John Stone, you rock! Never thought I'd say that but I cannot find one statement in this piece that does not ring true. My bullsxxt detector has been off the Richter scale since Julia and Tony piously announced this sideshow. Empty symbolism like this makes me weep for the future of indigenous Australians - always being offered the glass beads, never a seat at the table. Let's focus on jobs, education and integration and really "close the gap". Money wasted on this pointless exercise could actually build a school room, employ people, create some wealth and self-sufficiency within a community - actually change lives for the better, build a bit of pride. Time we grew up and stopped tinkering with the ephemera and focused on the core first. Get that right then we can all waste our days splitting hairs.

John Stone, how did you vote in the 1967 Aboriginal recognition Referendum? By the tone of your dismissive article, could it have been a 'No'?

Your guess at the next referendum outcome is probably equally wide of the mark.
In 1967, 90.77% of Australians voted yes on the question : 'Do you approve the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled 'An Act to alter the Constitution so as to omit certain words relating to the people of the Aboriginal race in any state so that Aboriginals are to be counted in reckoning the population?'

Most people thought they were voting for a change, for the better, not only for incusion in the census, but by implication, also amending the constitution to ensure that no such blatently racist laws are ever directed against indiginous Australians ever again. Sadly that proved not to be the case, in a subsequent High Court Case. The NT intervention fiasco a case in point.

So it’s up to us now to fix the remaining gaps, by referendum:
* Declaring that laws may only benefit Aboriginal and Torres Strait Australians, and
* Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait custodianship of the land and indigenous law. A treaty under this clause would put us in league with other treaty countries like New Zealand and Canada.

For some National Party members this may all sound like dangerous dreaming, but most decent Australians do want some genuine reconcilliation that goes well beyond mere symbollism in the pre-amble. If the 1967 vote is any guide, real change will deliver powerful reconcilliation, beating empty platitudes at the ballot box every time. It maybe new for us, but Britain in most other Commonwealth Countries, found that superimposing British law on native law made governance possible, until the yearning of replublicanism became too irresistable for some. We're merely taking a leaf from their history books.

For 200 years we have promoted, heavily financed and legislated to maintain the differences between the indigenous peoples and everyone else in this land, to the detriment of all.
The differences continued and widened, year after year.

Such is the entrenched thinking now. Each day we show by paternalistic efforts that there are differences and then do even more to ensure that the situation stays that way.
Hence the referendum. An ill-informed action by the Brown/Gillard consortium, not required in any way.

We have fulfilled our obligations to the original inhabitants in many other ways as well, not the least of which has been through being fair-minded, decent living, taxpaying Australians for all those years, years in which the same indigenous people became a full time, government sponsored and costly welfare group and who now sadly accept this as their right, their way of life. Normal practice!

The fault in creating this aboriginal welfare state belongs to past governments of this country, yes, but even allowing for a history of bad policies, what the majority of ordinary people have achieved in 200 years, those who migrated here from countries all around the globe, should mean clearly that we do not carry any debt or obligation to anyone, anywhere, particularly indigenous people. We also died by the thousands in World Wars for this country, everyone in this country, that is.

That also means we do not need to mention it in our Parliament, ever, entrenching the "differences" between us all, because wherever people came from, they are now Australians.

We do not need to have another referendum which has an obvious political objective, designed by our feckless Prime Minister to boost her insatiable need for power by equalling or surpassing the “Sorry” statements by the previous dispossessed incumbent, thereby pandering to the Greens and their often extreme policies.

A distinctly jaundiced referendum, doomed to failure. Such action is not needed, but good policies are if only to force aborigines to become part of the greater Australia, all one people, not to make them forever a separate segment, as they are now.

John Stone
With all due respect, a question. Have you actually read the constitution? Do you know what purpose it serves?

NaomiMelb, I would have thought the short answer is Yes. Check the man's CV. What is your point? I have read it too - several times, been tested on my understanding of it too. It serves a variety of purposes. Revising the preamble to make some sort of fawning apology to a sub-set of the population is just pointless symbolism compared to the task of resolving economic inequality - something that takes more than just an avid interest in the Constitution and how best to tweak its preamble. This is nothing more than a cynical distraction from the real task of encouraging economic independence for all Australians. The fact it gains any traction at all is just a sad reflection of what a shallow bunch we have become.

the preamble...is an act
it is not part of the constitution

the constitution is part of the act...voted on in briton
and then qualified..by the some voters.in australia

to add in mention of the first people..is as simple as validating a new act..by both houses...and leaving the body of the constitution as ratiefied previously...[with its current preamble]..adding only the new preamble...before it

it will then be known as
the constitutional ratification act...of 2011

that begins..as follows

the first people of these lands...unnamed by its first people
yet variously called...'great south land'...'Van Die Mens land'..[of the peoples land]...and as nieuwe holland..[new netherlands]..terra nulious..australus...and in time..australia

being bounded by sea...who have overcome systematic poisening and active genocide and many other autocities done by good people..for wrong reason..yet hold hope of betternment for all...

being as one people..as enjoined trustes;..as tennents in common...as each individually..being a part of the land..[these lands]..as well as the life essence residing.surving..thriving upon it

like our hand..is a part of our body..we thus join the goodwill..of our others..and do join with the people origonal..and un-origonal..to ratify certainty...for our future unborn...and peace for our honoured ancestors

seeing the values of good will to all...and the cetainty of stable representative governance equally due..as serving us all..by love of gods creation..and care..dutry due to the land...

embodying..the dust of our common ancestors...

do hereby declare our concensual combined will
to unite in a concensus of goodwill and reason..in gods ever living moment...gods live time..[now]..that recognises the past as being past...and the future...before us

that certainty..be accorded to us all...we support and regonise the reasoning...and wisdom..of the following

[add in preamble...and PRESENT constitution
get both houses to vote..[pass it]...then offer its sence to the first people..to individually*...ratify it

then reform the common wealth into 550 states..
chapter vi..[see 121]..

each with a male and femail govenor[general]
who is both ombudsman...and highest appeal level..of law...
that jointly [via mens/womens circles]..ratifies..and oversees... each..'states'..governance