Flying three flags when giving

a press conference as the Prime Minister or as a member of parliament is not appropriate.

We have a flag in this country. I am well aware some people do not like it. They would be happy to see it changed to something they see as "more inclusive" or any number of other political statements. They fiercely oppose the Union Jack in the corner, say the stars of the Southern Cross are confusing and get confused with our cousins across the Tasman pond.  Perhaps they do but I don't think it matters. The flag acknowledges our colonial past and the stars acknowledge the indigenous people here before that. 

It is this government, likely to be returned if the opinion polls are correct, which has started to appear in front of three flags. The "aboriginal" flag often appears in the centre. It is as if this is the most important of the three. I am aware that some people, while they know our national flag, are not even too sure what or who the third flag represents. Told it is there for the Torres Strait Islanders they remain confused. Are the islanders citizens of this country or not?

The Opposition has stated they will revert to showing just one flag except on special occasions. This is as it should be. They have also stated they would reduce the number of "welcome to country" and "acknowledgment country" ceremonies and statements that have sometimes overwhelmed any gathering in the past few years.

It seems however the government is not listening to the increasing demand for these things to, if not stop, at least become much less in number. People are tired of them. They have become so common they are irritating and lacking in any meaning. Does it matter? Do these things help anyone? Are they bringing us closer together?

I was talking to my good friend M... yesterday. He has been busy ensuring the aboriginal community knows how and where to vote. It is something he finds difficult because many of them are, as he puts it, "disengaged".  

Yesterday though he had another concern. He was talking to a candidate standing for the party likely to win another term in office. That candidate told him the government is "giving serious consideration to legislating a Voice to Parliament". The Voice to Parliament was of course the subject of a very expensive referendum, one which failed by a large margin. That the government could even contemplate trying to legislate something like this is disturbing. 

M... saw the Voice proposal as unnecessary and divisive and I have to agree. Trying to impose it on the nation by legislation when it failed would be wrong but it might just succeed. It might succeed because the government could be returned but only with the support of a minor party or "independent" members. Anyone opposing the introduction of such legislation will of course be held to be racist. It is possible however that the opposite is true. It could be seen as divisive.

Flying three flags is not about any sort of cohesiveness or acceptance either. We need to stop and think about what we are really doing.