PAULINE HANSON & ABORIGINAL LAND RIGHTS & GST*.
 

One of the less savory aspects of representative democracy is the frenzy of attacks and excrement that incumbents heap on any challenger to the existing politico-media oligarchy.  Similar behavior is observable in the chimpanzee cage in most zoos whenever there is a leadership challenge in the offing.

Like those chimp challengers, Pauline Hanson is paying the price.  That price is to be labeled racist. The policy that earned her the epithet "racist" originally rested on her assertion that Australian Aboriginals enjoyed financial privileges not enjoyed by other Australians.  This assertion is based on the fact that about 350,000 Australian aboriginals have been granted approximately $16 billion of Australian taxpayer's funds.  By my calculation this is an average of around $46,000 for each aboriginal man, woman & child.   Or about $275,000 for a family of two parents, four children.  That much money would buy a fairly good 3-4 bedroom house just about anywhere in Australia.

The Aboriginal community seems to be of the opinion that what they have received is but a drop in the bucket of the reparations that they expect.  This attitude on the part of the indigenous Aboriginal community seems to be generating a certain amount of resentment among non-indiginous Australians in the middle (taxpayer) class concerning the government's largess with their taxes.  (The very rich don't care because they don't pay any taxes anyhow).

The WIK decision by the Australian High Court gave potential title to 79% of Australia to people of Aboriginal descent (the Wik decision) & has caused concern within the Australian farming community.  This decision by the Australian High Court dispossessed farmers without any chance of compensation.    Farmers seek legislation reversing the court's decision, or giving fair compensation for any loss.

It is doubtful that any politician could persuade city voters to pay farmers compensation for land given to indigenous aboriginals.  Instead of seeking compensation John Howard has stolen Pauline's thunder by choosing to rectify the situation with legislation.   Wily independent senator Harradine sought to choose the point of balanced principal that benefits Tasmania before allowing passage.  John called his bluff, now Harradine is perceived as a seamy politician.

Aboriginals meanwhile are refusing to compromise on their "right to negotiate" with mining companies.  Can't say that I blame them.  Wish I had a veto right over anyone that wished to mine my land.   Trouble is, the Australian people might not like it much, once it hit their hip pocket nerve.

If this matter does come before the Australian people the phrasing of the referendum question will determine the outcome.  GST* will be the wild card.  If John Howard couples his Anti-Wik referendum with a Goods & Services Tax, Pauline would get my vote.  I suspect she would get a cabinet post as well.
 

* GST = Goods & Services Tax.  I had incorrectly written FBT (= Fringe Benefit Tax) into the previous version of this document.
 
 

Updated 30 November 1997.   This revision 6 April 1998