(1) Where does it refer to "disadvantaged" ATSI peoples in the proposed Amendment?
(2) Where does it say it's just an advisory body?
Because, in spite of all the banging-on by the 'Yes' camp, if it had been worded as such, there would be nowhere near the level of scepticism in the electorate at this stage of the proceedings.
They've had a good half decade to get this thing right. All the professors, all the motivated activists, all the signatories to the Uluru Statement, all the well-meaning advocates for change, all the lawyers, all the politicians across most of the political spectrum (including the Federal Government and strong personal mandate of the Prime Minister himself), all the massive financial and moral support from across our various institutions....yet no-one's REALLY listened to the "Voices" that eventually matter most: the people that vote.
And if they haven't got it right after all this, what chance have they of getting the Voice right in practice?
