the poor health, education, and housing that the Aborigines had, to point out and deteriorate the social discrimination barriers that existed between the ‘whites’ and Aborigines, and to support and encourage Aborigines to resi...
This presentation is about Charles Perkins, an Australian Aboriginal Activist. This presentation will outline who he is, why he promoted change, his roles, the outcomes of his actions and the people who benefited from his actions. This presentation focuses on Charles Perkins actions gaining rights and freedoms for Australian Aboriginals, mainly focusing on the freedom ride. Australian Aboriginal activist, Charles Perkins, had a significant impact and effect on the rights and freedoms of Indigenous Australians mainly in NSW but also Australian wide from 1963 to 1972 through organising the freedom riders and participating in other organisations and activities for Australian Aboriginals. Charles Perkins has done many things to help in the fight for rights and freedom for Australian Aboriginals. One of the main things he did was organise and lead the freedom ride in 1965. There were various reasons as to why Charles Perkins promoted change, but that fact that he experienced the discrimination and poor treatment of Aboriginals first hand definitely made his motives stronger. He had many roles in the fight for rights and freedom for Aboriginals, but one of his main positions was co-organising and leading the freedom ride in 1965. The main outcomes of his actions, was he helped gain rights and freedom for the Indigenous Australians.
The National Apology of 2008 is the latest addition to the key aspects of Australia’s reconciliation towards the Indigenous owners of our land. A part of this movement towards reconciliation is the recognition of Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders rights to their land. Upon arrival in Australia, Australia was deemed by the British as terra nullius, land belonging to no one. This subsequently meant that Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders were never recognised as the traditional owners. Eddie Mabo has made a highly significant contribution to the rights and freedoms of Indigenous Australians as he was the forefather of a long-lasting court case in 1982 fighting for the land rights of the Torres Strait Islanders. Eddie Mabo’s introduction of the Native Title Act has provided Indigenous Australians with the opportunity to state claim to their land, legally recognising the Indigenous and the Torres Strait Islanders as the traditional owners.
The protest began with a “silent protest from the Town Hall to the Australian Hall” (AIATSIS, n.d.), attended by both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. However, this march was delayed significantly due to the Australia day celebrations
Vincent Lingiari and the Gurindji people who walked with him changed the Australian political landscape. Therefore, the ‘Wave Hill Walk Off’ proved an establishment to the liberation of Aboriginal people from the struggles for rights and
On June 6, 1919, after over a month of striking in Winnipeg, the federal government amended the Immigration Act “[allowing] officials to deport any alien or Canadian citizen not born in Canada for advocating the overthrow of the government by force.”1 Canada, as a democratic country, was/is based upon the idea of allowing the people to influence the decisions that impact their own lives2. However, the government’s eventual decision to deport strikers and strike leaders displayed a lack of adherence and respect for the democratic system. The government contradicted itself as a democracy by ignoring the people instead of intervening to reach a peaceful and fair solution. The government overturned the political freedom3 it was meant to promote and foster by threatening to deport anyone who opposed the status quo. Looking at the amendment carefully will reveal that the changes to the Immigration Act only allowed the deportation of ‘aliens’ and immigrant citizens, but not ‘true Canadians’. This particular change in the Immigration Act displayed bias towards foreigners. Although not on the government’s mind, this was extremely...
...rial covered in the unit Aboriginal People that I have been studying at the University of Notre Dame Fremantle, Aboriginal people have had a long history of being subjected to dispossession and discriminatory acts that has been keep quite for too long. By standing together we are far more likely to achieve long lasting positive outcomes and a better future for all Australians.
The next policy brought in was the policy of self determination this, was very welcomed by the aboriginal community, as it gave the aboriginals back some of their rights. As the relationship between non-indigenous Australians and indigenous Australians improved, there was a high demand for reconciliation. With many opinions including why the people of today should say sorry for the past Australians injustices. The affects from reconciliation were caused by the controversial approach; there have been numerous speeches, activities and ‘sorry days’. The affects from all the policies varied greatly, due to the differences in the policies. The affects caused change the path of history and have gotten us where we are today.
Indigenous Australian land rights have sparked controversy between Non Indigenous and Indigenous Australians throughout history. The struggle to determine who the rightful owners of the land are is still largely controversial throughout Australia today. Indigenous Australian land rights however, go deeper than simply owning the land as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders have established an innate spiritual connection making them one with the land. The emphasis of this essay is to determine how Indigenous Australian land rights have impacted Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, highlighting land rights regarding the Mabo v. the State of Queensland case and the importance behind today’s teachers understanding and including Indigenous
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
Within Australia, beginning from approximately the time of European settlement to late 1969, the Aboriginal population of Australia experienced the detrimental effects of the stolen generation. A majority of the abducted children were ’half-castes’, in which they had one white parent and the other of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent. Following the government policies, the European police and government continued the assimilation of Aboriginal children into ‘white’ society. Oblivious to the destruction and devastation they were causing, the British had believed that they were doing this for “their [Aborigines] own good”, that they were “protecting” them as their families and culture were deemed unfit to raise them. These beliefs caused ...
Key events in Aboriginal Australian history stem from the time Australia was first discovered in 1788. For instance, when Federation came into existence in 1901, there was a prevailing belief held by non Aboriginal Australians that the Aborigines were a dying race (Nichol, 2005:259) which resulted in the Indigenous people being excluded from the constitution except for two mentions – Section 127 excluded Aborigines from the census and Section 51, part 26, which gave power over Aborigines to the States rather than to the Federal Government. Aboriginal people were officially excluded from the vote, public service, the Armed Forces and pensions. The White Australia mentality/policy Australia as “White” and unfortunately this policy was not abolished until 1972. REFERENCE