For anyone interested in what the Uluru statement
is really all about the following two links explain:

http://www.1voiceuluru.org/the-statement

And -

http://www.1voiceuluru.org/what-happened-next

SM,

Can you cite any sections in the Constitution which maintain racial discrimination ?

As for recognition: five thousand organisations, Indigenous members in almost all Australian parliaments, a $ 33 billion annual expenditure, land councils, peak bodies, spokespeople in every field, flags, changing of place-names - how are Indigenous people NOT recognised ? I would support a Preamble to the Constitution, but since Indigenous people are Australians like all other Australians, with all the rights of Australians, we've gone about as far as we can go, or need to go, in that direction.

There is enormous work to be done in Indigenous communities to reduce violence (as Big Nana says), child neglect, sexual abuse, drug and grog addiction, misuse of publicly-provided housing and vehicles, etc., and cto generate genuine economic activity. These are tasks which intelligent people in communities, with the policy of self-determination, should be tackling themselves. Indigenous people are NOT children: they can and should resolve their own problems. The funding is surely there to do it.

So the big question is: why aren't they ? How much longer can that question be avoided ? How many more women and children have to die ?

Joe

I oppose aboriginal sovereignty over any part of the continent, so a treaty which presumes the existence separate sovereign states, is something I further oppose. This view extends to the silent majority of Australians, I believe, who will not be swayed.

Reconciliation, to me, is about ensuring aborigines take their place beside every other Australian and, through endeavor, share in what this country has to offer. The aim is to help them to develop that endeavor rather than sink into dependence.

Reconciliation is also about removing from the constitution anything which sets aborigines apart, such as any ability to make laws that apply only to them such as occurred in the NT. It's about removing divisions, not constructing them, no matter what some aborigines might prefer.

I don't care how anyone arrived to citizenship whether by boat, plane or land-bridge, we are one nation AFAIAC, and will stay that way.

I can't believe that we are still arguing about
righting a wrong in this day and age.

We've all
heard the same old arguments - of "give them an
inch and they'll take a mile" or that " we are
all Australians - and what's good for some should
be good for all".

The fact remains it's not good for all.

The Constitution is the founding document of our nation.
And it is the pre-eminent source of law. But it makes no
mention of our Indigenous people.

It was drafted at a time when Australia was considered
a land that belonged to no one before European
settlement and when our Indigenous people were
considered to be a "dying race not worthy of
citizenship or humanity."

Our Indigenous people were excluded from
discussions about the creation of a new nation to be
situated on their ancestral lands and waters.

Yet the nation's founding document does not mention
Australia's Indigenous people.

All that is being asked is that it should.

Two centuries
later we're still arguing about it?

Another important fact is that the Australian Constitution
also permits the Commonwealth Parliament to validly enact
laws that are racially discriminatory.

The Australian
Constitution currently contains no protections against
racial discrimination and the Parliament is capable
of suspending existing statutory protections. The protections
under the Racial Discrimination Act have been removed on
several occasions - each time it has involved Indigenous
issues.

To me it does not appear to be asking for too much to
correct history. The only way we can change the
Constitution is if a majority of voters in a majority of
states vote YES at a Referendum. I'm sure that the
majority of Australians would. The same as they did
for same sex marriage.

cont'd ...

I would like to add that the Australian Constitution
permits the Commonwealth Parliament to validly enact
laws that are racially discriminatory. Section 25
recognises that the states can disqualify people
on the basis of their race from voting.

Section 51 allows laws to be made based upon a
person's race.

We need to ask ourselves whether these provisions reflect
a modern Australia?

The following links are useful:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-33404898

And -

http://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/constitutional-reform-faqs-why-reform-constitution-needed