Echo Issue Outline ... to return to the page you "clicked" from, simply close this window



Related issue outlines:
... no related issue outlines
Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).
Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis
Age, Herald-Sun and Australian items: Click this icon ...

... to search the Echo newspaper index and enter the following word(s), with just a space in between them.
dodson
australia
day
change

Sydney Morning Herald index: Click here to use the State Library of NSW's online index to the Sydney Morning Herald
2009/03: Should we change the date of Australia Day?<BR>

2009/03: Should we change the date of Australia Day?

What they said...
'To many indigenous Australians, in fact, most indigenous Australians, it really reflects the day on which our world came crashing down'
Professor Mick Dodson (pictured at right), 2009 Australian of the Year, calling for a national discussion about the date on which we celebrate Australia Day

'Civilisation arrived in Australian in 1788'
Former New South Wales premier, Mr Bob Carr, defending January 26 as the date on which Australia Day should be celebrated

The issue at a glance
On January 26, 2009, Professor Mick Dodson, an Aboriginal spokesperson who has recently been announced as Australian of the Year, called on the Australian Government to begin a national conversation on whether January 26 should remain the date of Australia's national day.
Professor Dodson explained that for many indigenous Australians the date commemorated a day that marked the invasion of their country and the end of their way of life.  It was for them a day of mourning rather than of celebration.  Professor Dodson also stated his belief that Australian society was now sufficiently mature to make such a debate possible.
On January 27, 2009, the Prime Minister, Mr Kevin Rudd, stated, 'To our indigenous leaders, and those who call for a change to our national day, let me say a simple, respectful but straightforward "no".'
This response was welcomed by some, including the leader of the  Opposition, Mr Malcolm Turnbull.  It was, however, criticised by a number of others, including former Australian Rules footballer and coach, Ron Barassi.
A debate on the issue proceeded in the print media and through call-back  radio.

Background
The Australia Day National Network is made up of eight state and territory Australia Day organisations and the National Australia Day Council. The Network's Internet site has a subsection giving a timeline of the major developments in the history of the day.  The information given below comes from this site.  It can be read in full at  http://www.australiaday.org.au/experience/page77.asp

Timeline

1788 - Captain Arthur Phillip, commander of the First Fleet of eleven convict ships from Great Britain, and the first Governor of New South Wales, arrived at Sydney Cove on 26 January and raised the Union Jack to signal the beginning of the colony.

1804 - Early almanacs and calendars and the Sydney Gazette began referring to 26 January as First Landing Day or Foundation Day. In Sydney, celebratory drinking, and later anniversary dinners became customary, especially among emancipists.

1818 - Governor Macquarie acknowledged the day officially as a public holiday on the thirtieth anniversary. The previous year he accepted the recommendation of Captain Matthew Flinders, circumnavigator of the continent, that it be called Australia.

1838 - Proclamation of an annual public holiday for 26 January marked the Jubilee of the British occupation of New South Wales. This was the second year of the anniversary's celebratory Sydney Regatta.

1871 - The Australian Natives' Association, formed as a friendly society to provide medical, sickness and funeral benefits to the native-born of European descent, became a keen advocate from the 1880s of federation of the Australian colonies within the British Empire, and of a national holiday on 26 January.

1888 - Representatives from Tasmania, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and New Zealand joined NSW leaders in Sydney to celebrate the Centenary. What had begun as a NSW anniversary was becoming an Australian one. The day was known as Anniversary or Foundation Day.

1901 - The Australian colonies federated to form the Commonwealth of Australia. The Union Jack continued as the national flag, taking precedence over the Australian red and blue shipping ensigns gazetted in 1903.

Melbourne was the interim federal capital. The Australian Capital Territory was created out of New South Wales in 1908, the federal capital named Canberra in 1913, and the Parliament House opened there in 1927.

1930 - The Australian Natives' Association in Victoria began a campaign to have 26 January celebrated throughout Australia as Australia Day on a Monday, making a long weekend. The Victorian government agreed with the proposal in 1931, the other states and territories following by 1935.

1938 - While state premiers celebrated the Sesquicentenary together in Sydney, Aboriginal leaders met there for a Day of Mourning to protest at their mistreatment by white Australians and to seek full citizen rights.

1946 - The Australian Natives' Association prompted the formation in Melbourne of an Australia Day Celebrations Committee (later known as the Australia Day Council) to educate the public about the significance of Australia Day. Similar bodies emerged in the other states, which in rotation, acted as the Federal Australia Day Council.

1948 - The Nationality and Citizenship Act created a symbolic Australian citizenship. Australians remained British subjects.

1954 - The Australian blue ensign was designated the Australian national flag and given precedence over the Union Jack. The Australian red ensign was retained as the commercial shipping ensign.

1960 - The first Australian of the Year was appointed: Sir Macfarlane Burnet, a medical scientist. Other annual awards followed: Young Australian of the Year, 1979; Senior Australian of the Year, 1999, and Australia's Local Hero, 2003.

1979 - The Commonwealth government established a National Australia Day Committee in Canberra to make future celebrations 'truly national and Australia-wide'. It took over the coordinating role of the Federal Australia Day Council. In 1984 it became the National Australia Day Council, based in Sydney, with a stronger emphasis on sponsorship. Incorporation as a public company followed in 1990.

1984 - Australians ceased to be British subjects. Advance Australia Fair replaced God Save the Queen as the national anthem.

1988 - Sydney continued to be the centre of Australia Day spectacle and ceremony. The states and territories agreed to celebrate Australia Day in 1988 on 26 January, rather than with a long weekend. Aborigines renamed Australia Day, 'Invasion Day'. The Bondi Pavilion protest concert foreshadowed the Survival Day Concerts from 1992.

1994 - Celebrating Australia Day on 26 January became established. The Australian of the Year Award presentations began alternating between Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne and Brisbane.

2001 - Centenary of federation. The National Australia Day Council's national office had returned to Canberra the previous year. In 2001 the Council transferred from the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts to that of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Australians' growing familiarity with the Australia Day holiday led the Council to focus on shaping their awareness of its significance and meaning.

2004 - The presentation of Australia Day awards - the focus of Australia Day - became fixed in Canberra.

Internet information
The Australia Day National Network is made up of eight state and territory Australia Day organisations and the National Australia Day Council. The Network's Internet site has subsections dealing with the history of Australia Day, a timeline outlining the major developments in the history of the day and an account of the place Australia Day plays in the process of Aboriginal reconciliation.  This information can be  found at http://www.australiaday.org.au/experience/page31.asp
The Network also has a section of its site specifically designed to inform students.  This information can be found at http://www.australiaday.com.au/studentresources/history.aspx

The online encyclopedia, Wikipedia, has an entry dealing with Australia Day.  It gives the history of the day and some of the controversies that have surrounded it.  This entry can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_Day

Suite 101 is a comprehensive independent online magazine. On January 28, 2009, the magazine published an informative piece titled, 'Australia Day or Invasion Day?' which gives a history of the day, the controversy surrounding it and outlines the dates that have been suggested as alternatives for Australia Day.  The article can be found at http://australian-indigenous-peoples.suite101.com/article.cfm/australia_day_or_invasion_day

On January 28, 2009, the magazine Online Opinion published a piece titled, 'Changing Australia Day' by former Democrat Senator, Andrew Bartlett.  The article presents a series of arguments suggesting that the date of Australia day should be changed.  The article can be found at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8460&page=1

On January 29, 2009, the Charles Sturt University Internet site published an article by Clive Hamilton, a professor of Public Ethics.  The article, titled 'Australia Day change: Let's hear the arguments' suggests that this is an important debate Australia should have.  The full of this article can be found at http://news.csu.edu.au/director/latestnews.cfm?itemID=20720D18C52DEBC3205B207ABE025266&printtemplate=release

Arguments in favour of changing the date of Australia Day
1.  Aboriginal Australians see January 26 as the date their country was invaded
Aboriginal  Australians have long opposed January 26 as a day of national celebration. The 2009 Australian of the Year, Professor Mike Dodson, has explained, 'Many of our people call it Invasion Day. To many indigenous Australians, in fact, most indigenous Australians, it really reflects the day on which our world came crashing down. I'm sensitive to that, I understand that... I too share the concerns of my indigenous brothers and sisters about the date.'
Former Australian Rules footballer and coach, Ron Barassi, has similarly stated, 'Australia Day is the day put aside to focus attention on just what a great country this is. But I reckon we're celebrating the wrong day.  I think we should change the date of Australia Day. We were invaders and conquerors in 1788 when the First Fleet arrived and we took this land from the Aborigines. January 26 just doesn't sit right with me and I'd prefer it were changed.'
A number of letter writers endorsed the views of Mick Dodson and Ron Barassi.  Mr John Kelly, in a letter published in The Age on January 27, 2009, stated, 'I would like to add my name to those of Mick Dodson and Ron Barassi who have called for a re-think on Australia Day. January 26 is unacceptable, insofar as it divides the nation and reflects a date that is infamous in the eyes of our indigenous population. If we are to be a truly inclusive society, a more appropriate date should be sought.'
As early as 1938, a group of Aboriginal protestors commemorated January 26 not as Australia Day but as the Day of Mourning, in acknowledgement of the dispossession of Aboriginal Australians.
By 1988 Aborigines declared their opposition to the celebrations of 26 January with land rights flags at Lady Macquarie's Point on Sydney Harbour, the Bondi Pavilion protest concert, and the gathering of Aboriginal marchers and white supporters at Belmore Park.  
The protesters set up a Tent Embassy at Mrs Macquarie's Chair adjacent the Sydney Royal Botanic Gardens.  The embassy, made up of several large marquees and smaller tents, was manned by a group of Aboriginal people from Eveleigh Street, Redfern. It became a gathering place for Aboriginal people from all over Sydney. One of the aims of the embassy was to raise awareness of Aboriginal rights and the distressing conditions under which many Aboriginal people live.  Opposition to the celebration of a national day on January 26 became a focus for the group's activities.
From 1992 there have been Survival Day concerts to mark Australia Day.

2.  Changing the date of Australia Day would be a powerful gesture toward Aboriginal reconciliation
It has been suggested that changing the date on which Australia Day is celebrated would be a powerfully symbolic act, demonstrating respect for the Aboriginal point of view.
Clive Hamilton, Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University, has stated, 'Many people believed that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's "Sorry" speech in Parliament soon after coming to office reflected a new respect for the views of Indigenous people, but Mick Dodson's call for a national "conversation" has been shut down before it has even started.
By ruling out discussion of the view of many Indigenous people, that Australia Day celebrates the invasion of the continent and the beginning of their dispossession and repression, Mr Rudd shows a worrying disregard for Indigenous perspectives
Are we too afraid to hear the arguments? Can we have reconciliation if some people's opinions are excluded?...
The symbolism would have real meaning if ... we showed a renewed respect for the history of dispossession by adopting a new date for Australia Day that marked both the shift to a ... recognition of original ownership of this land by the first Australians. January 26 could remain a public holiday to mark the arrival of the First Fleet and the history of white settlement, akin to Thanks Giving Day in the United States.'

3.  Other countries that were originally colonies have national days that commemorate their independence
It has been argued that January 26 is not a suitable national day for Australia to celebrate  national identity.  Critics of this date note that what it commemorates is Australia's connection to Britain.
Former Democrat Senator, Andrew Bartlett, has stated, 'It is not just that this date marks the start of a dispossession, displacement and killing of Aboriginal Australians far more brutal than our nation is still able to admit or acknowledge.
I also don't see why a nation which has become independent from the country which colonised them would celebrate their national day on the anniversary of colonisation. Most other nations with this sort of history celebrate on the date of independence, not the day of colonisation.
Republicans might argue that Australia is still not fully independent until we no longer have the British monarch automatically serving as our head of state. But in a legal sense, Australia is now a fully independent nation.
The date when Australia came into existence as a country was January 1, 1901, when the various colonies became states as part of the federation of Australia...
Despite Kevin Rudd having already said the answer is "no", I agree with Professor Dodson, and others like the chair of the Australia Day Council, Adam Gilchrist, that it is good idea to have this conversation and become more aware of our own history and what being Australian should be about.'
A number of letter writers also adopted the view that Australia should have national day that celebrates its independence, not its status as a former colony.  Robert Humphris, in a letter published in The Age on January 27, 2009, stated, 'We  should change the date of Australia Day, not because it represents the invasion of a nation of indigenous Australians, but because the arrival of a downtrodden group of English convicts and their less-than-noteworthy guards at Botany Bay does not represent the birth of a nation and is memorable only to their descendants. We want to celebrate our beginnings as a proud and independent nation. Independence started with self-government in Victoria in 1855. Sydney, of course, would object to this as a reason for celebration. The obvious point of independence is the birth of the nation through Federation on January 1, 1901.'
Similarly, Ruby Partland in a letter also published in The Age on January 27, 2009, stated, 'January 26 is a joke. Most countries celebrate the liberty they gained in fighting for an identity separate from their colonisers. I know a date that will not bring us shame and sadness: the day we get over our obsession with Britain and become a republic.'

4.  January 26 has no significance to Australians who are not of British origin
It has been claimed that for Australians who are not of British descent, there is little of significance in commemorating the day New South Wales was established as a British colony.
This point has been made by former Democrat Senator, Andrew bartlett, who has stated, 'But it is not only Indigenous Australians who feel that 26th January is not the best day to celebrate our unity as a nation, as Ron Barassi's views make clear. Many of the millions of Australians who are not of British heritage are also likely to find another day more meaningful. Plenty of other people who, like me, have some British ancestry, also feel the same.'
In a blog comment posted on The Australian's site on January 26, 2009, it was further noted, 'The Queen, the Union Jack on the flag and January 26 are still remnants of British/white colonial occupation and do not reflect today's Australian multicultural society. Australia still needs a lot of work to have more visible non-white, non-European representation in its social fabric.'

5.  The date and the title of Australia's national day has been changed on a number of occasions in the country's past
It has been noted that the custom of celebrating Australia's national day on January 26 as Australia Day is a relatively recent one.   Not until 1935 did all the Australian states and territories use that name to mark that date and not until 1994 did they begin to celebrate Australia Day consistently as a public holiday on that date.
Earlier in the colony of New South Wales' history, January 26 was celebrated either as First Landing Day or Foundation Day.  
After Australia's federation in 1901, there was widespread concern that federation not be misinterpreted as an attempt on the part of the new nation to sever its ties with Britain.  In 1905 Conservative Australian and state governments reinforced the Empire's role by instituting Empire Day, 24 May, the birthday of the late Queen Victoria.  At this point the new nation had no agreed national day of celebration.
During World War I, 30 July 1915 became Australia Day.  The day was an occasion for raising funds for the war by drawing on Australians' pride in their soldiers' achievements.
In addition, aboriginal protest groups have since 1938 commemorated the day as either a Day of Mourning or Invasion Day or Survival Day.
Critics of the January 26 date for a national holiday argue that the date cannot be said to be sanctioned by tradition when it has varied so much over the years and has been a source of significant contention.


Arguments against changing the date of Australia Day
1.  Changing the date of Australia Day would be divisive
Concern has been expressed that changing the date of Australia Day from January 26 couuld lead to ill-feeling against those Aboriginal activists who have advocated this change.  Thus,  there are those who believe that a change of date could set back the process of Aboriginal reconciliation and lead to increased hostility toward Aboriginal Australians.  This point was made in an editorial published in The Australian on January 27, 2009.
The editorial states, 'the danger in singling out for criticism a date of national pride for millions of people is that it can become divisive, offensive and, worse, counter-productive by encouraging the less sympathetic to react cynically.'
A similar point has been made by Herald Sun commentator Andrew Bolt who has argued that Australia requires an Australian of the year who will promote racial harmony rather than disharmony.  Mr Bolt claims that Professor Dobson's call for a conversation around the date of Australia Day is divisive and therefore not what this country needs.  Andrew Bolt has stated, 'We've been far better and more reconciled than Dodson has preached. We have no need to divide ourselves by race as he demands. Rather the reverse.
How odd it all is, and how sad.
We thought we were getting an Australian of the Year, but got instead some race-preacher of last century. Not helpful.'
Susie O'Brien in an article published in The Herald Sun on January 27, 2009, stated, 'Picking on the very concept of Australia Day will damage rather than improve the cause of Aboriginal people.
It's a move that is too divisive, and too negative, and will enrage many non-Aboriginal Australians.
No wonder that online polling shows around 80 per cent of Herald Sun readers are against changing the date we celebrate Australia Day.'

2.  January 26 is not celebrated as the day Aboriginal Australia was invaded
It has been claimed that there is no need to change the date of Australia Day as the public holiday is not used to celebrate the dispossession of Aboriginal people.  Though the date it derives from was the date on which white settlers came to Australia and began the dispossession of Aboriginal Australians, many defenders of the day argue that that is no longer what is celebrated.
Susie O'Brien in an article published in The Herald Sun on January 27, 2009, asked, 'How did you spend your Australia Day? Jobs in the garden? Barbie with friends? Picnic on the beach?
Or did you gather friends around and celebrate the annihilation of the Aboriginal culture more than two centuries ago? Of course not.
And this is why Australia Day should not be moved to a different date, and why it should not be changed into a day of mourning for the injustice done to Aboriginal people.
Although the day officially represents white settlement - which certainly amounted to an invasion of Aborigines in many areas - it has come to mean positive things to most people.'

3. The day now has significance for all Australians, regardless of their ethnic origins
It has been claimed that Australia day is meant to be a celebration for all Australians, regardless of their ethnicity or country of original.  It is for this reason that nationalisation ceremonies are held  this day, so that new Australians are symbolic invited to become Australian citizen on the day that the country as a whole celebrates what it means to be an Australian.
In an editorial published in The Australian on January 26, 2009, it was stated, 'Australia has welcomed nearly seven million migrants since 1945, demonstrating that the vast majority of us have an expansive idea of who can be included among "all" Australians.
This welcoming tolerance has served us well since mass migration began after World War II and the White Australia policy began to be reversed in the late 1960s. And it is a spirit the country will need this year. For the past 15 years, every Australia Day was a celebration of our national prosperity and the great, and very Australian achievement, of ensuring the wealth was shared across all segments of society.'

4.  Improving the quality of the lives of Aboriginal Australians is more important than altering the date of Australia Day
It has been claimed that improving the lives of Aboriginal Australians is not dependent on the symbolism of a day such as Australia Day.  Rather, it requires real practical changes in access to education, employment, housing and social services.  This point has been made by  J. Olaf Kleist is a political scientist from Berlin, Germany, who is working on political memory and migration in Australia in an article published in The Age on January 28, 2009.  Kleist stated, 'Just as a "sorry" should not be a substitute for reparations, inclusion into commemorations is not the social justice needed by those who still feel excluded.
It should not be forgotten that symbolic gestures tend to cover the social rifts that need to be fixed...
Any discussion of the commemoration of Australia Day that fails to acknowledge its social foundations helps preserve negative indigenous and non-indigenous relations in the symbolic realm of the past.'
A similar point was made in an editorial published in The Australian on January 26, 2009.  The editorial stated, 'But changing the date of Australia Day is irrelevant to the circumstances of too many indigenous Australians today, just as Professor Dodson is wrong to seek culturally specific solutions for their conditions. The lesson from funding two generations of indigenous Australians to subsist in remote communities as a means of protecting their culture is that it does not keep them healthy or educated, or give them a stake in the Australia they live in. Aborigines, especially in remote and regional Australia, are more likely to be unemployed, more likely to have been in prison and more likely to lack anything other than a basic education - and they will definitely die younger. The need to address the outrageous disadvantage endured by too many Aborigines living today is what matters most. The way to do it is to accept that the state has obligations to all Australians and that, while some of us have different needs, our rights and obligations are all the same.'
This point has also been made by Australia's Prime Minister, Mr Kevin Rudd, who has indicated has belief that it was more important to focus on practical measures to close the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians in health, education and employment, to build 'a nation for Australians all, not just for some Australians'.
This position was also put in an editorial published in The Australian on January 27, 2009, which claims, 'There is a need to free our indigenous citizens who find themselves trapped in mindset and social position between the world of 1788 and contemporary society, with completely unacceptably low life expectancy and poor health. There is a need to meet genuine continuing grievance with justice. The solutions for these needs will not be found in shallow attempts to blame present problems on a long-ago event.'
Susie O'Brien in an article published in The Herald Sun on January 27, 2009, outlined what she believed actually had to be done to improve the living conditions of Aboriginal Australians.  O'Brien states, 'In the end, the debate should come down to a discussion about inequity and not so much a serious suggestion about changing the date of Australia Day.
But let's face it, there's no point denying that there are two Australias - one for blacks and one for whites. Aboriginals are more likely to die at birth, suffer serious illness, go to jail, live in poverty and die young. They're less likely to hold down jobs, do year 12 at school, and own their home. Aboriginal Australians die on average 26 years younger than whites, and are three times more likely to die at birth. They also make up 21 per cent of the jail population but make up only 2 per cent of the general population. Some experts estimate more than 40 per cent of Aborigines live in poverty compared to 15 per cent of whites.
The answer is for Governments to work with community groups - with the support of the wider Australian population - to get things done. To get Aborigines off welfare, out of debilitating cycles of poverty and self-destruction, and instill pride in their customs and history. '

5.  January 26 commemorates all the benefits of British civilisation that all Australians now enjoy
It has been claimed that Australia's colonisation by thee British has left a legacy of law and political institutions which have benefitted all subsequent Australians.
This point has been made by commentator Janet Albrechtsen in the introduction to her blog for The Australian newspaper.  Ms Albrechtsen states, 'The indigenous activist [Professor Dodson] has made clear his views about the evils of Invasion Day. It was a "day of reflection" rather than celebration, Dodson told ABC radio this morning. In fact, the day is one of celebration as many Australians mark the settlement of the nation. Dodson may not like our history, but he cannot change it. For Dodson, the arrival of the First Fleet marks "the day our world came crashing down". For most Australians, that day marks the beginning of a nation built on the rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty.'  
This point has been elaborated by former New South Wales premier, Bob Carr, who has stated in an opinion piece published in The Australian on January 27, 2009, 'Some might think old-fashioned Manning Clark's opening line that civilisation arrived in Australian in 1788. Still, in a land that had only seen hunter-gatherer cultures the arrival of the First Fleet was the start of settled communities on the Australian continent: buildings, bridges, villages, towns. It also brought the application of British common law to Australia and, eventually, government through parliament where, to be truthful, there had been only tribal systems and cycles of warfare. It brought a written language. Fortunate to be begun as an English settlement, too, because a revolution in England 100 years earlier - 1688 - had resulted in new constitutional arrangements to check the power of executive government. Out of English ideas and notions we acquired, in fits and starts, the institutions of a free society.'

Further implications
It is interesting to note that Professor Dodson did not propose a change of date for Australia Day.  Though clearly opposed to the current date, the Professor actually called for a debate on the issue.  Thus, when the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, indicated that the date would not be changed, what he was forestalling was any debate on the question.
It seems likely that Kevin Rudd is seeking to avoid a debate which has the potential to be divisive and which he appears to believe is unnecessary.  This seems to mark a decisive change in approach from  that which the Prime Minister displayed earlier in his period of office.  The Rudd Government began its term with a 2020 Summit which deliberately sought a wide range of community opinions on a variety of issues.   Government also seemed to consider symbolism important, as could be seen in its decision to offer a formal apology to those Australians who were taken from their families as children.  As these men and women are not to be offered any form of compensation, the value of the apology would appear to be exclusively symbolic.  As such it was seen as a major step toward achieving reconciliation between Australians of Aboriginal and those of British and European descent.
It is therefore worth asking why the Rudd Government appears to have changed its general position on such questions to the point where it is not only not prepared to accept the suggested date change for Australia Day, it is not even prepared to discuss the question.
The Prime Minister was careful to decline politely, as he himself noted, he gave a 'respectful "no"'.  However, the speed with which he gave it and his refusal even to debate the matter is unlikely to be seen by Aboriginal Australians as betokening respect.  
It seems possible that with a Government heavily preoccupied in trying to steer the Australian economy clear of recession, symbolic issues are now seen as of less consequence and may have the capacity to divert public attention from more  pressing issues.  
It may also be that the Government believes, as do many critics of Professor Dodson's proposal, that a debate on Australia Day would be seen as vexatious by many white Australians and  could even led to the development of more negative attitudes toward Aboriginal Australians.
It is to be hoped that Kevin Rudd's prompt 'no' has not forfeited some of the goodwill that his earlier 'sorry' had created among Aboriginal Australians.

Newspaper sources used in the compilation of this issue outline
The Herald-Sun:   January 28, page 28, comment (photo of Dodson) by Andrew Bolt, `Our divisive myth maker'.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24971902-25717,00.html

The Age:  January 28, page 13, comment by J Olaf Kleist, `Heal divisions so a new day can dawn'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/heal-divisions-so-a-new-day-can-dawn-20090127-7qwv.html?skin=text-only

The Herald-Sun:   January 27, page 20, comment (photos) by Susie O'Brien, `Dodson stirs vital debate'.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24966045-5000117,00.html

The Herald-Sun:   January 27, page 19, cartoon. (see layout for page 19 below this list)

The Australian:  January 27, page 5, news items by Patricia Karvelas, `PM rejects national day change / Dodson accolade draws criticism' .
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24967787-5013172,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24967789-5013172,00.html

The Australian:  January 27, page 9, comment, by Nicolas Rothwell, `Bittersweet prize'
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24966769-5013871,00.html

The Australian:  January 27, page 10, comment by Bob Carr, `The day that tells the nation's story'
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24966994-7583,00.html?from=public_rss

The Australian:  January 27, page 11, editorial, `A date to remember'
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24967059-25209,00.html

The Australian:  January 27, page 11, letter, `Let's celebrate the nation's birth, not fleet arrival'.
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/letters/index.php/theaustralian/comments/lets_celebrate_the_nations_birth_not_fleet_arrival/

The Age:  January 27, page 3, news item by Harrison and Smiles, `No change in national day date, says Rudd'. (With video in online version)
http://www.theage.com.au/national/no-change-in-national-day-date-says-rudd-20090126-7q0d.html

The Age:  January 27, page 5, analysis (with photo of singer Archie Roach) by Tony Stephens, `Seeking a day to call our own'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/seeking-a-day-to-call-our-own-20090126-7q0n.html

The Age:  January 27, page 5, background by by Sarah Smiles, `Celebration date quite new, as traditions go'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/celebration-date-quite-new-as-traditions-go-20090126-7q0p.html

The Age:  January 27, page 10, editorial, `Look to the future for an Australia Day date'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/look-to-the-future-for-an-australia-day-date-20090126-7pym.html

The Herald-Sun:   January 26, page 4-5, news item (photo) by Peter Jean, `Dodson: change our celebration date'.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24962376-661,00.html

The Australian:  January 26, page 15, editorial, `What makes us the people we are'.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24962247-16741,00.html

The Age:  January 26, page 3, news item (photo) by Sarah Smiles, `Dodson urges rethink on "offensive" date of our national day'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/dodson-urges-rethink-on-offensive-date-of-our-national-day-20090125-7pgr.html