Bringing-Them-Home-Report-Web

Program was reviewed for ATSIC in 1995 by the National Language and LiteracyInstitute of Australia. The Review ‘strongly recommended’ a continuation of theprogram to the end of 1999-2000 ‘with an expectation that it may need to beextended further, given the range of languages involved and the work that needs tobe done’ (Recommendation A.1). The Program was also strongly endorsed in 1996by the National Board of Employment, Education and Training, with a similarrecommendation for extension. Core tasks of the language centres are languagerecording and maintenance and teaching languages.The existing language centre model is clearly appropriate for the task of assistingpeople affected by forcible removal to recover their languages. Local and regionalnegotiations will be required to determine whether the language centre is theappropriate body to take on other tasks envisaged by the Inquiry, notably that ofrecording and storing personal testimonies of forcible removal and its effects and thatof archiving local history records. The generic term ‘language, culture and historycentres’ is used to indicate the range of tasks that need to be performed. Existinglanguage centres may be expanded. Alternatively new institutions may beestablished.Language, culture and history centresRecommendation 12a: That the Commonwealth expand the funding ofIndigenous language, culture and history centres to ensure national coverage atregional level.Recommendation 12b: That where the Indigenous community so determines, theregional language, culture and history centre be funded to record and maintainlocal Indigenous languages and to teach those languages, especially to peoplewhose forcible removal deprived them of opportunities to learn and maintaintheir language and to their descendants.The Inquiry has found that a key objective of forcible removals was to sever the linkbetween the child and his or her family, community and culture. For many people thepractices used to advance this objective have resulted in an inability to establish theirAboriginality by reference to the frequently applied three-pronged definition. Formany purposes proof of Aboriginality now requires (1) proof of descent from theIndigenous peoples of Australia, (2) self-identification as an Indigenous person and(3) acceptance by the Indigenous community as an Indigenous person.Some people who were forcibly removed and their descendants are notacknowledged as members by their own communities of origin, while others areunable to locate their communities. The application of a definition requiringacceptance as Indigenous by the person’s community must not be permitted todiscriminate against the most direct victims of the forcible removal policies.Indigenous identificationRecommendation 13: That Indigenous organisations, such as Link-Ups andAboriginal and Islander Child Care Agencies, which assist those forcibly removedby undertaking family history research be recognised as Indigenous communitiesfor the purposes of certifying descent from the Indigenous peoples of Australiaand acceptance as Indigenous by the Indigenous community.