Latest Articles
If metrication was meant to sync Australia with a globalising world, why have we persisted with our unique definition of a tablespoon?
Feb 18 2026
8 mins
Destruction is all postmodernism has ever offered. It has no positive agenda. It works only against, not for. Incapable of direction and purpose, finally it is fading
Feb 17 2026
16 mins
One thing to be said in Race Discrimination Commissioner Giridharan Sivaraman's favour: he has mastered all the noxious cliches and racialist battle cries required of a Labor appointee
Feb 17 2026
4 mins
One Law, Please, forAll Australians
Anthony Dillon
Jul 11 2025
5 mins
With regard to colonisation, the Commission’s summary report states: “First Peoples’ lives are profoundly shaped by the enduring impact of colonial invasion…” Really? Could invoking the past be more about excuse-making in the present? Stan Grant, in his 2016Quarterly Essay, wrote: “But history—the history of dispossession and ensuing suffering—can be an all-too convenient explanation for what ails us.” Could that be what is happening here? The final report states that “the brutality of colonisation” has in part contributed to “higher rates of drug and alcohol issues, family violence, housing instability and homelessness” for Aboriginal Victorians.
Those problems affecting Aboriginal people just described are real. We all agree on this. However, the cause isn’t colonisation. Or at least it’s not a major factor. Were it a major cause, then all Aboriginal Australians could claim to be suffering and unable to move on. However, many Aboriginal Australians are doing very well today — and have done so for decades. How well are the Aboriginal authors of the Yoorrook report doing? Has colonisation held them back? It wouldn’t appear so.
I’m not saying that colonisation is irrelevant, but only that assigning it as a significant cause of the problems facing Aboriginal Australians’ today is misleading and extremely disempowering. Colonisation, or a person’s past more generally, is but one factor among many that determines behaviour and wellbeing today.
In Australia it doesn’t matter how unfortunate your past or current circumstances are, there are always fellow Aussies, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, ready to lend a helping hand. That’s what we do. Utilising the help available is what enables people to thrive.
Perhaps people are not victims of the past, but only victims of the lies they have been fed about their past?
Of course, the term ‘cultural safety’ featured prominently throughout the report. To give but one example:
Cultural safety and stability is the first thing that is needed to help young people in custody. There is nothing better for rehabilitating a kid who has been in custody to be able to learn about their roots, find connection in that with their family and kin, and return to Country once they are released.
I agree that safety and stability are crucial for laying a good foundation in life, but what exactly is ‘cultural safety and stability’? I guess it’s like ‘white privilege’ and ‘systemic racism’. You’re just expected to know what it is.
Teach these kids that they are Australians with the same needs as other Australians and that they are not the endless victims of colonisation or racism, and they will be less likely to end up in custody in the first place.So why do the authors of the Yoorrook Report harp on about cultural safety? Janet Albrechtsen nailed it inThe Weekend Australian recently when she wrote that cultural safety is a term that “keeps Indigenous activists and academics in jobs.” If that’s all it did, that would be fine. Sadly, it is more victim-brigade rhetoric that will condemn far too many children to a hell-like existence.
So how is this miserable existence inflicted? The term ‘cultural safety’ and similar expressions such as ‘culturally appropriate’ are code for the insistence that only Aboriginal people should be the ones helping Aboriginal people. This is often presented as ‘self-determination.’ Quoting from the Yoorrook summary report
Self-determination means transferring decision-making power, authority, control and resources to First Peoples … so that [they] can make decisions about the things that affect them.
But isn’t self-determination a good thing? Don’t all Australians have the right to self-determination? Well, it depends on your definition. It is good when applied at the level of the individual, where it means making decisions or taking actions that you believe to be in your best interest. For example, you and I may decide we want to get healthy, but ultimately, we each decide for ourselves how best to reach that goal. You might choose going to the gym, while I might choose to walk and swim.
At the group level, self-determination typically means members of the group making decisions on behalf of, and for, other group members. The Yoorrook report calls it a “collective right.” For Aboriginal Australians, such an approach might have some merit if they were an homogenous group whose members had vastly different needs from non-Aboriginal Australians. However, none of this true. Aboriginal Australians are very diverse in nature and have the same fundamental human needs as non-Aboriginal Australians.
In the case of Aboriginal people where the Yoorrook Commission applies self-determination in a collective sense, it is actually separatism. That is, Aboriginal Australians are kept separate from other Australians, perhaps not in a physical sense, but in terms of what services are required to address their needs and how they access them. All this does is encourage an us-and-them mentality.
Importantly, the report mentions how self-determination is needed for child protection. For any child in need of out-of-home care, selection of a carer should be about competence and not colour.
I am all for Aboriginal people being active in roles that contribute to the health and wellbeing of other Aboriginal people. However, non-Aboriginal people also have the right to help their fellow Australians, who just happen to have some Aboriginal ancestry. And of course, Aboriginal Australians also have the right to help non-Aboriginal Australians. I see this simply as Australians helping other Australians.
How well has the separatist approach worked? Former Norther Territory politicianAlison Anderson, an Aborigine, has stated: “The idea that separate development was the answer provided hope for many and jobs for an increasingly powerful few. However, it has failed.”
We know what works: recognise that Aboriginal Australians have the same fundamental needs as other Australians. Recognise that the commonalities between both groups far outweigh any differences. And of course, never forget that Aboriginal affairs is everyone’s business.
For the next state or territory thinking of conducting a similar truth-telling exercise, I hope I have saved you time and money.
Subscribe to Quadrant
Subscribe and enjoy unlimited access to Quadrant Editorial and much more.
Unlimited Access
Print & Digital
Member Benefits
From only $8.99 a month
What to read next
- Premium
Pearson is torn between maintaining a base among struggling Aborigines, whose hopes of building a community are virtually nil, and the desire to rescue the best and brightest
Feb 16 2026
14 mins
The late Pat Eatock won a famous victory when she targeted the columnist under Section 18C. Fifteen years on it emerges she wasn't an Aborigine at all
Feb 10 2026
5 mins
To infer that songlines, dreaming narratives, 'cultural' inventions, and smoking ceremonies can do anything for modern universities is an absurdity
Feb 09 2026
11 mins
If ‘truth’ could actually be ‘commissioned’ – then science might be capable of actually being ‘settled’. However, as it is, the starless desert nightsky holds ‘truth’ in the imagination of a mad Celtic Oracle claiming to be a Professor of Aboriginal Agriculture at Melbourne University. While truth is held in such distain – it will remain defeated. Yet, without the actual truth, some say, the centre cannot hold.
Great comment Patrick!!!
The fabrication starts in childcare centres – it’s just unbelievable.
Has anyone noted the naidoc presentations by councils – and schools before the holidays in NSW?
Claiming naidoc week is 50 years old is a place to start.
Truth is it was 1991 naidoc began to be celebrated but has now erupted on an intense scale.
Well said Tony. The Aboriginal people deserve greater honesty than they receive from bodies like the Yoorrook Commission. In the cold light of day, the famed “Streets of London” were not paved with gold and the patience of any Nation is not endless.
John ….”the famed “Streets of London” were not paved with gold and the patience of any Nation is not endless.”
YES!!
Anthony,
Now in my mid-80 age bracket, I can state that the most important social change I have seen in Australia over the years is that more and more people are paid to tell other people what they can and cannot do. The simple solution is to recognise this change as harmful and to stop paying people to indulge in it. The aboriginal activism industry thrives on telling others what to do. Geoff S
Simply put Geoff, “they,” he likes of the Noel Pearson’s et al, want to introduce apartheid.
The very thing Charlie Perkins did his ride against 🙁
Here, Here!
In addition, what we are made to read, here and say, in the form of forced patronising doctrine (‘acknowledgements’, ‘welcomes’, symbolical propaganda painted on urban buildings, etc., etc.)
This takes the cake – Kempsey NSW.
This so well written by Gonzos Macleay Valley.
KEMPSEY WATER TREATMENT WORKS $50 MILLION PROJECT BEGINS.
Grants totalling in excess of $21 million have ensured this valuable asset is upgraded and ensures our water quality into the future.
The professional work of Council staff in securing funding is a credit to our Shire.
WELCOME TO COUNTRY AND SMOKING CEREMONY DOES SOMETHING……
This valuable Community asset has been further enhanced by being welcomed to the country on which it is embedded.
Great to see this visual demonstration of an inclusive Council.
It did not go unnoticed the significant number of Akubra Hats also on show.
The whole event ticked all the boxes.
It was a virtual ceremony of goodness!
Apparently a Priest was offered a gig to bless the site but could not see the almost religious competition would favour his sprinkling of water and the gesture of a cross configuration using his hand.
( health warning – do not inhale smoke it may damage lungs).
~~~~~~~~
To see image – go to this profile on Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100094910242634
Basically, Aussie governments of all stripe have burrowed deeper and deeper into our lives, such that Labor in particular now has a huge voting block dependent on govt. largesse.
What it critically overlooked with the condemnation of colonisation is that there were alternatives – such as the uncontrolled arrival of disparate settlers such as occurred at the Bay of Islands in New Zealand with the resulting alcohol and vice, largely centred around the activities of whalers, sealers. What was never going to happen was the native people of Australia being left to maintain their nomadic lifestyle indefinitely. That British colonisation was imperfect flows out of the character of human nature. However, for the native peoples of this continent it was clearly the least malign outcome of all the alternative scenarios that flowed out of the developed technology of reliable, ocean-going sea vessels, sophisticated navigation and the overcoming of scurvy. To have achieved a quarter of a millennia of continuous stable government of an entire continent with civil war and to establish a prosperous, liberal, humane democratic society in this remote outpost is one of the finest achievements of civilisation. The transition of the indigenous people from a paleolithic to an industrial society was necessarily going to be painful and full of tragedy. That their descendants had the opportunity to participate in one of the most benign societies on earth is something to be celebrated, not condemned.
Yes, and a land that was only supporting a few hundred thousand nomads is now supporting about thirty million. That in addition to feeding millions more with exports.
We have heard about the greatest feat of arms in British history where, at Risdon Cove a small number of low-grade soldiers, armed with unreliable, wildly inaccurate rifles capable of being fired at a maximum of twice a minute fought a three-hour long battle with around 500 Aborigines.
Despite the Aborigines each carried several spears and a waddy, each weapon capable of being thrown in rapid succession with deadly accuracy, at the end of the battle there were 50 dead Aborigines whilst not one of the soldiers, settlers or convicts received as much as a scratch.
Normally such an account would be dismissed as nonsense, but years later a convict claiming to be Edward White gave an account of what took place and still accepted today. A minor problem with this story is that Edward White died en route to Australia on the convict ship “Atlas”. Recommended reading “Truth-telling at Risdon Cove” by Scott Seymour, George Brown and Roger Karge, Risdon Cove Publishing, 2022.
What is not so well known is Coroner Thomas Anstey”s “Report of robberies, outrages, murders and other aggressions, committed by the Aboriginal tribes of Van Diemen’s Land on the white inhabitants and their property in the District of Oatlands from the commencement of 1825 till the end of December, 1830.”
“The murders committed by the Blacks in a short period amounted to 121 – that is such as could be authenticated; many more were forgotten.
(Jorgen Jorgenson and the Aborigines of Van Diemen’s Land, N.J.B. Plomley,, Blubber Head Press 1991, pp 88 – 92)
Much is made about the “Black War” and Black Line in Tasmania. The Black line was formed in 1830 to protect settlers from the kind of attacks which were reported by Anstey as having occurred in just one district. Elsewhere Anstey commented that if all of the deaths of settlers at the hands of the Aborigines in the same period were recorded, a very large volume would be needed.
Your description of the armaments at Risdon Cove is accurate and not often disputed. The much publicised casualty rates however should have been dismissed as arrant nonsense, that they haven’t is a failure of Government.
Welcome to Country.
We are a land of migrants, from the very first in their canoes or who even walked here. Those who came in chains, those who fled famine, those who fled or survived genocide and war and it’s consequences. To those who came by jet plane yesterday. We acknowledge that in our past, as in most nations, bad things have happened. But we strive to be one people, equality of opportunity for all, no privilege by birth or class, truly one people. Welcome to you all.
Good work Anthony.
As I have said before though … What one might expect to see is the Victorian Attorney General and Minister of Aboriginal Affairs leaping in here to defend the Government’s prior policies and the efforts of their former workers from an unsubstantiated attacks. The Attorney General might point out the fact that these Commissioners are using the credibility of “Royal Commissions” based on English Common Law “Rules of Evidence” to produce a document based on “traditional” Aboriginal Customary Law “Rules of Evidence.” Under “traditional” Customary Law “truth”, as in “truth telling” is whatever expediency demands, and that appears to now be the new gold standard that the Victorian legal system has accepted. The lack of legal rigour should embarrass every member of the legal fraternity in Victoria … and indeed in the rest of legal fraternity of Australia too!!! Do they have no professional pride? Roll on the next “Truth telling” Royal Commission!
And so No, The Victorian Government is well aware of what it has bought and paid for in selecting the Commissioners they know will provide the “correct” answers for THEIR political agenda. They quite clearly want “separate development” and separate sovereignty and they are prepared to pay biggly for it.
The question becomes – if no one from the Government (either Party) or the legal profession are going to stand up and put an opposing argument – who is? I mean we can do it but are easily dismissed as amateurs. These days only “experts” are custodians of the “truth.”
Good article Anthony.
.
It is a truism that if someone is told they are a victim and only a victim then they will come to believe it and begin to think and act like a victim and to believe that they have no option but to let victimhood define their whole life and future.
.
The same result can be expected at group level when the reinforcing mantra of victimhood is infiltrated into school and university classes at every opportunity, insinuated at every sporting or similar public event, and worked into every other program on the ABC, SBS and NITV- with extra helpings during NAIDOC Week and similar events.
.
In these circumstances it would have to be a moot point whether the average person of Aboriginal descent really considered themselves an “Australian” or just a survivor of an alien invasion awaiting a so far denied and long overdue “retribution” of some kind – as increasingly proclaimed by a number of high profile activist leaders (with the tacit support it would seem of some of our elected politicians – some at quite high level).
.
While full equality in all respects as outlined in the article must be a goal of a shared citizenship, it is probably some way off before it will be embraced at least by those under the activist thrall where a separate identity still seems to be the hidden agenda. The Yoorrook report seems to be intended as providing a tacit support for separate identity.
The following is my personal opinion and I fear it will be condemned by some as insensitive.
Nevertheless it is based on my experience with full blood aboriginals in Far North Queensland in the 1960s.
Discrimination in our society is no longer based on race but on sex appeal.
A handsome black man will be more popular with the ladies than an ugly white man.
Like Anthony I feel sure the problems suffered by aboriginals in Australia have nothing to do with the inherited impact of colonialism.
Instead they stem from low self esteem associated with negative self image and shyness.
Full blood aboriginals often look unattractive and they know it.
We all know it and yet we are loath to admit that discrimination in our society is based on looks.
Compared to other ethnic groups the physiognomy of full blood aborigines is all too often coarse and unattractive.
For this reason it is rare to see a full blood aboriginal used as a model or actor in the entertainment or advertising industry.
The vast majority of “aboriginal” actors, activists, sport stars and celebrities that I see on TV have enough European or Asian blood to make them look attractive.
This gives them the self confidence to sell themselves and make something of their lives.
Ugly individuals of all races need to know that their value as human beings is God given and independent of their physical appearance.
Man looks on the outward appearance but God looks on the heart.
Culture and identity politics cannot mend the problem of a lack of personal self respect.
Only the personal experience of love in a one on one relationship can mend these broken hearts.
A little provocative perhaps, but some truth in it.
.
But remember that the average life span of the original aboriginal inhabitants was significantly below that of today and that modern imposed lifestyles and diets have not been kind to any of us.
.
Remember also that the physique of the younger males who came into contact with the early settlers around Sydney Cove was so impressive that one location was named “Manly” which must tell us something.
.
Remember that watching too much TV can warp one’s perception of reality. When did you last see a radio presenter on the Box advertising swimwear?
.
Remember also that prior to the advent of TV many individuals who have shaped the world simply by force of their personality and character, and their native ability – including some Australian Prime Ministers and US Presidents – probably would not get preselected today.
.
Finally, remember how Saint Paul in his second letter to the Christians at Corinth (Chapter 10) demolished any thoughts that one’s appearance mattered a jot in the eyes of God. This does not mean of course that God favours “ugly” people, only that with Christ a non-entity is in a moral majority.