Right: Fremantle Mayor Brad Pettit, called courageous by his supporters and excessively politically correct by detractors.
Arguments opposing changing the date of Australia Day
1. The current date marks a significant event in Australia's history Defenders of the January 26 as an appropriate national day for Australia stress the political, cultural and social significance of the British legacy in Australia. They claim that the current date is a suitable marker of the origin of this legacy. This point was made by Kevin Donnelly, Senior Research Fellow at the Australian Catholic University, in a comment published by The Daily Telegraph on January 25, 2017. Donnelly stated, 'The arrival of the First Fleet is one of the most important events in Australian history as it represents the first step in our development as a liberal, Western democracy based on English common law and a Westminster Parliamentary system.' Donnelly further stated, 'The rights and freedoms we now take for granted, including freedom of assembly and speech, the right to a fair and timely trial, and the right to vote and elect a representative government, trace their origins to events that occurred on January 26, 1788.' Perth legal academic, Augusto Zimmerman, has similarly stated, 'When the penal colony of New South Wales was established in 1788, the laws of England were transplanted into Australia. As a result, the legal sociopolitical institutions of Australia found their primary roots in the legal and sociopolitical traditions of England.' Some supporters further claim that all Australians, including those who claim to have been dispossessed and traumatised by the events of 1788, are the beneficiaries of the political and cultural traditions that were established at that time. In an article published on The Unshackled on January 16, 2017, Lance Thomas stated of those critics, who claim to feel disposed, 'They are living in a country that has prospered as a result of British settlement and they have the opportunity to be a full and equal part of our great nation. The only reason people are still angry is because the media...continue to push an agenda of division instead of unity.' On January 27, 2017, The Herald Sun published an opinion piece by commentator Andrew Bolt in which he similarly stated, 'The brutal fact is that while many Aborigines did suffer from colonisation - not least because of imported diseases - most today now lead lives immeasurably richer, freer and less painful as a result. Many now have some reason to feel grateful for European civilisation, despite the pain that came with it. There is in fact a reason why no Aborigine today chooses to live as their pre-colonisation ancestors did. It is time to recognise the truth of our history - that Aborigines were not merely victims of British colonisation.' Additionally, Kevin Donnelly has noted that Australia's Christian legacy dates from the country's British settlement. Donnelly has stated, 'While we are a secular society, where the constitution forbids favouring one religion over another, it is also true that, without Christian hospitals, schools and charitable organisations, Australia's education, health and welfare sectors would collapse. Christian concepts like the dignity of the person, the right to individual liberty and a commitment to social justice and the common good also underpin our legal and political systems and way of life.' 2. Though the day's meaning can be enriched, the date has been consolidated by tradition Supporters of the current date argue that a national identity is a mixture of change and continuity; however, within this mix, they claim the continuity is important. According to this argument, there are established elements of a national identity that can be viewed in a variety of ways and there are elements of a nationality identity that are added to over time. Those who think in this manner argue that the established date should be retained, while at the same time we enrich our attitude toward what the celebration is acknowledging. Foreign correspondent Peter Greste, an Australia Day New South Wales Ambassador argues, 'I'm happy with the day. I think the day is important; it is about tradition and continuity. It is OK for the message to change, these things are constantly evolving over time, but I think the date needs to stay there.' In an opinion piece published in The Herald Sun on December 8, 2016, Tom Elliott also argued for the continuity that a fixed date supplies. He stated, 'Apart from, perhaps, New Year's Day, every holiday has its detractors. But this doesn't mean we should abandon them. The various dates we celebrate, commemorate and remember exist because they form an important part of our social fabric.' It has been noted that although January 26 has been established as Australia Day across all Australian states and territories only since 1994, that is now a full generation ago and for many Australians it is the only date they have known. It is also the case that for all Australians January 26 is the only date to have been celebrated by all states and territories as the country's national day; therefore, it is claimed, though the tradition is relatively recent, it is significant and changing it would be difficult. In an analysis published on the ABC's Internet site on January 25, 2017, James Purtill noted, 'In the last 20 years, we have made the anniversary of the first day of British colonialism a day of national celebration. Awareness of Australia Day has grown from 75.2 per cent in 1980 to 99.6 per cent in 2007.' On January 27, 2013, Benjamin Thomas Jones noted, 'Without a viable alternative, a move away from 26 January will receive a negative backlash, not only from conservatives, but from many members of the community who have only ever seen it as a day to celebrate all that is good about the country.' 3. The date can be marked in a way that is respectful of Indigenous Australians and recognises cultural diversity It has been claimed that Australia Day can be celebrated on January 26 in a way that is sensitive to the attitudes of Australian citizens who are not of British origin and which recognises their contributions. Equally the day can be celebrated in a way that acknowledges Australia's evolving identity and the contributions of more recent immigrants. This point has been made by Australia's Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, who has stated, 'It is a day where we celebrate the rich diversity of all of our cultures - from our First Australians as we saw with Tina's beautiful welcome to country on behalf of her people, the Ngunnawal people of this region here in the Canberra area, to the new citizens, migrants who come from such a diverse range of countries.' On January 27, 2013, Benjamin Thomas Jones similarly noted, 'Let us keep 26 January as the national day and be ever vigilant to ensure that Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people walking together is something both sides can celebrate.' Anthony Dillon, lecturer in the faculty of Health Sciences at the Australian Catholic University, has noted, 'While I see Australia Day as a day of celebration, it is also perfectly legitimate for people to take time to reflect on past injustices associated with the invasion. Australia Day can be a day of remembrance and reflection, as well as celebrations.' Dillon further noted, 'It does not have to be one or the other - we can reflect on the past, with particular attention given to the injustices endured by Aboriginal people since the invasion, and celebrate what a great country Australia is today.' It has been noted that efforts must also be made to ensure that the ethnic and cultural diversity which large-scale immigration has brought to Australia be properly acknowledged. In January 2017 an Australia Day billboard showing the image of two young Australian girls of Muslim descent wear hijabs was withdrawn because threats were received from those with prejudiced views toward Islam. In response, a crowd funding campaign has raised more than $130,000 to get the photograph reinstated on billboards across the country. Some commentators have suggested that this response is emblematic of the attitude Australia should be adopting - one of tolerance and inclusion regarding the diversity of peoples that make up the Australian community. The United Muslims of Australia organisation has stated, 'This is a great initiative that must be fully supported because it reflects the true Australian spirit.' 4. Changing the date would be of no practical benefit to Indigenous Australians It has been claimed that changing the date would merely be an empty symbolic gesture which would do nothing to improve the circumstances of Indigenous Australians. In an opinion piece published in The Conversation of January 25, 2017, Anthony Dillon, a Lecturer in the Faculty of Health Sciences at the Australian Catholic University stated, 'In response to my words "Australia is a great country to live in", some will immediately retort: "Well, it's not so great for many Aboriginal people." I agree, and this should never be forgotten. But how will protesting about the date and Australia Day help those Aboriginal people most in need?' Dillon continued, 'Protesting about the day, I believe, is a smokescreen to obscure the real problems that many Aboriginal Australians face today. In addition to the problem of violence there is poor health, community dysfunction, unemployment, child neglect, and poor school attendance.' In conclusion Dillon stated, 'These problems will not be solved by changing the date of Australia Day or giving it a new name. For those objecting to Australia Day celebrations, I encourage you to consider the aforementioned problems and ask yourself: "How will changing the name or the date help those who are suffering most?"' Opponents of a date change note that many Indigenous Australians share Dillon's view regarding the 'pointlessness' of such a change. Northern Territory leader Jacinta Nampijinpa Price has stated, 'I keep hearing that Aboriginal people want to change the date of Australia Day... why aren't these people as concerned about the aboriginal people affected by domestic violence, alcohol and drug abuse? Why aren't the marches for murdered Aboriginal women as big as the marches occurring today?' The Indigenous leader compared changing the date of Australia Day with the Rudd government's apology to the 'stolen generation' and suggests that such gestures change nothing. She stated, 'After all has saying 'sorry' stopped domestic violence and dysfunction? Has saying 'sorry' saved an Aboriginal life? I know it did absolutely nothing for me but most token symbolism does very little for me because in my opinion only hard work, responsibility and real action can make real change.' In a comment published on January 27, 2017, by news.com.au Joe Hildebrand stated, 'We cannot reverse the mistakes of the past, nor fully remedy them. There is a limit to justice when both the victims and the perpetrators are long dead. All any mortal can do is accept the present and try to improve the future. So maybe we should change the date of Australia Day or maybe we shouldn't. Either way it will make no difference to the lives of Aboriginal people unless we couple it with more than hashtags and hand-wringing.' 5. Changing the date would provoke widespread hostility It has been noted that there is no general consensus within Australia to change the date of Kate Darian-Smith, professor of Australian Studies and History at the University of Melbourne, has stated, 'Any decision to change Australia Day to an alternative date or disband it altogether would need to be made by the combined federal and state governments. That seems unlikely to happen. Suggestions from time to time that Australia Day be moved to another date have met with little enthusiasm.' In the absence of a clear national consensus it has been argued that changing the date of Australia Day would not remove ill-feeling. It has been claimed that a change of date would simply shift the sense of grievance from some Indigenous Australians and those more recently settled in Australia to the larger group of Australians who have become used and attached to the current date. Indigenous spokesperson, former West Australian of the Year and former head of the Australia Day Council WA, Robert Isaacs, has criticised the city of Freemantle's attempt to shift the date of Australia Day. Isaacs has stated, 'The shire needs to retract what it's doing. It's not in line with community attitudes. I strongly condemn them for this whole thing. They've really upset a lot of people and are not representing the ratepayers. Australia Day is Australia Day.' A range of public comments rejecting the Freemantle shire's decision indicate the hostility which changing the date of Australia Day would be likely to provoke. One respondent noted, 'Shame on Freemantle council for caving in to racist bullies and bigots. I hope that you remove the Australian flag from your flagpoles since I am sure that someone will find that offensive!' Another respondent feared that he would be termed a bigot for supporting the January 26 date. He stated, 'The regressive left continue to inflict their sanctimonious political correctness on normal Australians. What's worse, if you dare to disagree with them, you are branded racist or bigot. Rather than uniting us this will only create division in this country.' Another commentator stated, 'I am offended by this race-based date change. It attacks all non-aboriginal people, branding them as criminals.' |
Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said.