ipl-logo

What Is Jeff Kennett Speech Against Aboriginal Australia

1740 Words7 Pages

Introduction In 1993, the former Victorian Premier, Jeff Kennett, stated that ‘from good we gain pride; from the bad we learn; and from the totality of our past we gain our identity'. In his speech, Kennett speaks about his ideologies of republicanism and his “excitement” for the potential for the nation to position itself for the future. The quote is derived from a section of his speech, where Kennett is talking about Australia’s history with the United Kingdom and how it is best forgotten. He states that whilst this section of Australian history is best forgotten, Australia, as a nation, cannot pick and choose its history. Without this cultural inheritance, specifically, the adoption of the United Kingdom’s constitutional and legal systems, …show more content…

The situation no longer directly affected the Non-Indigenous Australians, as Non-Indigenous Australians had thought that the process of reconciliation was complete, with the matters of the Indigenous Australians now handed over to the Australian Government. Over the course of the next 10 years, the nation became apathetic towards indigenous affairs, however public interest was revived in 1982 when Eddie Mabo, an Indigenous land rights activist and several others challenged action against the State of Queensland and the Commonwealth of Australia in the High Court over Indigenous land rights in the Murray Islands. This gained massive media coverage, as it was the first time that the issue of Indigenous land rights had been raised at a federal level. At this time, it was unexpected, as many, again, believed that the altering of the constitution had closed the seal on reconciliation. It was not a high priority for the Government who, at the time, was trying to meet the political demands driven by the public to fix the Australian economy, which whilst booming, was leaving thousands unemployed, with high-interest rates, a catalyst for impending disaster. The Commonwealth was completely unprepared, and as the Mabo story gained traction, apathy started to fade away, knocking down any political policy the government had set out to conquer at the beginning of its term. On 3 June, 1992, the High Court of Australia rejected the doctrine of terra nullius and recognised Indigenous land rights for the first time. In doing so, the Commonwealth had admitted that the Indigenous peoples had lived in Australia for thousands of years, that their land had slowly dissolved into the colonies as they grew, underwriting the Australian identity. This lack

Show More
Related
154 Words | 1 Pages

To become a part of a society or culture by social characteristics and being part of a group. The Mabo Case was a legal case held in 1992 in the High Court of Australia which determined that Indigenous people should be treated equally using

Read More
149 Words | 1 Pages

In the 1971 Gove land rights case, Justice Blackburn ruled that Australia was terra nullius prior European settlement. This judgement was challenged for a total of 3 years but all attempts failed. However, on the 20th May 1982, Eddie Koiki Mabo and 4 other Indigenous people began their legal claim for ownership of their traditional lands on the island of Mer in the Torres Strait. The case was later taken to supreme court and after ten years, the case was closed and the government granted the indigenous people of australia their rightful land. Before this, Eddie had been helping his community from a young age.

Read More
767 Words | 4 Pages

However, this was completely disregarded by Australians. ' The native inhabitants of any land have an incontrovertible right to their own soil, however, which seems not to have been understood ‘ was a statement by House of Commons select committees report on Australian Colonies in 1837. This lead to Australians using the concept of ' Terra Nullius’ implying that Australia was unoccupied at the time of ‘discovery’. We now rightfully recognise that there were others here before us that should have rights to their own land that we wrongfully took

Read More
695 Words | 3 Pages

When the Europeans first arrived in Australia, Indigenous Australians lost all their land rights. This was mainly due to the Europeans claiming that Australia was Terra nullius. Terra Nullius was a international law stating that if territory was not owned, it was to be given to the first nation to discover it and entitled to take over. The Europeans did not recognise the Aboriginals and Torres Strait islander people as the traditional owners of Australia and therefore took all there land rights. The indigenous people were then constricted by the terra nullius rule from 1788 to 1991.

Read More
902 Words | 4 Pages

The Mabo decision changed the legal, political and social relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. In recognising the traditional rights of Murray Islanders it changed Australia forever. The Mabo decision opened the doors for other indigenous people and groups to be able to claim ownership of land. They were required to prove that they had continuous connection to the land and maintained their traditional associating with it. The 'native title ' is the recognition by law that some aboriginal and torres strait islander people have rights to certain land due to their traditional laws and customs.

Read More
420 Words | 2 Pages

The Mabo Decision was a turning point for the recognition of the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. From recognising ownership of traditional lands to raising awareness of racial discrimination, it affected the Indigenous Australian society in various ways. Firstly, the Mabo Decision was significant because it acknowledged the ownership of traditional lands by abolishing “terra nullius”, meaning that the land is empty and owned by no one. Previously, the British denied the Indigenous Australians' connection and ownership of the land by declaring that Australia was "terra nullius". However, on the 3rd of June, 1992, the High Court decided that the Merriam people were "entitled as against the whole word to possession, occupation

Read More
620 Words | 3 Pages

The Mabo decision of the high court in 1992 is vastly significant as it marks history as the victory of indigenous Australian land rights against the federal government, who had colonised their land and refused to acknowledge that Australia was originally owned by the ATSI people but became a terra nullius land due to the European colonists. The events that have occurred before 1992 such as the The Aboriginal Land Rights Act (NT) of 1976 and the bark petition is deemed less significant than the Mabo decision. I firmly believe that the Mabo case is an extraordinary achievement. it started in 1982 when Eddie Mabo brought up a case against the supreme court of Queensland that Indigenous Australians should have land rights. After almost a whole

Read More
702 Words | 3 Pages

Indigenous Australians had experienced a long history of dispossession, colonization, and marginalisation. The doctrine of terra nullius was used by the British to justify the of Indigenous lands, without recognising their traditional ownership or sovereignty. It was not until 1965 Indigenous Australians were allowed to vote, two years later 1967 Indigenous Australians were finally granted citizenship and in 1985 they were treated equal with other voters, ending almost two centuries of political exclusion.   The Mabo decision is significant as it marked the first time the High Court explicitly rejected the doctrine of terra nullius and recognised the existence of Indigenous land rights. The case was named after Eddie Mabo, a Torres Strait Islander man who, alongside a group of Meriam people, challenged the Queensland state government with the Commonwealth and High Court to claim back their family land on Mer Island.

Read More
370 Words | 2 Pages

The Mabo Decision was the turning point for the recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights. Firstly, the Mabo Decision was significant because the decision was the lead up to the recognition of Aboriginal Rights. The Mabo Decision was the movement that made everyone fully recognise the Aboriginal people as humans, and official citizens of the country. The Decision also raised awareness to the discrimination the Aboriginal people were facing before the referendum.

Read More
996 Words | 4 Pages

Edward Koiki Mabo (Eddie) is a well-known Australian Indigenous person, who throughout his lifetime was committed to obtaining justice for Indigenous Australians. His greatest achievement was his stand against racial discrimination and his fight for Australian laws to recognise the traditional land rights of his family and the Meriam People of Murray Island. As a result, the doctrine of terra nullius, that claimed Australia was a land without owners, was overturned, changing Australian law forever, and the Native Title Act was introduced, which legally recognised the traditional land rights of Indigenous Australians. Edward Mabo was born Edward Koiki Sambo, at Mer (Murray Island), in the Torres Straits on c. 29 June, 1936, and at that time

Read More
938 Words | 4 Pages

They owned the land and that’s all that mattered. The land had belonged to the indigenous people right from the beginning and the Australians had no

Read More
320 Words | 2 Pages

'If there existed any lingering doubt as to the applicability of the principles enunciated in Mabo to mainland Australia, that doubt is, as a matter of practicality, dispelled by the statement of Mason CJ in Coe v The Commonwealth (1993) 118 ALR 193. In the context of an application to strike out a statement of claim, his Honour said (at 200): 'Mabo [No.2] recognised that land in the Murray Islands was held by means of native title under the paramountcy of the Crown. The principles of law which led to that result apply to the Australian mainland as the judgments made clear. ' Mason v Tritton (1994) 34 NSWLR 572 at

Read More
834 Words | 4 Pages

During the next 20 years’ Australian citizens grew to consider themselves separate from ‘Mother Country’ making Australia a nation in its own right. This line of thought lead to people questioning if it was still acceptable to give everything they had for Britain. In particular, was it sensible to join a war no matter what the cost to

Read More
974 Words | 4 Pages

His activism and leadership in the land rights movement helped to bring about important changes in Australian law and society, and his legacy continues to inspire Indigenous people around the world. One of Mabo's most significant contributions was his role in the landmark Mabo v Queensland case, which was decided by the High Court of Australia in 1992. This case overturned the legalism of terra nullius, which had been used to justify the dispossession of Indigenous peoples' lands by European colonizers. The court recognized that Indigenous peoples had a pre-existing system of land ownership and that this system had not been extinguished by British colonization. This decision paved the way for the recognition of Indigenous land rights in Australia and helped to establish a legal framework for the negotiation of land rights agreements between Indigenous peoples and the Australian government.

Read More
625 Words | 3 Pages

Speeches made within the past are still relevant to today’s society as the issues they have faced are significant to the values of the present. The statement: "Any significant and valued speech is able to transcend its immediate context", is exemplified within Paul Keating 's Redfern Address (1992) and Noel Pearson 's An Australian History for Us All (1996). Within these speeches, the themes of taking responsibility for actions and the importance of reconciliation resonate as they have influenced change in present-day Australia through new laws and forming the basis of Australian society. Conducted in a predominantly Aboriginal community, the former Prime Minister of Australia, Paul Keating addresses a controversial topic in celebration of

Read More

More about What Is Jeff Kennett Speech Against Aboriginal Australia

Open Document