GreenWolf70
Sunday, November 15, 2009 8:41:00 AM
This is the kind of things that happen because, "they know best." Intellectually this sounded good, common sense said it would be terrible. What do you think?

LONDON – Britain and Australia are saying sorry to thousands of British children who were promised a better life overseas, only to suffer abuse and neglect thousands of miles from home.

The British government said Sunday that Prime Minister Gordon Brown will apologize for 20th-century child migrant programs that saw thousands of poor British children sent to Australia, Canada and other former colonies until the 1960s. Many ended up in institutions or were sent to work as farm laborers.

Brown's office said officials would consult with representatives of the surviving children before making a formal apology next year.

The Australian government says Prime Minister Kevin Rudd will offer his own apology Monday to the child migrants, as well as to the "forgotten Australians," children who suffered in state care during the last century.

Sandra Anker, who was sent to Australia from Britain when she was six, said the British government "have a lot to answer for."

"We've suffered all our lives," she told the BBC. "For the government of England to say sorry to us, it makes it right — even if it's late, it's better than not at all."

The British government has estimated that a total of 150,000 British children may have been shipped abroad under a variety of programs that operated between the early 19th century and 1967.

A 2001 Australian report said that between 6,000 and 30,000 children from Britain and Malta, often taken from unmarried mothers or impoverished families, were sent alone to Australia as migrants during the 20th century. Some of the children were told, wrongly, that they were orphans.

The migration was intended to stop the children being a burden on the British state while supplying the receiving countries with potential workers. A 1998 British parliamentary inquiry noted that "a further motive was racist: the importation of 'good white stock' was seen as a desirable policy objective in the developing British Colonies."

British Children's Secretary Ed Balls said the child migrant policy was "a stain on our society."

"The apology is symbolically very important," he told Sky News television.

"I think it is important that we say to the children who are now adults and older people and to their offspring that this is something that we look back on in shame," he said.

"It would never happen today. But I think it is right that as a society when we look back and see things which we now know were morally wrong, that we are willing to say we're sorry."

But official apologies for historical wrongs have proved controversial.

Former Australian Prime Minister John Howard resisted calls to apologize to institutionalized children and Australian Aborigines, arguing that contemporary Australians should not take responsibility for mistakes made by past generations.

Rudd reversed the policy after he was elected in 2007, apologizing to Aborigines for 200 years of injustice since European settlement.

At a ceremony Monday in Canberra attended by hundreds of former child migrants, Rudd will apologize for his country's role in the child migrants program and say sorry to the 7,000 survivors of the program who still live in Australia.

He also will apologize to the Australian children — more than 500,000, according to a 2004 Australian Senate report — who were placed in foster homes, orphanages and other institutions during the 20th century. Many were emotionally, physically and sexually abused in state care.

HockeyDad
Sunday, November 15, 2009 9:07:00 AM
Which Progressives ran these programs?
big chief
Sunday, November 15, 2009 9:16:00 AM
it was those progressive progressives--they are always goofing around
rfenst
Sunday, November 15, 2009 9:17:00 AM
^

WTH does that have to do with anything?

Chilly9321
Sunday, November 15, 2009 10:06:00 AM
Actually sounds more like the Nativist/Preservationist sentiments that are rejected by the Progressives in regards to immigration policy. Much more of a right-wing policy than a left-wing one.

But hey, don't let reality stop you from posting.

HockeyDad
Sunday, November 15, 2009 10:19:00 AM
I wan also thinking it sounded much more like a conservative policy. The progressives would have just aborted the kids.
rfenst
Sunday, November 15, 2009 11:55:00 AM
4 for 2
HockeyDad
Sunday, November 15, 2009 12:03:00 PM
The title of the thread.
big chief
Sunday, November 15, 2009 1:15:00 PM
#7,

I wasn't worried.

I'm a conservative, but the OP story sounds more like misguided conservative policy than it does liberal policy/mindset. I think we agree on that.

rfenst
Sunday, November 15, 2009 1:24:00 PM
What I find most amusing about this post is that whether or not this was done by liberals or conservatives, they were British liberal or conservatives, making discussion concerning and analogy to, U.S. politics- irrelevant!

(Never mind that I do not recall ever even seeing clear agreement as to what exactly a liberal or conservative means here on CBid)

HockeyDad
Sunday, November 15, 2009 1:28:00 PM
The fear might be that President Obama is going to start shipping white kids out of the country to former US colonies.
big chief
Sunday, November 15, 2009 1:38:00 PM
are you implying that the CBid Source Of All Definitions is not up-to-date??

LOL, the middle-road cons and libs are not far apart, it is the extreme, unbending parts of both parties that paralyze the country.

I suspect that those extremes are funded by elements of this country that need to be stamped out.

I just (primarily) want to see the U.S. live within it's financial means and not reward 'bad behavior'/poor judgement.

big chief
Sunday, November 15, 2009 1:39:00 PM
12 for 10....HD snuck in there...
GreenWolf70
Sunday, November 15, 2009 9:37:00 PM
Actually, the Progressives are in both parties. They are the ones who think the government should make your personal decisions for you as the government is more likely to make the correct decision. They are the ones using "political correctness" to keep you in line. Say "Climate Change is a scam" out loud in a Mall and it will be the Progressives who shhh you and ridicule you.

Even though these were Brit Progressives, it still is relevant because its intentions were in the "best interests" of the state and..."was intended to stop the children being a burden on the British state..." The British government has estimated that a total of 150,000 British children may have been shipped abroad under a variety of programs that operated between the early 19th century and 1967. Many times the children were just taken by the state from poor and single parent families.

Doesn't this sort of sound like the "Death Panels" that the Dems say won't happen (but are already operating in Oregon). Will old people be similarly treated so they don't burden the state?

HockeyDad
Monday, November 16, 2009 3:00:00 AM
...progressives in both parties....death panels....

Can we get this in a cartoon form?

Gene363
Monday, November 16, 2009 3:04:00 AM
re 6

They will always let some slip by, this policy was for the better of society, albeit to the detriment of the individual. Like letting old people die instead of sucking limited resources.

HockeyDad
Monday, November 16, 2009 3:23:00 AM
We should ship old people to the Phillipines. We need more ex-colonies. We really didn't think this whole "empire" thing out well.
DrMaddVibe
Monday, November 16, 2009 4:37:00 AM
You shudda switched to Geico!

Cue the cheesy Rockwell song...

rfenst
Monday, November 16, 2009 4:51:00 AM
I did! It was so easy even a caveman could do it!

(Not Really. I would never by auto insurance from GEICO)

DrMaddVibe
Monday, November 16, 2009 4:53:00 AM
Well, Progressive is out too!