Under a photo of a glum-looking Turnbull, Larry Pickering yesterday opined that "this bloke is a joke" who should "piss off and take the treacherous Stick Insect with him.

That says it all, really.

Dear Paul,

It's a pity that Tony Windsor won't be running for
office again but as he explained - due to the
attacks that were made not only on him but his
family the last time, understandably he does not
want to put them through that again. Also as he
explained in his interview on television - he will
be kept busy with investigations into the water
problems and the corruption involved in the region.
He'll probably achieve much more out of Parliament
than in it for the people in the electorate.

As far as the proposal for a Voice to Parliament is concerned
well this emerged from a year long national consultation
process with Indigenous Communities and a summit of 300
leaders at Uluru in May, which emphatically rejected
recognition in the Constitution that was merely symbolic.
They called for an advisory body only. A body without veto
power over legislation. And frankly I can't see the problem
with that.

But as Mr Noel Pearson stated - "There's no reconciliation and
recognition under this Prime Minister."

What with leadership tensions in the government - we are
living in a reform inert era.

Foxy, in my honest opinion, reconciliation has absolutely nothing to do with government. Reconciliation is about respect. Respect for the rights of another person, respect for the beliefs of another person and the respect we should all automatically show towards each other, unless they show themselves undeserving of respect.
Government cannot force respect, it's a personal view that develops over time, fed by frequent contact and familiarity with another person. It should be easily achieved in urban areas because indigenous people lead almost identical lives to everyone else and in many causes are indistinguishable from ordinary Australians.
Only in remote areas do indigenous people have lives that are culturally different to mainstream but even this is no barrier to respect and reconciliation because long term non indigenous residents in remote areas learn to understand these differences and come to accept them, apart from the morally wrong aspects of culture, such as wife beating.
From where I sit, what is preventing reconciliation is the relentless barrage of accusations, claims of victimisation and downright racist lies presented by a small group of bitter activists who seem bent on anything but reconciliation. All they are achieving is resentment and an increasing loss of goodwill from non indigenous Australians and this is what will prevent any constitutional changes ever being accepted.

Dear Big Nana,

Thank You for your opinion, it is as always appreciated.
I admit that I have to do much more research on this
complex issue. The history of our Indigenous people
is something that needs to be taken into account and
their treatment to this very day examined objectively.
What I don't understand is - if all they are asking for
is simply an advisory body only without veto power
over legislation in matters concerning Indigenous issues
then why is the government so reluctant to give it to them?
Apparently, there are so many inequaties that currently
exist towards our Indigenous people in our Constitution -
surely that needs to be fixed. They're not asking for very
much it seems.

Foxy, I don't know of any inequalities for aboriginal people in this country. Certainly there are disadvantages that come from living very remote but those disadvantages equally apply to non indigenous people.
As you know, I live fairly remote and most people here have no interest in rehashing the past, accepting that all cultures have lived through traumatic times, frequently far worse than happened here.
The indigenous community have some major problems to address and frankly, worrying about what happened before thy were born simply detracts from these very real, and very urgent problems.

Dearest Foxy,

Ah, so young, so naive ;). Do you really think that a ginger group outside of the circles of power and responsibility, but with the 'power' to snipe at every piece proposed legislation, won't use that 'power' ? Sometimes I think that the 'powerless' can often be in the cat-bird seat, all 'voice' and no responsibility.

But I had to laugh at Noel's suggestion in today's Australian, that any new 'voice', in his words, "would be an advisory body like the one that exists now, except constitutionally guaranteed in terms of existence and hopefully more effective."

Well, ....... if there is already such a body, why not work to make it more effective ? Why this straining at gnats ?

Meanwhile:

1. Out in remote 'communities', life expectancy is probably half as long as that for other Australians, and for urban working Indigenous people;

and

2. With the Census figures out this week, nearly 49,000 [forty nine thousand, yes, that's right] Indigenous people had tertiary qualifications, diplomas and above, at the end of 2015. Add in last year's and this year's graduates, and you get a total of around 56-57,000. In the cities, about one in four or five Indigenous adults is a graduate. In remote communities, some - and quite decent-sized - have none at all. Doesn't self-determination require a broad range of highly qualified people to work ? Or are 'communities' relying on white fellas to do all that stuff ?

Noel lamented that the recognition agenda would be put back many years, perhaps decades. I suspect that it's dead and buried, permanently - and that this focus on a phantom misses the crucial point that enormous efforts will have to be made to merely keep the Indigenous population together as a coherent, if very loose, united body.

With urban people going off in one direction and getting on with life, and 'community' people, on the whole, content to sit and inexorably move backwards, the unity, such as it is, of the Indigenous population is in dire jeopardy.

Joe