Now the PM has used the Queen's Platinum Jubilee to declare Australia's relationship with Britain is one of "equals" rather than "parent and upstart", and has committed himself to advancing reconciliation with First Nations peoples, there is a clear path to take.
Our constitution remains an act of the British Parliament made when we upstarts denied Aboriginal people any rights at all. No wonder the Aboriginal Embassy people want no part of it. Britain was never their "parent". The more than 250 First Nations were never "upstarts" like the rest of us colonials.
The only practical way to put the Uluru Statement from the Heart into Australia's constitution is to respectfully repeal the old constitution, by referendum of all Australians, who now of course include all First Nations people and write our own.
We can choose to remain members of the Commonwealth of Nations if we wish, with an Australian head of state to replace the Queen and her representative, the Governor-General, with similar "above politics" responsibilities.
We can include a preamble with a proper reference to the whole of this country's history.
The constitution will make it clear that our First Nations people have equal standing with those who have invaded their lands since 1788, recognising the special status of their many tens of thousands of years of ownership by establishing a First Nations' Voice to Parliament and a Makarrata as a basic structure of government.
I would hope that by convention the head of government would not be "king", "queen" or "president" but would be a respected First Nations elder formally representing the continuing ownership of the whole country as one nation since ancient times.
Despite plenty of fine journalism in the lead up to the election, your editorial on May 31 entitled "The battle for Australia 2025 has begun" was a disappointment. Whilst no one would deny the interest we have as Mr Dutton tries to reinvent himself, the use of words like "battle", "head kicking" and "clout" are not in the refreshing spirit of the new, less conflict-ridden, more collaborative approach to parliament of which our new Prime Minister speaks.
Millions of us have voted for this more civilised interaction within our new government and we will be very disappointed to see it degenerating into the shouting, name-calling and discourteous rabble that we have suffered in the past.
We will be grateful if journalists do not provoke parties or elected individuals to focus so wholeheartedly on the next election as anticipated in your editorial.
We want them to show us how politicians with diverse opinions can converse and cooperate to find solutions to the many challenges which face us now, without the distraction of a self-centred concern about winning the next election.
Like a lot of my fellow citizens, I am very well aware of decisions I made on May 21.
The primary one of which (whether we agree with it or not) was to change the federal government. For a little over a fortnight now, we've been deluged with the goings on in the (new) opposition parties, and not much else.
In the middle of this "hoo-ha", the nation was advised to expect a monumental increase in electricity prices. Outcome - absolutely nothing heard at all from our (newly sworn in) Finance Minister as to what is going to be done by our elected government in providing the affordable delivery of a most staple utility to its constituent community.
To avoid rambling on ad nauseam, the Finance Minister and her colleagues might just like to recall that they have about 1000 sleeps to go before they face "the music" (we electors) again.
A markedly unsatisfactory start to their term in office.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong's public endorsement of the Prime Minister's opposition to the Americans' continuing prosecution of Julian Assange is to be welcomed. Let us hope that Washington will act promptly to lance this long-running sore.
When she returns from her current efforts to deal with Pacific family problems, Minister Wong would be well advised to apply her energies to doing something about her dysfunctional department which is currently led by Kathryn Campbell of "robodebt" infamy.
Steve Evans's moan about masks made me wonder about how we react to other dangers. ("I know the science, but I am sick of wearing masks", canberratimes.com.au, June 3)
We regularly hear about finest hours such as the Blitz; so much so that you might think we'd be better off bringing it back. But I wonder how many Londoners decided during an air raid that they'd had enough and they were just going to get back to normal?
How many primitive humans decided in the depths of winter with wolves and tigers about that they were sick of being cooped up in a small, smoky lodge and that they were going to stretch their legs? I think they stayed inside and invented culture instead.
As someone who loves several immunocompromised people, I was pleasantly surprised by Steve Evans' column about masks after my initial apprehension ("I know the science, but I am sick of wearing masks", canberratimes.com.au, June 3). I'm very happy to see this kind of blend of personal opinion and common sense.
Evans notes that while masks are a bother (it's true), wearing one when you have respiratory symptoms or in an enclosed space like an airplane (as many Asian countries have been doing for decades now to their benefit, I would note) makes sense.
In this third quarter of the pandemic I increasingly see opinions to the effect that "disabled, elderly and immunocompromised people want to take away our freedoms and never let us have fun again".
No, not at all. But a bit of common sense and appropriate care for others is appreciated so we can all be in the world together however. Thank you for the balance Steve.
Leslie Barnard (Letters, May 31), asks how an Albanese government can reduce green house gases if Australia's contribution is just 1.12 per cent of the global total.
The answer, Leslie, is related to those cow farts you mention.
If you are in a room with another 99 people, it doesn't matter how softly you fart; your stink will be noticed, and, really, do you want others to follow your example?
Before the election we had a shadow minister for road safety, senator Glenn Sterle, but no mention in Monday's new ministry announcement.
The joint parliamentary select committee in March this year, co-chaired by both major parties, made recommendation one of 61; "The committee recommends that a cabinet minister for road safety be appointed. A key responsibility of the minister should be reporting to the Parliament on an annual basis in relation to the performance indicators in the National Road Safety Strategy 2021-2030 (NRSS 2021-30) and on progress in relation to the goals and priority actions in the NRSS 2021-30 and associated Action Plans."
Every year there are 1200 deaths and 40,000 serious injuries. Has this been overlooked or is it just too hard?
So the Nationals ask us to entertain the idea of building a nuclear energy industry in Australia. The risks are too high. Look at the disasters that have occurred around the world. USA, Ukraine, Japan for example.
Radioactive pollution has already spread all around the world and undoubtedly has, is and will continue to kill many people for probably longer than humans will survive.
The Nationals like coal and other fossil fuels too. They have possibly become irreversibly irrelevant to the vast majority of Australians.
Getting rid of unrepresentative people such as Barnaby, Matt and others might help. Your choice Nationals.
The gas price shock was always a possibility. Why is it that domestic and foreign owned companies were not pulled into line by the self proclaimed "best economic managers" (the previous LNP govt)?
Could it be that having mining executives involved in framing government legislation in this provided undue protection to the companies and their profits that the welfare of Australian businesses and people came off second best?
Former chief scientist Alan Finkel says the world is "entering the electric age" and we need to "deploy renewable energy as quickly as possible".
However the natural environment and agricultural vistas must also be considered.
Moorabool Shire Council wants transmission lines to go underground. Germany legislated this in 2015. Australia should too.
Maybe your photographer James Croucher (About Town, May 30) stopped only at the Croatian club in Turner, but there was much more going on at its neighbours.
The Polish White Eagle Club and Alliance Francaise joined the Croatians in hosting a massively successful multicultural festival last Sunday.
Much money was raised for the work of Medecins sans Frontieres in Ukraine.
When David Littleproud fronted the media after his election to lead the Nationals he was flanked by two "strong and powerful" women (to use his words): newly elected party deputy leader senator Perin Davey and senator Bridget McKenzie who is apparently continuing as party Senate leader.
Why isn't Perin Davey, a senator, as party deputy leader, not also party Senate leader?
Another somber official announcement that another elderly Canberran has died "with COVID-19". This is just government sophistry. Nobody dies "with a traffic accident". The question is whether or not that person would have died had they not contracted COVID-19.
Felicity Chivas (Letters, May 26) laments the extinction of certain grammatically correct words in "modern" Australian grammar, in particular the replacement of "who" or "whom" with "that".
I have noticed a trend to omit "that" wherever possible, including after a transitive verb such as "claim" or "allege". This can make the whole phrase, or even the paragraph ambiguous or meaningless.
Adopting the term chosen by the recent prime minister to refer to his behaviour (bulldozer) as a nickname for him is a mistake ("Strong members bookend Labor's team", editorial, June 2).
It gives an undeserved polish to his record. "Asleep at the wheel" would be more apt.
In public life, was there ever a leader who, on their appointment, was not humble - or a leader who, at their demise, was not proud of their achievements?
Bill Bush (Letters, June 2) is right in saying that drugs are a health issue.
In the early 1970s a very senior US official of the then Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) told an Australian official in Singapore "we are interdicting approximately 10 per cent of the world's illicit drug trade and in 50 years time we will still be interdicting approximately ten per cent of the world's illicit drug trade".
Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.