E/CN.4/2002/24/Add.1 page 40 83. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission stated that the Commonwealth Government responded positively to only 6 of the 62 recommendations for which it had primary responsibility. It agreed to fund the expansion of family reunion services, a national network of Indigenous mental health services, and record keeping and oral history projects. ATSIC feels that the central recommendations of the report were ignored and the Government rejected the call for a national apology to the stolen generations, stating that it is impossible to evaluate by contemporary standards decisions that were taken in the past. It also questioned the use of the term “stolen generations”, since not an entire generation was affected. The Government further questioned whether the motivation for removal was racist, and stated that the treatment of separated Aboriginal children was essentially lawful and benign in intent and also reflected wider values applying to children of that era.15 The level of government funding ($A 63 million over four years) and the way it has been spent has been criticized by many other Indigenous organizations as well. 84. To help move the debate about providing adequate reparation forward, a reparations tribunal has been proposed, based on the views of Indigenous Australians. It would deliver reparations measures, including compensation, and would be established and funded by the federal and state governments and the churches involved in the removal policies.16 The proposal has been rejected by the federal, state and territory governments.17 And since that time they have also rejected the inquiry’s calls for a national apology and acknowledgement of the history of forcible removals in the name of assimilation. The reasons advanced by the federal Government for rejecting the recommendations concerning compensation are that the practices in question were sanctioned by the law in force at that time, that they were intended to assist the people to whom they were applied, and that the implementation of an equitable and practicable compensation system would create serious difficulties (absence of witnesses and records, in view of the length of time elapsed). The Government has therefore preferred to provide financial support for initiatives facilitating family reunion and psychological support for victims. The Government has also failed to accept the human rights evaluation of past practices by denying its genocidal nature as recognized by the Commission in its report. 85. Some members of the stolen generations have filed cases in federal court. The Gunner-Cubillo case, which was turned down, was a test case for an estimated 700 members of the stolen generations who are prepared to take their claims to court. The Commonwealth first attempted to have the case struck out and then defended it, contending that the children were more rescued than stolen. The judge found the Commonwealth had not breached its “duty of care” with respect to the removal from their families and their subsequent mistreatment in the Northern Territory institutions.18 86. One striking aspect of the policy of separation of Aboriginal children from their families is the unpaid wages of these children. The authorities sent removed children to work on farms or in factories; however, as the children were not trusted to receive their wages, these were to be held in trust for them until they reached the age of 21. ATSIC is currently researching the issue of such trust fund accounts in relation to the State of Queensland. Mr. Melrose Donley, a claimant, has been unsuccessful in getting salary paid since 1935, when he reached 21. He requested the assistance of the United Nations in this matter and reported that moneys held on behalf of members of the stolen generations may total more than $A 20 million.