Australia Day: We all have a stake in the future of our nation

We’re sorry, this feature is currently unavailable. We’re working to restore it. Please try again later.

Advertisement

This was published 6 years ago

Australia Day: We all have a stake in the future of our nation

The 26th of January became a public holiday uniformly across all Australian states only in 1994. For many Indigenous Australians it is symbolic of the act of dispossession. Yet we seem unable to have a frank and honest conversation about changing the date.

If you accept – as I do – that the Australian frontier was a violent place and many Aboriginal lives were lost in this violence and that Aboriginal Australians have suffered because of the loss of livelihood, disease and poverty, then there is much to provoke a sense of guilt. Guilt, however, prevents constructive dialogue.

Illustration: Cathy Wilcox.

Illustration: Cathy Wilcox.

Instead, I want an honest conversation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians about our shared past and its consequences. I want to have this conversation in ways that enable us all to address the legacy of the past and create a shared future.

Whoever we are – Indigenous, descendants of settler Australians, migrants or refugees – we all have a stake in our nation's future. A generous approach to dialogue based on empathy, respect and compassion would seek to find a date to celebrate our nationhood that is inclusive of all Australians.

Sarah Russell, Northcote

An exercise in denying reality

The idea of changing the date of Australia Day is an exercise in denying reality. January 26 is the logical birthday of modern Australia.

You can celebrate it or bemoan it. But you can't undo it.

Let's not divide our races, but do all we can to make our great multicultural nation a true Commonwealth for all its citizens.

Advertisement

Philip O'Carroll, Fitzroy North

This is not the day for a celebration …

"We cannot let the past define us", says Amanda Vanstone (Comment, 15/1). Exactly. And that is why Australia Day should not be celebrated on the anniversary of the arrival of the First Fleet.

Kate Puls, Eltham

… the last Monday in January is

I believe that Australia Day should be held on the last Monday in January. We will get used to the idea that it does not have to be on a day that commemorates an invasion, a war, a political event, important as they may be. A day to celebrate and be thankful for what we have and to make a collective public and private resolve to value it all and and to be aware that it can't be taken for granted. We can still have all the good things that happen now, parades, awards, flag waving.

And we shouldn't shy away from the idea that a holiday is just that. A holiday. And what could be more Australian than a summer long weekend?

So, what happens to 26th January? It will not be forgotten, it is a big part of our story, but let us accept that it is a day with a mixed message, and cannot be celebrated by all Australians. Would we hold a family party to celebrate something that disadvantaged or offends one member of the family? Vern O'Grady, Park Orchards

The date must recognise inclusiveness

I fully support Dr Richard Di Natale's campaign for the date of Australia Day to be changed to a more appropriate date. January 26 marks the day the British fleet dispossessed the first peoples of their land and for many their lives.

If the rhetoric of "inclusiveness" is used to celebrate Australia Day, then it could be celebrating the day in 1967 when Indigenous Australians were "included" in the census by being recognised as actually being part of our population or the day the 1983 electoral act was amended giving all Indigenous people in all states the same voting rights as all other Australians. Some have suggested we wait until we become a republic to change the date, but that could be a long time coming given Charlotte has just been announced as the most popular girls name yet again.

Diana Yallop, Surrey Hills

THE FORUM

Where would it stop?

Margaret Court has a different world view and moral/ethical code than many other Australians, but we have to be careful in shouting down her beliefs and demonising her as a person. If we go down the path of demanding that the beliefs of the majority should be the only ones expressed, or that all opinions must be those of particular ideology, then we go down the road of fundamentalism.

Now some former tennis players are saying they would not have played on Margaret Court Arena because one of the greatest tennis players of all time has a different ideology and opinion.

But even if the name was changed, how would the players get there? They would go via Batman Avenue. Was John Batman of good character? Did he have high moral values that concurred with the former tennis players?

Contemporary George Augustus Robinson called him "a bad and dangerous character" and the artist John Glover said he was "a rogue, thief , a cheat, a liar, a murderer of blacks and the vilest man I have ever known". Should tennis players refuse to be transported to the tennis along Batman Avenue until the name is changed?

Keith Boyle, Eudlo, Qld

The name matters

Margaret Court was a great tennis player, who now is out of step with the majority of Australians, holding abhorrent views about LGBT people. Court has every right to voice her opinion, and we should not revise her history, nor deny her records. But adorning a public building with her name is a different matter altogether. Melbourne Park is about more than tennis; it is a place where a broad community gathers. We don't have public spaces to memorialise individuals but to help bring people together.

Stephen Wilson, Five Dock, NSW

It's damaging the brand

Margaret Court Arena should be renamed because it is damaging the brand of the Australian Open here and worldwide.

Margaret Court chose to make her extreme views on homosexuality public using her name as an outstanding tennis player as a platform.

Her name, and therefore the arena, will always be associated with values that are not only inconsistent with most Australians, but incompatible with sport's mission of inclusiveness and equality for all.

Catherine Boal, Wangaratta

Kick them out

It's not too late to do something about discipline with those morons who continually chant their tuneless rants and upset not only the patrons but also those of us watching on TV (Letters, 15/1). Their antics at the Sydney International were absolutely disgraceful with the chanting barely stopping when a player was about to serve. These idiots should be warned and then ousted if they do not comply. We've all had enough.

Ian Anderson, Surrey Hills

The response was feeble

Those people who looked to Julie Bishop as a potential leader of the Liberal Party must have been sorely disappointed with her feeble response to Donald Trump's hateful comments about Haiti and Africa. Instead of saying something, anything, expressing some level of disappointment she simply blathered meaningless platitudes about the strength of the Australia/USA alliance. How weak and pathetic. In her defence however, her comments were stronger than the Prime Minister's.

Ross Hudson, Camberwell

Hard to defend

So Donald Trump says: "I'm not a racist. I am the least racist person you have ever interviewed. That I can tell you." ("If Donald Trump is racist, so is Australia and Malcolm Turnbull: US Homeland Security chief", theage.com.au, 15/1). So, these days you just have to SAY something is so to make it true (in the face of and in spite of overwhelming contrary evidence)? On the other hand, and sadly, it is difficult to defend Australia against Kirstjen Nielsen's counterclaim.

Anthony Hitchman, St Andrews

A recipe for a mess

Just exactly where does David Leyonhjelm draw the line on his ambiguous ideology of a free society (Comment, 15/1)? How does this open concept stop those with far less than altruistic intent from conveniently hiding behind a veil of unaccountable conscience whenever it's convenient to do so?

For a society to remain harmonious it needs to operate within a zone of common laws. If there is a collective conscience that some laws should be changed to iron out the imperfections and historical irrelevance then we have that opportunity to do so through our democratic political processes.

Trying to include non-conflicting exclusions to satisfy every minority cultural, political and religious conscience that wants special protection from common laws associated with discrimination is going to result in a tangled, uncivilised mess.

The current exclusions for religious bodies to protect their open freedom to discriminate in some areas of human equality while the rest of us have to abide and cannot discriminate against them is already difficult enough.

Paul Miller, Box Hill South

Bravo, Barbara Chapman

Barbara Chapman's letter (15/1) analysing the federal government's failure with regard to the lack of support on the African issue could not be better put. I have held these views for a long time now, but I could not have articulated it as well as she has done.

Jeanne Hart, Maryborough

Experience counts

So, 63 per cent of people aged 18 to 29 rate life today as better than it was 50 years ago, when they weren't even alive, while only 41 per cent of those who have experienced both then and now agree ("Is life really better for all?", Comment, 15/1). Surely experience counts for something.

Chris Curtis, Hurstbridge

Start listening please

If only politicians stopped talking and started listening. Is that too much to ask? When one side says something, it is automatically dismissed by the opposing side after being belittled and those raising it, derided.

The recent release under Freedom of Information laws about the Labor proposal regarding negative gearing is just one example of common sense being overridden by ego and political opportunism.

Greg Tuck, Warragul

Hypocrisy is a problem

In his provocative piece on hypocrisy (Last Word, 13/1) Nick Miller asks "What's the problem?" and asserts that hypocrisy is in all of us, so forget it, let it go. Well, hypocrisy — proclaiming virtue while behaving in the opposite fashion — is a profound problem. We must not let it go. The problem is that politicians and journalists scream "hypocrisy!" when they should mutter "inconsistency!" Most of us fail to live up to our ideals, Nick, but we are not all hypocrites. Hypocrisy is contemptible. Consistent inconsistency is merely inexcusable. Occasional inconsistency of the "oops!" variety is a minor misdemeanour. Inconsistency resulting from new information (when the evidence changes, I change my opinion) is a virtue. The problem is that exaggeration and hyperbole are destroying our language. Politicians are a problem, probably beyond salvation, but surely journalists could stand up in defence of public discourse.

Campbell McAdam, Barongarook West

Stop these agreements

During the 1990's "Public First" campaign against the privatisation of essential services – electricity, gas and water – economist Kenneth Davidson articulated the point that one doesn't need a gun to steal public wealth – commercial-in-confidence agreements can protect the theft of massive public finances and/or priceless cultural value, from the community.

The plan to replace a building in Melbourne's public community space, Federation Square, with an Apple super store, with no transparency regarding the process and details of this decision, is an exact illustration of this point. Commercial-in-confidence agreements are undermining our confidence in the democratic political system. Their time for abolition is well overdue.

Jennifer Gerrand, Carlton North

We were lucky this time

Carolyn Webb's report "Is this it?: Terrified Aussies in panic over Hawaii missile alert" (15/1) shows one way a nuclear war can start at a time when the US is led by an erratic President who is threatening North Korea with the size of America's nuclear arsenal. The world was fortunate that there were no nuclear missiles in Hawaii ready for retaliation during the crucial 38 minutes after the false alert sounded before it was cancelled. American hubris and exceptionalism has brought the world to this frightening scenario. It is time for the Turnbull government to let the US know that Australia will have no part in a war started by America in north-east Asia.

Bill Mathew, Parkville

We knew the drill ...

I was surprised by the comment that "the [Hawaiian] government didn't have much of an emergency plan" to deal with a nuclear attack.

Those of us who lived through the Cold War know the drill well: Seek shelter under a desk or similar object. Put your head between your legs and kiss your a--e goodbye! Sam Bando, St Kilda East

We've got a way to go

Why is it a shame if on Australia Day indigenous activists remind of of the brutal ways white settlement took away their lands and way of life?

It's easy to want forget the past when you're the beneficiary of someone else's losses. If it makes some people feel uncomfortable, then do something about healing past wrongs by acknowledging land and cultural thefts, telling the stories of black warriors who fought the King's troops, land squatters and government officials stealing their children.

The Australia Day where Indigenous, white and migrant Australians celebrate together free of the perils of land degradation, class conflict and resource wars is in the future yet to be made. Only then can we we raise our glasses in the knowledge we have righted the wrongs that connect our lives.

Leon Zembekis, Reservoir

Come in, spinner(s)

Where were Glenn Maxwell and Nathan Lyon when we needed them? Will selectors drag them back out from under the bus before the next one-day international?

Sue Currie, Northcote

AND ANOTHER THING

Vanstone and the past

Amanda Vanstone (Comment, 15/1) doesn't want the past to define us. There go the Anzac Day commemorations then.

Steve Melzer, Hughesdale

SBS has a winner

At last! Somebody's found a good use for television. Thank you SBS for The Ghan, the best thing on over the weekend.

Peter Mitchell, Hampton

Singing the blues

Love was in the air, now it's strictly courtroom.

Paul Custance, Highett

Bernard Tomic

So sad to see. It appears that Bernard Tomic seems to believe that a person's worth can be measured in dollars.

Brain Marshall, Ashburton

Is Bernard Tomic's middle name "Scrooge"?

Doug Burnip Balwyn

Great work, Golding

What a brilliant cartoon by Matt Golding. Just sums it up really.

Alan Fancourt, Werribee

That arena

Change the name from the Margaret Court Arena to the Politically Correct Arena.

Thos Puckett, Ashgrove

Can we change the Margaret Court Arena to the Tina Arena?

Ben Campbell, Hampton East

Furthermore

How much of the Greens' war against Australia Day just an attempt to shore up votes in the inner suburbs of our major cities rather than a genuine quest for change?

Phil Alexander, Eltham

Australia Day will be the day we become a republic, Richard Di Natale. Let's be patient and concentrate on pollution and social services.

Graeme Lee, Fitzroy

Australia Day is really a no brainer. We became a nation on 1 January 1, 1901, not January 26, 1788!

Ian Maddison, Parkdale

Finally

I'd like to suggest a "Tandberg" for a new noun in the 2018 Australian dictionary.

Pamela Pilgrim, Highett

Most Viewed in National

Loading