Stolen wages repayments scheme: A story of scandal and corruption

From the criminalisation of Aboriginal activists to the politics of corruption in Aboriginal Land Councils, Professor Heather Goodall and Heidi Norman from UTS, and Vavaa Mawuli, a senior solicitor with the Indigenous Justice Program, brought Australia’s shady past into the spotlight at a 2009 History Week discussion, Redressing Scandals Past.

But, as the speakers revealed, some scandals are so devastating, they reverberate in the present and future like the Stolen Wages Repayment Scheme – a fight for fairness that continues to this day.

Between 1900 and 1969 almost every aspect of Aboriginal people’s lives were subject to supervision and control by the Government authorities. Under legislation passed by the NSW Government, money was withheld from Aboriginal people, including wages, pensions and child endowment payments and placed into trust funds. Although the money was meant to be paid back, in many cases, it was not.

Outraged Aboriginal campaigners and community figures have fought to bring this issue to light but it wasn’t until 2005 that the Government did anything. Although a five-year scheme to return the money was proposed, the campaign was poorly organised with very little promotion and resources.

“Essentially the problem for claimants is there is a lack of legal representation available,” Vavaa Mawuli says.

“We’re trying to provide people with the most accurate information we can but we just don’t have the capacity to,” she says.

The Government’s inability to communicate with their intended audience has also led to problems, as the letters they sent to claimants, to explain the situation, were ineffective.

“The Government needs to be more aware of the kind of audience who receives these letters. They are elderly and many claimants have low literacy levels and need extra support to understand the kind of language being used,” she says.

Recently the State Government amended the Repayment Scheme so that claimants can now receive a one-off payment of $11,000, regardless of what they are actually owed. While the Government claims this will be advantageous as most claimants are owed less than this amount, there are others who are owed significantly more, up to $40,000 in some cases.

“Many of our clients have difficulty with that amount,” says Ms Mawuli. “They think that after all these years people should be paid what they are owed and that simply won’t happen because of this new process.”

Organisations such as the Public Interest Advocacy Centre and Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation are currently campaigning for a fairer repayment scheme.