Anzac Day

Press, Volume CXIII, Issue 33158, 23 February 1973, Page 8

Anzac Day

Sir, —Many members of the R.S.A., and former servicemen who do not bellong to the R.S.A., must be wondering at the speed with which the Mayor and the R.S.A. have reached ‘‘complete unanimity” regarding , Anzac Day, 1973. It would appear, from the “most amicable” atmosphere now exist- : ing between both parties, that (the Mayor’s actions last (Anzac Day have been condoned by the R.S.A., and the 'actions of former servicemen (who provided a cordon to i protect the wreath - laying {ceremony stand condemned. |lt is a wonderful let-out for 'the Mayor. Last year, 10 (groups of protesters gave {public notice that they intended to disrupt the cereimony. Former servicemen are (a diminishing race, but there (were enough left to take up the protesters’ challenge and (provide a counter-measure. ■ln 1973. there will still be enough left should disruption (again be threatened.—Yours, (etc., B. C. BORTHWICK, j February 22, 1973. Sir, —With regard to the recent discussion between the Mayor and the R.S.A. and the subsequent announcement that there will be no cordon, this was only a repetition of a similar announcement made by the R.S.A. president on April 24 last year. A strong group of concerned former servicemen reserve the right to again take whatever action they consider advisable. “Liberte” can rest assured (that, as far as this group is (concerned, there will be no abdication to threats of conduct such as occurred at the iNaval Ball and more recently iat the naval parade of men given the freedom of the city. I- Yours, etc., P. M. KERR. ( February 22, 1973.

Sir, —If, as “Liberte” states, the object of the R.S.A.’s invitation to the two Nazi generals to attend the Anzac Day ceremonies was to pay its respects to their honourable and worthy foemanship, surely, well outside the qualifying eligibility prescribed in the Anzac Day Act of 1966, cited by K. A. Gough, what then can be the objection to a wreath laid on the citizens’ war memorial inscribed to

'the Viet Cong for precisely the same reason? — Yours, ietc., M.C.H. 1 February 22, 1973.