❓ Question regarding the denial of a Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme application for work done at Texas Downs Station. The Minister defends the decision, stating the scheme is limited to former residents of Native Welfare institutions and declines to apologise or review the scheme.
AnsweredQoN 976Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Regarding an application by Ms Rena Mung of Halls Creek to the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme WA, I ask: (a) is the Minister satisfied with his department's answer to Ms Mung, that her application was refused because "Texas Downs Station is not an Institution or Facility within the Reparation Scheme": (i) if yes to (a), can the Minister please explain how this can be so when it was State legislation that provided the
frameworks of control over all Aboriginal peoples lives in Western Australia, including the
consequential controls over Aboriginal peoples property, including money, as
stated in the 2008 Stolen Wages Taskforce report; and (ii) if no to (a), why not; (b) will the Minister apologise to Ms Mung and others like her who had the wages withheld as was also recommended in the Taskforce report of 2008: (i) if no to (b), why not; and (ii) if yes to (b), when will the apology take place; (c) will the Minister acknowledge the links between the discrimination inherent in the Government's laws, which allowed Rena and others like her to be denied a fair income for the work they did and the links between this and the gap in wellbeing that today exists between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people: (i) if no to (c), why not; and (ii) if yes to (c), when will the Minister acknowledge these links and what will he do to rectify the situation; (d) will the Minister undertake a review of the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme WA through a process that fully involves Aboriginal people, as requested by Ms Mung in a letter to him, dated 16 April 2013: (i) if no to (d), why not; and (ii) if yes to (c), when will this take place, and how will the Government report the findings of the review; and (e) will the Minister establish a new scheme, which makes proper amends to Aboriginal people for their work on station, as requested by Ms Mung in a letter to him, dated 16 April 2013: (i) if no to (e), why not; and (ii) if yes to (e), when will this occur, and how will the Government include Ms Mung and others like her in the process?
frameworks of control over all Aboriginal peoples lives in Western Australia, including the
consequential controls over Aboriginal peoples property, including money, as
stated in the 2008 Stolen Wages Taskforce report; and (ii) if no to (a), why not; (b) will the Minister apologise to Ms Mung and others like her who had the wages withheld as was also recommended in the Taskforce report of 2008: (i) if no to (b), why not; and (ii) if yes to (b), when will the apology take place; (c) will the Minister acknowledge the links between the discrimination inherent in the Government's laws, which allowed Rena and others like her to be denied a fair income for the work they did and the links between this and the gap in wellbeing that today exists between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people: (i) if no to (c), why not; and (ii) if yes to (c), when will the Minister acknowledge these links and what will he do to rectify the situation; (d) will the Minister undertake a review of the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme WA through a process that fully involves Aboriginal people, as requested by Ms Mung in a letter to him, dated 16 April 2013: (i) if no to (d), why not; and (ii) if yes to (c), when will this take place, and how will the Government report the findings of the review; and (e) will the Minister establish a new scheme, which makes proper amends to Aboriginal people for their work on station, as requested by Ms Mung in a letter to him, dated 16 April 2013: (i) if no to (e), why not; and (ii) if yes to (e), when will this occur, and how will the Government include Ms Mung and others like her in the process?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
6 May 2014
Responded by
Minister for Aboriginal Affairs
Response time
47 days
(a) Yes.
(i) The State Government's response to the issue of stolen wages was largely based on advice from the Stolen Wages Taskforce, which found that Government controls over Aboriginal people's money during the period 1905 to 1972 were at their most extensive for those living at Government Settlements including Carrolup, Moore River and other institutions across the State. After careful consideration, a decision was made to limit ex gratia payments through the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme to former residents of Native Welfare institutions where the State Government had direct control over Aboriginal people's money and conditions.
(ii) Not applicable.
(b) No.
(i) The State Government's response to the issue of stolen wages was largely based on advice from the Stolen Wages Taskforce Report, which found that Government controls over Aboriginal people's money during the period 1905 to 1972 were at their most extensive for those living at Government Settlements including Carrolup, Moore River and other institutions across the State. After careful consideration, a decision was made to limit ex gratia payments through the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme (the Scheme) to former residents of Native Welfare institutions where the State Government had direct control over people's money and conditions.
(ii) Not applicable.
(c) Yes.
(i) Not applicable.
(ii) Refer to (b)(i).
(d) No.
(i) The scheme will not be reviewed or reopened. Application to the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme does not affect the legal rights of any applicant that may choose to pursue other courses of action.
(ii) Not applicable.
(e) No.
(i) Refer to (d)(i).
(ii) Not applicable.
(i) The State Government's response to the issue of stolen wages was largely based on advice from the Stolen Wages Taskforce, which found that Government controls over Aboriginal people's money during the period 1905 to 1972 were at their most extensive for those living at Government Settlements including Carrolup, Moore River and other institutions across the State. After careful consideration, a decision was made to limit ex gratia payments through the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme to former residents of Native Welfare institutions where the State Government had direct control over Aboriginal people's money and conditions.
(ii) Not applicable.
(b) No.
(i) The State Government's response to the issue of stolen wages was largely based on advice from the Stolen Wages Taskforce Report, which found that Government controls over Aboriginal people's money during the period 1905 to 1972 were at their most extensive for those living at Government Settlements including Carrolup, Moore River and other institutions across the State. After careful consideration, a decision was made to limit ex gratia payments through the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme (the Scheme) to former residents of Native Welfare institutions where the State Government had direct control over people's money and conditions.
(ii) Not applicable.
(c) Yes.
(i) Not applicable.
(ii) Refer to (b)(i).
(d) No.
(i) The scheme will not be reviewed or reopened. Application to the Stolen Wages Reparation Scheme does not affect the legal rights of any applicant that may choose to pursue other courses of action.
(ii) Not applicable.
(e) No.
(i) Refer to (d)(i).
(ii) Not applicable.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.