Now say and pay Peter Faris February 28, 2008 THE apology given by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd means that the Aboriginal people must be fully compensated and I say this for legal as well as moral reasons. Labor, which wants to say but not pay, has chosen to give this heartfelt apology from Cowards' Castle, that is under parliamentary privilege. It is said that privilege prevents the apology being used in court to support a claim. To that I say four things. Firstly, I am not so sure that legal advice as to the operation of the privilege is correct. Time will tell as the extent of the privilege will inevitably be examined in the courts. Secondly, the apology has been repeated outside the Parliament by Rudd by reference and adoption. It could never be that he would not mention the apology in the real world. This is akin to calling someone a criminal under privilege. But as soon as you say it outside you can be sued for defamation. Thirdly, in any claim for compensation the apology will be the elephant in the courtroom, particularly before a jury. Fourthly, it is inconceivable that Rudd, when an Aborigine sues the Commonwealth, will instruct his lawyers to submit that the apology cannot be used. This would be gross hypocrisy. Morally, an apology, being an admission of terrible wrongs done to all Aborigines by all the governments of Australia, must be a basis for compensation. How can Rudd say these things and then seek to admit morally just claims in court by using legal technicalities? The critical words of the apology are at the beginning. It is time for the righting the wrongs of the past. An apology is just words but righting wrongs is something else. The only way wrongs can be righted is by compensation. The apology is an acknowledgment that all the governments of Australia and the UK should and would compensate all Aboriginals. Let me analyse the apology. Who committed these wrongs? Answer: The laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments. There is no temporal or geographic limitation. This would seem to operate from the time of British settlement, so the UK Government is apparently liable for the colonial period and after that the Commonwealth and the state and territory governments. What were the wrongs? Answer: The profound grief, suffering and loss caused by the removal of Aboriginal children, which in turn caused the breaking up of families and communities and their pain, suffering and hurt. What is this worth? Answer: The recent Adelaide case put a figure of $500,000 for compensation. There are about 500,000 Aborigines so if it were averaged out to compensation of, say, $100,000 then the total would be $50 billion. Of course, 500K each would be $250 billion, which means that the 361-word apology would cost each taxpayer $692,520 or $775.62 per word, which is fairly expensive, even for Labor (any arithmetical errors are cause by my poor education in a government school). This would right the wrongs of the past. How can this be financed? Answer: Rudd was elected on a promise of $31 billion tax cuts. These cuts can be cancelled and the $31 billion paid directly to Aborigines in cash. This is a pretty good start for righting the wrongs of the past. The other $19 billion can be taken off Aboriginal welfare payments, which will no longer be necessary. Remember that the UK Government must pay its share. Alternatively, we could have a sorry tax. Every Australian taxpayer (except Aborigines) could be levied in July to raise the $50 billion. God knows how much this would be per taxpayer. If Rudd is sincere, he must pay. History demands it. Peter Faris, QC, is a Melbourne barrister
top of page