What they said ... `What you need for a national flag is a symbol that can be recognised as Australian everywhere in the world, and that can be accepted by all the people in Australia as representing Australia' Former Australian Prime Minister, Mr Gough Whitlam
`I am not in favour of a change. I see no argument for a change. I have never seen a flag that comes anywhere near approaching the Australian flag' Current Australian Prime Minister, Mr John Howard
In March, 1998, the Flags Amendment Act 1998 was passed by Federal Parliament. The 1998 Act was an amendment to the Flags Act 1953 which gave official status to the current Australian flag.
Under the Flags Amendment Act it was declared that any future change to the Australian flag would have to be accepted by a majority of Australian voters.
In April, 1998, there was a dispute over the proposal that the current Australian flag be removed from some of the uniforms worn by Australian competitors at the Olympic Games.
These are the two most recent incidents in the on-going debate as to whether Australia should change its national flag.
Background
A flag closely resembling the current Australian flag became Australia's new national flag after Federation.
In 1901 the new Federal Government organised a competition for the new flag. The winning design was based on a British ensign with the flag of the United Kingdom, the Union Jack, in the top left hand corner, five stars of the Southern Cross to the right and a six point star below the Union Jack.
In 1903 three of the stars in the Southern cross emblem were altered. In 1909 a seventh point was added to the Federation star below the Union Jack.
Different forms of the flag, sometimes with a red ground could be flown in different military contexts. In some military engagements, Australian forces have fought under a British Union Jack.
It was only after the passing of the Flags Act 1953 that the Australian flag acquired seniority over the Union Jack in all circumstances.
A lobby group promoting the adoption of a new Australian flag, Ausflag, was established in 1981. It became incorporated as a non-profit organisation in 1983. Among its endeavours has been the promotion of alternative flag designs.
A rival organisation, the Australian National Flag Association, was launched in 1983. Initially established in New South Wales, each other state established its own ANFA later in that year.
Prime Minister Howard indicated, shortly after his government was elected in March 1996 that he would have the Flag Act 1953 amended so that the Australian flag could only be changed by a majority vote of the whole Australian electorate. The Flag Act Amendment Bill was ultimately passed in March 1998.
In the meantime the debate is likely to develop greater urgency with the approach of the 2000 Sydney Olympics. Many of those who want a new flag believe it is important it is in place before the Olympics.
It is also likely to be effected by what the referendum on the Australian republic decides.
There are a number of interesting and highly informative Internet sites that deal with the Australian flag. Most, however, argue strongly in favour of either changing or retaining the current flag. When assessing their arguments, you need to be careful to note which position they favour.
The main site for those who want to change the Australian flag is the Ausflag home page.
Ausflag is an apolitical, non-profit organisation. It aims to gain popular support for a change of flag.
The site supplies information on the history of the Australian flag and extensive information on the flag debate. This includes Ausflag press releases and a range of speeches, letters to the editor and newspaper articles relevant to the debate.
The site is searchable and contains a great deal of information. The purpose of this information is to argue against the current flag and develop ideas about possible replacements. It can be found at http://www.ausflag.com.au/home.html
The main site for those who want to retain the current flag is the Australian National Flag Association (ANFA) home page. This home page can be found at http://www.flagaustnat.asn.au/index.html
The ANFA is also an apolitical, non-profit organisation. Its aim is to promote and defend the current Australian flag.
The ANFA home page also contains information on the history of the Australian flag and the concepts it embodies. It, too, has an opinions section where it presents arguments in support of the current flag.
The Flag It home page is another site set up to defend the current Australian flag. This site is directly intended to counter or debunk the arguments put by Ausflag. The Flag It site can be found at http://www.statusquo.org/flagitfolder/flagit_frames.htm This is a sub-site of the anti-republican The Australian Republic Unplugged site.
Flag It is a much smaller site than either Ausflag's or the Australian National Flag Association's. However, it contains a good deal of useful information. It gives three flag recognition tests intended to show that many flags around the world are similar to the flags of other nations. It also contains the text of the Flag Act 1953 and the Flag Amendment Act 1998. The Flag Amendment Act 1998 can be read at http://www.statusquo.org/flagactamend1998.htm
Background information on the Flags Amendment Bill 1996 (which became the 1998 Act), together with its main provisions and a statement of its purpose can be read at the Department of the Parliamentary Library Bills Digest 18 1996-97 at http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bd/1996-97/97bd018.htm
Arguments in favour of Australia changing its flag
There are five arguments offered by those who claim that Australia should change its national flag
Firstly, it is claimed, the current flag does not symbolise Australia's political or social reality.
According to this line of argument, the Australia about to go into the 21st century is a different nation from the country which existed at Federation in 1901.
Those who hold this view, claim that Australia is now fully independent of Great Britain and that our current flag does not acknowledge this.
Opponents of the present flag claim it not only incorporates the flag of another nation, but places the Union Jack in the most prominent position.
Mr Henry Scruby, of Ausflag, has claimed, `The Union Jack is in a position of dominance.'
This argument was explained further in an editorial in The Age published on January 27, 1998. The editorial stated, `The problem with the present flag is that it bears the flag of another country, Britain's Union Jack, in its top left quadrant. In heraldry that is a position of honor, and it indicates that the reality symbolised by the rest of the flag is subordinate.'
It has further been argued by some that if Australia becomes a republic, then a change of flag will be even more necessary to declare our symbolic separation from Great Britain.
Ms Mischa Schubert, a delegate to the Constitutional convention for the youth team, Republic4U, has stated, `I think that if Australia does become a republic, then having a symbol to honour the change is critical ... They are about the same recognition of our national independence.'
It is also claimed that the current flag does not acknowledge that since World War II Australia's migration programs have brought to Australia large numbers of migrants from all over Europe, and more recently from Asia, who have incorporated elements of their cultures into Australia's way of life.
Those who point to social and cultural changes in Australia claim that a flag that presents us as still a British nation does not reflect our current identity.
Mrs Janet Holmes a Court, a prominent business woman and also a member of Ausflag, has claimed, `I believe we need a flag that represents us now ...'
Secondly, it is claimed, our current flag is not sufficiently distinct from that of other nations and so can cause confusion as a symbol supposedly representing Australia to the rest of the world.
According to this line of argument, in addition to incorporating the British flag, Australia's flag is almost indistinguishable from the New Zealand flag which also features the Union Jack and the Southern Cross.
It has been claimed that on at least one occasion when an Australian Prime Minister was travelling overseas, his host country mistakenly flew the New Zealand flag to acknowledge his visit.
It is also suggested that Australian travellers and tourists find their flag does not distinguish them as Australian.
Mr Scruby has claimed, `Travelling overseas, I was increasingly frustrated by the number of people who mistook me for British.'
Thirdly, it is claimed, the flag actually gives offence to a significant portion of Australia's population.
According to this point of view, in commemorating Australia's connections with Britain it also commemorates the dispossession of Australia's Aboriginal population.
Dr Lois O'Donoghue, former Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission chairperson, has claimed, `Most of Australia's indigenous people cannot relate to the existing flag. For us it symbolises dispossession and oppression.'
This position has also been put by the current Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission chairperson, Mr Gatjil Djerrkura, who in July, 1997, joined the lobby group, Ausflag.
Mr Djerrkura claimed, `... for indigenous people ... [the current flag] recaptures the oppression, the genocide and in some cases the complete wipe out of tribes and nations, and that is something I'm sure we as Australians are not proud of.'
Fourthly, it is claimed that the current Australian flag has only been in general use since 1953 when it was proclaimed by the then Menzies Government in the Flags Act.
If, it is argued, the present flag, in exactly its current form, has only been in use for some 45 years it does not have the historical associations its supporters claim for it.
This view has been put by Mr Harold Scruby, who has maintained that the flag under which Australians at war fought and died was not, in many instances, the present national flag.
Mr Scruby has said that frequently it was a different colour, red, and that often, in the navy and the airforce, a completely different British flag.
Fifthly, it is claimed, a symbol is not the country it supposedly represents and so a symbol can be altered without doing harm to the country.
Mr Scruby has argued that Australians at war have fought for their country, not their flag. Similarly, it has been argued, Australians competing in international sporting competitions were doing so for Australia, not for whatever emblem of Australia may have been flown at the time.
Mr Scruby has argued that other countries that have changed their flags have not undermined their national identities or demeaned their heritage.
Former Australian Prime Minister, Mr Gough Whitlam, summed up many of the pro-change arguments when he claimed, `What you need for a national flag is a symbol that can be recognised as Australian everywhere in the world, and that can be accepted by all the people in Australia as representing Australia.'
Arguments against Australia changing its flag
There are four broad arguments offered for the retention of the current Australian flag.
Firstly, there are those who maintain that it is appropriate for the Australian flag to contain elements that indicate our previous connection with Great Britain.
According to this line of argument, the retention of the Union Jack in the upper left hand corner of the Australian flag indicates that we have derived our language, legal system, much of our culture and many of our traditions from Great Britain.
It has been claimed that having a flag which retains elements of the flag of another nation involved in the establishment of Australia does not undermine our independence, rather it acknowledges our heritage.
Professor Geoffrey Blainey has claimed that the flags of many other countries help to indicate their historical origins. Professor Blainey includes the flags of France and the United States in this group.
Secondly, it has been claimed that a nation's flag gains increasing significance over time.
According to this line of argument, a flag gains added importance and meaning from each significant event in a nation's history at which it is flown.
For example, some of those who favour the retention of the current flag argue that a variation of this flag was flown when Australia was federated; when Australians have fought in a number of wars; and has been flown at the various Olympic Games in which we have competed.
An element of this view has been put by the Federal Social Security Minister, Senator Jocelyn Newman. Senator Newman has said, `[The flag] is Australia's brand. We are proud of the flag our men died under.'
The position has been summed up by Professor Blainey, who has argued, `The flag is not perfect but it links the living and the dead, and has been flown over so many of Australia's triumphs and not a few of its tragedies.'
Those who hold this view argue that those few changes which have occurred in the Australian flag since 1901 have either been minor modifications or determined by the traditions of warfare. For example, in some military engagements the Australian flag was flown showing a red background rather than a blue.
The national president of the Returned Soldiers' League (RSL) Mr Digger James, has claimed, `The changes to colour that have occurred are insignificant - it is the content that matters.'
Thirdly, it is claimed, any new flag that was designed would inevitably be without the historical associations that the current flag has because of the momentous occasions on which it has been flown.
According to this line of argument, any national symbol that has not acquired its meaning and importance over time is likely to seem merely arbitrary and decorative.
This point has been made by the Victorian president of the RSL, Mr Bruce Ruxton, who has condemned a number of the new flag designs being promoted by Ausflag as being `like a lot of chocolates in a box, wrapped in chocolate paper, toffee paper ...'
Similar comments were made by a number of young critics of one of Ausflag's preferred designs.
Sophie Finnane, 16, asked of the new design, `Why red? Why blue? Why stars?' These questions appear to reflect the view that any new design is likely to appear capricious and without significance.
Fourthly, it is claimed, no flag is ever likely to be a reflection of all the different cultural, social and racial elements that make up a country.
According to this line of argument, it is foolish to ask that a flag mirror all the major elements of a nation's contemporary reality, because to do so it would probably need to be changed every generation or two..
Those who hold this point of view maintain that a flag needs to remain a fixed and enduring symbol of a nation's core identity and should not need to be changed because some elements of that identity have altered.
Supporters of the current flag maintain that it is an appropriate symbol of this core identity.
The president of the ANFA, Mr John Vaughan, has maintained that the Union Jack (which he refers to as the crosses, apparently because it is made up of the crosses of St George, St Andrew and St Patrick) represent `the principals on which our country was based, while the Southern Cross represents our geographical position.'
Those who argue this position also claim that the current flag is an appropriate symbol to encompass Aboriginal Australia.
Mr Vaughan has argued, `The Southern Cross is an important part of Aboriginal culture and it is fundamental to the Australian flag.'
The position held by supporters of the present Australian flag is largely summed up by the current Australian Prime Minister, Mr John Howard.
Mr Howard has said, `I am not in favour of a change. I see no argument for a change. I have never seen a flag that comes anywhere near approaching the Australian flag.'
Further implications
The current Government is clearly unlikely to take the lead in putting a plebiscite(or straight majority vote) on the current flag before the Australian electorate.
Ausflag and others are likely to apply increasing pressure for it to do so as the 2000 Olympic Games approach. Unless there is a change of Government, however, it seems unlikely that the question will go to the people. The present Prime Minister, Mr Howard, has made it plan he sees no reason to change the flag.
Currently the level of popular support for changing the flag appears to depend on what is put up to replace it. This seems to suggest that while there may not be enormous enthusiasm for the current flag any alternative would need to be seen to be clearly better.
However, the question is also likely to become more urgent if the referendum which is to be held on an Australian republic results in a pro-republic decision.
It is generally agreed that if Australia does decide to become a republic then it is likely that many people would also believe it was necessary to change the flag.
Sources The Age
28/1/97 page 5 news item by Louise Martin, `Ideas for a new flag poles apart'
30/1/97 page 15 comment by Harold Scruby and Brendan Jones, `Britain's legacy flies in the face of public opinion'
30/8/97 page 6 news item by Chris Ryan, `Former PM flags his preference for cross'
27/1/98 page 1 news item by Louise Martin, Sushila Das and Janine MacDonald, `Kennett flags a new day dawning'
27/1/98 page 10 editorial, `A new flag can wait'
28/1/98 page 6 news item by Claire Miller, `Designer wants Aboriginal flag kept off new national standard'
28/1/98 page 1C analysis by Padraic Murphy, `Flag fight's first flutter'
The Australian
28/1/97 page 2 news item by Fiona Carruthers, `The cross still stars on Ausflag no. 9
26/4/97 page 9 news item by Mike Steketee, `New flag advocates see red over historical blue ensign'
9/6/97 page 13 comment by Nicolas Rothwell, `Two sides to every emblem'
29/7/97 page 2 news item by Tracey Sutherland, `ATSIC head joins flag body'
11/11/97 page 2 news item by David Nason and Katherine Glascott, `Hayden's fear: First the Crown, then the flag'
26/1/98 page 4 news item by D D McNicoll and Stephen Brook, `Australians jack of the British flag, O'Donoghue claims'
27/4/98 page 9 news item by Katherine Glascott, `Coates re-ignites flag fight'
The Herald Sun
29/1/97 page 18 editorial, `Stars, stripes and symbols'
30/1/97 page 18 comments by Nick Greiner and Sharon Firebrace, `Is the latest Australian flag design the best yet?'
28/1/98 page 28 news item by Michelle Edmunds, `Ruxton war on flag'
11/2/98 page 12 news item by Andrew Cummins, `Flag causes split'
27/4/98 page 4 news item by Tom Salom, `Coates ignites Games flag row'
28/4/98 page 18 editorial, `Leave the flag alone'
The Sydney Morning Herald
27/1/97 page 5 news item by Paul Sheenan, `Support grows for Aboriginal elements in flag'
28/1/97 page 14 editorial, `Too few salute the flag'
Internet
There are a number of interesting and highly informative Internet sites that deal with the Australian flag. Most, however, argue strongly in favour of either changing or retaining the current flag. When assessing their arguments, you need to be careful to note which position they favour.
The main site for those who want to change the Australian flag is the Ausflag home page.
Ausflag is an apolitical, non-profit organisation. It aims to gain popular support for a change of flag.
The site supplies information on the history of the Australian flag and extensive information on the flag debate. This includes Ausflag press releases and a range of speeches, letters to the editor and newspaper articles relevant to the debate.
The site is searchable and contains a great deal of information. The purpose of this information is to argue against the current flag and develop ideas about possible replacements. It can be found at http://www.ausflag.com.au/home.html
The main site for those who want to retain the current flag is the Australian National Flag Association (ANFA) home page. This home page can be found at http://www.flagaustnat.asn.au/index.html
The ANFA is also an apolitical, non-profit organisation. Its aim is to promote and defend the current Australian flag.
The ANFA home page also contains information on the history of the Australian flag and the concepts it embodies. It, too, has an opinions section where it presents arguments in support of the current flag.
The Flag It home page is another site set up to defend the current Australian flag. This site is directly intended to counter or debunk the arguments put by Ausflag. The Flag It site can be found at http://www.statusquo.org/flagitfolder/flagit_frames.htm This is a sub-site of the anti-republican The Australian Republic Unplugged site.
Flag It is a much smaller site than either Ausflag's or the Australian National Flag Association's. However, it contains a good deal of useful information. It gives three flag recognition tests intended to show that many flags around the world are similar to the flags of other nations. It also contains the text of the Flag Act 1953 and the Flag Amendment Act 1998. The Flag Amendment Act 1998 can be read at http://www.statusquo.org/flagactamend1998.htm
Background information on the Flags Amendment Bill 1996 (which became the 1998 Act), together with its main provisions and a statement of its purpose can be read at the Department of the Parliamentary Library Bills Digest 18 1996-97 at http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bd/1996-97bd018.htm
Back to previous page
