Flag flap
From today’s Sunday Times:
A political row has erupted over a plan to redesign the state’s 130-year-old flag.
Opposition Leader Colin Barnett’s legislation to officially recognise the flag and protect it from alteration has been sabotaged in the Upper House.
Premier Geoff Gallop guaranteed Labor support for Mr Barnett’s private member’s Bill but Labor MP and Upper House president John Cowdell has blocked the move.
Mr Cowdell has called for a public competition to redesign the flag.
The best designs should be presented with the present flag in a referendum at February’s state election, Mr Cowdell said.
“It is appropriate that the people be involved in determining such a significant state symbol, particularly in the state’s 175th anniversary year,” Mr Cowdell said.
He believed “many people” had grave reservations about setting in concrete a flag described as a “defaced British blue ensign”.
“The current flag was appropriate when WA was a remote colonial outpost, but not today,” he said.
“Let the people have a say.”
There was a backlog of about 45 Bills in the Upper House and it was unlikely Mr Barnett’s Bill would be passed before the election.
Mr Cowdell was prepared to defy Dr Gallop, saying the Premier’s decision to support the Bill in the lower house was contrary to Labor Party policy.
Labor’s platform says the present flag has never been determined by a democratic vote and there should be a competition to design a new one.
At last year’s State Conference, the following resolution was passed:
Labor recognises that the current West Australian State flag:
a. has not been determined by a democratic vote by plebiscite or referendum of the West Australian people;
b. bears the stamp of invasion (the Union Jack) which is offensive to many indigenous people; and
c. is unrepresentative of the multicultural composition of our community.
Accordingly, the State Labor Government will conduct a State-wide flag competition to design a new State flag, the designs to be exhibited to the public and the most popular designs to go to a plebiscite.
The motion was passed without dissent. The Premier had an opportunity to oppose the flag competition at that time, but chose not to do so. He should be bound by the unanimous decision of Conference to oppose Colin Barnett’s jingoistic attempt to boost his profile, and John Cowdell should be congratulated for defending the views of the rank-and-file.
(I reckon a blue flag with a black swan on a gold disc would be fine — just get rid of the bloody butcher’s apron.)
It’s a good thing the electorate doesn’t get to read these resolutions. And a good thing the Libs don’t have the nous to run with them.
“bears the stamp of invasion (the Union Jack) which is offensive to many indigenous people;”
is such a minority opinion it is hard to imagine how its proposers thought they belonged to a great political party fighting for the agreement of the electoral centre.
What irritates me (and I am not a party member so it is in some ways impertinent of me to bitch about the party on this level but hey this is the internet) is that the resolution is probably a fine idea, but it is then dipped in ideologically driven and blame focused rationale.
A resolution is a statement of action, not a moral treatise. Yes we should change the flags at state and national level; no it should not be contingent on any belief that a) there was an invasion and b) we should feel bad about it and c) our action should be reflected in booting the Union Jack off the flag.
Me, I believe it was an invasion. And a whole lot of fascinating debate and action should follow from that, which we can discuss elsewhere. But it does not mean surely that the future flag should be inoffensive to ‘many indigenous people”? Who have not been polled according to the democratic principle established in the resolution.
On the level of action required to deal with indigenous suffering, the question of the damn flag is just contemptibly trivial.
God spare us from sanctimonious people.
While I am a republican to my boot straps (which is why I love John McCain) I would have toruble finding an issue less important than the West Australian flag. If anyone can be bothered, I back Rob’s idea, ditch the jack, keep the rest. Giving the aborgines a token nod by sticking some white dots and brown lines on it will probably offend more than the jack itself.
“On the level of action required to deal with indigenous suffering, the question of the damn flag is just contemptibly trivial.”
- couldn’t have put it better.
I agree, it’s not just about the fact that the Union Jack offends some Indigenous people — it’s about the fact that it is irrelevant and unrepresentative. And ugly.
No, this will not solve the problems facing Indigenous people. But at some stage, we’ll have to change the flag. Maybe we shouldn’t make it our top priority, but maybe we shouldn’t bow to Colin Barnett’s desperate attempt to wrap himself in the damn thing, either.
God spare us from sanctimonious people.
Right back at you, David.
“unrepresentative”
If you don’t mind, I’m gonna remember you said that if you ever suggest puting some Aboriginal symbol on the flag.
I’ve already made my preference clear, Troy: “I reckon a blue flag with a black swan on a gold disc would be fine”.
And while I’m on the subject, I think Giovanni is dead on when he says, “Giving the aborgines a token nod by sticking some white dots and brown lines on it will probably offend more than the jack itself.”
Have you seen the crazy American guy who wanders around Perth and Fremantle promoting his alternative design? It’s not great, but I bought a sticker off him once. Then he added a sprinkling of red dots, and I now give him a wide berth.
It was being hassled for five bucks, in return for a crummy sticker, that sees me giving the crazy flag guy a wide berth.
It must be wonderful to be able to feel good about yourself, simply via self-indulgent ramblings about flags. fortunately for Labor, they’re never foolish enough to highlight such matters as key electoral issues.
Norman, the internet is full of discussion about apparently trivial issues. And you love it for that. Certainly you chase them around with the best of them.
Robert, I hope I am not being sanctimonious - I try to be exactly the opposite. I did say we should change the flag; it is an isssue that stands on its own as something that does have to be done fairly soon. I am just soo sick of people who tangle issues up and ruin our chance to act and I’ve done my fair share of meetings where that goes on.
Norman, what a stupid comment. I did not start a debate about the State flag — the Liberals did, I’m just throwing in my two-bob’s worth. If you have more important things to talk about, piss off and talk about them on your blog.
David, I didn’t mean to cause offence, but your last post certainly seemed to have been drafted from atop a high horse. The flag is crap, it needs to go, its offensiveness to Aborigines is one of the reasons, but there are many others. (I’m not sure what you were trying to say about the fact that the Indigenes “have not been polled” — the point is that nobody has!)
ON another issue, if anyone is reading this, my car is dying…does anyone have a really nice car they’re prepared to sell to a starving student for cheap?!!
Whoops, I forgot…
the flag annoys me no end. I agree it’s not the most important issue, and I certainly dont’ want it to be an election issue, but since everyone’s going on about how great the damn thing is, it’s important that those of us that disagree say so now. And the jingo-ism that goes with all this flag-waving is scary.
Rob, sorry to steal your website for comercial purposes. ;-)
Carita.
Go the mighty Swans-
1. It links with the Aborigine’s affinity with land and animals.
2. The Swan River has a huge catchment area covering much of the state - especially the original agricultural areas, it is also very much under the influence of the sea.
3. Swan, for a long time = beer. This is a hot and dry state built by hard thirsty work.
4. Black swan throws spanner in works of very old Aristotelian syllogism thus linking us back to most of the best of Western Civillisation.
5. Gold disk - without gold we would have been waiting until Rose’s ex found iron ore until we were more than a rural supply town.
6. Dark blue - is, is…dunno
No West Australian flag would be complete without a likeness of Dear Leader Gallop, superimposed in front of a strong economy preserved by 9-5 trading and lush fields of green saved from rape and pillage by evil, faceless corporations.
He will save us from ourselves!
No offence involved Robert. I’m interested in the feedback- particularly when I am frothing at the mouth. A moment when my pleasure was clearly not shared.
I have no dog in this fight, but it’s interesting that the Union Jack is though to be offensive to Aborigines. In Hawaii, whose flag also incorporates a Union Jack, native (i.e. aboriginal) Hawaiians use the state flag as a symbol of ethno-nationalist pride. Union Jack and all.
It must be wonderful to be able to feel good about yourself, simply via self-important sniping at other bloggers. Fortunately for Norman, he’s never foolish enough to highlight such matters as… well, anything actually important, really.
Vaara,
Nice point and rekindled my flagging interest. It may suggest a different colonial experience and how they choose to express it. There’s an almost to good to be true story to it here under “History”.
“I’ve already made my preference clear, Troy: “I reckon a blue flag with a black swan on a gold disc would be fine”.”
Sorry Rob. Sometimes I get a bit presumtious when reading Lefty blogs.
[the union jack] is unrepresentative of the multicultural composition of our community.
Let’s see here…
Union Jack => Overlayed St Andrew’s, St Patrick’s, St David’s, St George’s crosses => Scots, Irish, Welsh and English => multiple cultures => Multicultural
Yes. Screw the Scots, Irish, Welsh and English but make sure you include the Hammer and Sickle, Fasces and Swastika. After all, we wouldn’t want anybody to feel left out.
We got both kinds, Country and Western!
Leave our flag alone, you lefty bastards! Australia is a great country with a proud history, a history that ancestors of mine have been part of since 1806; that members of my family have fought for in various wars during the 20th century. You are trying to wipe away OUR history because it doesn’t accord with YOUR ideas of political correctness. You are attempting a form of cultural genocide. How dare you! Damn you forever.
Moron, we’re talking about the WA flag, and since the colony didn’t even exist in 1806 I doubt you’ve been connected to it since then. In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion you’re a t’othersider.
And Murph, if you could point out where I’ve said we should include either the hammer and sickle or the swastika, I’d greatly appreciate it. Ta.
So I’m a moron am I?
Do you think I’m so stupid as not to be aware of what you and your compatriots are really up to? It’s the thin edge of the wedge and YOU KNOW IT. The West Australian flag today, the Australian flag tomorrow. THE SAME ARGUMENTS WILL APPLY.
I was poking fun at the warm and fuzzy ‘logic’ of the ALP that the flag does not include symbols which are relevant to everybody.
Strange that they can say that the UJ is not relevant but somehow the Aboriginal Nationalist/Socialist flag is.
Anyhow, I agree with you to the extent that the only acceptable change to any Australian flags (state or federal) would be the removal of the UJ.
BTW. If we change the Oz flag to be more reflective of the multicultural composition of the nation (or whatever pile of toss the Left think of), and subsequently 10 million Bible-bashing Republican Americans emigrate to Australia (as ,say, refugees from the Kerry regime), would we change the flag again and put Stars and Stripes in it? Or even better, a Confederate symbol?
The sooner we change both flags, the better. We’re not going to agree on that point, so you may as well piss off and whinge elsewhere.
Murph, if 10 million bible-bashing Republicans turned up, I would support changing the flag. National symbols should reflect the nation. I don’t believe the current flag does, so I think it should be changed.
But you’ve invoked Godwin’s Law by describing the Aboriginal flag as Nazi (even though nobody had raised the Aboriginal flag as an issue), so there ends this debate.
Now you’ve admitted it. You DO want to change both flags, so we both know where we stand. Well, I’m NOT going to piss off and neither are those who agree with me. You are a recent immigrant and it is impudent of you to promote any such change. Anyway, you will fail in this endeavour.
Nope. I didn’t invoke Godwin’s Law, funnily enough it just came out like that.
Anyhow, if we’re going to change the flag to be reflective of the cultural make up to the nation, I would have thought that the Union Jack and the Irish tri-colour would cover about half, then we could have a montage of Serbo- Croat- Italian- Lebo- Greco- Cypriot- Armenian- Turko- Dutch- German- Russo- Pole combined with a patchwork of Chinese- Philipino- Indian- Sri Lankan- Thai- Vietnamese- Cambodian- Pakistani- Iranian- Tongan- Samoan- Soloman Islander- Fijian- New Zealand (with its Union Jack)- Japanese- Indonesian- South African- Sudanese- Ethipioan- Eritrean- Kenyan- Zimbabwean- New Guinean- Colombian- Chilean- Argentinian- Equadorean- Brazilian- American- Canadian- Mexican. Don’t forget the people who don’t identify themselves with nationalistic terms! We’ll need Christian- Jewish- Muslim (Shi’ite&Sunni)- Sikh- Hindu- Buddhist- Jain- Zoroastrian- Animist- Jim Jones Cult- Breatharian- Scientologist- Branch Davidian- Salvation Army- Rastafarian- Communist- Fascist- Trot- Leninist- Stalinist- Maoist- Gay- Green symbols too. With about 2% being set aside for the Aborigines.
Hang on! Here’s an idea: Maybe we could use a computer, which is connected to the census database, to generate a new flag every couple of years.
[Comment edited for formatting. RC.]
Antony: I have not “admitted” to some kind of secret agenda. My opposition to both the Queen and her flag is, I think, quite widely known.
And as an Australian citizen, I have as much right to discuss our national symbols as you have. Xenophobic appeals to a pure Australian identity from which all newcomers should be excluded are quite pathetic — and ironic, given your clear opposition to those who inhabited these lands before 1788 (and long before 1806). “I’ve been here longer than you” pissing contests do nothing for me, sorry.
Your argument boils down to this: Conspiracy! The invading foreigners are undermining our British identity! Cultural genocide! Etc!
Puh-lease.
Murph: I’ll accept that your Nazi reference was accidental, although you’ll surely understand why I thought you would make such a comment — it’s what you usually do.
I don’t believe that our flag should simply incorporate the flags of other nations to reflect our cultural composition. That’s one of the reasons I think including the Union Jack is a ludicrous way to reflect our British history.
The union jack isn’t in the flag to reflect our ethnic composition, though. It’s there to reflect how our nation began. We were an english colony, and we eventually gained independence peacefully, while still retaining strong ties.
That’s why the union jack is part of our flag, because it’s a significant part of our history. I personally don’t feel any particular affinity to England, but I still think the UJ is an appropriate symbol. Without the “butchers” as Rob calls them, none of us would be here.
It’s a far more appropriate symbol of Australia than any sort of aboriginal symbol would be. Our traditions, rule of law, political system, language, technologies and the vast majority of ancestors were imported from England.
To create a new flag that acknowledges aboriginal inhabitants without acknowledging England would be far less representative of Australian culture than the current one.
English culture gave us the successful, wealthy, peaceful, friendly society we live in today.
Aboriginal culture has given us….paintings and boomerangs.
OK Robert, let’s get down to basics. I want immigrants to join with us to add to and enrich our culture. You, by contrast, want to remove, obliterate, blank out and consign to the dustbin of history part of our history and culture. How dare you! Keep your malice and historical resentments to yourself. Don’t try to impose them on the rest of us.
As for this crap about my purported “clear opposition to those who inhabited these lands before 1788″, well, try telling that to some of my close relatives!
Antony: I want to remove the Union Jack from our flag, yes. But I don’t believe that involves “obliterating part of our history and culture”. If the flag is the only thing linking Australia to the British strand of its history (it is not, as Yobbo points out), then it’s sad that you cling so dearly to the symbol. Indeed, if you believe our connection to Britain is that weak, then it undermines your claim that it is an appropriate symbol to represent us.
Yobbo: I have not advocated adding dot paintings to the flag, as I thought I pointed out quite clearly above. Do you not think that the rest of the WA flag is a pretty good symbol of the people (all of them) that live here? The black swan is a universal symbol. It’s that sort of universality that we should be seeking. We should also be looking to things that are uniquely (Western) Australian to represent us.
“I don’t believe that involves ‘obliterating part of our history and culture’”
The Canadians went through this same debate back in the 1960s. A large segment of the population wanted to keep the Red Ensign (a red field with the Union Jack in the upper left corner) but eventually they decided to adopt the Maple Leaf flag as a positive national symbol.
From a branding point of view, it was a brilliant decision. Today the Maple Leaf™ is universally recognized as the symbol of Canada™ — the sort of symbol that Australia, apparently, lacks.
However, the Union Jack or some component thereof still features on several provincial flags.
We could go the boxing kangaroo. Or, um, er… a gum tree! Yeah! Or, er, um… some daft-looking bloke in a flannie and akubra riding around on a hoverboard-thingy, waving a piece of corrugated iron in one hand and attempting to play two-up with the other, while across his back is a tucker-sack with jumbuck attempting valiantly to escape.
Robert, it is nonsense to assert that removing the Union Jack from our flag doesn’t involve obliterating part of our history and culture. It does and that’s the key point. Of course, our culture has many strands, as Yobbo reminds us. We are the product of European civilisation generally, a civilisation that has developed over several thousand years, and its British variant in particular, a variant that has developed over the past thousand years. It is a challenge to subvert it, but here’s the key: civilisation depends on memory. The Dark Ages destroyed memory. The Renaissance required its restoration. Destroy our national memory and you will destroy our civilisation.
And that’s the true malevolence of your position. By abolishing such symbols, you are chipping away at our national memory and by so doing, subverting our national foundations. And for what? To create a void that can be filled with whatever bland symbol takes your fancy provided, of course, it’s acceptable to the multicultural thought police. I’m not prepared to countenance the steady subversion of the tried and tested foundations of our nation for some kind of mushy multiculturalism. I’m not prepared to see Australia lose its unique identity and become mere geographical expression, its citizenship a mere flag of convenience. Which leads me to Vaara’s comments on Canada.
Canada is now a nation whose seat at the peak economic councils of the world is based on history, not current achievement; a nation whose international influence has been for some time in decline; a nation now totally dependent for both its defence and prosperity on the great benevolent hegemon to the south; a nation with an unbridgeable ethnic divide; a nation that hangs together by just a thread; a nation which no longer has much point to it at all; a national identity reduced to a brand. Whatever its other attractions, that’s the only message from its flag. As Vaara has perhaps inadvertently noted, it’s merely a trademark.
That won’t be our fate, not if I have any say in the matter!
If we are going to argue to heritage, then the harp shurely belongs on the thing.
And if we are going to argue to heritage, shouldn’t the Stars and Stripes have the Union Jack as well?
What is the point where we are our own heritage? Isn’t two hundred years enough?
I actually think there is a far far more powerful symbol of heritage flown at every time our national identity is at issue or asserted. We speak English. I reckon that’s enough.
For myself, I think an authentic representation of our current state is a flag showing a football rampant over a library book.
strike a bloody light
There’s an on-going argument between fruitcakes and the rest of us in Rob’s comments-thread, I have produce my own version of the Future Aussie Flag. Inspired by vaara’s comment about the Canadian flag and the need for an Australian national symbol…
“Canada is now a nation whose seat at the peak economic councils of the world is based on history, not current achievement”
And yet somehow it still manages to be more prosperous than Australia. If you want Australia to replace Canada in the G8, you’ll have to come up with a better argument than that. Why not ditch Italy instead? What has Italy given the world lately?
“a nation now totally dependent for both its defence and prosperity on the great benevolent hegemon to the south”
Which is, in turn, heavily dependent on Canadian natural resources, especially oil.
Shame this had to turn into a round of pointless Canada-bashing, but then I don’t suppose a knee-jerk monoculturalist is capable of anything else (even though Canada’s republican movement, unlike Australia’s, is virtually invisible).
Finally, if your British heritage is the *only* component of “Australianness” worth celebrating, why not ditch the national flag altogether and revert to using an unsullied Union Jack?
Vaara, please don’t misrepresent what I actually say. Where did I say or imply that Australia should replace Canada in the G8? What has Italy to do with it? Where did I say or imply that our British heritage was the ONLY component of “Australianness” worth celebrating?
I’ll repeat what I said in an earlier post on this thread. I want immigrants to join with us to add to and enrich our culture. If that make me a “knee-jerk monoculturalist” in your eyes that’s too bad. And all this nonsense brings to mind my business partner and good friend who occasionally refers to himself as a wog and whose children will extend the very small number of people in this country who currently bear a particular surname. As it happens, if you visit his home, you may notice that he’s taken to flying an Australian flag above his carport.
Ah. Well, when I read the following:
“Canada is now a nation whose seat at the peak economic councils of the world is based on history, not current achievement”
I inferred that you felt that Canada is no longer worthy of being “seated at the peak economic councils of the world.” And by “peak economic councils of the world” I assumed you meant the G8, as I can’t think of another PECOTW of which Canada is a member.
It was, admittedly, a bit of a stretch to infer that you wanted Australia to take Canada’s place, even though you took great pains to contrast Canada and its namby-pamby multi-culti liberalism with Australia and its lack thereof. So, if I’ve misrepresented your remarks, I apologize.
And by all means, carry on proudly flying the banner that represents the proud Australian nation: a Union Jack with asterisks.
“A Union Jack with asterisks.” That’s gold!
And a happy Independence Day to you too!
I suppose it’s already July 5 where you are, but it’s still the Fourth of July in my native land, namely the U.S. of fuckin’ A. And isn’t that the only country that really matters? (he said, not entirely sarcastically)
vaara, the 4th of July is a great day indeed, celebrated even in this great, wide, brown land.
Yes, we all celebrate the beginning of the Kanga Cup: the greatest junior tournament in the southern hemisphere!
Robert: I guess I should come out and say that I don’t really give a toss about the WA flag. I see this issue as just the latest battle in the Australia-wide culture war and a step towards changing the Australian flag. Once the cultural warriors in the labor left have gone ahead with their plan to take the UJ off the state flag, the next logical step is to target the rest of the states and then finally the national flag. I like the Australian flag as it is and don’t wish to see it changed.
As far as the swan goes, I disagree on its universality. Black swans are only really found in the Perth area. Many WA residents have never even seen one. A more universal symbol of WA would be a saltbush, as those things are bloody everywhere.
A sillhouette of Paul Medhurst’s hair would be even better. It’s instantly recognisable, serves as a reminder of the resourcefulness, confidence, and ability to rise to occasion of Western Australian people, along with an acknowledgement of our multicultural society. Perfect!
Anyone ready yet, to run up a white flag?