SORRY-A 5 letter word thats made history

[Liverpool]

the money the money the money!
Don't u ever open up yr mind to anything else, livers?

Not when the Aborigines say this not 5 minutes after 'sorry' was muttered:


Aboriginal leader Patrick Dodson has urged the government to follow today's apology with compensation for the stolen generation

http://news.smh.com.au/sorry-compo-wont-cripple-nation-dodson/20080213-1ryn.html


AN indigenous lobby group believes the wording of federal parliament's apology to the stolen generations leaves the door open for compensation.
Michael Mansell, a spokesman for the National Aboriginal Alliance, said his group believed the words used by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in the text revealed to parliament late this afternoon may indicate that he is open to the possibility of compensation but does not want to spell it out yet.
"The fact that the prime minister put in the text that Australia must right the wrongs of the past indicates that action will be taken,'' Mr Mansell told reporters.
"The fact that these words were used in the text does indicate that the door is open for negotiations and we think there is a real possibility that compensation could come after negotiations, during the passage of this year.''

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23202983-5007133,00.html

 

[Six Pack]

If it's due and deserved and the individual cases can be proven, I don't have a problem with compensation.

 

[Liverpool]

Don't answer a question with a question.

I'll answer your question simply that I do not know the legislation enough to say an apology can or cannot be used.
However, a "confession" seems to be good enough and is sorry a confession of guilt and blame?

Now your turn (or SixPack):

Well, I'll ask you the same question I have asked Sixpack.
If what you say is true, why did Rudd delay this apology until the lawyers looked over it?
If a simple apology cannot be used to grab a few $$$, then why are people like Mansell and other Aborigines (such as Dodson) already looking for loopholes to go for the cash?

 

[t-rob]

Why not repeat the apology outside the confines of parliamentary privilege in front of the indigenous people?

 

[Liverpool]

If it's due and deserved and the individual cases can be proven, I don't have a problem with compensation.

If the individual cases hinged on this apology, I certainly would have a problem with it.....as the evidence in the past hasn't been good enough...so it would be disappointing that a phoney apology left the door open, as mansell said, to compensation.....undeserved compensation.

 

[mld]

Why not repeat the apology outside the confines of parliamentary privilege in front of the indigenous people?

Because it was a bi-partisan parliamentary apology, not an individual apology.

 

[mld]

If the individual cases hinged on this apology, I certainly would have a problem with it.....as the evidence in the past hasn't been good enough...so it would be disappointing that a phoney apology left the door open, as mansell said, to compensation.....undeserved compensation.

What is the legal mechanism in which an apology could be substituted for a lack of evidence?

 

[Six Pack]

Livers, i am pretty sure that saying sorry doesnt legally transfer into a guilty plea in a court of law. You can check this with one of the pre legal eagles if u like.

Secondly, i am sure that every act or bill in parliament gets looked over by legal teams, so whats the big deal about that?

And thirdly, if compensation is deserved and cases are proven, i have no problem with compo.

My main issue is that all this talk about the money detracts from the importance of what happened today.

 

[Liverpool]

Why not repeat the apology outside the confines of parliamentary privilege in front of the indigenous people?

Moe than likely that Rudd wanted to say 'sorry' for his own reputation, as that is one of the many promises he said during he election campaign.
He also wanted to try and show people that is was not "me too".

But he also isn't totally dumb....he has had lawyers look over the apology and try to word it so it is watertight for legal action to be taken against it.
He also wanted to say it in Parliament and in the building...maybe it was another legal tactic? :don't know

Rudd is trying to appease both sides....he wants to keep the lefties who voted him in happy with this apology and all the Aboriginal "love in" that we have endured today....but he also doesn't want to distance himself from the everyday Australian who has not supported this apology for a long time now. Massive compo payouts will turn this 'everyday Australian' group totally against him.

he has taken a gamble....and today everyone can cry and laugh and celebrate....but you just wait until the attention recedes and the likes of Mansell, O'Donohue, and Dodson start getting their teeth stuck in for the $$$.

If people think 'sorry' was today and thats it are sorely mistaken...

 

[Liverpool]

Livers, i am pretty sure that saying sorry doesnt legally transfer into a guilty plea in a court of law. You can check this with one of the pre legal eagles if u like.
Secondly, i am sure that every act or bill in parliament gets looked over by legal teams, so whats the big deal about that?
And thirdly, if compensation is deserved and cases are proven, i have no problem with compo.
My main issue is that all this talk about the money detracts from the importance of what happened today.

All fine and dandy Sixpack....but while you say talking money detracts from the day, what do you think of the Aborigines who TODAY are already threatening legal action for a push at compo?
If Aborigines are talking about money, then why can't people like me talk about it?

 

[checkside]

I was watching it from Fed Square today. Good to see so many people out there. Well done to Rudd for doing something Howard never had the balls to do.

 

[Rosy]

You have an interesting way with words checkers. Extremely well said. :rofl

 

[Hayfever]

Moe than likely that Rudd wanted to say 'sorry' for his own reputation, as that is one of the many promises he said during he election campaign.
He also wanted to try and show people that is was not "me too".

But he also isn't totally dumb....he has had lawyers look over the apology and try to word it so it is watertight for legal action to be taken against it.
He also wanted to say it in Parliament and in the building...maybe it was another legal tactic? :don't know

Rudd is trying to appease both sides....he wants to keep the lefties who voted him in happy with this apology and all the Aboriginal "love in" that we have endured today....but he also doesn't want to distance himself from the everyday Australian who has not supported this apology for a long time now. Massive compo payouts will turn this 'everyday Australian' group totally against him.

he has taken a gamble....and today everyone can cry and laugh and celebrate....but you just wait until the attention recedes and the likes of Mansell, O'Donohue, and Dodson start getting their teeth stuck in for the $$$.

If people think 'sorry' was today and thats it are sorely mistaken...

What's your definition of an 'everyday Australian' ?

 

[mld]

Given the apology was supported by both side of parliament, that makes the people opposed an extremely small minority, though dare I suggest, a vocal minority.

 

[Willo]

All fine and dandy Sixpack....but while you say talking money detracts from the day, what do you think of the Aborigines who TODAY are already threatening legal action for a push at compo?
If Aborigines are talking about money, then why can't people like me talk about it?

People must be either naive or accepting if they believe saying "sorry" won't eventuate in massive compensation claims and lawsuits

 

[mld]

People must be either naive or accepting if they believe saying "sorry" won't eventuate in massive compensation claims and lawsuits

I ask again - outline either the legislation or legal precedent that will result in this happening.

 

[Six Pack]

Given the apology was supported by both side of parliament, that makes the people opposed an extremely small minority, though dare I suggest, a vocal minority.

LMAO @ Livers now being in one of those dreadful minorities! :hihi

 

[Willo]

I ask again - outline either the legislation or legal precedent that will result in this happening.

I don't have to outline anything mate. If you read the earlier post as quoted from the Sunday Mail, the reason Rudd was apologizing under parliamentary privilege was that the Feds wouldn't be held accountable, it would fall back on the states.
This is already happening. I don't have any problem with people who have a legitimate and provable case. Just the "me too" factor of people jumping on this as a way to making a quick buck.

 

[Disco08]

You don't think there'd be a fairly rigorous approval process if a compensation fund is established?

 

[mld]

I don't have to outline anything mate. If you read the earlier post as quoted from the Sunday Mail, the reason Rudd was apologizing under parliamentary privilege was that the Feds wouldn't be held accountable, it would fall back on the states.

The states have already apologised years ago, so I fail to see how anything has changed.

This is already happening. I don't have any problem with people who have a legitimate and provable case. Just the "me too" factor of people jumping on this as a way to making a quick buck.

So in other words the apology legally makes no difference? I'm pressing this point, because to me it seems the naive people are those who have fallen for the compensation strawman.