Australia Day: People are getting facts wrong, says Jason Gillespie
In recent times there has been lot of chorus about changing the date and Gillespie who has indigenous roots said that the argument that January 26 is the only appropriate date to celebrate Australia Day is wrong.
'What I find interesting is that when a lot of people defend Australia Day being on January 26 they say 'it has always been January 26', he told News Corp. 'That's factually incorrect. You go over history and that has not been the only day Australia has celebrated Australia Day.'
Gillespie's argument is backed by facts. Its only since January 26, 1994 that all states and territories in have incorporated to celebrate Australia Day on the said date. Before 1994, certain states and territories staged celebrations on the Monday closest to the date. Also, the first official Australia Day celebrated in 1915 was on July 30. It was a way to raise much needed funds during World War I.
'It (January 26) is seen as a day of genuine and deep sadness for Indigenous Australians and not seen as a day to celebrate. If it creates such sadness (for many people) on such an important day of the year – and it has been moved before – surely there must be 300 or more days Australia could look at which could be a great day for everyone to celebrate,' Gillespie said.
In Australia's rich cricketing history there have been only two cricketers from Indigenous background to play Test cricket. Gillespie was the first and more recently Scott Boland became the second. 'I naively assumed that I couldn't possibly have been the first,' he told ABC Radio Adelaide a few years ago. 'With our rich, multicultural history in our country, with so many people from so many diverse backgrounds, I just assumed there must have been lots of [Indigenous] cricketers and lots of sportspeople.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
34 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump's trip to Scotland highlights his complex relationship with his mother's homeland
U.S. President Donald Trump 's trip to Scotland this week will be a homecoming of sorts, but he's likely to get a mixed reception. Trump has had a long and at times rocky relationship with the country where his mother grew up in a humble house on a windswept isle. He will be met by both political leaders and protesters during the visit, which begins Friday and takes in his two Scottish golf resorts. It comes two months before King Charles III is due to welcome him on a formal state visit to the U.K. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Villas For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You Villas In Dubai | Search Ads Get Rates A daughter of Scotland Trump's mother was born Mary Anne MacLeod in 1912 near the town of Stornoway on the Isle of Lewis, one of the Outer Hebrides off Scotland's northwest coast. "My mother was born in Scotland - Stornoway, which is serious Scotland," Trump said in 2017. Live Events She was raised in a large Scots Gaelic-speaking family and left for New York in 1930, one of thousands of people from the islands to emigrate in the hardscrabble years after World War I. MacLeod married the president's father, Fred C. Trump, the son of German immigrants, in New York in 1936. She died in August 2000 at the age of 88. Trump still has relatives on Lewis, and visited in 2008, spending a few minutes in the plain gray house where his mother grew up. A long golf course battle Trump's ties and troubles in Scotland are intertwined with golf. He first proposed building a course on a wild and beautiful stretch of the North Sea coast north of Aberdeen in 2006. The Trump International Scotland development was backed by the Scottish government . But it was fiercely opposed by some local residents and conservationists, who said the stretch of coastal sand dunes was home to some of the country's rarest wildlife, including skylarks, kittiwakes, badgers and otters. Local fisherman Michael Forbes became an international cause celebre after he refused the Trump Organization's offer of 350,000 pounds ($690,000 at the time) to sell his family's rundown farm in the center of the estate. Forbes still lives on his property, which Trump once called "a slum and a pigsty." "If it weren't for my mother, would I have walked away from this site? I think probably I would have, yes," Trump said in 2008 amid the planning battle over the course. "Possibly, had my mother not been born in Scotland, I probably wouldn't have started it." The golf course was eventually approved and opened in 2012. Some of the grander aspects of the planned development, including 500 houses and a 450-room hotel, have not been realized, and the course has never made a profit. A second 18-hole course at the resort is scheduled to open this summer. It's named the MacLeod Course in honor of Trump's mother. There has been less controversy about Trump's other Scottish golf site, the long-established Turnberry resort in southwest Scotland, which he bought in 2014. He has pushed for the British Open to be held at the course for the first time since 2009. Turnberry is one of 10 courses on the rotation to host the Open. But organizers say there are logistical issues about "road, rail and accommodation infrastructure" that must be resolved before it can return. Protests and politicians Trump has had a rollercoaster relationship with Scottish and U.K. politicians. More than a decade ago, the Scottish government enlisted Trump as an unpaid business adviser with the GlobalScot network, a group of business leaders, entrepreneurs and executives with a connection to Scotland. It dumped him in 2015 after he called for Muslims to be banned from the U.S. The remarks also prompted Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen to revoke an honorary doctorate in business administration it had awarded Trump in 2010. This week Trump will meet left-leaning Scottish First Minister John Swinney, an erstwhile Trump critic who endorsed Kamala Harris before last year's election - a move branded an "insult" by a spokesperson for Trump's Scottish businesses. Swinney said it's "in Scotland's interest" for him to meet the president. Some Scots disagree, and a major police operation is being mounted during the visit in anticipation of protests. The Stop Trump Scotland group has encouraged demonstrators to come to Aberdeen and "show Trump exactly what we think of him in Scotland." U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is also expected to travel to Scotland for talks with Trump. The British leader has forged a warm relationship with Trump, who said this month "I really like the prime minister a lot, even though he's a liberal." They are likely to talk trade, as Starmer seeks to nail down an exemption for U.K. steel from Trump's tariffs . There is no word on whether Trump and Starmer - not a golfer - will play a round at one of the courses.
The Hindu
2 days ago
- The Hindu
Universities everywhere are in crisis
On July 21, a federal judge challenged the U.S. administration's reasons for slashing billions of dollars in federal funding to Harvard University. The funding threats and cuts reflect a larger worldwide trend of right-wing governments forcing higher education institutions with their ideological agendas. Across the world, universities, once imagined as havens of free inquiry, are now being transformed into sites of political control. Weaponised budgets This pressure is particularly evident in the U.S., where Ivy League universities have become the centre of a cultural conflict. Portraying these institutions as havens for 'anti-Americanism', Mr. Trump tightened visas for overseas students and threatened funding cuts to colleges that defied his definition of 'free speech'. The U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 ruling ending affirmative action in college admissions gave right-wing activists even more confidence and spurred calls for broad changes in admissions rules. While Columbia University was pushed into adopting a strict definition of antisemitism, a measure critics say silences legitimate debate about Israel and Palestine, the 2024 congressional campaign forced Harvard's president, Claudine Gay, to resign. Major donors withdrew millions in funding from institutions that resisted these pressures, leaving faculty fearful that discussions on race, gender, or foreign policy might provoke similar reprisals. The effects are felt globally. In Australia, using the nebulous concept of 'national interest', ministers have vetoed peer-reviewed humanities research proposals covering topics such as climate activism and Indigenous politics. Law faculties have faced criticism for deviating from 'black letter law' and incorporating decolonisation into their courses. Universities are also under pressure to pass anti-foreign interference audits to protect rich international student enrolment and engage in persuasive self-censorship on sensitive subjects, such as China, Palestine, and Australia's colonial past. In India, populist leaders see public universities as elitist strongholds. Police visit campuses to quell dissent; budgets are cut; and vice-chancellors replaced. Jawaharlal Nehru University, once a hub of open debate, now frequently faces the label of 'anti-national'. In 2023, the University Grants Commission mandated compulsory courses in 'Indian knowledge systems'; this is seen as advancing Hindu nationalist narratives. The South Asian University, established by SAARC as an international institution, pressured a faculty member to leave after his PhD student cited Noam Chomsky's criticism of the Modi government. From Budapest to Bahrain, the pattern is clear. Viktor Orbán forced Central European University out of Hungary. Turkey dismissed thousands of academics who supported a peace petition. Brazil and the Philippines drastically cut social sciences' funding, silencing studies on inequality. Gulf states impose tight restrictions on conversations about religion, gender, and labour rights. Independent research is now seen across continents as a threat to national security. Along with these direct attacks is a quieter but equally destructive force: the neoliberal makeover of higher education. Rankings, patent creation, and the pursuit of student 'employability' are transforming universities into corporate entities. People discount feminist studies, sociology, history and other subjects which explore power dynamics as unnecessary extravagances. Students become paying customers, faculty members turn into disposable service providers, and trustees prioritise brand management above intellectual exploration. The far right exploits this market-driven logic, portraying universities as taxpayer-funded breeding grounds for sedition, while simultaneously cutting public funding essential for maintaining intellectual diversity. Defending the commons According to the Academic Freedom Index, produced by V-Dem and partner organisations, academic freedom declined in 34 countries between 2014 and 2024, not only in autocracies but in democracies as well. Indicators measuring institutional autonomy, freedom of research, and campus integrity dropped to their lowest levels since the early 1980s. Every erosion of academic freedom limits society's ability to tackle pressing global challenges such as climate change, the impacts of AI, and democratic deterioration. Despite these challenges, hope remains. Networks of academics, students, and civil society groups around the world are resisting ideological pressure. Faculty groups and student coalitions in the U.S. actively promote inclusive education, which forces some colleges to rethink too rigid definitions of antisemitism. Legal collectives and independent academic platforms still guard areas for critical inquiry in India. However, survival alone is insufficient. Universities must recover their public agenda. Governing boards should shield hiring, promotions, and funding decisions from political interference. Donors must support uncomfortable inquiry rather than dictate it. Alumni can fund independent academic chairs or legal defence efforts. Faculty members must engage in university governance instead of leaving it to bureaucrats, while students should remember that campuses are democratic commons, not merely credential factories. If fear, profit motives, or majoritarian arrogance dictate what can be taught or expressed, we risk inheriting not just weakened universities but diminished democracies. Amrita Nambiar, Assistant Professor of Law, Vinayaka Mission's Law School, Vinayaka Mission's Research Foundation (DU); Amrithnath Sreedevi Babu, Sessional Academic and PhD candidate, Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University, Australia
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Stephen A. Smith accuses Donald Trump of using Redskins name to distract from Epstein scandal
Stephen A. Smith has criticized Donald Trump for his comments regarding the Washington Commanders (Getty Images) In a fiery moment on ESPN's First Take, Stephen A. Smith didn't hold back in calling out U.S. President Donald Trump over his latest remarks on the Washington Commanders. Smith claimed that Trump's push to revive the team's controversial former name—the Redskins—is nothing more than a political distraction, aimed at shifting public attention away from far more serious issues, including the unreleased Jeffrey Epstein files. Donald Trump's stadium threat reignites a name-change controversy long thought over Stephen A. Smith didn't hold back when slamming President Donald Trump for reviving the Redskins name debate. Calling the move 'petty' and 'evasive,' Smith claimed it's a deliberate distraction from more serious issues—namely, the unreleased Jeffrey Epstein files. "Well, I think it's the president being petty. I think it's him being evasive," Smith said, directly criticizing Trump's attempt to tie federal stadium funding to the team changing its name back. Trump made headlines again in July 2025 when he suggested that he might block federal support for the Commanders' proposed $2.7 billion stadium project unless the franchise reverts to its old name. That name was officially retired in 2020 after decades of protest from Indigenous groups and civil rights advocates. The team rebranded as the Commanders under new ownership in 2022. Though Trump framed his argument as standing up for tradition, Smith sees something much more calculated behind the president's push. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo "Because when you look at the Redskins name, obviously it's something that needed to be changed," Smith said. "And by him bringing that issue up, we all know from a political landscape, it's much ado about nothing... it's just him catering to his base to make sure that he serves, to appease them in some way to distract them from other issues, including the Epstein files." Political tension overshadows stadium progress in Washington The Commanders' new stadium plans, centered around the RFK Stadium site, have received broad support from Congress and D.C. officials. President Biden had already signed legislation earlier this year to grant control of the land to the city. Yet Trump's comments threaten to complicate that progress just as local leaders debate final budget allocations. For Smith, it's not just about football. It's about accountability—and, in his eyes, a president more focused on stoking culture wars than addressing unfinished business that demands transparency. Also Read: 'I may put a restriction on them': Donald Trump threatens to block $4 billion Commanders stadium plan FAQs Q: What did Stephen A. Smith say about Donald Trump's Redskins comment? Stephen A. Smith called it 'petty' and 'evasive,' accusing Donald Trump of using it to distract from the Epstein files. Q: Why did Donald Trump mention the Redskins name again in 2025? Donald Trump suggested blocking stadium funding unless the Commanders reverted to their former name. Q: What does Stephen A. Smith believes is behind Donald Trump's comment? Stephen A. Smith believes it's a political tactic to appease Donald Trump's base and divert attention from the Epstein scandal. Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
