Government agencies and community organisations request
proof of aboriginality when someone is applying for
Indigenous specific services or programs.

There are three criterias that have to be met:

1) Being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander discent.

2) Identifying as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander.

3) Being accepted as such by the community in which you
live or have lived.

This was Warren Mundine in 2017.

Nyunggai Warren Stephen Mundine AO calls for a constitutionally guaranteed Indigenous voice to parliament in the publication of his essay Practical Recognition from the Mobs' Perspective-Enabling our mobs to speak for country.

“The push for recognition needs to capture the hearts and minds of Indigenous Australians. It must not be framed around the way others have looked at us, but how we look at ourselves; it must not be about recognising a race of people, but about recognising the First Nations of our country and the mobs to which each of us still belong.”
http://www.sbs.com.au/language/nitv-radio/en/article/a-guarantee-that-traditional-owners-will-always-speak-for-country-warren-mundine/eqgst9ocd

Then he joined the the Liberal Party in 2019 and look at him now.

The NSW Liberal Party looks to have joined the Victorian Liberals in deciding to remain as a useless opposition for the foreseeable future.

Opposition Leader, Mark Speakman, has announced that his drop-kick party will go against the federal party and support the Voice.

Speakman has been "quickly congratulated" by Comrade Albanese. What an honour!

We should be grateful, I suppose, that unlike New Zealand, for instance, it is the people, not politicians who will decide whether or not their country will be wrecked by racial division.

Dear Josephus,

You have much knowledge, but weighing into the history wars acknowledges the yes argument. Whether you have been an Aussie for five minutes or five generations should make you no more or less equal in a democracy. Arguing for democratic privilege on the basis of your heritage is like a modern day version of the right of kings.

I find it curious that people who might normally be opposed to things like royalty and apartheid are supporting both in the belief that it is the only way to lift up a disadvantaged group of Australians. There is always a plan b.

great way to waste half a billion dollars

Dear Fester,

You wrote:

"I find it curious that people who might normally be opposed to things like royalty and apartheid are supporting both in the belief that it is the only way to lift up a disadvantaged group of Australians."

My God. Really? You are equating an advisory body without any veto powers to royalty or apartheid? Do get a grip mate. This is a completely fanciful comparison and one which continues a theme of debased fearmongering by your side of the debate.

From the Uluru Statement from the Heart

"Proportionally, we are the most incarcerated people on the planet. We are not an innately criminal people. Our children are aliened from their families at unprecedented rates. This cannot be because we have no love for them. And our youth languish in detention in obscene
numbers. They should be our hope for the future.

These dimensions of our crisis tell plainly the structural nature of our problem. This is the torment of our powerlessness.

We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.

We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution."

Why is so frigging hard to accept this proposal for what it is? A factually based simple proposition that isn't taking any skin off your nose at all.