(more of the article at the link - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p ... 360150.stm)The story of the British child migrants sent to Australia has been described as a history of lies, deceit, cruelty and official disinterest and neglect.
Before being shipped out to Britain's distant dominion, many of the children were told their parents were dead, and that a more abundant life awaited them in Australia.
Most were deported without the consent of their parents, and commonly, mothers and fathers were led to believe that their children had been adopted somewhere in Britain.
On arrival in Australia, the policy was to separate brothers and sisters.
And many of the young children ended up in what felt like labour camps, where they were physically, psychologically and often sexually abused.
'Awful experience'
In testimony before a British parliamentary committee in the late 1990s, one boy spoke of the criminal abuse he was subjected at the hands of Catholic priests at Tardun in Western Australia.
A number of Christian brothers competed between themselves to see who could rape him 100 times first, the boy said.
Sandra Anker was sent out to Australia when she was six years old
They liked his blue eyes, so he repeatedly beat himself in the hope they would change colour.
There are calls for the current British government to also make a public apology to those involved - something which they've resisted doing so far.
So my question is, what difference does 'sorry' make? And - especially in cases where children have been ripped forever away from their families and mother's and father's have been ripped apart forever from their children - is it ever enough?
Regards,
Ann
