By: Jon Hunt

Jon Hunt — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 01:23:55 +0000

It seems logical that long term benefit may come as a result of short term costs and effort. However, it is the effort that is lacking from the government. They appear only interested in short term goals (mainly voter related) and as a consequence there are no long term changes. Until Aboriginal people’s votes are significant at election time I unfortunately can’t see this changing.

By: Liz45

Liz45 — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:27:01 +0000

It’s a sad indictment on previous governments both state and federal, that the plight of indigenous people is so horrendous. After all, there’s only 500,000 indigenous people and 20 1/2 million non-indigenous. The only logical answer is obscene neglect!This is a rich country, and what adds insult to injury is the fact, that in the states with the largest reserves of natural resources, (QLD, WA and NT)are where poorest housing, education and health exist. It’s painfully obvious, that the taxes gained from the resources boom has not reached those who usually have lost the most to mining companies. Aboriginal people suffer from illnesses and diseases that were eradicated from the country years ago-like rheumatic fever which stems from poor housing and sanitation. This disease, with permanent damage to children’s hearts was rife in squalid conditions in Sydney & Melbourne. It was eradicated after WW2 when poor/overcrowded housing and sanitation were addressed. Indigenous people, particularly in areas like the Kimberly have inadequate housing. At certain times of the year, the numbers living in a 2 roomed house can be between 5-20 or more-people sleep in shifts?How can children be at school(if one exists) if the day time is their time to sleep?People having no access to
medical treatment except for every 4-6 weeks; specialist help is a plane trip away, and children are often left in a strange city hospital, without a parent or family
friend. A recent report (after 7 years of investigation) found that aboriginal housing is in a terrible state. Houses are built ‘on the cheap’ with inadequate materials and design, and blatant gaps are evident eg. a light fitting in the middle of a room, a light switch on the door frame, but no wiring between the two? Inadequate space and facilities for food preparation, eating, privacy, washing facilities etc. These gross inadequacies are the norm in too many incidents. This would not be tolerated in Sydney or Brisbane or? How can you raise children and protect them, have a ‘normal’ family life if the living conditions are like this? IT’s appalling, and I feel ashamed each time I see these ‘dwellings’ on TV – it’s a disgrace. The infant mortality rate in indigenous communities is 3 times higher than the rest of the country. We have the money, and the Rudd Govt has stressed that it intends to reverse this shame and misery – I hope they’re serious! I also find it repugnant, that in areas of health, education and housing is deemed a right and responsibility of govt’s, while indigenous people are made to feel, that they shoud be SO grateful for even meagre consideration, and phrases like “mutual responsibility” are trotted out. This would raise the ire of shock jocks and printed media if a child on the North Shore had to feel ‘grateful’ for medical treatment or a school they could attend, and rightly so? There’d be a public outcry if children in Sydney and Melbourne (or any other state)presented to health professionals with Rheumatic Fever, now we know how to prevent it – why aren’t we outraged that aboriginal kids die too early, and suffer for life due to poor living conditions. I cringe with rage each time I hear economists and politicians laud THE SURPLUS! Any thinking person knows, that a huge surplus means only one thing – too many people in the community are having to pay for it with their health/their future/their lives?

Comments on: What's in it for me? The self-interested reasons for spending more on Indigenous health

By: Jon Hunt

By: Liz45