Jump to content

Talk:First Nations Australian traditional custodianship

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

recognition in the Constitution preamble

[edit]

I think this current sentence needs expansion:

In 2017, the Referendum Council received several submissions expressing a desire to have First Nations Australians recognised as traditional custodians or guardians in the preamble of the Constitution of Australia.[1]

  1. ^ Referendum Council (30 June 2017). "Final Report of the Referendum Council" (PDF). Uluru Statement from the Heart.

as it is misleading and/or missing important information:

  • the 1999 Australian republic referendum § Preamble question
  • The Referendum Council received submissions in 2017 for recognition in the preamble, but according to the cited reference (with my emphasis here) the leaders submitted a statement ... saying that a ‘minimalist’ approach—one that provided symbolic recognition in a constitutional preamble ... —would not be acceptable to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
  • The 2023 Australian Indigenous Voice referendum

Mitch Ames (talk) 12:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Mitch and thanks for your edits on this article, really appreciate it!! I agree that sentence is over-simplifying things. I was focusing more on mentions of the phrase "custodian" and similar terms rather than the broader historical-political context, as in pages 154-56 of that report on "A STATEMENT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FIRST PEOPLES OF AUSTRALIA" under Appendix K: URBIS Analysis of Submissions Received. Would the following edit address this?:
In 2017, the Referendum Council received several submissions expressing a desire to have First Nations Australians recognised as traditional custodians or guardians in the preamble of the Constitution of Australia, although the Council's final report recommended prioritising a Voice to Parliament and Makarrata Commission rather than symbolic recognition of this status.[1]
  1. ^ Referendum Council (30 June 2017). "Final Report of the Referendum Council" (PDF). Uluru Statement from the Heart.
Neegzistuoja (talk) 21:08, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your new sentence is good; it covers the last two of my bullet points - but not the first. Although not using the words "custodian" or "guardian", the 1999 proposal did explicitly acknowledge the first peoples in the preamble, so I think it rates a mention here, even if it's only a footnote, eg:

In 2017, the Referendum Council received several submissions expressing a desire to have First Nations Australians recognised as traditional custodians or guardians in the preamble of the Constitution of Australia,[a] although the Council's final report recommended prioritising a Voice to Parliament and Makarrata Commission rather than symbolic recognition of this status.[2]

  1. ^ A referendum in 1999 had failed to add a preamble to the Constitution that included "honouring Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, the nation's first people, for their deep kinship with their lands and for their ancient and continuing cultures which enrich the life of our country".[1]
  1. ^ The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia (1999). "Schedule—Preamble to the Constitution" (PDF). Parliament of Australia.
  2. ^ Referendum Council (30 June 2017). "Final Report of the Referendum Council" (PDF). Uluru Statement from the Heart.
Mitch Ames (talk) 05:36, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:First_Nations_Australian_traditional_custodianship&oldid=1238144613"