Bringing-Them-Home-Report-Web

and therefore the Territory is not responsible.We acknowledge the material assistance provided to Link-Up (Qld) by theCommunity and Personal Histories Service (work space, access to the Heritage databaseand training in archival research) and by the Queensland welfare and Indigenous affairsdepartment (office accommodation).The absence of an independent Indigenous family tracing and reunion service inSouth Australia is particularly concerning. Indeed there was no link-up worker at all formuch of 1995 and 1996, a critical period during which the Inquiry was receivingevidence and recommendations from Indigenous victims of the removal policies. Evenwhen the position is occupied the function is limited to helping people access governmentrecords and archival information (Aboriginal Legal Rights Movement submission 484page 40). There is a desperate need for a culturally-appropriate counselling service in SAboth to support the family reunion process and generally to assist people affected byremovals.The SA Aboriginal Child Care Agency advised the Inquiry that in this period itreceived numerous requests to undertake reunion work. However, not being funded forthis work, the Agency had to refuse these requests (submission 347 page 19). In SA theInquiry took confidential evidence from more than 120 Indigenous people directlyaffected by forcible removal, a number which can only hint at the need in the Indigenouscommunity in that State for the assistance, support and counselling provided by a familyreunion agency.The SA Government assured the Inquiry of its commitment to assisting Indigenousfamily reunions and acknowledged the complexity of the process. However it complainedabout the ‘limited resources [existing] to help people in this process’ (interim submissionpage 22). There is no evidence that the State plans to fund the necessary services in theforeseeable future.It is quite clear to the Inquiry, as it was to Royal Commissioner Elliott Johnston, thatthe need for reunion assistance can only be met effectively by an independent Indigenousagency because ‘people would not go to welfare for help in finding their parents andfamily because of their past record’ (Learning from the Past 1994 page 66). The agencywould preferably be managed and staffed by people who have experienced the removalpolicies themselves.The location of the SA link-up worker within the Department of Family andCommunity Services was criticised by the Aboriginal Legal Rights Movement.This has been a bone of contention among the Aboriginal community as there is a widespreadopinion that the Link-Up programme should come under the control of the Aboriginal communityand not a part of the government machinery. We support this proposition as FACS was thegovernment department that played the largest role in the removal of Aboriginal children fromtheir families and we feel this is adding insult to injury for the survivors of this tragic attempt atgenocide (submission 484 page 40).