Page 1170 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 24 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Lamont: Lionses and tigerses.
MR KAINE: If we turned all those zoo animals loose in Namadgi, perhaps we could adopt the elephant as the ACT's symbol. At least, if you turned them loose they would keep the hikers away and they would not damage the landscape. I am being a bit facetious; but I think there is a need for us to adopt some symbols that reflect this community, so my proposition is quite serious.
I would like to take up one point, Madam Speaker. Somebody asked how it is that members of the ACT Assembly can be diverted on such irrelevant issues as this when there are major issues before us. Of course there are, but I find it quite possible to deal with two or even three matters at a time. I can cope with the problems of a termination of pregnancy Act being repealed; I can cope with budgetary problems; I can deal with matters of planning. At the same time, I and, I am sure, other members of the Assembly are quite capable of dealing with a matter such as this. I think it is rather trivial for people to ask why we are wasting our time. The implication is that we are such imbeciles that we can deal with only one matter at a time and anything beyond that is too much for us. I do not accept that.
For the same reasons that were outlined eloquently by Mr Humphries, Mr Lamont, Mrs Grassby and others in the previous debate about the significance of the wattle to us as Australians, I think it is important that we adopt some symbols of our own so that when our sporting clubs and others go interstate and elsewhere they can display them. I point out that there clearly is a need. If you look around Canberra you see that a number of organisations fly that brownish-tannish coloured flag with the city emblem on it - the black and white swans. They adopt that because there is no other flag. It is not an ACT flag; it is a flag that was granted to the Federal Capital Commission when it was established in 1927, and it is a Canberra city flag. But people use it because they have no other. I think there clearly is a need. People see a need, and we should be doing something about it.
As to how we resolve what our flag should look like, we have had a number of competitions over the years and most of the results have been terrible. Many of them in recent years have incorporated the flagpole on top of Parliament House. I would think that is the last thing we want to adopt to represent the people of Canberra. It is a Federal symbol, not a territorial one. I have my own ideas about what we should put on our flag; but I will not force those on you, because most of you probably would not agree anyway. I will do a drawing for you and submit it to the Chief Minister.
Mr Lamont: It has not got a Union Jack on it, has it?
MR KAINE: No; but it is a good symbol, and for me it does encompass the history of Australia. The first migrants to this country came from the United Kingdom. Why do we want to throw that heritage away? I do not understand that thinking at all. I am afraid that I do not have much sympathy for those who want to throw away the past. It is our history, and I have no difficulty acknowledging that. I cannot understand why people now want to disassociate themselves from the fact that this country was settled by the British.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .