Is May 8 Australia Day the Answer We’ve Been Looking For?

Australia stands alone among 53 Commonwealth nations as the only country celebrating its national day on the date of colonization. January 26, 1788, marked the beginning of British settlement, disrupting over 60,000 years of Indigenous peoples’ peaceful existence. This has led many Australians to question whether we need a more unifying date for our national celebration.

The growing debate around May 8 Australia Day offers an intriguing alternative. This date, chosen for its phonetic similarity to “mate,” represents a potential shift toward a more inclusive national identity. In fact, recent surveys show declining support for January 26 celebrations, particularly among younger Australians and women under 35. As we consider this change, we need to examine whether May 8 could truly serve as the unifying date our nation needs.

The History Behind May 8 as Australia Day

The concept of moving Australia Day to May 8 emerged from a uniquely Australian wordplay. The date “May 8” pronounced in a broad Australian accent sounds like “mate” – a term deeply woven into our national identity ^[1]. This connection stems from Middle Low German “ge-mate,” originally meaning sharing a meal at the same table ^[1].

Origin of the ‘Mate’ connection

The significance of mateship in Australian culture runs deep, tracing back to early European settlement when survival often depended on mutual support ^[1]. This historical foundation has evolved into modern interpretations, with many grassroots organizations embracing mateship as a cornerstone for building community connections ^[1]. Furthermore, May 8 has informally become known as “Mates Day” in various Australian communities ^[2].

Previous campaigns and support

The May 8 movement gained substantial momentum between 2015 and 2019 ^[1]. Initially, the campaign emerged as a partially humorous suggestion in 2017 ^[2]. Additionally, the date carries historical significance as it falls near the opening of Australia’s first Federal Parliament on May 9 ^[2].

The campaign’s approach differed from previous attempts to change Australia Day by offering a specific alternative rather than simply opposing January 26. Supporters argue that selecting May 8 makes the movement solution-oriented rather than purely protest-driven ^[2]. Meanwhile, various local councils have already taken steps toward change, albeit not specifically to May 8. Notable examples include:

• Flinders Island Council’s decision to end January 26 celebrations ^[3]
• Fremantle Council’s 11-1 vote to modify their traditional celebrations ^[3]
• Moreland’s move to shift citizen awards to October ^[3]

Key advocates and opposition

The proposal has attracted both support and criticism from various quarters. Notably, Aboriginal activist Michael Mansell suggests that any new national day should follow a comprehensive treaty process ^[3]. Some Indigenous voices have expressed concern that simply changing the date without addressing underlying issues misses the broader point of reconciliation ^[1].

The debate has evolved beyond just the date change, with some advocates shifting focus from #changethedate to #changethenation ^[1]. This transition reflects a growing understanding that meaningful change requires more than selecting a new calendar date. Primarily, the discussion now encompasses broader considerations about national identity and reconciliation processes.

Analyzing Public Support for May 8

Public opinion about moving Australia Day to May 8 reveals complex attitudes and shifting perspectives across different segments of society. Recent polling data shows varying levels of support for changing the date from January 26, with 15% of those opposing the current date favoring May 8 as an alternative ^[1].

Recent polling data

Support for changing Australia’s national day has fluctuated significantly. A comprehensive Ipsos poll indicated that 28% supported changing the date, while 48% opposed any change ^[1]. Significantly, 49% of respondents believed the date would change within the next decade ^[1]. The Institute of Public Affairs survey revealed that 65% preferred keeping January 26 ^[2], though the Australia Institute found that 54% were flexible about the date as long as the nation maintained an annual public holiday ^[2].

Demographics breakdown

Age emerges as a crucial factor in shaping attitudes toward date change. The data shows striking generational differences:

• 47% of people aged 18-24 support changing the date
• Only 19% of those 55 and older favor a change ^[1]
• Support varies by location, with Western Australia showing 83% support for keeping January 26
• Urban areas demonstrate 66% support, compared to 78% in regional areas ^[2]

Education levels significantly influence perspectives, as university graduates show 55% support for keeping January 26, while those without degrees demonstrate 75% support ^[2]. Political affiliations also play a role, with 67% of Greens voters supporting date change, followed by 31% of Labor voters and 23% of Coalition voters ^[1].

Social media sentiment

Social media platforms reflect diverse viewpoints about May 8 as an alternative. Some users express strong support, stating “As a sign of respect I think the date should be changed. May 8 for sure!” ^[4]. Others propose creative solutions, suggesting celebrating both perspectives to honor different historical narratives. Consequently, some suggest that younger generations might embrace change more readily, particularly if cultural institutions like Triple J lead the way ^[4].

The online discourse reveals a growing acknowledgment of Indigenous perspectives, with many users emphasizing the importance of choosing a date that promotes unity. Nevertheless, social media conversations indicate that no single alternative date has emerged as a clear favorite ^[1], highlighting the complexity of finding a universally acceptable solution.

Practical Implementation Challenges

Changing Australia’s national day requires extensive coordination between multiple levels of government. A successful transition to May 8 would need approval from both federal and state governments, which has historically lacked sufficient political backing ^[4].

Legislative requirements

Moving Australia Day involves complex legislative processes. Primarily, the change requires federal government support, subsequently followed by state-level endorsements. Local councils, although vocal in the debate, face limitations in their authority. For instance, when certain councils attempted to modify their Australia Day celebrations, the federal government promptly restricted their powers to conduct citizenship ceremonies ^[4].

The legislative framework dictates that councils must hold citizenship ceremonies on January 26 and September 17, according to the Australian Citizenship Ceremonies Code ^[1]. Accordingly, any date change would require amendments to these established protocols.

Economic costs and benefits

The economic implications of changing Australia Day present both challenges and opportunities. Research indicates several key impacts:

• Lost productivity when January 26 falls mid-week costs the economy substantially ^[5]
• Higher rates of workplace absenteeism occur around mid-week public holidays ^[5]
• Businesses face increased operational costs due to penalty rates ^[5]
• National employers struggle with inconsistent holiday applications across states ^[5]

The Productivity Commission emphasizes that declaring additional public holidays brings significant economic costs ^[5]. However, they acknowledge genuine social benefits from widespread community engagement in culturally significant events ^[5].

Transition timeline considerations

Implementation timing requires careful consideration of various factors. The government would need to establish a clear transition period to allow businesses and organizations to adapt their operations. Moreover, the cost-benefit analysis framework must incorporate First Nations perspectives, which has historically been overlooked in government decision-making processes ^[2].

The transition would require updating various systems and processes:

• Modifying citizenship ceremony schedules
• Adjusting business operating procedures
• Revising public holiday legislation across states
• Implementing new community engagement programs

Recent analysis suggests that successful implementation would need comprehensive stakeholder engagement ^[2]. Essentially, the transition timeline must balance practical considerations with cultural sensitivity, ensuring adequate time for communities to adapt while maintaining momentum for change.

State and Territory Perspectives

Local governments across Australia demonstrate varying stances on changing the national day, with recent surveys revealing complex patterns of support and resistance. Presently, a University of South Australia study shows 67% of citizens are open to celebrating Australia Day on any date, provided there remains a dedicated day for national celebration ^[6].

Current stance by jurisdiction

State-level responses to potential date changes reflect diverse perspectives. Generally, support for maintaining January 26 remains stronger in regional areas at 78% versus 66% in metropolitan regions ^[4]. Primarily, Western Australia shows the highest resistance to change, with 83% favoring the current date ^[4].

The divide between urban and rural perspectives becomes increasingly apparent when examining jurisdiction-specific data. State governments maintain authority over official holiday declarations, yet many have adopted a cautious approach to the debate, allowing local councils to lead community discussions.

Local government views

Local councils have emerged as key drivers in the national conversation about Australia Day. Several significant council decisions highlight this trend:

• The City of Yarra voted unanimously to stop referring to January 26 as Australia Day
• Darebin Council followed with a 6-2 vote supporting change
• Inner West Council became Sydney’s first authority to end January 26 celebrations
• City of Mitcham pioneered opposition to the current date in South Australia ^[1]

These actions prompted swift federal government response, including the removal of certain councils’ powers to conduct citizenship ceremonies ^[1]. Ultimately, this led to new regulations requiring councils to hold citizenship ceremonies exclusively on January 26 and September 17 ^[1].

Regional community feedback

Community sentiment varies significantly between metropolitan and regional areas. Recent polling indicates that support for retaining January 26 remains notably stronger in regional communities ^[4]. Similarly, the Australia Institute’s research reveals that 54% of Australians remain flexible about the date, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a national celebration rather than focusing on a specific date ^[4].

Local government engagement efforts have yielded valuable insights. For instance, AlburyCity’s comprehensive community consultation involving 2,107 respondents demonstrated strong support for maintaining traditional elements while incorporating Indigenous perspectives ^[7]. The consultation revealed that 70% of participants desired continued Australia Day activities at community gathering spaces ^[7].

Regional councils have adopted diverse approaches to balance community expectations. Some, like Tamworth Regional Council, focus on creating inclusive events that encourage both reflection and celebration ^[1]. The National Australia Day Council supports these efforts through grants, enabling over 600 local community events in 2024 alone, with funding totaling AUD 7.27 million ^[1].

International Examples of Date Changes

Looking beyond Australia’s borders reveals valuable insights from nations that have successfully navigated national day changes. Primarily, New Zealand and Canada offer compelling examples of how countries can thoughtfully evolve their national celebrations.

New Zealand’s experience

New Zealand’s Waitangi Day, celebrated on February 6, commemorates the 1840 signing of the Treaty of Waitangi between British representatives and Māori chiefs ^[5]. The day became a national public holiday in 1974 ^[4], marking a significant shift in how New Zealanders acknowledge their founding document.

Historically, Waitangi Day celebrations combine formal ceremonies with cultural education. Political leaders attend speeches by Māori representatives, creating structured dialog between indigenous and non-indigenous groups ^[5]. The day’s observances extend nationwide, with Māori leaders conducting educational sessions about traditional customs in local communities ^[5].

Evidently, this approach differs markedly from Australia’s current situation. Waitangi Day centers on an agreement rather than arrival, focusing on inclusion rather than colonization ^[8]. The holiday underwent its own evolution, briefly being renamed “New Zealand Day” in 1973 before reverting to Waitangi Day in 1975 ^[4].

Canada’s national day evolution

Canada’s journey offers another instructive example of national day transformation. The country celebrates its national day on July 1, commemorating the 1867 formation of the Canadian federation ^[2]. Originally known as “Dominion Day,” the celebration underwent a significant change when it was officially renamed “Canada Day” in 1982 ^[6].

The transition process involved several key developments:

• Initial celebrations in 1867 featured bells, bonfires, and military displays ^[3]
• Government-organized celebrations began in 1958 ^[3]
• Multicultural celebrations emerged between 1968 and 1979 ^[6]
• Local community involvement increased after 1980 through government grants ^[3]

Lessons from other countries

Both examples offer valuable insights for Australia’s consideration of May 8 as an alternative date. Chiefly, successful national day changes require:

1. Structured Dialog: New Zealand’s experience demonstrates the importance of creating formal platforms for indigenous voices ^[5]
2. Community Engagement: Canada’s approach shows how government support for local celebrations can build nationwide acceptance ^[3]
3. Cultural Integration: Both countries emphasize inclusive celebrations that acknowledge diverse perspectives ^[5]

Undoubtedly, these international examples highlight that changing a national day involves more than selecting a new date. The process requires careful consideration of historical context, cultural sensitivity, and community involvement. Currently, Australia stands as the only Commonwealth nation commemorating colonization as its central national celebration ^[9].

Certainly, both New Zealand and Canada’s experiences demonstrate that national days can evolve while strengthening cultural bonds. Their approaches show how celebrations can balance historical acknowledgment with forward-looking unity. These examples suggest that May 8 Australia Day could potentially offer a similar opportunity for inclusive celebration, provided the transition process incorporates lessons from these successful international precedents.

Impact on Indigenous Reconciliation

Moving beyond symbolic gestures, the discussion around May 8 as Australia Day intersects deeply with Indigenous reconciliation efforts. First Nations peoples have consistently voiced their perspectives on national celebrations, with many viewing January 26 as a day of mourning that marks the beginning of colonization ^[10].

First Nations perspectives

For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, who have maintained the world’s oldest continuous living culture for over 60,000 years ^[7], the current Australia Day represents profound loss. Recent surveys indicate that 80% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people support changing the date ^[1]. Primarily, this stems from January 26 symbolizing the start of dispossession, with Indigenous population declining by 90% by the 1900s ^[7].

Growing up in the early 1990s, many Indigenous Australians experienced Australia Day celebrations as a source of cultural tension ^[4]. Currently, First Nations communities often refer to January 26 through alternative terms:

• Invasion Day
• Day of Mourning
• Survival Day
• Aboriginal Sovereignty Day

Indeed, the National Australia Day Council acknowledges that January 26 carries multiple meanings, recognizing it as a day of mourning for some while others view it as an opportunity to celebrate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ survival and resilience ^[1].

Relationship to Voice referendum

The debate around May 8 gains additional context following the Voice referendum. Recent data reveals that 80% of Australians support the importance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples having a voice in matters affecting them ^[6]. Ultimately, the referendum results did not indicate opposition to constitutional recognition, as those supporting recognition outnumbered opponents by a margin of five-to-one ^[6].

The Voice referendum highlighted that Australians broadly acknowledge ongoing Indigenous disadvantage caused by past government policies ^[6]. Hence, the May 8 proposal emerges within a broader context of reconciliation efforts, with 27% of Australians now choosing not to celebrate January 26 ^[4].

Treaty implications

Aboriginal activist Michael Mansell suggests that any new national day should follow comprehensive treaty processes ^[3]. Currently, the absence of a treaty remains a significant barrier to meaningful reconciliation. Unless addressed, simply changing the date might not achieve the deeper structural changes many Indigenous leaders advocate for ^[10].

The National Australia Day Council encourages proactive engagement with local Indigenous groups, promoting inclusive events that authentically reflect on history and culture ^[1]. Soon, this approach could extend to May 8 celebrations, incorporating:

• Acknowledgement of Country protocols
• Welcome to Country ceremonies
• Recognition of continuous connection to land
• Community-led cultural celebrations

Thereafter, the transition to May 8 could potentially strengthen treaty discussions by demonstrating national willingness to address historical wrongs. The Australia Institute’s research shows that 54% of Australians remain flexible about the date, prioritizing inclusive celebration over specific timing ^[7].

Overall, Indigenous perspectives emphasize that changing the date represents just one step in a broader reconciliation journey. Recent shifts in public attitudes offer hope, with several councils already modifying their January 26 celebrations to better acknowledge First Nations peoples ^[4]. Since 2017, organizations like Triple J have led by example, demonstrating how institutional changes can respect Indigenous perspectives while maintaining national celebrations ^[4].

Conclusion

Australia’s journey toward finding a unifying national day reveals deeper questions about our identity as a nation. Recent surveys show declining support for January 26, particularly among younger generations, while May 8 emerges as a potential alternative that celebrates our shared value of mateship.

Lessons from New Zealand and Canada demonstrate that national celebrations can evolve meaningfully when changes address both practical and cultural considerations. Though implementation challenges exist, successful transitions in other countries prove that thoughtful planning and inclusive dialog can lead to positive outcomes.

The path forward requires more than selecting a new date. Meaningful change demands addressing underlying reconciliation issues, treaty processes, and Indigenous perspectives. Public sentiment suggests Australians value unity over specific dates, with 54% remaining flexible about when we celebrate our nation.

May 8 represents an opportunity to redefine our national celebration through a lens of inclusivity and shared values. Whether this date becomes Australia’s new national day depends on our willingness to embrace change while honoring both our ancient heritage and modern diversity. The conversation about May 8 opens doors for deeper discussions about who we are as Australians and how we can build a more unified future together.

References

[1] – https://www.australiaday.org.au/about/respectful-first-nations-engagement
[2] – https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/what-does-each-countrys-national-day-represent/6ht3na3jn
[3] – https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/history/australia-day-invasion-day
[4] – https://indigenousx.com.au/shifting-attitudes-to-invasion-day-give-me-hope/
[5] – https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-24/australia-day-and-national-days-politics-around-world/11886420
[6] – https://csrm.cass.anu.edu.au/research/publications/detailed-analysis-2023-voice-parliament-referendum-and-related-social-and
[7] – https://www.australianethical.com.au/blog/australia-day-why-we-need-to-change-the-date/
[8] – https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/joy-or-pain-australias-not-the-only-country-with-a-controversial-national-day/m6m7vf1gi
[9] – https://strongersmarter.com.au/changing-views-of-january-26th/
[10] – https://www.commonground.org.au/article/australia-day