You aren't wrong, but they didn't think like that at the time. The racism was off the charts by today's standards. It's ghastly to look back on and the psychological damage this policy did is immeasurable and ongoing. But beyond all that, they truly were attempting to improve the lives of "the savages" as they saw it.
"The Board may assume full control and custody of the child of any aborigine, if after due inquiry it is satisfied that such a course is in the interest of the moral and physical welfare of such child. The Board may thereupon remove such child to such control and care as it thinks best."
Still on about that whole "age of entitlement" thing?
Didn't Mr Dutton make this same mistake? Promise to cut stuff but not name what he'd cut because he knew it'd be unpopular? It appears that Mr Dutton's deputy thought this was a good plan. It isn't. Tell us specifically what you want to cut. Particularly if you want more money to go to Defence. Tell us explicitly what you'd sacrifice to make that happen.
The overall vibe of her speech is that government subsidies are meant to be targeted and not applicable to all Australians. Which is a weird take for me. If you want us all to pay taxes, then we should all be entitled to the benefits we qualify for. Otherwise, what am I paying taxes for? I particularly liked the quote that "We are essentially running a peacetime economy on emergency fiscal settings. That is obviously not sustainable." I can't think of a better way to tell the electorate that you are out of touch with this cost of living crisis than this quote. You may not be feeling this fiscal emergency, but most Australians certainly are.