Pearson pays price for helping his people
15.04.2000
EXACTLY a year ago, Aboriginal lawyer Noel Pearson released a plan he and others had developed to lift indigenous people from welfare dependency and make them responsible for their own lives.
It was a brave move, an intellectual attempt to address a problem that no government in Australia had succeeded in addressing.
Living conditions for Aboriginal people in remote areas are every bit as bad now as they were at any time since they were forced into communal living by church and government policy a century ago.
In releasing his plan, Pearson identified several problems with its implementation. He did not foresee major problems with government because the plan was basically in line with conservative politics -- the reciprocity philosophy advanced by Prime Minister John Howard.
But he predicted that opposition would come from the political left and the rednecks, and from bureaucrats -- particularly black bureaucrats -- who had forged for themselves most comfortable niches in the current flawed system that Pauline Hanson labelled ``the Aboriginal Industry''.
Not surprisingly, Pearson was correct in his predictions.
The main criticisms have been that Pearson is an unelected, self-appointed spokesman and that he has not ``consulted'' enough with Aboriginal and Islander people on communities. The counter view, of thinking people including Premier Peter Beattie, is that Pearson could be the saviour of Aboriginal people -- the one person with the intelligence, nous and courage to break the present cycle of waste and stupidity and turn the hopelessness around.
Beattie's support has been unequivocal and he has made it clear to Cabinet colleagues and the public service that he wants the plan worked through and, if it has the answers required, to be put in place.
For his part, Pearson has written to Opposition Leader Rob Borbidge and Liberal leader Dr David Watson offering the Coalition a briefing on the details of his discussion paper.
That offer has not been taken up. Their interest level could possibly be gauged from the revelation last week that in the life of the Beattie Government the Opposition's Aboriginal Affairs spokesman Vince Lester has not visited one Aboriginal community or asked a single question on indigenous issues in the Parliament.
Pearson's plan is just that -- a plan to be examined and debated and, if it is found to have merit, to be implemented. Many people, for their own crass political reasons, have responded by attacking the author of the plan.
In producing the paper, Pearson said: ``The `plan' is this: that the State Government is prepared to work in partnership with Cape York people to overcome problems and to seize opportunities for families, individuals and communities in the Peninsula.
``Now, as to how the partnership will work and what particular plans and ideas should be pursued, there is much more work and discussion that needs to take place before this is done.
``The fact is that no matter how good the ideas might be, they have no chance of succeeding if Aboriginal individuals, families and communities do not actively embrace them and adopt them and indeed generate their own initiative in relation to them.
``The community must take responsibility for deciding on and effecting change. That is why the whole approach of the consultation is based on communities making their own decision about whether they wish to proceed with the partnership plan.''
The proposal by Pearson does have holes. It depends entirely on its acceptance by indigenous people, and then on the co-operation of the government and others to see that it works.
To get Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to understand what is proposed is a time-consuming task. Just travelling to all the communities and spending the time explaining and answering questions is a chore, and it is costly.
It is therefore a nonsense for those who criticise the Beattie Government for providing funds for this consultation process and to accuse Pearson of promoting a scheme that might somehow personally benefit him.
Lest anyone doubt Pearson's integrity in regard to the entire matter, it is worthwhile quoting from a letter of explanation he wrote to Beattie, Borbidge and Watson.
It said in part: ``I have not received any remuneration from the Queensland Government for work undertaken on the Cape York Partnership Plan to date.
``I will continue to work on this same basis on the development of the plan for the foreseeable future.
``If, in the future, I undertake any work for which I am entitled to receive payment from the Queensland Government in relation to the partnership plan, I will request that such payments be made in favour of Cape York secondary school students, whose college fees I have been personally sponsoring in recent years.''
What Pearson refers to there is that each year for the past four years he has sponsored all the costs of sending an Aboriginal girl with scholastic promise from a Cape York community to board and be educated at Clayfield College in Brisbane.
All his fees for public speaking have gone to this project and now four young women are enjoying a college and tertiary education paid for entirely by Pearson -- so that they might be educated and be able to contribute to a better future for all indigenous people.
This personal charity and commitment is not something Pearson particularly sought to have made public. It is common knowledge among those business leaders who contract him as a guest speaker at seminars -- they are instructed to pay his engagement fee to Clayfield College to defray the boarding and education expenses of the Aboriginal students.
Beattie's sensible and sensitive approach to the issue demonstrates a genuine commitment to addressing the dreadful problems faced by indigenous people.
