It says something about our society that there are regular demands for apologies for historic wrongs. The latest involves children sent to Australia and Canada during the 20th Century.
Gordon Brown is planning to apologise for the UK’s role in sending thousands of its children to former colonies in the 20th century, the BBC has learned.
Under the Child Migrants Programme – which ended just 40 years ago – poor children were sent to a “better life” in Australia, Canada and elsewhere.
But many were abused and ended up in institutions or as labourers on farms.
The move comes as Australia’s Prime Minister prepares to apologise for the mistreatment of the children.
Here we go again. We’ve already had this over the slavery issue and now another group wants a meaningless apology. This practise ended forty years ago. How old was Gordon Brown then? Was he in government? The answers being that he was a teenager when this finished and he was not in government. Therefore, he has no right to apologise and neither has Kevin Rudd as neither of them was involved in the offence. An apology, to mean anything at all, must be proffered by the person or people who caused the original harm. You cannot apologise by proxy. To do so is empty gesturing. But, then, gesture politics is in vogue at the moment.
In a letter to the chairman of the Health Select Committee this weekend, Gordon Brown said “the time is now right” for the UK government to apologise for the actions of previous governments.
No. You do not have the right to apologise for the actions of previous governments. Only they have that right. There is something deeply disturbing about this hair-shirt-wearing, self-flagellating desire to proffer sanctimonious apologies for the sins of previous generations. Grow up and grow a spine.
What happened to these children was appalling, but it is the fault of neither Gordon Brown nor Kevin Rudd and they have no right to apologise for it and nor should they. As for those who demand one, well, it’s a bit late for that. The time to do so was when the perpetrators were around to take responsibility. Stop wallowing in a past that cannot be changed and harbouring resentment over the actions of people who are either dead or in their dotage and move on.
“gesture politics is in vogue at the moment”
Kevin Rudd is a world champion at gesture politics. As commentator Thatmosis says here:
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/the-mounting-evidence-of-rudds-style-over-substance/
“From day 1 I knew that if you took the spin out of Krudd you could ship him overseas in a flatpack which would save the Australian tax payer millions of dollars.He is great on stating the bleeding obvious but small on actually doing anything except buckle at the knees when things get tough,aka the asylum seekers.”
I always thought that Blair was the pinnacle of a self-serving, mendacious, incompetent, arrogant, odious, complete and utter shit of a prime minister, but Rudd is running him down hard and may yet overtake him, possibly at Copenhagen where he is minded to sell Australians down the Swanee to flatter his massive ego and advance his ambition to be UN Secretary-General.
Yet, as with Blair, the media still love him and the voters may well return him at the next election, partly due to the fact that the leader of the opposition is a completely useless twat.
“But, then, gesture politics is in vogue at the moment.”
Well, of course. It’s easy, isn’t it?
Agreed.
But maybe they could track down a couple of elderly civil servants who actually were involved (if it ended only forty years ago) and make them apologise?
.-= My last blog ..Thought for the day =-.
Mark, that depends on how senior they were. An apology from a minor foot-soldier is pretty meaningless.
In this case I think an apology is warranted if only because the victims (some of them at least) are still alive.
The time was actually right some 40 years ago when it was stopped, but as ever it was cover it over and forget time.
That the British government should apologise is a given, that it’s Jonah is unfortunate because an apology is also due from Blair, Major and Thatcher. I’d include Heath Callahan and Wilson too but they’re dead.
As for other apologia, it’s only relevant if the victims are alive, I don’t think for instance we should apologise for slavery.
According to the Channel 4 news, the worst abuses took place in Roman Catholic institutions run by the Christian Brothers.
Perhaps they should apologize – and pay restitution?
QM, the victims may still be alive but all of the PMs who oversaw the policy are long dead. The migrations ceased the year Heath became PM. No prime minister since than has any responsibility for this practice and therefore cannot apologise and nor should they. Any apology from someone not directly responsible for the hurt is meaningless gesturing. No one can apologise for something someone else did – not least when some of the incidents concerned happened before the apologist was born.
I saw an interview with one woman today who was seeking practical help (along with the apology). Now that I can go along with. Doing whatever is possible to help people trace family members or relocating back to the UK is something that government can do and is right and proper.
Well, there’s a surprise…
Yes, but you have to hand it to Rudd and Brown. There cannot be very many opportunities for this level of grandstanding. They’ve done quite well to find this one.