Australians have resoundingly rejected a proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in its constitution and establish a body to advise parliament on Indigenous issues.

Saturday’s voice to parliament referendum failed, with the defeat clear shortly after polls closed.

  • canuckkat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m not sure why you’re confused because the first sentence of the article literally says:

    Australians have resoundingly rejected a proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in the country’s constitution and establish a body to advise parliament on Indigenous issues.

    Which sums up why they were trying to make this happen, which also sounds like they don’t have an official group of Indigenous peoples advising the government on anything that is an Indigenous issue, which is super bad.

    • Gerula@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Thank you for your reply. It’s simple:

      • if they have Australian citizenship (I think in 67 was a push for this) then they already have all the Constitutional rights and obligations like every other Australian citizen. Why are these extra steps necessary?

      • if they don’t: what is their current legal status? Why not just give them citizenship and thus having the right of representation in the Parliament and so forth?