Ray Martin is not right

The contentious point about our present flag is the Union Jack in the corner. But what does the Union Jack tell the world? It tells a world rent with intrigue and spies that there is a country that gets on so well with another that it voluntarily includes its flag on its own. The members of the new global community that diplomatically smile at each other while stock-piling weaponry would see that as rather unnerving. It just ain’t normal.

The Canadians and South Africans got rid of the Union Jack - but that is not an argument the reformers can use. In Canada there was considerable internal pressure for change coming from the French component of the population. Any obstinate resistance by the government to change would have generated a more vigorous call for secession by the Quebecois. In South Africa the Afrikaans component actually went to war against Britain in 1899. Besides, the end of apartheid and the emancipation of the majority of the population called for a new flag for a dramatically new future.

Flags are all about symbols. If the Union Jack is removed, what do we loose symbolically? Britain has given us its legal system, its system of government, its sports and, most of all, its language.

What a blessing that language has been! We have access to the best literature ever written, to the greater majority of the best songs ever composed and the best cinema ever filmed. About 80 per cent of the material on the internet is in English and all of the science performed in the world has been originally written or translated into English. At the end of this century English will be the world language.

No nation could have had as much influence on another's development as what Britain has had on Australia. As for the Union Jack compromising our independence: we showed how independent we were when Britain advised us not to get involved in Vietnam, but the snap of fingers from Washington had us in there. Also, we jumped into World War l because we wanted to be noticed on the world stage - and we can’t blame the Brits for that.

The real question is: what is it that is unique to Australia that could ever go in place of the Union Jack, that means as much as it does and about how we feel about ourselves now - and at the same time we are not hell-bent on degrading or driving to extinction? The awful truth is that we have a struggle to think of anything.

The best evidence for change seems to be the high proportion of Australians with non-British backgrounds, and who, it must be expected, would have no emotional connection to the Union Jack. (Even if they are now benefiting from the fact that the Portuguese, Spaniards, French or Dutch did not take over the place first.)

Once again there is the same problem with Australians with non-British backgrounds - what do they think should go in place of the Union Jack? From what I can gather, they don’t think about it at all. The heat seems to be coming from the Anglo-Celtics.

Then there is the option of nothing going its place. But, of what significance would the remaining stars have for the world (or even for over 90 per cent of this country’s citizens)?

The current flag serves its purpose - which is to have something to fly as all other countries have.