[in Japanese]

View full abstract

The Grant-in-Aid Scheme is administered by the Department of Immigration within its framework of Australian migrant settlement and multicultural policy. The Scheme gives grants to migrant welfare organizations so that they can employ workers to help migrants in their quick and effective settlement into Australian society. Although migrant organizations were not the prime grantees at the beginning of the Scheme in 1968, their role in migrant settlement was recognized after the adoption of Australia's multicultural policy in the 1970's when racial barrier in immigration was abolished. As a result, grants to the migrant welfare organisations increased considerably.Increases in grants to migrant organizations were aimed at promoting migrants' "self-help", one of the principles of multiculturalism in its early stages. A review of the multicultural policy in the mid-1980's revealed a number of problems with the self-help principle. The Scheme was adjusted in line with the revised principles of the multicultural policy itself. The cornerstones of the revised policy, defined in the 1989 National Agenda for a Multicultural Australia, were `cultural identity', 'social justice', and `economic efficiency'. Grant-in-Aid Scheme was re-defined as promoting `social justice' by helping migrants to have equitable access to government services and by giving them a suite of information considered necessary for their new life in Australia. In doing so, the Scheme effectively utilized Australia's extensive network of migrant organizations.The significance of the Scheme is that migrants are not only the object of assistance for settlement,but also their potential role and effectiveness in Australian society is widely recognized. The inclusion of the non-government sector for the welfare of migrants is one of the characteristics of Australian migrant settlement policy that emanated from the ideals and principles of multiculturalism introduced in the 1970's. Australia's experience in migrant settlement can be a useful example in the current era of international movement of human beings.

View full abstract

Learning from an Aboriginal historian's story-telling, this paper aims to explore the reality' of Australian Aboriginal past. Drawing upon field research with the Gurindji people of Daguragu, Northern Territory, the study explores ways of presenting and interpreting Aboriginal historians' teachings. It explore how we can use the Aboriginal method of historical interpretation. The paper is based on story of the origins of Europeans as told to me by Jimmy Mangayarri of the Daguragu.According to the Gurindj i people, the first European was Jacky Pantamarra. He came out from monkey' and bred white people in England. Jacky Pantamarra wrote a book/law for Europeans that contained a lot of `silly ideas'. He claimed Australia as his country and commanded Captain Cook to invade it and kill the Aboriginal people.The question is: how can non-Aboriginal people share the reality of this mysterious story of Jacky Pantamarra with the Gurindji historians? We need to investigate the distance and relation between the Gurindji analysis of Australian history and the academic way of historical interpretation. The paper emphatically rejects the idea that academic historians know the `right history' and that Aboriginal people are telling the wrong history'.Two forms of examination are required: translation and interpretation. Firstly, this study attempts to translate their history' into our history' by discussing the historicity' of the story of Jacky Pantamarra.Evolutionary theory, Dutch explorers, dingo/crocodile hunters as well as racial separatism in cattle stations are considered the `historical background' of Jacky Pantamarra. Secondly, the paper interprets their history' within their own cultural modes of practice. Aboriginal historians' narratives are framed according to the logic of their own ontology and cosmology, or their `time-space concept of Dreaming'.The story of Jacky Pantamarra is based on Aboriginal concepts of time', space' and `morality' Without learning those, academic historians can never understand the Gurindji analysis of Australian colonisation.The lesson is that academic historians should be humble'. The academic historical interpretation cannot monopolise the Australian past. Instead of declaring the authenticity of academia's interpretation of Aboriginal/Australian history, we should start learning alternative ways of historical interpretation from Aboriginal historians. Aboriginal oral history should not be used as a supplementary source for the academic history', but should be understood within their history.

View full abstract