Divided We Stand: Political Reflections on the Federal Experiment

24 June 2008

Dr Norman Abjorensen

Was the federation of the six Australian colonies into a Commonwealth of Australia really such a good idea? What were the alternatives? Might there have been a better way of doing things? The hard and brutal fact is that the Federation in the end was a political compromise; it was a product of some ferocious horse-trading and Canberra is its monument.

This lecture looks at the politics - as distinct from the legal and financial aspects - of Australia's federal arrangements. How the political compromise was arrived at, how it was implemented, how it has evolved into something quite different from what was originally conceived, and how it has been a constant arena of political contention, exploited by populist premiers and cynical prime ministers alike. It concludes with a political assessment of the state of the union in 2008 and a look at what the future might hold.

Broad Topics: Arts and Social Sciences

Sub-topics: Policy & Political Science

Areas: ANU College of Arts and Social Sciences

Dr Norman Abjorensen teaches politics in the School of Social Sciences at the ANU. A former National Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald, he is a prominent political commentator on radio, television and in print. His book, Leadership and the Liberal Revival, was published in 2007, and he is the author of studies of former Liberal leader John Hewson, former NSW premier Tom Lewis and the role of George Reid in federation. His new book, John Howard and the Conservative Tradition, will be published later this year as will two co-authored books, Australia: the State of Democracy, and a book dealing with the culture wars.

Part of the Blake Dawson-ANU Public Lecture Series