For the last thirty years anyone who wants to visit the Aborigine territory has to ask for permission. This necessity for a formal request, which goes much further than ordinary landownership rights, was introduced by the Land Rights Act in 1976 with which the Canberra government recognised the rights of the Aborigine population to ownership of part of the enormous Australian outback that covers an area five times bigger than Italy. Whoever enters without permission, whether tourist or journalist, and is caught can be brought in front of court. Now, however, this situation could change since John Howard’s government is proposing to abolish the need for permission to visit the Aborigine areas.
 
The proposal. The idea was launched yesterday by the minister for indigenous affairs, Mal Brough, although it’s not clear if the proposal was influenced by the decision taken a few weeks ago by a court to grant the “original ownership” of Perth, a city with 1.5 million inhabitants, to Aborigines. In any case, the minister is convinced that the current system is anachronistic and inefficient even though it was devised to protect Aborigines from the “dangers” of modern society, in the form of crime, drugs and economic exploitation. The real effect, though, seems to have been the opposite since alcoholism, family violence and unemployment are all rife in the Aborigine community. “My fear is that the permission system has crated a closed community, which undermines the capacity of individual people to interact with other people and to participate in the economy”, Brough said. The minister proposed five alternatives to the present system ranging from complete abolition to softening its effects. In this way, he believes, these closed communities will come under external control, with beneficial effects on the social conditions of the original inhabitants of Australia.
 
The reaction of Aborigines. Representatives of the 460,000 or so Aborigines in Australia (5% of the population) were quick to condemn Brough’s proposal.   According to George Newhouse, a lawyer representing the Mulitjulu community, without the permission system Aborigines would be exposed to the indiscreet stares of tourists who would transform their areas into an “Aboriginal Disneyland”. “If a white farmer has a couple of houses on his land where he lets his farm workers sleep, he can stop anyone from setting foot on his land. So why does the minister want to take away the Aborigines’ right to a bit of privacy?”, Newhouse asked. The director of the Central Land Council (CLC) – the Aboriginal area in the Northern Territory – observed that without the permission system “unscrupulous art dealers” could exploit the Aborigines who could also risk seeing their sacred areas violated.
 
Howard’s position. The Prime Minister, John Howard, has also been drawn into the dispute, stating that “The majority of Australians think that the right to move freely around the country, obviously in a legal way that respects private property, should be recognised. Nobody wants to destroy the “Abroiginality” of these people, but if they want to enjoy the benefits of the health system and of the scholastic and professional opportunities available to other Australians then they must participate in the Australian community”. Howard has already had run-ins with the Aborigine community before, refusing to make a symbolic apology for the injustices perpetrated in the past.