All those voting Yes should adopt an aboriginal child from the bush and give them education and better standards of health care and see if it improves their life. I know of one family that tried this and gave him private education, however in his teenage years he reverted to join his tribe in the bush. Wandering is in their genes, and it is unlikely to change. The mob is the basic family unit, and those that work in Cattle stations support their Mob.

The WA government gave remote aboriginals the opportunity to move into towns so they could receive health, education, and better home services and they did not want to move. Their tribal lands are sacred, and they are attached to them.

I agree with the fact that our Indigenous people need to
take responsibility for their lives. That is what they
want to be given the chance to do. That is what The
Uluru Statement From The Heart is all about.

"In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard."

Indigenous leaders want to take responsibility. No one
knows their communities and the challenges they face
better than they do themselves. It is time the
Australian governments listen and follow their lead and
puts Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people at
the heart of their decision-making.

They can't take responsibility if they are not involved
in the decision-making processes of what affects them.
Therefore voting YES at the referendum, will give me
the responsibility they are asking and which most of us
agree needs to be done.

Please excuse my typos. But I think that the meaning
is clear.

By voting YES at the referendum - it will give THEM
the responsibility they are asking - and most of us
want them to have.

Foxy,
Ignorance on a monumental scale, better stop reading those novels !

Foxy,

Even if everything you say about the aboriginals needing a body to voice their views to government - actually most of it is wishy-washy drek but let's pretend for a moment that it holds water -...even if its true, why does this body need to be in the constitution.

The government can, and indeed will, set up a body legislatively to allow for this supposed voice to be filtered through to the various powers-that-be, constitution or no constitution.

As has been shown more times than needed, the reason is that giving it constitutional backing gives it prestige beyond mere a advisory body and protects it from being disbanded in the event it turns out to be something other than what its boosters assert.

So set it up legislatively and if its a wildly successful as you assert, then come back to the constitutional issue later.