After re-reading your comment here, your suggesting putting the $364.6 million into indigenous issues directly. Thats a fair discussion to have for budgetary matters. Directing the funding to where it may have the largest impact is an important consideration.

I think this makes the argument for holding a referendum stronger. There are a number of effects this referendum has had:

• education of constitutional law
• normalisation of holding this thing called a referendum (something younger generations had never done)
• a year of aboriginal issues being central to national debate. No matter how toxic it was, everybody will be a lot more familiar with the challenges that group face.
• the Aboriginal community now know beyond any doubt that a 1/3 of Australia have an understanding and want to help in a truly meaningful way. That shouldn’t be dismissed lightly.
• politicians understand the electorate on this single issue more clearly. A general election could never deliver this. Take Bill Shortens 2019 failure at election as an example, they still don’t quite know why they failed, all they can say it was likely to do with their tax policy. Its one of the reasons they’re so gun shy about tax changes in our current national debate.

Sure theres other things the money could have gone on, (there always is). And they might prove to be a better investment. But there have been short term and long term benefits from this referendum even in failure, and even if a voter didn’t support the proposition itself, there are still recognisable benefits.