Whether you celebrate or demonstrate, history is unchanged

Peter Dutton is on to a winner with his aspiration to legislate January 26 as Australia’s national holiday (“ ‘National Day January 26 by law’ ”, 15/1).

The perfect nation does not exist and never will, and so it is curious that the vocal activists who sullenly appear every January 26 have never publicly nominated a country they believe is morally better.

The same goes for the miserable throng of aggrieved local councils whom Dutton is finally putting the boot into for their woke whining.

My conviction is that, ultim­ately, the date is perfunctory. It would not matter in the slightest to the perpetually outraged legion what day was chosen. They still would be perturbed that other citizens would dare to express a sense of thanksgiving for living here and continue to exhort us all to demonstrate, not celebrate.

Australia Day strives to bind together all the complex cultural, geographical, historical and familial threads that form our intricate social fabric.

Nothing will be achieved by metaphorically raining on the parade of the majority of thankful citizens and flagellating them into an annual guilt trip.

Peter Waterhouse, Craigieburn, Vic

Here we go again with the annual flurry of complaints about celebrating Australia Day on January 26. Some are just plain silly (like the recent report that some councils object as it can be “too hot” on January 26, although apparently two or three days later is always much cooler).

Others, such as suggestions that it really only applies to NSW, ignore the fact there would have been no other settlements without that first landing, or that those settlements would have been French or Spanish speaking.

But the simple truth remains that no other event, on any other date, in the long history of this land, has had such a profound effect on how this country has evolved and on how we live and are governed today.

The start of British settlement is the most defining moment in our history and changing the date will do nothing to change that history.

It remains worthy of celebration and that is not to deny any other aspects of our history.

Kym MacMillan, O’Malley, ACT

Australia Day used to be such a lot of harmless fun. We would all chorus “Happy Australia Day”, then Dad would take us kids into the city to watch the march, and Mum would stay home and read the papers.

To change the date might seem a small concession, but these thin-edged wedges are increasing by the day, and why should we be railroaded into changing a date most Aussies have enjoyed for yonks? May as well suggest I change the date of my birthday.

Rosemary O’Brien, Ashfield, NSW

Model for super

Of course workers should be allowed early access to superannuation savings for limited purposes; for example, school and medical fees and home purchases (“MPs push Dutton on super reform”, 15/1).

This would follow in the footsteps of the world’s premier scheme, Singapore’s CPF. However, you cannot make an omelet without breaking eggs and the hard right and unions would both be shocked to learn the CPF also calls for employer contributions of 17 per cent and employee contributions of 20 per cent for those under 55 (and lower for older workers). Let’s bring in both measures – or neither.

Nick Hortle, Sydney

Playing Trump card

Do we really have to invite Donald Trump to Australia? (“Albanese invited Trump here in first phone call”, 15/1). Even though Anthony Albanese was criticised for spending time overseas early in his term, it would be far better (and no doubt cheaper) that he goes to the US instead.

Whether Trump’s inauguration will be “an epochal event of immense importance to Australia” (“Getting things right with Trump a priority ambition”, 15/1) remains to be seen. Arguably getting things right on climate change is a priority.

A key role for Australia should be to convince Trump not to leave the Paris Agreement. The best location for this discussion is Los Angeles.

Karen Campbell, Geelong, Vic

Korean energy lesson

It will be interesting to see opposition climate change and energy spokesman Ted O’Brien’s report from South Korea (“Bowen rubbishes Coalition’s nuclear fact-finding mission”, 15/1).

While South Korea seems to be expanding its nuclear power generation, that industry is facing generation restrictions because of insufficient transmission infrastructure. As noted in your report, the country’s power bills are kept low not through efficient generation but through government edict, which has left its state-owned, sole electricity retailer reeling under $224bn in debt.

Should O’Brien recommend that we follow the South Korean example, he will have to accompany this with a policy for making substantial reforms to our antiquated tax system to underpin the Liberals’ claim to excellent financial management.

Chris Young, Surrey Hills, Vic