Australia Day or bust and no boardies or thongs
“Heavy-handed” and “odd” are some of the words used to describe the Federal Government decree that councils must hold their citizenship ceremonies on Australia Day. And a strict dress code has been established that bans citizens being sworn in from wearing board shorts and thongs.
The move follows breakaway ceremonies by rebel councils in 2017. Two Melbourne councils – Yarra City and Darebin – were stripped of the right to hold citizenship ceremonies after scrapping Australia Day celebrations last year due to indigenous sensitivities. Several other councils had already planned to move or cancel traditional celebrations this year because they believed 26 January was a day of mourning for many indigenous and non-indigenous people.
As a result, Scott Morrison’s government has revised the citizenship code to make it compulsory for all councils to hold citizenship ceremonies on Australia Day. And, from 2020, councils will also have to hold a second citizenship ceremony on 17 September – Australian Citizenship Day.
Mr Morrison said on Sunday that the Government would "protect our national day and ensure it is respected".
Australian Local Government Association president Mayor David O’Loughlin said most councils were unlikely to oppose the changes although some had valid concerns. He told SBS that if the government had "bothered to consult" with council it would have found the summer heat was a factor in the timing of ceremonies.
“In some locations, it’s simply too hot for councils to hold ceremonies during the day, so they do it the evening before, just as the Federal Government does with its Australian of the Year Ceremony," he said.
What’s your view on the Government compelling councils to hold citizenship ceremonies on Australia Day?
Isn't it the activists with their radical aims who are actually the 'heavyhanded' 'odd(balls)'? Why turn it upside down to make those accusations against the democratic majority. Why the switcheroo?
Also, isn't it the activists who are being racist and xenophobic for denouncing the early settlers and the compulsorily relocated convicts as 'invaders'? Is every migrant after the first migration an 'invader' according to activist ideologues?
Next, how come the same serial activists who denounce their hated 'white' settlement are also ardent supporters of diversity for the sake of diversity (and the more contrasting/competing the imported culture the better), but they want to lock Aborigines into a time warp cultural bubble that prevents the children from enjoying the rights and advantages that other children can take for granted? Isn't diversity equally good for indigenous too? If not, why not?