ADDRESS: By Professor Vijay Naidu

I have been given the honour of launching the 30th anniversary edition of the Pacific Journalism Review (PJR) at this highly significant gathering of media professionals and scholars from the Asia Pacific region.

I join our chief quests and others to commend and congratulate Dr Shailendra Singh, the head of USP Journalism, and his team for the organisation of the 2024 Pacific International Media Conference.

This evening, we are also gathered to celebrate the 30th birthday of Pacific Journalism Review/Te Koakoa.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Media Conference reports

At the outset, I would like to warmly congratulate and thank PJR designer Del Abcede for the cover design of 30th anniversary issue as well as the striking photoessay she has done with David Robie.

Hearty congratulations too to founding editor Dr David Robie and current editor Dr Philip Cass for compiling the edition.

The publicity blurb about the launch states:

“USP Journalism is proud to celebrate this milestone with a journal that has been a beacon of media excellence and a crucial partner in fostering journalistic integrity in the Pacific.”

This is a most apt description of the journal, and what it has fostered over three decades.

Dr Lee Duffield and others have written comprehensively on the editorials and articles covered by the Pacific Journalism Review.

I will just list some of the diverse subject matter covered over the past 10 years:

• PJR edition celebrating the journal’s existence for 20 years with the coverage of political journalism in the Asia Pacific — a book edition (2015);
• Documentary Practice in the South Pacific (2015);
• Endangered Journalists (2016);
• Journalism Education in the Pacific (2016);
• Climate Change in Asia-Pacific (2017);
• Journalism Education in Asia-Pacific (2017);
• Disasters, Cyclones and Communication (2018);
• Journalism Under Duress (2018);
• Terrorism Dilemmas and Democracy (2019);
• Media Freedom in Melanesia (2020);
• Climate Crisis and Corona Virus: Rethinking the social world (2020);
• Pacific Crises: Covid, Climate Emergency and West Papua (2021);
• Media Change, Adaptation and Culture (2022);
• Governance, Disinformation and Training (2023); and
• Gaza, genocide and media — PJR 30 years on, another special double edition (2024)

The editorial in the 30th anniversary double edition manifests this focus — “Will journalism survive?”, by David Robie

Unfolding genocide
Mainstream media, except for Al Jazeera, have collectively failed to provide honest accounts of the unfolding genocide in Gaza, as well as settler violence, and killings in the West Bank. International media stand condemned for its complicity in the gross human rights violations in Palestine.

The media have been caught out by the scores of reports directly sent from Gaza of the bombings, maiming and murder of mainly women, children and babies, and the turning into rubble of the world’s largest open-air prison.

The widespread protests the world over by ordinary citizens and university students clearly show that the media is not trusted.

Can the media survive? Indeed!

These are not the best of times for the media.

“At the time when we celebrated the second decade of the journal’s critical inquiry at Auckland University of Technology with a conference in 2014, our theme was ‘Political journalism in the Asia Pacific’, and our mood about the mediascape in the region was far more positive than it is today,” writes David.

“Three years later, we marked the 10th anniversary of the Pacific Media Centre, with a conference and a rather gloomier ‘Journalism under duress’ slogan.”

The editorial continues:

“Gaza has become not just a metaphor for a terrible state of dystopia in parts of in the world, it has also become an existential test for journalists — do we stand up for peace and justice and the right of a people to survive under the threat of ethnic cleansing and against genocide, or do we do nothing and remain silent in the face of genocide being carried out with impunity in front of our very eyes? The answer is simple surely.

“And it is about saving journalism, our credibility and our humanity as journalists.” (emphasis added).

Contemporary issues
Besides the editorial, the 30th anniversary edition continues the PJR tradition of addressing contemporary issues head on with 11 research articles, 2 commentaries, 7 book reviews, a photo-essay, 2 obituaries of Australia’s John Pilger and West Papua’s Arnold Ap, and 4 frontline pieces. A truly substantial double issue of the journal.

The USP notice on this 30th anniversary launch says “30 years and going strong”. Sounds like the Johnny Walker whisky advertisement, “still going strong”. This is an admirable achievement as well as in PJR’s future.

It is in contrast to the NZ Journalism Review (University of Canterbury), for example, which survived only for nine years.

Founded at the University of Papua New Guinea in 1994 by David Robie, PJR was published there for four years and at the University of the South Pacific for a further four years, then at Auckland University of Technology for 18 years before finally being hosted since 2021 at its present home, Asia Pacific Media Network.

According to Dr Robie, Pacific Journalism Review has received many good wishes for its birthday. Some of these are published in this journal. For a final message in the editorial, he recalled AUT’s senior journalism lecturer Greg Treadwell who wrote in 2020:

“‘Many Aotearoa New Zealand researchers found their publishing feet because PJR was dedicated to the region and interested in their work. PJR is central to journalism studies, and so to journalism and journalism education, in this country and further abroad. Long may that continue’.

“In answer to our editorial title: Yes, journalism will survive, and it will thrive through new and innovative niche forms, if democracy is to survive.

“Ra whānau Pacific Journalism Review!

Steadfast commitment
I have two quick remaining things to do: Professor Wadan Narsey’s congratulatory message, and a book presentation.

Professor Narsey pays tribute to David Robie for his steadfast commitment to Pacific journalism and congratulates him for the New Zealand honour bestowed on him in the King’s Birthday honours. He is very thankful that David published 37 of his articles on a range of issues during the dark days of censorship in Fiji under the Bainimarama and Sayeed-Khaiyum dictatorship.

I wish to present a copy of the recently published Epeli Hau’ofa: His Life and Legacy to Professor David Robie and Del Abcede to express Claire Slatter and my profound appreciation of the massive amount of work they have done to keep PJR alive and well.

It is my pleasure to launch the 30th anniversary edition of PJR.

‘Far more than a research journal’
In response, Dr Robie noted that PJR had published more than 1100 research articles over its three decades and it was the largest single Pacific media research repository but it had always been “far more than a research journal”.

“As an independent publication, it has given strong support to investigative journalism, sociopolitical journalism, political economy of the media, photojournalism and political cartooning — they have all been strongly reflected in the character of the journal,” he said.

“It has also been a champion of journalism practice-as-research methodologies and strategies, as reflected especially in its Frontline section, pioneered by retired Australian professor and investigative journalist Wendy Bacon.

“Keeping to our tradition of cutting edge and contemporary content, this anniversary edition raises several challenging issues such as Julian Assange and Gaza.”

He thanked current editor Philip Cass for his efforts — “he was among the earliest contributors when we began in Papua New Guinea” — and the current team, assistant editor Khairiah A. Rahman, Nicole Gooch, extraordinary mentors Wendy Bacon and Chris Nash, APMN chair Heather Devere, Adam Brown, Nik Naidu and Gavin Ellis.

He also paid tribute to many who have contributed to the journal through peer reviewing and the editorial board over many years — such as Dr Lee Duffield and professor Mark Pearson of Griffith University, who was also editor of Australian Journalism Review for many years and was an inspiration to PJR — “and he is right here with us at the conference.”

Among others have been the Fiji conference convenor, USP’s associate professor Shailendra Singh, and professor Trevor Cullen of Edith Cowan University, who is chair of next year’s World Journalism Education Association conference in Perth.

Dr Robie also singled out designer Del Abcede for special tribute for her hard work carrying the load of producing the journal for many years “and keeping me sane — the question is am I keeping her sane? Anyway, neither I nor Philip would be standing here without her input.”

“Let other people decide your salaries” is the latest message in the Fiji parliamentary pay controversy.

This is the call of Fiji’s longtime House of Representatives Secretary Edward Blakelock, who believes that the Special Emoluments Committee must be independent.

He said the Emoluments Committee, traditionally comprised independent consultants who were not sitting parliamentarians and cabinet ministers.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s main opposition FijiFirst sacks 17 MPs who voted for pay rise
• Other Fiji Parliament pay rise reports

Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry echoed similar sentiments, adding the report on the review of emoluments for parliamentarians should have been cleared by Finance Minister Professor Biman Prasad in cabinet before it was tabled in Parliament.

RNZ Pacific reports that the political fallout from Fijian parliamentarians giving themselves a pay rise last week is spiralling out of control after the main opposition — FijiFirst, the largest single political party in Parliament — sacked 17 out of 26 of its MPs.

While Parliament decides on the make-up of the Special Emoluments Committee, Blakelock said it should not comprise ministers and members of Parliament.

The Parliamentary Remunerations Act 2014 does not spell out who should be members of this committee, but in accordance with parliamentary tradition, the body is expected to be independent of the Parliament.

It should not include current sitting members as committee members so as to ensure no conflict of interest but to be eventually be answerable to Parliament in terms of the approval of its report.

Not eligible
He said the 1997 Constitution specified that exclusion under Section 83 (4) — that a person whose renumeration is reviewable by the Parliamentary Emoluments Committee is not eligible to be appointed as a member.

“As a matter of principle, I personally believe that a member of Parliament — whether a minister or not — should not be a member of a committee which reviews their own salaries, allowances and benefits purely because of conflict of interests issues and just basic fairness,” said Blakelock.

“As mentioned earlier, the 1997 Constitution specifies that exclusion in no uncertain terms.

“In other words, members are expected to be drawn from outside of the current membership of Parliament.

“The Parliament itself chooses by agreement who should be a member of the committee.

“Again, Parliament has to act within the confines of the relevant constitutional provisions and precedence, as well as the provisions in the Parliamentary Remunerations Act 2014.

“I would have thought that if the committee had comprised of members who are not current sitting members of Parliament, we would certainly not be going through all these rigmaroles today.

Independent committee
“The committee should, in my opinion, be independent and consist of experienced and qualified persons from outside of Parliament.”

The 2013 Constitution requires that Parliament “must, under its rules and orders, establish committees with the functions of scrutinising government administration and examining Bills and subordinate legislation and such other functions as are specified from time to time in the rules and orders of Parliament”.

And according to Parliament’s Standing Orders on Special Committees, a special committee may be established by a resolution of Parliament to carry out the assignment specified in the resolution.

This allowed Parliament to pass a resolution on July 12, 2023, for the establishment and membership of the Special Emoluments Committee.

The committee is chaired by Minister for Women Lynda Tabuya and comprises Minister for Infrastructure Ro Filipe Tuisawau, Education Minister Aseri Radrodro, and Opposition MPs Alvick Maharaj and Mosese Bulitavu.

Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Gerehu, the sprawling suburban township to the north of Papua New Guinea’s capital Port Moresby, is now a “ghost town” for shoppers.

All major shops in the central business district in the city’s biggest suburb — Papindo, Gmart, Total Energy service station, Desh Besh Motors, Pharmacy, Supermarket and the bakery which serve a population of more than 50,000 — was set on fire by looters on last week’s “Black Wednesday” riot.

There is nothing left of the shops but debris and charred remains of buildings.

• READ MORE:  Marape accuses ‘rogue police’ of being part of Port Moresby’s riots
• ‘Uphold right to life’ says watchdog in aftermath of deadly PNG unrest

Many residents have expressed remorse that there is nothing left.

“Gerehu is now a ghost town,” said one emotional resident.

“We have nothing here anymore and the shops we grew up with are gone.

“Gone just like that at the blink of an eye.

‘I grew up here’
“I grew up here, this is my home.

“Oh my heart breaks.”

The busiest bus stop in the city was empty with no vendors in sight.

The main market was left with only a few food items and vendors.

One could guess mothers were chased out of the market as well while doing their usual marketing.

Only the thin smoke coming out from the walls and outside of the sheds was noticeable when the PNG Post-Courier visited the area at the weekend.

The Government has evoked a law that now gives government agents absolute rights to search your homes, vehicles and mobile phones during the State of Emergency.

Click the link to read more: ( https://t.co/5Ykkzwo0Rz )

— PostCourierlive (@postcourierlive) January 15, 2024

Gerehu General Hospital security supervisor Topo Dambe said the burning of buildings affected their area where they had received several casualties and the hospital was busy throughout the day.

“But when they set fire to the shops, the hospital staff and the lives of the people and properties were at risk and we were left to protect them and the hospital,” Dambe said.

“We had to close the gates allowing only emergencies.”

Republished with permission.

A Papua New Guinean court has banned political blogger Martyn Namorong from publishing “defamatory remarks” about Electoral Commissioner Patilias Gamato and the writer has responded by publishing a “gagged” silhouette image of himself on his Facebook and Twitter accounts.

Loop PNG reported last night that the Waigani National Court granted the orders sought by Commissioner Gamato in response to an urgent application by his lawyer before Justice Collin Mikail.

Namorong was not present in court because court officials “could not locate him to serve the documents”, Loop PNG reported.

On his Twitter feed, Namorong said: “Just heard I am being taken to court. I need a pro bono lawyer.”

The application was heard ex-parte.

“The case arises from alleged defamatory remarks the blogger made on social media, associating Commissioner Gamato to a fruit,” Loop PNG reported.

Justice Makail granted the application and ruled that the orders could be published by both daily newspapers, the Post-Courier and The National.

‘Activist, antagonist’
He also ruled that the case must come before the court again on July 25, which is after the counting period in PNG’s just completed general election.

Martyn Namorong describes himself on his Twitter feed as a “Papua New Guinean atheist, activist, antagonist”.

In his latest Facebook posting, he published a statement from former Prime Minister Sir Mereke Morauta condemning PNG’s election as having been “hijacked” and “failed”.

Sir Mekere claimed the resignation of the Election Advisory Committee had sent a “loud and clear signal” that the conduct of the election had been “hijacked” by current Prime Minister Peter O’Neill, Chief Secretary Isaac Lupari and the Electoral Commissioner, “ably assisted by the Police Commissioner, the Defence Force Commander and the Secretary for Finance”.

Sir Mekere said the resignation of the EAC was a clear statement to the nation about the failure of the 2017 election.

“The members of the EAC, Ombudsman Richard Pagen, Richard Kassman and Professor John Luluaki, are all extremely capable men of high integrity,” he said.

“They will not have taken the decision to resign lightly. They have resigned because they have been ignored by the Electoral Commissioner and prevented from fulfilling their obligations and their role, which they take seriously.”

The Namorong Report
During a public presentation at the Centre for Communication and Social Change at the University of Queensland, just before voting began in the general election, he talked about how he started The Namorong Report in 2009.

He dropped out of medical school in his final year and, to fund his writing, took to the markets of the capital Port Moresby selling buai (betel nut).

This experience offered some deep insights into the struggling and depressed society and culture of modern Papua New Guinea, impressions which greatly influence his writing.

Namorong went on to win PNG’s Crocodile Prize national literary award for the best essay and is now a political activist and PNG’s most prolific and internationally quoted blogger.

Commissioner Gamato has defended the conduct of the elections.

• Gamato defends elections in face of mounting condemnation
• Former PNG leader comes to aid of censured blogger
• Martyn Namorong on Facebook
• Martyn Namorong on Twitter

Dr Camille Nakhid continues her series on Australia’s shame, the unending Stolen Generation.

Following strong advocacy and persistent lobbying from Laura Lyons, the Grandmothers Against Removals (GMAR), and Werribee*, two of Laura’s children, aged 12 and 9, were finally removed from the homes of strangers and placed with family. However, Laura’s 11-year-old daughter, was placed in a specialised therapeutic placement in Newcastle. The child has since reported being abused by the caregivers in the placement and by the manager who, during an incident, sat on the girl’s back in an attempt to forcibly restrain her, resulting in the young girl being admitted to hospital.

The daughter has run away from the centre on numerous occasions and has fallen prey to strangers who have offered her cigarettes and “drugs to snort up her nose”.

Laura Lyons’ complaint to one of the New South Wales police/station officers in October 2016 about the claims of abuse made by her daughter Laura was met by Detective McClarke from the Marrickville Police Station who confirmed that indigenous children are routinely abused in foster care.

Laura claims that the placement of her daughter with strangers has resulted in psychological and emotional trauma for both her and her daughter.

Laura’s children, who had previously been moved from one placement because of sexual abuse claims made by the daughters against the 17-year-old son of a foster caregiver had, on several occasions, begged the Department of Family and Community Services to be returned to their mother’s home.

Laura’s four grandchildren who were also removed from their mother’s home in 2014 are still in the custody of caregivers of the state.

Laura is aware that it is a long process to get her children and grandchildren back but with the support of GMAR and Werribee she vows to continue fighting. GMAR operates to visit and support grandmothers who have had their grandchildren taken away from their parents. GMAR is aware that it is not only the children and parents that are left traumatised by these events but the wider family and community.

Fathers have also been affected by the forced removal of their children. Laura claimed that in the central tablelands of New South Wales, as many as 26 children were removed from single fathers in one month.

In December 2016, GMAR, along with other interest groups and organisations focused on human rights joined together to support each other and to fight for the future of Australia and of Australia’s children.

GMAR has developed a set of guiding principles about the removal and placement of Indigenous Australian children. The principles include:

• placing the child in an environment where the child is raised with a positive awareness and knowledge of their culture,
• parents are consulted,
• children are placed with family members, and
• siblings are not separated from each other.

Laura says the social workers need to be aware of, and trained about, these principles.

Laura believes that the ongoing problems with her youngest daughter are because of her being placed in isolation at the residential facility and disconnecting her from her family.

“For Aboriginal people, that’s the most important thing — family and culture. Without that, you got nothing. You’ve got absolutely nothing. You will lose your self-identity”.

Update: After moRe than a year of fighting to bring awareness of the harmful and discriminatory practice of the forced removal of Indigenous Australian children from their families, Laura’s children have all been restored to her care in April with the help and support of GMAR and Werribee.

“Now my children have been restored to my care, it’s time to commence the healing process and that’s going to be quite challenging,” says Laura.

Laura Lyons continues to fight to bring about change within a “racist genocidal system”. She continues with her dedication to support other families who are also victims to this system.

“With the over representation of Indigenous children in ‘out of home’ care, we need to form solutions to reduce these numbers and prevent our children from getting lost in the system”.

Laura’s grandchildren have also been returned to their mother.

* Werribee is a self-help support group founded by Laura Lyons and her daughter Bianca. Werribee is a Wiradjuri word that means backbone.

Associate Professor Camille Nakhid has written a series of articles about the Stolen Generations. Other articles can be viewed here. Pacific Media Watch contributing editor Kendall Hutt assisted with today’s publication by transcribing the interview.

Other Stolen Generation stories on Asia Pacific Report:

• Uncle Shane on Australia’s shame
• A Wiradjuri grandmother’s sad story: ‘The Stolen Generations have never stopped’
• Still stealing the generations
• GMAR wins justice award

More about Grandmothers Against Removals

If you wish to donate to GMAR, click on this link:

Contact | Donate

If you want to sign the petition, click here

Following my interview with Laura, Uncle Shane, as he introduced himself to me, said he wanted to tell his story. He said he wanted people to know what it was like being taken away from home and placed in state foster care or in residential care facilities. Uncle Shane said he was here to support GMAR and the work that they do as he never wanted to hear of another Indigenous Australian child being taken away from their family and culture.

As Uncle Shane told his story, he became angry at what had happened to him and others he knew, and at what was still taking place. Despite his anger, I was in awe at his apparent lack of bitterness and the enthusiastic and positive approach he had. But his past must have had some impact because I had thought Uncle Shane was in his mid-70s. In fact, Uncle Shane had just turned 59.

This is the story that Uncle Shane wanted to share as told to Dr Camille Nakhid:  

Uncle Shane: I’ve written to them, to the government, and to the opposition — suggesting to them that they should start concentrating on those who’ve perpetrated the crimes against us, you know, ex-state wards – against the children such as us. We are the vulnerable ones, the ones without the voice.

Uncle Shane had been removed from an abusive family home only to be placed in an even more abusive state system from 1959-1982.

Which we had none. We had no choice. It was all forced on us, including the abuse, the abuse of drugs to testing for pharmacies, and the abuse of the slavery of the hours, long hours. Five in the morning until 11 at night, seven days a week. That’s long hours. No play, no birthday cards, no presents, nothing.

In the morning, I’d have to get up at five o-clock, we’d do the dairy. That finishes at nine. We’d do that, we go up to the house, polish all the floors.

And then we do the laundry, all day, and then we do the dairy in the afternoon, then we go back up the house and scrub all the pots. Or, you know, other chores that need to be done in the house. Polish all the floors by hand. With long hours, no play. You know, that’s all gone. The time you spent playing in parks with kids, that’s all gone. I see that today and I’m really angry. Because we didn’t get it. You know, it’s gone.

We’ve lost that. We’ll never get that back. And no human being has the right to take that away from us. You know, we couldn’t even go to our – you can’t even have friends. Outside, outside they go to their friend’s place and they play, and they go to beaches, they go to – forget about that, that’s all gone. That wasn’t allowed. All we did was work. And all we did was whatever they wanted us to do. We were physically and sexually abused. We were at the mercy of them. That’s terrible. That’s not a way to treat a human being.

But I’m angry with the government because it hasn’t done anything. You know, it holds a royal commission, it’s only to shut up people, you know, because of the talk. When the abuse come out to the public, what’s the best way to shut the public up? What do you do as a government?

‘You get a media spin together’
You panic, you quickly get a media spin together, and you quickly turn it into a spin, a song and dance. And you say: “We’re going to hold a royal commission”. That should shut everything down. That should shut down the public talking and getting angry with the government of the day.

So you’re no better off.

How are you better off? You’re not safe at home, so you’re taken away and even then if you’d read the reports, the very DoCS department was at the home when these things were happening. And still nothing happened to protect you. They didn’t step up to the plate. Not a way to treat a human being – is it?

No clothes on a kid, walking around, smelly, wet urine all over the place – and you’re not going to go and write a report about that and take the kid away somewhere safe? You’re not going to step up to the plate and help that kid?

Now, I’m hoping to wake the people up, you know. To shake them up and to wake them up to the injustice out there of children like us, you know, people like us.

I forget my tribe. I don’t know the name of it but I’ve been accepted down here in Sydney by my step-brother, which is the Wiradjuri.

We’ve got a lot of injustice, as you know, in Australia. It’s not like any other – some countries have some, which I’ve watched injustice there – But we have a lot here.

I fail to see the benefit of taking children away from their parents. I don’t see the benefit. If DoCS is trying to punish the children, then they’re doing a good job. If they’re trying to punish the parents, they’re doing a good job. So I don’t understand what they’re trying to do.

‘They should set up a home visiting programme’
I believe that they should set up a home visiting programme where the department should come into the home and work with the parents.

It’s not what the parents can do for the department, but what the department should be doing for the children and the parents.

There’s so much injustice – the culture is stolen right beneath us. Their culture is being pushed, you know, into the children of today. What they should be doing, is doing what people are doing in New Zealand and letting the elders take over and letting them decide how their children should be brought up.

Not like these government departments. They’re, to me, government departments only amp up the situation and make the situation worse, as you’ve seen.

I just think that, you know, the United Nations should’ve been doing more. All they’ve done is close their eyes on all this. They must’ve seen what was going on. They must see, they must know what’s going on. But they don’t raise their eyebrows to the abuse.

In the Northern Territory — the children that were abused there, they’re only now being mentioned by the UN Human Rights giving the Australian government a stern warning. But what they should’ve done is do that years ago. This has been going on for many, many years. This is not just a one-year off, you know, or a two-year trick.

It should be the community that should decide what should happen to the children. It should be the parents and the whole community to be involved in what they want for their own community and what they want for their own parents, you know, from what they want for their own children. And their housing, their legal services, all that has been cut as you are aware.

‘You never know what fight’s next’
Uncle Shane is a volunteer with GMAR.

GMAR teaches us further stuff as well, which is good. You never know what’s going to come around that corner. You never know what fight’s there for you.

It was only two months ago we held a rally in Campbelltown and we set that up, put it together with everybody and the first time they didn’t bite.

The second time outside the courthouse they bit. At the end I did ring them up and I told them: “We’re gonna keep doing this, we’re gonna keep coming back until the woman’s kids were given back. The next job we’re gonna do after the court case, we’re coming into your office –  And we’re not moving”.

We’ve got a hell of a struggle ahead.

Look at my case. The royal commission said to me, wanted to ask one question: “How the hell…did you survive?” Hope.

And hope’s a dangerous word for people like us. Hope is a very dangerous word. You’re hoping, you’re just praying that you get out of there one day. You know, they could have kept me further – You know, much more than 22 years. And in there, you probably notice, that they did pretend I was 80 percent retarded.

So these are the names you’re left with. The stigma that they put on you. When, if anything, the only thing you don’t have is the education — because of them.

Associate Professor Camille Nakhid has written a series of articles about the Stolen Generations. Other articles can be viewed here. Pacific Media Watch contributing editor Kendall Hutt assisted with today’s publication by transcribing the interview.

Other Stolen Generation stories on Asia Pacific Report:

• A Wiradjuri grandmother’s sad story: ‘The Stolen Generations have never stopped’
• Still stealing the generations
• GMAR wins justice award

More about Grandmothers Against Removals

If you wish to donate to GMAR, click on this link:

Contact | Donate

If you want to sign the petition, click here

Grandmothers Against Removals (GMAR) were recipients of the Aboriginal Justice Award at the Justice Awards in Sydney this month.

The group were recognised for their advocacy against indigenous children being forcibly taken away from families as well their contribution to guiding principles for strengthening the participation of local Aboriginal community in child protection decision making.

Laura Lyons, a member of GMAR Sydney, told Asia Pacific Report earlier this year of the forced and unjustified removal of her children and the abuse they faced in a residential care facility.

‘Proud moment’

She said the award was a “proud moment” for the group and believed their ancestors were present to witness it.

‘On our way to the awards we saw a rainbow,’ Lyons explained.

“It was actually Bianca (Lyons daughter) who looked up in the sky and said, ‘mum there’s the rainbow’. I said to her, ‘that’s our ancestors with us’ and I knew we were going to win the award.”

‘Ongoing’

Lyons said her case with the Department of Children Services (DoCS) is ongoing but GMAR continues to be busy travelling to other communities to assist and support families.

GMAR have set up a GoFundMe page to raise money for transport costs to visit other families who need their help.

• Guiding principles for strengthening the participation of local Aboriginal community in child protection decision making
• Laura Lyons case: ‘stolen generations’
• Still stealing the generations – the abduction of Indigenous Australian children goes on
• Stop Stolen Generations

In March 2014, my daughter got on drugs and she had to have a meeting with the Department [Department of Children Services – DoCS] because she was at risk of losing her children. And I totally understood that because our priority is to keep our children safe.

Anyway, I went into the meeting to support my daughter and the case worker was using language that my daughter couldn’t understand. So I kept on pulling her up [the case worker] and said: “Listen, could you please use language or words that my daughter would be familiar with so that she could understand?”

And this case worker took offence to what I was doing. I said: “How can my daughter answer you honestly and openly if she doesn’t understand what she’s being asked or what you’re saying to her?”

So she got offended, looked at me and said: “What’s happening with your case?” And I said “My case file is closed. The allegations about me were never proven. And she looked at me and said: ‘We’ll see about that!’”

So next minute I had DoCS on my door and my case file was opened back up! So this case worker put in her affidavit at the court that I had an open case file! She was the one that got my case opened back up so that I couldn’t go for my grandchildren.

And in the process I ended up losing my own children. This was March 24 and I eventually did lose my children on 4 December 2015. I clearly became a target because I supported my daughter.

I only get to see my children once every three weeks for an hour and a half, maybe two hours.

My children are supposed to go with family members, there was no consultation process. They took my children from school, they placed them into what is known as a residential care facility. It’s similar to an institution. The residential care facility was getting paid $11,000 + a month to have my kids there. That’s been confirmed.

[Laura’s children that were allegedly stolen from her are aged 11, 10 and eight years old — two girls and a boy respectively.]

The abuse in care
My 8-year-old boy was getting put in a corner. Being isolated as a form of punishment. My 10-year-old daughter was apparently getting dragged along the ground by the hair of the head by an 18-year-old worker. This was a high cost placement with high qualified and skilled staff to support my children to ensure that my children will be kept safe.

They [the case workers] are 18 years old! How could they be qualified? They would have just finished school! (My children) were getting locked in their room. My daughter would be threatened when she was to leave the property, “If you run away, if you misbehave, when you get back you will have no dinner. You will go straight to your room. You’ll be separated from your siblings!”

My children were being forced fed because they didn’t like the food, and were only allowed water and cordial to drink. The manager is also the owner of this residential care facility. So initially it’s her own privatised enterprise, it’s her business. They make large amounts of money by taking our children.

The manager’s 17-year-old son was speaking rude to my daughters in Spanish. I said to my daughter, “How do you know that it’s rude because you don’t speak Spanish?” And my two daughters replied, “Because he always tells us in English afterwards”.

My children eventually ran away from this facility because of how they were being treated.  I found my children and took them to the police station and my little 10-year-old daughter screamed and begged and cried to the police officers from Kogarah police station not to send them back there.

They did not listen! They did not believe my children and what they were telling them. They left us sitting in the police station for four hours. Eventually they sent my three children back there.

And then it escalated, the manager’s 17-year-old son was making sexual advances towards my 10-year-old daughter. He was having free access to my children. He didn’t have a criminal record check! Or a “working with children” check! He was on the property with them, unsupervised.

So when further allegations were disclosed to me I didn’t tell the Department. I couldn’t trust them because they didn’t believe my children the first time. They didn’t believe me. So I called the Hotline. And I contacted the Ombudsman. And as a result of my actions to keep my children safe, that facility is no longer an out-of-home care provider and are under investigation, and my children were removed from that facility.

My children were supposed to be kept safe. My children were supposed to be supervised 24 hours a day, seven days a week

My children were then placed with another non-Aboriginal placement called Interactive Community Care service. They are a little bit different because they don’t have a live in facility. My children were then being dragged from motel to motel.

We [taxpayers] would have been paying for that. I pay taxes, I work. Here I was at home with a three-bedroom loving home and they wouldn’t let my kids come home. And they were saying that (the motel) was suitable! That it was safe for them! That was in their best interest, and that they had routine and structure.

So while they were in the motel, with the new workers that were supposed to be supervising them 24 hours a day, seven days a week, my daughters locked themselves into a bathroom. They had iPods and they were taking nude photos of themselves and sending the photos to some unknown paedophile online.

Where was the staff when my children were doing that? They said that my children were going to be supervised again. That they were going to be kept safe. That’s obviously proven that they failed again!

Their system

The system that they’ve got set up here in Australia is what we call flawed, very flawed.

Anyone can ring up and make false allegations. Once you do that, they will act on that information. You will not get an opportunity to fight those allegations until after the removal of your children. Then it will take you a lengthy period of time to go through the white society’s court system – to try and prove that these allegations are not true.

When any Aboriginal child is placed into care with the Department, they’re supposed to place Aboriginal children with families, extended families or remain in their communities. It’s in their own policies and procedures.

But they don’t that. The majority of Aboriginal children are placed with non-Aboriginal white carers or placed in residential care facilities just like my children were.

It is important that they follow their own policies and procedures. That then guarantees that our children remain connected to their families, their culture and their communities

Laura fighting to get her children and grandchildren back
I’m fighting. I love my children and grandchildren more than life itself. I miss my children and my grandchildren. The department had me doing alcohol testing, drug testing. I’ve been sober for 26 years. I spent two and a half years in a rehabilitation centre back in 1990.

Even though I was having ongoing drug testing, and ongoing alcohol testing, people were still ringing up anonymously and saying that I’m drinking alcohol in front of my kids. So I was just basically discriminated against, labelled and stereotyped.

They fabricate evidence and they will manipulate and twist your words to suit them. They are corrupt. They went from me to my mother. I wanted my mother to care for my children and they said the same thing about my mother. She’s 69 and they said that she abuses alcohol and that she’s a gambler!

They stated that they received an allegation about my mother in 2013 that she was abusing alcohol. People who know my mother know she is a non-drinker. This clearly displays the level of discrimination and corruption.

Laura is very clear about why this is happening
Because of the power and control. Because they can take our children and keep them! And it’s all about the money they get. For every child that goes into out of home care, they get an income stream.

I went to a forum about the escalating numbers of Aboriginal children. The forum was held at Little Bay, at old Prince Henry Hospital on the May 27 this year. That was organised by the Minister for DoCS Brad Hazzard. He is even aware that there are too many Aboriginal children in care.

Why are all those Aboriginal children in care! We make up a minority of the population in our country. We’re only like two percent of the country but thirty percent of our children are in care. Our children can stay in care until they turn 18.

DoCS believes that my kids shouldn’t be with me. DoCS have discriminated against me. DoCS have no understanding or acknowledge our model of raising our children. It’s like the saying, it takes a village to raise a child. That’s how we are and we’ve raised our kids for thousands of years before colonisation.

Grandmothers Against Removal is a New South Wales body set up now locally state-wide and also nationally. We’ve got GMAR set up all over Australia. I am part of the Sydney, branch. Other branches are Moree, Campbelltown, and Ballina with the intention of growing.

Our own individual GMAR set up in our own communities is to fight issues at the local level. There’s probably only about 30 to 40 members [in GMAR Sydney]. We’re not a very big group but we’re a very powerful group.

Anybody can join. There are Aboriginal grandmothers like myself. GMAR New South Wales was formed back in 2014 and was formed by Aunty Hazel, Suellyn Tighe, Aunty Deb Swann and Jennifer Swann. All these strong black deadly women provided me with hope and inspired me at a time when I needed it most. Our Sydney branch was formed on December 7, 2015.

We’ve been going for about six months. Everything we do is as volunteers. We try and function on donations, at times can be quite difficult. And then there is Werribee, the self help support group that me and my daughter Bianca are the founders of. Werribee is a Wiradjuri word that means backbone in Wiradjuri language. That’s my culture, that’s my tribe.

When me and Bianca lost our children we had nowhere to go. No one to talk to. Nobody to tell how we were feeling, that we were angry, that we were hurting. We were very emotional. Every time they [Bianca’s children] see me and Bianca, they say they wanna come home.

We’re fighting! Bianca’s been fighting for two years. Her children have been in care for two and a half years and she’s still fighting to get them back. She’s lost her children because of drugs, you know? We accept that.

However, she’s not on drugs anymore. She hasn’t been on drugs for 17, 18 months. Give her children back! They don’t want to give her, her children back. We will fight and continue to fight not only for our children but for all Aboriginal children that are in care.

GMAR wants people to know about their cause
We gather every Sunday (at a market in Marrickville) just to make people aware of what’s going on. We say, “Have you heard about Grandmothers Against Removal?” No? And I say, “Well do you remember when Kevin Rudd said sorry for the Stolen Generations?”

They say “Yes”. “Well, the Stolen Generations haven’t stopped!”

There are actually more kids in care now than there ever was! And Kevin Rudd said sorry on the 11 February 2008. And when you say sorry, it means that you don’t do it again.

And all these people in Australia are oblivious to the fact that there’s more kids in care than there ever was! Around about 20,000, and that the stolen generations have never stopped. It’s just been covered up by their policies.

More about Grandmothers Against Removal

If you wish to donate to GMAR, click on this link:

http://stopstolengenerations.com.au/contacts

If you want to sign the petition, click here

• Still stealing the generations

A group of Indigenous Australian grandmothers have organised themselves to stop the Australian government from taking away Indigenous children from their immediate families and their mums and dads.

The group — who call themselves Grandmothers Against Removals (GMAR) — says the stealing of Indigenous children has been going on for more than 20 decades and the group is fighting the government to have the children returned to their families.

Linda Jackson, a 61-year-old Indigenous woman, a child of the Stolen Generation, said she was taken away from her mother in the 1950s when she was a baby in Western Australia. She said her parents had no rights to them so she and her siblings were placed in institutions and missions and the practice of taking Indigenous children away from their families has continued ever since.

Catherine Jackson, Linda’s 42-year-old daughter, said that GMAR was formed because of the large numbers of Indigenous children who were being taken from the hospitals as soon as they were born or from the family homes.

“It’s like a slave industry but better for the white man because they are taking innocent children who will grow up not knowing their culture,” says Jackson.

Jackson blames the high rate of teenage and youth suicide among Indigenous Australians on their growing up without knowing their culture. The police, says Jackson, come in with the DoCS (Department of Children’s Services now called Family and Community Services) social worker and take the children away without any consideration for their families or the children’s well-being.

‘Very scary’
The children are then placed in “horrible situations with people who don’t know how to handle Indigenous kids” and taught the “white man’s ways”. The children are put “in unsafe care where they are raped by paedophiles…they get beat up, they get stressed out, they don’t eat properly. They can’t sleep because they don’t know what’s happening to them. They’re innocent children so it’s very scary for them, very scary”.

The Stolen Generation is not a thing of the past.

Catherine Jackson says it began more than 200 years ago — when “the white man came here and invaded this country” — and it continues today.

GMAR became involved because of their continued concern for the growing number of suicides among Indigenous youth and the large numbers of children going missing. “Not just children, people that are Aboriginal. They were just being slaughtered and wiped out never to be found when the white man finished with raping these kids in care. What do they do with the kids, you know?”

Laura Lyons,* herself a grandmother who has had children and grandchildren stolen from her, agrees that the children have suffered at the hands of their caregivers: “I know through neglect of these white carers our children have died while in care.”

GMAR has been active in the last two and a half years since it was formed and says that stealing and selling Indigenous Australians is a money industry. “They see dollar signs…they think that they can sell these children into adoption agencies. It’s just another slave industry where the white man can come in, take whatever and sell the kids off”.

“They get thousands of dollars per child” says Linda and says that Indigenous Australian families get half the amount of money for fostering a child than white families.

Many reasons
Laura said that she knew of one residential care facility where the carer was being paid the sum of A$11,000 per month for the care of 3 children, aged 11, 10 and 8.

According to GMAR, the police and government officials give a number of reasons for taking the children, such as the use of drugs and alcohol in the families, unsafe homes, accusations of molestation in the family, and often use prison records and mental health records against the families.

“They’ll come up with allegations that have never been proven before but all of a sudden they’re there. So then they build up a case on lies against families,” says Jackson.

One of the grandfathers, Christopher Simpson, said he was taken as a child up to Bomaderry. Back then, he said, a car pulled up full of Aboriginal children and they were taken to Bomaderry where he stayed for 16 years, 14 of them in a home without his own family. The grandfather said that children were kept until they were 21 and that “if you’re a good worker they won’t let you go”.

According to Linda Jackson, the boys are stolen to carry out domestic work, farm work, dairy work or sent to the cattle stations.

Linda Jackson has had three of her grandchildren taken away from her. The grandchildren are currently 14, 2 and one year old. It has been 14 years since the eldest was taken away. Linda Jackson said there was no reason for the grandchildren to be taken away.

“The white woman she come in my house and saying we were all drinking and on drugs. And I’ve never taken drugs! And there was no alcohol there. All of my grandkids. I raised all of my grandkids. Even my sister’s daughter too. I mean this white woman turns up to the door. Sees the Aboriginals in there, then she puts an act on, goes, ‘Ah black fellas, I’m gonna get attacked!’ You know what I mean? Then she goes, ‘I’ll be back in about half an hour’. Goes and gets a tank full of cops!’

‘Still a mystery’
Linda Jackson still does not know why the woman showed up at her place. “It’s still a mystery to me. Why? Because she had no reason to come there.”

Linda Jackson’s son had been arrested and the son’s wife and child had been taken to the police station. Catherine Jackson said that her mother should have been given the option to take the grandchild but the police and government officials put the child in welfare. “So my niece has grown up without family and got a new family.”

The grandmothers of GMAR have vowed to keep fighting to take back their stolen grandchildren and to reunite them with their families and culture.

Associate Professor Camille Nakhid of Auckland University of Technology is a contributor to Asia Pacific Report and chairperson of the Pacific Media Centre Advisory Board.

• *Laura’s story will be featured in an upcoming edition of Asia Pacific Report.