Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On indulgence, as deputy chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, I agree with our chair, the previous speaker, that the inquiry into language learning in Indigenous communities was a most important inquiry. The Australian public has little understanding of the number, or the complexity, of Indigenous languages spoken at the time of British colonisation in 1788. All tribes and the Torres Straits Islanders were multilingual, typically speaking, as well as their own language, the languages of each of their neighbours. Australian Indigenous languages are recognised as amongst the most complex in the world in their structure and vocabulary.

The first settlement governor, Arthur Phillip, recognised that understanding the natives' languages was essential if the new settlers were to interact peacefully with the Indigenous people. On 30 October 1788, in his regular report to Lord Sydney back in London, Governor Phillip lamented:

I now doubt whether it will be possible to get any of these people to remain with us, in order to get their language, without using force; they see no advantage that can arise from us that may make amends for the loss of the part of the harbour in which we occasionally employ the boats in fishing.

Just two months later, Governor Phillip reported to Lord Sydney:

… one of the natives was seized for the purpose of learning the language and reconciling them to us.

However, by 1838, colonial attitudes about the usefulness of learning the Indigenous languages—and indeed about their complexity—had changed. In a lecture given in Hobart town, Captain Maconachie of the Royal Navy said:

I am … of opinion that, in attempts to civilise and convert native tribes, systematic efforts should be always made to teach them English; and that translations even of the Bible into their own language are of very doubtful utility … The object is to raise the native, not to descend to his level, or apparently even below it, by imperfect, and therefore necessarily in many cases ludicrous, efforts to use his jargon.

This view was formalised in government policy and missionary behaviour throughout the colonies.

Indigenous children in schools were not allowed to speak their Indigenous languages. In particular, children removed from their parents were not allowed to speak their own language. There was a concerted effort for some 150 years in Australia to prevent any language other than English being used in our courts, in our hospitals or in our schools.

This inquiry aimed to identify whether it is important to recognise and help to preserve traditional languages and, if so, to identify exactly what traditional language learning gives to its speakers. We also looked at how the continued preservation and use of one's home language—in this case, traditional Indigenous language—impacts on other learning by the children, in particular their learning of standard Australian English. We found overwhelming evidence that there was an enormous benefit when the people of any human society, including our Indigenous Australians, are able to speak, preserve and indeed restore their native languages. There are enormous benefits for their sense of wellbeing, their self-esteem and to their identity as having a unique and amazing Australian Aboriginal culture.

We found the most extraordinary efforts being made, often in struggling, very poorly resourced communities, to retain their language—to make teaching materials and to have their elders engage with their younger people. Even when there were just a few words remaining, the effort to put those words together to preserve them for future generations was profound. We walked away with an enormous sense of the effort being put into language preservation and recovery by Indigenous Australians. We commend them for that. We also found that there is a significant educational advantage when any child coming to school with a first language other than English is taught in that first language. There was so much evidence that Australian teachers are not equipped to teach multilingually in any language other than English, much less complex Indigenous Australian languages. We also took much evidence about the importance of the contact languages—typically called Kriol, but there are different names for different creoles in different parts of Australia—and we acknowledge in our report the importance of also teaching in Kriol if that is the home language of the child when they first engage with the formal education system. We found that NAPLAN was useless when it came to assessing young Indigenous children's progress in literacy and numeracy when they had a home language other than English and had not been taught bilingually. We also saw interpreting in Australia as not appropriately regulated or accredited and we recommended that that be addressed. (Time expired)

See this speech in context