An Australian Experience-The Liberals' fingers and toes

The Liberal Party of Australia has something of a misreading of its name, since the party is in effect an Australian party of conservatives, similar to that party in the UK and sharing many things in common with the right wingers in the US, rather than an Australian version of Canadian Liberal Party. Being Liberal and Conservative at the same time seems contradictory, and parties bearing these names in other countries commonly stand way apart in politics. The key is that this Liberal is not liberalism of usual understanding, but seeks to promote the market, free enterprise, and privatisation, genuinely against government intervention into the economy.
The rule of charismatic leaders, obviously applicable to Labour, may not be true to the Liberal Party of recent times, for their star leaders often fell hard and plain natured, uninspiring leaders survive well and run government offices. It is the "honest little Johnny", not other statesmanlike, charismatic Liberal leaders, who ended the rule of populist Labour and gained support from the majority of voters at elections. High calibre Liberal leaders missed their prime time and once in a lifetime chance to becoming Prime Ministers, such as Andrew Peacock and Dr. John Hewsen. Their sorry experience in Australian politics are not unlike those of many American NBA stars, for instance Karl Malone and Patrick Ewing, who received not even one single championship gold ring after decades of hard labour and excellent individual performance, simply because they were playing the game at a time when superstar Michael Jordan reigned supreme.
Andrew Peacock was too gentlemanlike and urbane to win an election for the Liberal Party. He suffered in the hands of populist Hawke, as the leader of opposition, but his style and posture conformed to fine parliamentary traditions, even when fielding a few insults. Inevitably his leader position was under constant threat from various ambitious party politicians. His successors in the party turned out to be more opportunist, conservative, and nastier in politics, and these demonstration of traits ironically brought about certain hope of winning. Overall, you can say that politics has deteriorated.
From the time being the Treasurer in the Fraser government, John Howard has outstayed all other major contenders in his party and finally outshone them from the late 1990s, with an unbroken election winning record. A Howard dynasty is built under this little charismatic leader, in which internal dissent, discontent, and slight to him are seldom tolerated. This seems understandable. Liberal party faithfuls are extremely grateful for his incredible deeds leading them out of opposition wilderness of 13 years and for having so far stifled a Labour resurgence. The Liberals who moaned the loss of 1993 election udder Hewsen can not rightfully celebrate.
The Hewsen run finally convinced the party that drastic actions are not welcome and popular, even under an undisputed smart leader. They should stick to their fundamentals while seeking wider support and acceptance. They thus chose the long time standard bearer and steady hand John Howard. To this, he did not disappoint. Attempting to receive the widest support possible, Howard has been outstanding in leading by following, tracing public opinions before making any major moves. The rise of the Liberals Party on his watch also represents turn in political history that the mood was now swinging to more conservative and traditional values of the West. Radical socialist practices and political correctness began to lose appeal, and attacks on the left and affirmativeness were justified. This trend is greatly enforced by the rise and strength of the right and conservative blocs in the US.
I saw John Howard from a distance one sunny day in Sydney in 1986, when he was the opposition leader hard pressed by the Labour government. Howard was standing in front of an office building and fast-talking to someone by his side. With that glance, I remain puzzled to this day why so many Australian political cartoons and TV comic shows portrayed him half knelt to indicate him being dwarfed by may other political figures of the time, at least in height. This perhaps is a little unflattering and unfair to him. Regardless, John Howard today stands tall for his cause, as well as for the nation, and those popular shows ceased to be aired, partly in response to Liberal supporters who feel upset watching their successful leader being dramatically ridiculed. This is in the similar vine to that in the US that the popular TV series "The West Wing" first toned down rhetoric about the Republicans and then simply ceased to be aired, as a staunch Republican President has resided in the White House for two full terms and is therefore not to be subject to any slight from "unpatriotic" script writers.
The Liberal Party has made strides in Australian politics, in terms of a string of election wins. This derives chiefly from their leader's shrewdness in judging Australians' sentiments at particular times. After years of Labour reforms and social welfare initiatives, a reversal in fashion has been on the rise, and people began to cast doubt on certain political correctness, in rhetoric or in policy. If one keeps talking about Aborigines' rights or generous treatments to new immigrants, people grow an uncomfortable feeling of themselves being marginalised in this egalitarian society. The bulk of middle groups has their primary concerns over household spending and standard of living, and has minimum interest in raising others' standards, especially during less optimistic economic times. When existing pastoral property owners felt emerging threat from Aboriginal rights and native title claims, their top priority is certainly not righting past wrongs, but their daily survival and legal protection. This kind of sentiments has become a potentially fertile ground for a re-emerging of White Australia, mostly in areas of the north and with more abusive attacks on new immigrants.
The Howard government has put fingers on the pulse of the populace and detected the turning in public opinions. On issues of Aborigines and an Australian republic, they nurtured sufficient fear and fatigue among people to defeat those motions, from which acquired elections victories as well. The handling of the Tampa in 2001 is against international practice and Australia's own standards in cases of humanitarian obligations toward refugees, including a false claim of children being thrown off boats. This bad record did not matter, since the electorate at that time became fed up with constant news reports of intruding waves of immigrants and refugees to Australian land and wanted something, anything, to be done firmly, or even ruthlessly. Howard accurately judged the situation and showed his tough side of personality. The outcome was a Liberal government re-elected. Labour had only made feeble or useless protests, under the circumstances of shifting national sentiments.
The Liberal Party has so far carried on with their pragmatic centre right approach, sensed public sentiments correctly, and maintained sizeable popularity. Conservatism has become a fashion. The question is on their ability to continue the current course towards ultra right, as a matter of acceleration and heightened passion, when public moods shift again and return to reasonable tolerance. The party has fingers and toes, to stand firm on their ground of principles and follow favourable sentiment shifts, but lacks vision and insight, to move forward. Conservatism by nature is being drawn back to the known and turning back to the old. The Liberal Party, bathed in economic gains generated from previous Labour restructuring, is drifting comfortably but aimlessly as a ruling party. It is doing dismantling, rather than constructive, work, obviously for grabbing popularity and short-term benefits. This smacks the years of post-Menzies Liberals.
It is a precarious job to make bold predictions of political fortunes of a particular party on the basis of current success and invincibility. Such analyses are often shaky, unreliable, or even false, and may soon be swept away by turns of events. During the helm of Kennett of Liberal Party reign in Victoria, politics scholars lavishly threw their praises to his courage and vision, and labelled his administration the most prominent example of the new era of Liberal governance in Australia. State Labour seemed to have lost hope and plot in regaining office, according to analyses and academic rationalisation. As soon as some of such research writings were published, Labour won government in Victoria and grabbed consecutive wins thereafter in the face of unconvincing Liberal leaders. Considering the odd feature of political unpredictability, the swings of the pendulum as shown in the above example of current affairs, one is to be alert about complacency in politics and cannot casually assume the continuity of present status quo, with a dominant party in perpetuity. It is hard to draw a definite concluding remark on the fate of a political party, especially in a lively democracy of Australia, with its regular swings and turns of public opinions. The current hold on power by the Liberal Party might not be an "end of history", but more likely an end to a cycle in politics.
The Liberal Party has its blue blood Anglo-Saxon traditions and gathers Australians of money, either business or professionals. This background is distinctive, if one takes a look around the Liberal safe seat of Higgins in Melbourne, covering the second most expensive district in the nation, Toorak. In more recent times, however, there are growing numbers of Liberals with ethnic immigrant background, including many Chinese small businessmen. It seems more sensible for them to take Labour as the designated party, on the basis that they got entries to Australia during Labour years and that Labour is definitely a party more sincere over multiculturalism. Plausible explanations for this divergence are a few. Businesspeople tend to agree with the party that looks more pro-business and advocates reduced taxes, charges, etc. They demand to have adequate legal protection and minimum government interference in business, more earnings and less care to workers. The Labour emphasis on workers' rights ma lead to more expenses and cost upon those in business, especially small businesses. In addition, those from authoritarian or socialist economies have their prior experience of command or centrally planned economies. The free business and market environment is extremely appealing to these people, and some of them could become more ideologically transfixed and driven than locals on issues of regulations and markets liberalisation. Further, they have an inclination to embrace Liberal Party as a way to realise dreams of higher social status. The Liberals are usually the members of upper social groups, well-to-dos, elites, businessmen, professionals, and large land owners. This prospect is more inspiring than the blue collar groups commonly represented by Labour. Social stereotypes work here. A combination of these factors leads to rising willingness and desire from immigrants to be identified with the Liberal Party.

An Australian Experience-Kevin Rudd's turn

Labour after Keating has performed with a lot to be desired, and leaders from Simon Crean, Kim Beazley, and Mark Latham missed precious opportunities to return Labour to the Lodge. Worse, the party has shown signs of friction and drifting, offering less attractive policy packages to the public. Labour did not capitalise on Coalition's, and particularly Howard's, blunders during previous elections and did not hammer home the points Labour was making. As Labour at this current stage is facing similar, recurring opposition wilderness to the 1950s, and as factions voiced bitter loathing after defeats, the party is in danger of being sucked back to that tortuous path.
There was a long time that Labour seemed to have no clear leader to lead beyond squabbles and bickering. Bob Carr, the successful Labour Premier of NSW over a decade, had been seen as a chance to bring a new face to federal Labour caucus, but he chose to keep some distance from federal politics and refused to go to Canberra. Anyway, he announced his resignation from that state post in 2005, perhaps signaling a genuine retirement.
Labour's current predicament is perhaps reminiscent of a previous cycle of events in the early 1980s, when the federal Labour was terribly hopeless, so that they had to recruit an outside help in the shape and form of popular Bob Hawke. The downside is whether Labour faithfuls can wait that long this time, and if the current Labour Party does think out of the box, whether they are able to muster enough confidence to experiment again after the defeat of wild card Mark Latham in 2004. To dispel this daunting scenario, Labour finally moved at the end of 2006 to replace Kim Beasley with Kevin Rudd as the party's leader before the next election.
The contrast between the tired veteran and the more youthful successor is apparent for everyone to see, and with Rudd's not so blank political career and portfolios, it stirs up a vague image of the power transfer between Hawke and Keating being replayed. My impression of Rudd is mostly his fluent Putonghua. This is not in the sense of "fluent" when people give generous complements to an eager language learner. I mean real fluent, speaking almost as a native. Rudd gave a lengthy interview on a Hong Kong TV in 2006 about WTO and trade issues. The interview was conducted in Putonghua throughout, and Rudd demonstrated his perfect Chinese expressions and fluent choices of words regarding specific and complex trade issues, so much so that his Chinese host lost points with his heavy southern accent and frequent confusing phrases. If Rudd did win the government office, he would be the first Australian Prime Minister talking straight like a native Chinese.
The Rudd phenomenon caused some stirs in recent times, while the question remains if this heat of enthusiasm can last to the election day this year. The long draught passed some hopeful phases of reversing the fate, but so far has not seen the end of it. It may still be possible that certain troubles or mishaps lead to another disappointment to Labour faithfuls.
After Hewsen's election defeat, the Liberals moved to a centre right position and tried to project an image of "compassionate conservatives". This has not only brought them four election wins, but also shrank the ground for Labour. The Hawke-Keating era moved Labour to a centre stand, which was fine at the time, but when the Coalition did the same, Labour backed itself into a corner. You simply cannot be more conservative than traditional conservatives. In the end, it makes people feel that Labour has lost its soul through a course of pragmatism and political convenience. The tactic of eclectics could easily backfire and cause long run retreat.
Labour is in urgent need to rebuild its credibility and to launch clearly defined programmes adherent to its principles. This is not easy when the West is in general going the direction of conservative right, following the US's lead, and when the Coalition makes their agendas appealing to many interest groups and sounds economically sensible. The distinction with the Coalition is in no way to be blurred. It is time for the leaders to think and act like true believers of Labour, before the risk of getting genuine social democratic ideals vanishing in this country.
Labour governments in the past three decades have profoundly transformed the Australian society, first the Whitlam and then the Hawke-Keating administration. Their invaluable contributions centred on initiatives on economic restructuring and implementation of social welfare. The impact of these drives is shown in growth and a balanced society of today. Each of these governments benefited from leaders' vision and path opening, and the gains from these significant transformations are for the entire citizenry to share. It is thus hoped that Labour leaders have the vision and creativity to hold on to the course and organise tasks more confidently, as a ruling party rather than a bitter opposition, and with those remarkable attributes win back the right to rule and gain momentum countering conservatism.

An Australian Experience-Paul Keating's last waltz

Keating appeared new to the post of Prime Minister and unwittingly displayed his timid side during the state visit of US President George Bush senior. Hawke could be a better host of formal state functions. This temporary drawback made people wonder where was the passionate and aggressive Keating they knew. As expected, Keating soon returned to his peak form and offered splendid defence of Labour and his government in and out of the Parliament. Furthermore, he had a priority in proving his own mandate through winning an election in his own right. An inherited Prime Ministership exposes to the public of a lame duck character, which is definitely not Keating.
Right before the 1993 election, the Liberal Party campaigned extremely hard and had high hopes on their slick and younger looking candidate Dr. John Hewsen to create a rapid downfall of their hated Keating. I went to a massive shopping mall in Melbourne one sunny day and faced a large crowd of noisy Liberal supporters. Even the local Liberal candidate was there, Dr. Woodridge who served as shadow health minister and is a real medical doctor. Party supporters were quite aroused by his presence and happily handed out party pamphlets and other promotional materials to passers-by. The atmosphere was like a carnival for the coming victory.
I declined a few handouts on my way to the shops, and then spot a lone Labour supporter, a tall, sizable girl standing nervously outside a toy shop, with handful of Labour pamphlets. Obviously not many people were interested in taking them, and she felt quite discouraged even to try handing out anymore. I walked up to her and took a page to have a look. When I asked what she thought about the noisy Liberal supporters and campaigning around the mall, she emitted a sign and said: "They all say the Libs will win this time, ye know?". All I could respond then was "hanging on there".
This is the time for Keating to prove his worth or lack of it. Amidst all the exuberance and heightened expectations, the short tempered and quick firing Keating did not give up and pounded his rivals hard to the end. He produced some entertaining and also awkward moments during the campaign, calling his debate opponent Dr. Hewsen a "big boy" on live TV, which made that gentle politician look to the moderator for intervention and laying down some penalties on this kind of improper, aggressive behaviour. Keating was once treated as a star celebrity when jumping onto a wired fence to wave to some nearby high school girls and received hilarious screams of surprise and admiration in return. At least he restored some of the charisma Hawke used to project on others.
On the election night, the sense of an unwinable election for Labour this round and people's eagerness to see change were overwhelming. The Liberals smelt a win in the air. A Hewsen ascendancy seemed almost assured, in the bag, unlosable, and it was time for the Liberals to celebrate. With all these atmosphere of certainty, the eventual Keating win is an extraordinarily exciting and spectacular event in contemporary Australian politics, even from his opponents' point of view. It is over dramatic, stunning, and against all odds.
Current affairs commentators on the election night, regardless of their party preferences, initially sounded the same prediction of an easy Liberal win. The Liberal guests present on TV programmes looked most upbeat, while the Labour guests humbly offered their opinions, trying to hide their emotions as deeply as possible. Their comments accurately reflected the mood of the parties right at that moment. At around nine o'clock, the mood quietly but decisively shifted, as seats filled by Labour candidates increased in number and swings to the Liberals in many marginal seats did not materialise as predicted. The faces of Liberal guests turned pale, and they choked on words or were simply speechless. This subtle shift lightened Labour guests up considerably. You could tell at a glance that they were trying very hard not to openly display their joy and elation, avoiding embarrassing their honourable Coalition counterparts on site and losing a gentleman's touch.
Away from TV broadcast rooms, there were wild scenes at the Labour headquarters in Sydney. Paul Keating walked up the stage with that briskness and wide smile, delighting his audience, loyal party supporters, immensely. They enjoyed the Keating victory speech in his typical style" "This is the sweetest victory of all. This is a victory for the true believers, for those who kept the faith through difficult times". With this heart-throbbing speech amidst thunderous applause, history was made and hopes restored.
When it was clear that Keating beat Hewsen, the mood of Liberals changed swiftly, and planned celebrations turned sour in many occasions. Local newspapers reported that a taxi driver in Sydney received a few dollars as tips from an over dressed lady who just left a huge ball which was set up to celebrate a sure win for Hewsen. The half drunken lady parted with bitter mutterings that if Hewsen did win, that taxi driver would be many times luckier to get a lot of money as tips. It is easy to picture in my mind how exhilarated could it be for the girl of Labour faithful I met in Melbourne right before this election night.
In many aspects, this huge election upset with a Keating win is similar to that won by President Truman. Both took the office from a previous charismatic national leader and had not contested in an election of their own. Both continued the work of the previous leader, faced a top problem of their credibility, and had a strong urge to prove their worth in an election to leave the doubters behind for good. Both were not popular figures at the time of their campaigns and were expected to meet a near certain defeat in the hands of their brilliant and more popular opposition leaders. Both crushed their opponents in spectacular ways, beating the odds and shredding the oppositions with a resounding victory. The only difference is that the agony of waiting for the results was shorter for Keating, having the night to himself and enjoying cheers from party supporters not long after the votes were cast.
In many aspects as well, this huge turnaround for Labour in Australia is comparable to the election of Clinton as the President of the US in 1992. These events did give people some hope that in politics you can take a chance, make changes, and work your way out. Politics can be exciting, fulfilling, and indeed with a meaning.

An Australian Experience-Labour leaders of Hawke and Keating

A ruling party is in an enviable advantageous position to draw talents and recruit ambitious persons to share power and participate in policy making and implementation. A long absence in government makes essential administrative experience lapse, weakens the party's appeal, and disappoints those with a desire to serve. Without any memory of long years of Liberal governments from the time of Sir Robert Menzies, I witnessed overwhelmingly the exuberant Labour governance and sorrow state of Liberal opposition at federal level. Labour politicians and supporters then could hardly imagine a picture of their own opposition wilderness recurring sometime in the following decade.
The talent pool under Labour is impressive. A good example is Dr. Barry Jones, the Science Minister who used his high intelligence level to win many Australian quiz shows before entering politics. His calibre of thought is further demonstrated by his idea and promotion of a "knowledge society", prior to the phenomenon of knowledge economy, the so-called new economy, in the US.
Senator Gareth Evans was another prominent figure in the party and took up the posts of Foreign Affairs Minister and Senate leader. His knowledge is wide and thorough, and his speeches, especially in the Parliament against opposition questioning, were often long and winding, displaying his versatility and depth, and explaining foreign affairs matters in professional ways, but perhaps a little overkill and overstretched to audience of ordinary folks. It sometimes got one worried from his fiery eyes and facial expression that his contempt to the opposition is unquestionably stronger than it ought to be. His temper and emotion are also well known to all. The combination of a unique way of articulating and the temper issue perhaps ruled out his chance to stand as a national leader, especially a popular one, but he is well qualified to be an excellent minister. A student friend of mine happened to have rented a self contained room in his massive Ivanhoe house in Melbourne, and he attests to the long working hours of Senator Evans most of the time. His brilliant records of service later extended from politics to roles at international bodies.
The most prominent Labour leaders of this period were the two Prime Ministers, Bob Hawke and Paul Keating. Hawke rose with a union background, from the ACTU (Australian Council of Trade Unions). That is not only a firm backer of Labour, but also a source of personnel to Labour leaders and senior politicians. Apart from Hawke, Simon Crean, another ACTU president, served as Labour leader in opposition in later years. This strong union base is in general weakening in the country, and surprisingly, when Labour was in government, the ACTU lost some influence, since the party is torn between left and centre right wings, and Labour governments' continued effort on restructuring the economy inevitably eroded unions' hold on political power.
Labour in the 1980s started an Enlightenment. It shrugged off many past baggage and confirmed their ability to govern. The party appeared more assertive, humanist, and fair minded than the Coalition bathed in their past doctrines and glory. Hawke was the initiator of the virtual turning in policy direction, made great achievements politically, and was rewarded by a series of election wins which offer him a special place in Australia's contemporary political history. His stature withing the party was also immeasurably high, as signified by a sarcastically humble kneeling from a former Labour leader Bill Hayden to a kingly Hawke at a gathering of newly sworn in ministers. Loud laughter of this gesture, not nervous murmurs or boos from surrounding party members, prove the popularity and acceptance accorded to this brilliant Labour leader.
The Hawke administration was sustained by vital assistance from the talented Treasurer Paul Keating who mastered economics and policy matters through self-education. I bet no politicians of the time would openly boast their education credentials in front of this former high school dropout. With that low starting score, he then simply outperformed them all. The once political leader with the highest possible education credential of all political parties is Dr. John Hewsen, an economics and finance professor, yet he felt greatly inadequate in confronting Keating on national economic issues and in debates in general. A well known conversation occurred between these two leaders during Parliament question time. Hewsen asked a simple question, to which he expected to receive a direct answer: "Why won't you call an election?" Keating replied in his typical casual and serpentine manner: "Because I want to do you slow-ly". That brought the house down. Even Coalition parliamentarians seemed acknowledging Keating's brilliant counter remarks and the over eagerness of Hewsen to win as a novice in politics. Hewsen, eventually, left politics for good without an upper hand over Keating.
The Labour team of statesmen Hawke and facilitator Keating worked wonders from the later half of the 1980s and thwarted a number of offensives from the Coalition. He was frequently seen as Hawke's charging light brigade, on the order of the senior politician. Conflicts and friction bound to surface between these two capable, outstanding, and charismatic leaders. One solution is for Keating to take over from Hawke the leadership position, through agreement or challenge. Keating, seeking his own destiny, employed both means. Hawke made concessions to Keating in the famous Kirribilli agreement of an orderly power transfer. Few would have expected Hawke to disavow the agreement and retract his words, but he did. The only way open for Keating was then through a leadership challenge.
Even with a good number of supporters, Keating lost the first challenge and immediately relinquished his key government posts. There were then awkward regular TV footage showing that Keating sat at backbench of the Parliament and leisurely chatted with other MPs, sometimes leaving the chamber without a word. Hawke had to counter Opposition questioning on his own. The feeling Hawke had must be a sad and depressing one, since he was facing a coming tidal wave, and behind him perhaps half of his staff were going to abandon him, those people who wanted to see him embarrassed enough then stepping forward to dump him. Everyone knew there was something not right in this picture. The waiting for the moment of truth was nerve-wracking.
It is hard to imagine how an articulate and quick firing Keating would endure this forced political exile for long This resembles perfectly a situation succinctly described in the Chinese "Book of Change" that sometimes great leaders experience temporary lows, just like a dragon is trapped in a swamp. It will roar and fly high above the cloud at the next turning point. To Keating, his time was to come in the second leadership challenge in December 1991, and as Hawke's vulnerability was fully exposed, Keating grabbed the power in a vote with sufficient numbers of his supporters.
After becoming the new Prime Minister, Keating was once in a helicopter for a visit to some rural regions. The chopper lifted up in an area surrounded by tall eucalyptus trees, which are common in Canberra. The rotors then swept tree stems and leaves and cut them down. This caused the chopper to be unstable for a while, long enough for people to get worried. Keating seemed not noticing the danger and at least showed no panic. The authorities later admitted that there was a sight chance of downing. All these were shown on live TV, so people witnessed a new Prime Minister in real "trouble" soon after his takeover of power and possibly a first ever occasion of losing a head of government in an air tragedy, in addition to the sea tragedy which took the life of former Prime Minister Harold Holt.

An Australian Experience-Parties at party

Political parties in Australia still have their own distinctive characteristics and traditions ("stripes"). A divide between the two major, leading parties is clear and definite. The Labour Party is just what the name says it is. It is claimed to be the oldest political party in Australia, established well before the Federation. The Liberal Party, on the other hand, has something of a misreading of its name, since the party is in effect an Australian party of Conservatives, similar to that party in the UK. Being liberal and conservative at the same time seems contradictory, and parties bearing these names in other countries commonly stand way apart in politics. The point is that this party is liberal against regulation and control, while reserving principles on stability, British royal heritage, and value preservation.
Due to their separate origins, political inclinations can be roughly drawn along a centre line separating blue collar workers and office or business persons. Leaders are largely drawn from teacher (for Labour) and lawyers (for Liberal), though there are numerous exceptions, such as Bob Hawke of the Labour Party having worked as a lawyer specialising in industrial relations. This traditional line is getting blurred by the day, with both parties receiving new recruits of various backgrounds and convictions.
The Labour Party has endured a roller coster ride in their pursuit of power from early times. With its left wing or "wet" stand, Labour was very much the underdog in Australian politics, constrained at all sides by British loyalists and conservatives in all forms. The party got a big break during WWII, with nine years in government under John Curtin and Ben Chiefley. They worked extremely hard to win the war and defend the country. For these remarkable deeds, they received recognition and respects from people then and now, despite most recent revisionist comments from Liberal politicians. The way Labour activists and historians portrayed and glorified their war leaders inevitably annoyed conservatives of the 1990s intensively, especially when the Liberals have not commanded government offices for over a decade. That glorification, then, must be tone down.
One thorny point is that John Curtin made a dramatic turn to seek help from the Americans and lessened the previously unquestioned bond of kinship with Britain. He resolutely disobeyed direct orders from British Supremo Winston Churchill and urged a re-assignment of Australian troops back to the Pacific to defend their own country, rather than deployments for the European war, or wars in Britain's Asian colonies. British loyalists in Australia, key members of the Liberal Party, feel deeply upset and find it hard to forgive this departure from the cherished "England first" stand.
Curtin also won eternal reverence for this death in office shortly before the overall war victory of the Allies. This adds some tragic and mythical touches to the legends of Labour leaders and raised their status in the eyes of fellow countrymen. There are no higher standards and stricter criteria in judging great leaders than that on their performance in wars and defending national interests. The fact that Labour governments shouldered the heavy responsibilities of dealing with the war and post war reconstruction outstandingly successfully puts later revisionist history writings in an uncomfortable position of attempting to erase something which are cast in iron and beyond party politics.
Thereafter, it was a Liberal era all the way to the 1970s. This unfortunate period to the Labour Party witnessed the incredible feat of Sir Robert Menzies as the longest serving Prime Minister in Australia's history. Labour under Gough Whitlam saw a brief break after an extended long drought. His catchphrase, "It is time", accurately reflected the anxiety and impatience of the party repeatedly deprived of a chance to run government offices. Labour had the Vietnam War as an effective weapon in campaigns and generated numerous ideas to govern. They commanded vigour and vision, while their opponents were stuck to the legacy of a previous great.
Amazingly, a great deal of work was done during the brief reign of Whitlam government before the controversial "dismissal". Australian troops were withdrawn from Vietnam, formal foreign relations were established with "red China", "White Australia" policy were officially ended, and measures to set a welfare state, including the Medibank, were undertaken.
The succeeding Liberal government under Malcolm Fraser carried on some of the Labour initiatives, but proceeded to dismantling many other. With this reversal of the policies formulated during the short years of Labour government, the Coalition went on to win elections in 1977 and 1980. The sparks of magic light seemed to have shone so briefly for Labour, and the tug of war remained one-sided.
To Labour, things got worse before they got better. It seems true that any political party waiting for its turn in office and ascendancy in general can only achieve these when charismatic leaders emerged to lead with confidence and popularity. A more charismatic and voter friendly Labour politician after Whitlam, Bob Hawke, emerged and effortlessly grabbed the leadership of the party, pacifying resistance of Bill Hayden and other members of Labour echelon. The writing was on the wall, and a new page was going to be turned with a band. Hawke and an equally brilliant leader Paul Keating forged an unbroken Labour rule of 13 years encompassing the 1980s and the 1990s. In reference to the Curtin-Chiefley era, the remarkable feats of this second duo prove once again the undeniable significance of extraordinary leaders to the fate of a political party.
The 13 year rule under Labour Party enforced an impression of Australia of an unending, perpetual Labour era, especially to those people who moved to this country in the 1980s. My time of study and life in Australia was squarely within this time span of Labour rule, as such this is the main cause to my profound interest in this country and the part of Australian reality I understand most. I take this experience as a disclaimer here to some of the observations made on political parties of Australia. (to be continued)

An Australian Experience-democratic representation

Despite those flashy royal trappings and colonial legacy, plus occasional interventions, Australia has a lively and well-established democratic political structure to its long term advantage. In my opinion, this system, with typical Westminster parliamentary flavours, has certain definite merits over the US system of President and Congress. The key issue here is representation in a parliamentary democracy. The political parties in Australia have their regularly elected party leaders and cabinets (governing or shadow) as fixtures. The electorate and the media have pretty clear ideas of the party figures, leaders, policies on various issues, and initiatives.
Set in structure, the government is responsible to the Parliament, and its fate is decided at elections by simple seat counts in the Lower House. The mandate is usually very clear to favour a particular party, based on the Australian system of compulsory voting. Government ministers and shadow ministers must be elected members of the Parliament, and the leader of a winning party with a House majority serves as the Prime Minister. The party which lost an election turns to be the opposition, still with a shadow cabinet, waiting for the next election time for a reversal of fate. The numbers of returned members of the Parliament could clearly decide the winning or losing side in an election, without having to resort to another instrument such as an electorate college.
The political system in the US displays a rather loose and random nature, in that elections for the President and Congress are separate runs. Anyone with certain national popularity at a certain time can be suddenly called in as the candidate on behalf of a political party. That particular person may be disguised party believer, may be little known to party loyalists around the country, and worst of all may be very detached to own party members of Congress after being elected President. A presidential candidate does not have to carry an electorate seat, so there is no strong sense of answering to particular electorate constituencies and voices from below. The setting of the electorate college is obviously another drawback of this system.
Once elected, the President drafts the persons he trusts most to form the new cabinet (so far no female President has emerged), with his own selection priorities on loyalty and intimacy. A President could quickly surround himself with lieutenants from his campaign committees and from his own state, those people who were little known to the public and even to politicians outside the administration. Anyone with certain credentials can serve various portfolios right away in the cabinet, if nominated. This is why personnel shuffling is usually so massive after the President from the other party moves into the White House. It is much like a Russian roulette game in that the public have to accept a new cabinet formed on a random basis and filled with a number of previously obscure figures.
The US President is not responsible to Congress, in a majority or minority situation, and sees not need to directly and frequently face enquires and challenges shot over from Congress; the person in fact seldom set his foot in that building of Legislature anyway. if proposed bills fail to pass, the President is merely slightly scratched, mostly his pride, and he can last till the end of his tenure; no early election has been called in recent history for the reason of an unpopular President who could not have his bills passed.
Under the parliamentary democracy of Australia, a government minister must be an elected MP or Senator. This means the person has to get the hands dirty down to an electorate and win that seat before having any chance of taking up a ministerial portfolio. A party's regular connections with the electorate is more ensured this way. It is not rare a cabinet member in governing or shadow position lost the seat and ceased to be appointed. A similar example in Britain is Mr. Chris Patten who lost his Bath seat at the election and failed to gain a cabinet post, despite him being a close friend of Prime Minister John Major. Although he made an international name out of his stirring things up in colonial Hong Kong, his influence and hope in the party were dashed, becoming a wondering figure outside power circles.
In the case of failed bills, the likely results in Australia would be a hung parliament and a collapse of government, leading to a fresh election. Consequences could be either an increased majority for the passage of a particular bill, or the the government loses office to the opposition. That gives people some hope of solutions to a stalemate in parliamentary proceedings. Even when prime ministers are replaced at mid term due to party leadership challenges, their successors are political figures well known to the public, such as the Hawke-Keating transfer and the forthcoming Howard-Costello transfer. This provides consistency and stability for a party to carry on its policies and reduces the risk of tension in in the process. In contrast, vice presidents in the US are usually obscure, peripheral figures whose occasional power grabs often create awkward scenes. Some of them are so significant that people fear a scenario of a sudden accident to the incumbent President, which allows these deputies to effectually take over.
The separation of the President and Congress in the US displays a deep desire to accord the former's office some regal touches, short of a king, in order to represent national interests above entangled and sometimes carried away party politics. On the other hand, the parliamentary system in Australia put political parties in close contact with the public, and the electorate identifies those parties with certain declared goals and evaluates them accordingly at elections. The Prime Minister is none other than a member of the Lower House who happens to be the leader of the ruling party. This is a more democratic representation in nature. And the essence of modern democracy is this far best embodied in parliamentary democracies, as that existed in Australia.
One fairly urgent change is to be made about this system, the three year time span in between elections. With a high possibility of an early election due to a quagmire in the Parliament or a sudden opposition disaster seized upon by the government of the day, there will be an even shorter time than the three years allowed for the administration. This make it harder for the government to govern, and inevitably reelection is placed as a top priority, in order to achieve some sensible continuity and undertake designated tasks in two terms, rather than one.
Under these circumstances, it is easier for an Australian politician to claim three or four elections wins in a row. Bob Hawke grabbed four election victories in the 1980s, and John Howard countered this with his own four wins in the 1990s and 2010s. Record breaking has been a fair game played by Australian politicians most fervently.
An option of a four year term of government in future then come under discussion. The previous Labour opposition leader Mr. Kim Beazley gracefully made it clear that he was not opposed to this idea, despite the fact that this new scheme would first extend his arch rival, the Prime Minister incumbent, a longer stay in the official residence, the Lodge, in Canberra.

An Australian Experience-political and colonial traditions

Growing out of a humble origin of convicts and refugees, political parties and figures i Australia have demonstrated their casual and unassuming manners and styles. The old Parliament House stands at one side of the lake in the federal capital Canberra, a white house of fair size, but nothing fancy or grand. Its mission was to be the second temporary parliamentary gathering place, after the Melbourne Royal Exhibition Building, while a permanent parliament house was on the drawing board. This mission, however, lasted for sixty one years, and Australian politicians had to make do of their designated work at this humble site, projecting to the world a typical Australian style of modesty.
The new Parliament House was finally completed in 1988, at a cost of over one billion Australian dollars. In a full display of colonial and Commonwealth heritage, the Queen Elizabeth II of the UK opened the House at a grand official ceremony. Similar opening ceremonies were performed by her father in 1927 for the old temporary house and by her grandfather in 1901 for the Legislature in Melbourne. What an incredibly tight, unbroken linkage! These places unavoidably showcase British legacy and royal blessing, presenting a contrast to the appreciative, deferential, and modest Australian attitude.
The new Parliament House is not a tall building of classical shape, Gothic or Greek. It is basically a flat, round building taking up large grounds. The interiors are impressive, bright, spacious and well arranged, but not overbearing and imposing. It is essentially a place to house politicians and their staff, so having adequate space in the chambers and offices will do nicely. On this note, Members of the Parliament and Senators are surely delighted immeasurably by new seating and working conditions in the new House. The conditions for British MPs, on the other hand, are appalling. Every time I watch the scene on TV of the Commons in full house packed with these MPs elbow to elbow, I harbour a fear that an unpleasant odor would make a number of them faint, or a scream of "fire" would seriously hurt people and physically damage the chamber by causing a massive stampede. So working conditions at the Canberra site are far more humane and pleasant.
The Parliament in session is open to the public, but there are usually very few people attending, perhaps an indication of routine while boring Australian politics. I could only recall one incident during which an eager person, or a protester, at the upper deck fell to the chamber floor and startled seating members, including the then Prime Minister Paul Keating. It was reported that when this colourful person was in during debate time, people lined up around the corner to get a ticket to the audience seats. Even serious occasions like parliament need some sparkles and spicy scenes.
The relaxed and unassuming nature of national politics is evident in this and other government buildings. One sunny day in 1987, I encountered a busload of tourists from Taiwan near the big Lake Griffin of central Canberra. The tour coach driver, a Caucasian Australian, joined in our conversation and confessed on something he experienced. Those tourists from the US did not appreciate that much what they saw in Australia and tended to say that they had seen this or that and always had something grandeur or better back home. For the Parliament House, they apparently had Capitol Hill in mind. To this driver, hearing all these dismissive tones during the trips could hardly make him feel cheerful. On the contrary, visitors of Asian backgrounds would indeed appreciate and enjoy time there, as well as learning something Australian. This made the driver happy throughout the touring days.
The ABC TV programme at noon was a major source of information for me for those years and provided life dramas of politics. Frequent and rapid exchanges of wit and arrogance, even verbal abuse and outburst, made it more interesting and entertaining to watch. The most entertaining person showing during question time was undoubtedly Paul Keating. At his peak, his clever use of language and occasional lambaste of abuse of his opponents were legendary unmatched. Opposition Liberal Party leaders from Andrew Peacock, John Howard, John Hewson, Alexander Downer, back to John Howard again more or less suffered in his hands embarrassment and uncomfortable moments, not to mention their shadow ministers. His departure after losing the 1996 election returned the centre stage of the Parliament to Coalition frontbenchers, and a more dismal and duller performance on both sides of the chamber is thereafter evident.
The British masters of Australia brought over their Westminster setting of modern parliamentary politics to this continent and still play ceremonial roles in this young country. Although the system sounds old and tedious sometimes, considering its roots in the complicated and over prodeduralised British traditions, it somehow has sustained itself and served the purpose well of maintaining certain crucial political balances. The Commonwealth of Australia at the time of Federation willingly gave up some sovereign rights to their colonial master. This was willingly accepted by early Australian settlers and politicians, as their origin of British subjects obliged them to do. The connection with the royal crown was so strong and intertwined that an early Prime Minister Sir George Houstoun Reid even served as a member of the British parliament away from Australia in his retirement days.
Long after the Federation, Australians saw Britain as their only place to belong to and rely on. Australian troops served under British command in both world wars. One vital even in 1915 sealed the fate of Australia with Britain in more ways than one, the Gallipoli landing. Mr. Winston Churchill was obsessed with penetrating Dardanelles Strait and attacking Turkey from behind, so that Australian troops were ordered to charge forward against slaughtering machine gun fires from the Turks. The whole battle plan conceived by Mr. Churchill failed to prevail. Australians suffered large number of casualties as a result. Heavy losses of human lives did not dampen the enthusiasm towards and recognition Australians hold with their colonial masters, as shown in the national Anzac Day for the remembrance of this event.
Legacies go a long way before being questions and swept to the peripheries. On top of the elected head of government, there exists a position of Governor General as the official representative of the British crown. As if this is not odd enough for a sovereign country, there are also Governors in each of the six states of Australia. The photo attached here is with the background of Stonington Massion, a grand residence for the Victorian Governer for about 30 years. These vice regal seats are ceremonial ones, now filled by Australians nominated by the political party in office. Despite best intentions and most lenient treatments from the British monarch, these ambiguous and misplaced relations bound to cause conflicts with the reality of Australia being a civilised sovereign nation.
The dramatic event of "the Whitlam dismissal" made this issue come to a head. The Labour government of Whitlam was blocked in the parliament by the opposition to pass bills, so that the then Governor General Sir John Kerr intervened resolutely by announcing the dismissal of that parliament and calling for a fresh election. Despite the ceremonial role of his position after seventy five years of Australian federation, he invoked a rarely used power at his disposal to force the course of action. This dramatic turn and ensuing constitutional crisis laid it bare for all Australians to see that they remain under a British rule in some uncanny ways and that those colonial positions did matter to their lives, political or otherwise.
Another event is the hanging of one Ronald Ryan in Melbourne in 1967, when there was an emerging movement to make Australia a more humane society by abolishing death penalty. Campaigners made appeals to the British Privy Council for commuting his execution to jail terms, but they were turned down. This legal challenges illustrates the very point that Australians did need to make final appeals to courts of another country in Europe. Hong Kong lawyers used to make similar appeals to London courts and the Privy Council back in the days of colonial rule, but they now turn to the final court of appeal in Hong Kong, and to the People's Congress in Beijing on constitutional matters regarding national concerns. The fact where is the palace you make your final appeals to indicates the status of sovereignty. In the case of Australia, this unequivocal distinction is still lacking. It seems that remaining colonial heritage is to be gradually phased out in this new century before Australia is truly a sovereign nation and fitting for a genuine oasis of the world.

An Australian Experience-the best of both worlds

A primary reason for Australia to be recognised as an oasis of this materialised and tormented world is that people are entitled to enjoy wide-ranging freedom in this country. Australia is a parliamentary democracy, typical of the Western world. The first half of this statement alone seems not saying much, since parliamentary democracy can be had in many other countries. Looking around the globe today, most countries make claims of their democratic institutions, and people of various nationalities do vote for political parties on regular basis. Multi-party elections are as common as the ubiquitous presence of Coca Cola. This rather recent political landscape has made ultra right ideologues extremely happy, vindicating in sheer numbers their unwavering conviction of what is the set mainstream and the right side of history, hence the claim of "end of history".
Few of them heed the irony coming out of this rather monotonous landscape Democratic institutions have done little to improve the pathetic situations and people's well beings in many of these countries. If these political establishments did work wonders as promised, then we would have had 100 plus of the US on this crowded planet. If that looks not an acceptable line of reasoning, since the US is the sole world super power and an embodiment of immense concentration of wealth in the hands of the super rich, then can we expect to have over 100 Australias? Most unlikely.
The point is that democracy and development do not mix well in so many cases. The rich club of OECD after all includes old colonist democracies. There have been few clear signs or certified examples of sharply improved economic performance and remarkably faster growth of a developing country, shortly after democratic institutions, primarily political parties and routine elections as forms of freedom of choice, are introduced and implemented. Magic sparks from a switch of political system may on occasion come from massive foreign aid and over generous allowances from the developed world. These external assistance obviously have much to do with geological and ideological considerations of certain powers, as a regular component of "carrot" strategies, indicating that the rare sparks of growth are rather not truly endogenous. There are in fact more sick or lacklustre democracies than healthy ones. The biggest country of democracy, India, began to shrug off its well known image of dire poverty only very recently, after decades of parliamentary democratic wranglings.
Closer to Australia, an illuminating example is the Philippines, a key ally of the US and bearing an American signature and traditions of democracy much longer than many other Asian countries. I was accidentally involved in a conversation with a number of Filipino students at a the University of Sydney canteen when the Marcos family faced their anticipated downfall. Those students sounded sensitively proud of their ingrained democratic traditions and were optimistic about the future betterment of their countrymen after the crucial "People Power" movement. Nearly twenty years later, elected governments there behave in similar ways in almost every aspect, though with much shorter duration of administration. China under a so-called dictatorship has obviously made a longer stride in economic development in the same time span. It so comes that the pleasing landscape of a near total presence of democracies hides undercurrents and encounters the same old problems of poverty and insecurity in most countries stuck in a developing status. The asserted direct, crucial link between democracy and development has perhaps been well overstated and over simplified.
Regardless of these controversial and academic wranglings over democracy as a working solution to underdevelopment, it is quite safe to say here that Australia has no danger of being mistaken as in the "others" group, and this country is an ideal place to rate democracy as a key component of a genuine oasis. This component is even more significant than the rich resources Australia has its hands on. A huge country with a totalitarian regime cannot be trusted to deliver freedom in many fields and be elevated to a level deserving rightful respect. A developing country may also be driven by rich resources to make wrong decisions in development and wealth building and distribution. In a broad comparison, Australia as a country with similarly rich resources while being democratic in the truest form obviously has the best of both worlds.

An Australian Experience-egalitarian to the bone

Australians sometimes went out of their ways to make the impression of egalitarianism stick. One best approach is to show that people here ultimately receive same treatments regardless of their positions in the society. The long-serving popular Labour Prime Minister Bob Hawke once had a taste of this "star treatment". He was caught on TV not wearing a seat belt during an interview in a moving government car. The local police soon came out to defend justice and issued him a ticket of 200 AUD fine for that offence. Hawke didn't seem to mind that at all, a small amount in his language, for that incident may well have convinced people that his leader position did not get him any favours in this land of legal equality. Further to prove this point, the journalist who interviewed Hawke also got a ticket. The exercise of equal treatment is complete and perfected in this saga. Perhaps partly for such popularised media showing, Hawke did not fail to keep his image of an ordinary Aussie bloke by once personally going to a car dealer in Doncaster, Melbourne, to pick up a brand new BMW after he left government and federal politics.
People have a matured indifferent attitude towards some showing of wealth. At a small post office, I used a friend's address to post a package overseas. The old postman at the counter spot the name of that well known beach esplanade and casually mentioned that he had a holiday house in a close-by area, also well known for beach views and open space. Then we engaged in a casual chat like neighbours about sites and scenes over there. It just makes one think that this society is quite egalitarian that average working people, if making smart household finances and not indulging themselves too much, they would be able to enjoy wonderful life and comfort coming with it. It is absolutely not a hard life and provides many benefits to people who do honest work. When most things are affordable, people here naturally see less value in extreme luxuries and extravagance.
The line got blurred also because of the mobility of labour and talents. Even between cities and the countryside, there are similar living and working conditions. An acquaintance ensured me that there is no problem going to stay with him in a northern Victorian country town, living in essential conditions matching that in Melbourne. This brilliant guy boarded at the prestigious Scotch College after his father and studies law at the Melbourne University. While doing legal work he met a beautiful country girl in northern Victoria, fell in love, got married, and stayed there practicing. This back and forth between country and city demonstrates an absence of boundary for people to cross in their career and life, so that they could expect change of course and do not fear of being locked in a particular place and stratum.
It is undeniable that differences among social groups exist in real life, if we don't blindly fall for fantasies of utopia. The social divide surfaces not only in income gaps, but also in districts people choose to reside. In Melbourne, this choice is called the right side of the Yarra, implying good residential areas of the south east. I had fielded some jokes from Aussie friends about the first choice of house buying at the wrong side of the Yarra, to the north; to correct that innocent mistake, the next house should be in some reputable suburbs instead. Sydney and other major cities have their own local areas of choices. These perceptions are deep in people's mind and futile to resist. Impressions of a place often depend on which parts of the city you first encounter. I once attended a conference in Sydney and happened to find accommodation in a kind of shabby house belonging to an associate within a neighbourhood of ugly street scape. Another friend owns a house in a far away suburb, passing miles of gum trees at both sides of the roads, quite a treat of country style. But if one starts looking from a residence in north shore of the harbour or Manly which screams a good life, things become quite pleasant and worry free. It does take time to discern imperceptible differences in choices and visible boundaries, and making gloomy comments from temporary initial impressions also tens to miss the mark. For this reason alone, my observations of Sydney are quite limited, as a non-Sydney-sider would sensibly do.
Australians in this classless society still harbour curiously expectant craving of recognition or high regard from certain quarters of the outside world. Even with fading connections with British royals and growing tide of republicanism, ordinary people are keen on reading about glimpses or signs of royal occasions and links. Magazines with sections of tabloid stories of the British royal family and bestselling books on royal figures have almost guaranteed good sales. The prestigious Geelong Grammar, outside Melbourne, is forever more prestigious in Australia for once housing an extraordinary royal student, Prince Charles of Britain. A Tasmanian girl became Princess Mary through marrying Prince Fredrik of Denmark. This modern day fairytale coming true excited the Australia public and the media, causing unprecedented waves of well wishing from the Prime Minister down to local folks. News media follow the event inch by inch and throw out some bits of the Princess' itinerary from time to time, long after the royal wedding completed. It seems that these kinds of bond with a European royal family are deemed to be proud of, at least for the reason of adding something spicy to a good but dull time here. Those extravagant, fancy affairs stand against the plain origins and backgrounds of Australia.
It takes one to visit and stay in Australia to fully appreciate how wonderful and blessed a place this is. Unique in climate variety, clean natural environment, and established urban centres make live remarkably comfortable. Adding egalitarianism, social democratic traditions, and abundant resources, Australians have good reasons to boast their fortunes and to certify Australia's claim to be one of the best places in the world. The social factors prove decidedly significant and persuasive, in that the society has retained an Australian fair go mentality based on European heritage of progressive politics, equality, and pursuit of quality life. It is highly crucial for Australia to become a more humane, multiculturalism, liberal minded (not Liberals), and progressive society, in this world of material madness and unilateralism. Australians are to remain confident, compassionate, and fair minded, those precious qualities which were central to their past endeavours, did their country credit, and are vital for their admired and sustainable future.

An Australian Experience-egalitarian vines

A common perception of Australians is their evident tendency to relax. This could be seeking shorter work time or spending much of the time and attention on leisure. As vividly shown in the movie "the Nugget", Aussies in the types of Eric Bana acting usually take frequent breaks to "grab a beer". This laid back attitude shows a determination there to resist intrusion into easy and enjoyable life and a disgust of ugly aggressive competition. It is very hard not to be influenced by this take it easy persuasion in this bounteous and blessed country.
It is inevitably in this easy life setting that drinking has become a problem. The consumption of beer is high, and drink driving caused road accidents and fatalities from early times on. One public ad warning of drink driving was notoriously catching in the 1980s, "if you drink and drive, you are bloody idiot". Pretty rude and shocking, but it worked for some time. In comparison with the other famous drinking country, Russia, there is probably a dividing line between drinking insensibly for a worry free good time and that for relieving one from loads of worries, especially the harsh, bitter winter.
This seemingly over relaxed environment attracts curiosity as well as some criticisms from outside. When I made a query to an Aussie tutor of mine about the fact that Sweden, half of Australia's population but producing excellent industrial brands, such as Volvo and Saab, the very patient and knowledgeable lady replied sarcastically without slightest hesitation: what could those people do in severe and lengthy winters, with several months of dark, sunless days? Surely they would have to stay inside and have plenty of time to contemplate, design, and invent something slightly amusing to do. That might just be the origin of their amazing abilities to configure and build fine crafted machines, including cars. Australia is without those nearby competitors, but with abundant resources to sustain a society of liberalism, and with nice and diverse climate to enjoy outdoor sports and leisure. Innovation is a relatively less urgent matter, and a lack of creativity drive appears not posing unsettling threats. Put it simply, how can people spend a lovely sunny day not at beach or outside but in a tight, dim cubicle for a dull task? This is quite an eye opening observation, a candid defence of the Australian way.
The good life of Australia can be seen from tranquil suburbs spreading out of downtown Melbourne. It is deafeningly quiet around. You may fall asleep by passing along some of the streets and neighbourhoods. Living in and around the city centre has yet caught on as a trendy fashion, and most prefer free standing houses with yards and gardens. Although a quarter acre land for a house site is now a luxury for most property owners, small lots of land and townhouses with separate yards and garages are acceptable alternatives.
This extension of suburbs has reduced the lure of urban centres, leaving few people around after work. The central Melbourne district used to look like a ghost town, with seldom passersby and crowds, though this has improved a great deal in recent years. A lecturer of Chinese origin from Hong Kong taught at the economics department where I was studying. He blended in quite well with Australian and American colleagues, but after merely two years when his initial contract was out, he returned to Hong Kong. His parting words were:"It is too quiet here, unlike Hong Kong, and there is not much to do". I found it hard to believe when heard these words from a Hong Konger, since the quality of life is definitely a notch up than that in Hong Kong, and enjoying a quiet weekend is the dream of most people. Regardless, this tranquility in Australia remains an advantage, nominally with less thrills and stirring, but standing out as a major indication of the kind of quality life many other peoples would die for.
Australians have maintained their spirit of "fair go" and equal rights for all deep in political institutions and people's mind. These have not been fundamentally polluted by political nastiness and negative politicking prevailing in the US. A pretty serious charge of offence is being un-Australian, meaning unfair, unscrupulous, and unenlightened. This is shown in many aspects of life in Australia. The funeral of a former Queensland Premier Sir Joh Bjelke Peterson in early 2005 cause some stirs, since protesters opposed to this veteran state politician accused him of cronyism, corruption, curtailing of civil liberty, running a police state, and damaging environment during his reign. Some unforgiven protesters announced plans to picket his funeral. This was quickly denounced not only by Peterson's enlarged family and loyal National party supporters, but also by the Labour Premier, whose party suffered badly in the hands of Sir Joh. The Premier called the proposed picket to be dropped, because it was a union action, and a picket line at a funeral would be, in his words, "inappropriate and un-Australian". Anywhere in life, a fair go is urged to be exercised, despite emotions, anguish, and feud.
On the other hand, wealth and opulence receive certain unkind attention and remarks. Few brag what multimillion dollar homes or expensive limos they have, unlike in the US. The Rich 200 list composed by "Business Review Weekly" is the place to line up and parade the super rich of the country in a good light. People in business pay adequate attention to this list, but there are often readers who just hate the list for its repulsive glorifying of those people of wealth.
Australia used to carry a system of colonial titled, borrowed from Britain, giving people knighthood on behalf of the British monarch. For Prime Ministers on the Liberal side were bestowed British titles and honours, such as Sir Robert Menzies. As expected, no Labour Prime Minister has been a "Sir". The Whitlam government instituted a new honour system in the place of the British honours, the highest being the Australian of the Year. An Aussie friend of mine received a Federal honour in 2004, the Order of Australia, for her distinguished service to Australian children education overseas.
The largely blurred line between classes in the open serves to remind people that one can be extraordinary in certain aspects but is not high above the ordinary. Bill Bryson described a life example of this Australian egalitarianism in his book "Down Under", concerning the former deputy prime minister and treasurer Jim Cairns who was reduced to selling his books at market places in Melbourne. This is a true story. Years ago, on a visit to a south Melbourne market, a friend of mine there made a an excited announcement about his stall being just next to a former government minister and him having a brief chat with the guy about his books for sale. Mr. Cairns' place was next to a gate where crowds passed to lines of small stalls. His set was not even a designated stall, just on a card table, so I gathered he would not have to pay much fee for doing this "commercial" business. Mr. Cairns had a tough time after exiting office. He once led massive street protest in Melbourne against the Vietnam War and Australian involvement. Imagine that! Those thunderous rally calls from the participants must be deafening and music to the ears of this brilliant organiser. There must be some high leadership quality in this man sitting at the corner of a market chatting idly and aimlessly. After his passing away in 2003, certain recognition was accorded to him from Labour Party and those once in the left wing government. (to be continued)

An Australian Experience-Aussie compassion abounds

Attempts to summarise national characteristics of a society by the educated are often flawed and unsuccessful. These could lead to stereotypes, misconceptions and even prejudice about a particular society, based on certain obvious collective similarities. I feel confident in making some observations of Australians' behaviours only within the range of my personal experience They may not contain real uniformity or may contradict other evidence or examples.
Compassion is said a to be a great Australian characteristic and asset. It could be originated from the fair go mentality and a tendency to pay sympathy towards the underdogs. It goes beyond typical Aussie pleasantries and is followed by concrete helps to those in need. This is also out of their comfortable living with abundance in supplies and sufficient welfare covers, so that extra effort in helping others does not harm themselves in terms of money costs or waste of emotion.
The most vivid and enduring memory I have is the Aussie style unreserved help and compassion. On return from the ski place of Lake Mountains many years ago, my old second hand car broke down, with a dead battery. It was nearly dark, and among streams of cars passing by, an Aussie couple stopped to offer roadside help. It was obviously worse than the sturdy man thought, certainly not possible to start by connecting jump start cords. He did not give it up and followed us to a nearby gas station, where plenty of lighting could make his work easier. The man tried everything he could, even pull out a pole from ground to lift up one set of generator to a certain position. When these did not work, his female partner tried to cheer him up and would not let us get stranded in a remote place in darkness. She spot my little boy in the baby seat at the back and could not resist the urge to play with him for a while. The man turned to us and mused:"She just loves kids". This apparently gave the woman more reasons not to abandon us, and she worked with her partner for an extended time span to get the car started and running in a normal way. She then turned to us saying:"Now you can drive back to Melbourne safely". We could not thank them enough, but all they would accept were a pack of cigarettes.
This ordeal took about two hours of their time, a long time to test their compassion and willingness to help total strangers (Asian strangers were then few in country Victoria). They were typical Aussies, and country folks, simple, perhaps not well educated, but stuck to the accepted standards of compassion. Whenever I think of Australian thereafter, that single even reminds me of decent and fair-minded Aussies in this lovely country. I feel I owe that Aussie couple something, so much so that I tend to urge me to forgive bad behaviours of other Aussies I encountered, to forgive those racial slurs hurled by ignorant teens, slight, and dismissive attitude in everyday life. Compassion from an ordinary Aussie couple proves the true worth of a national characteristics and more than compensate certain bad memories and negative feelings coming from past experience in Australia.
Sometimes even when it is not their own concerns, Aussies just feel they should render some help. I once lodged a visa application for my fiance to come to Australia. An education officer in a government department handling this matter showed his sympathy towards my separation with my fiance and verified the application with minimum fuzz. It is a widely accepted view that if one is posted overseas for over several months, the spouse should be allowed to go along. The next time I went to the department, things went a dramatic turn. Since my fiance got permission to visit Australia for six months as part of an exchange tour, I chose to take up that option because of quick procedures on the Chinese side. The officer was evidently upset when he was told by front desk that I withdrew my application that I could hear him screaming behind open door "he what?!". After I laid out my reasons, he remained unconvinced and tried to talk me out of that, with a typical Aussie view of life: your fiance still has to go back to China after six months, and you don't know what will happen after; with this family reunion visa, you can have a stable family life in Australia; and the Chinese government may force you to accept separation, so an individual rather than government visa will give you more freedom. Although he obviously knew little about China, he talked in a very compassionate way, and I was really moved. All these are not his concerns, really; if I made a wrong decision, I alone suffer the consequences. He could simply do the paper work and had no obligation to think of the options from my point of view. In later years, when waves of self-paid Chinese students swamped government offices of major Australian cities on visa related matters, I treasured immensely the relaxed earlier time when a government officer had time to sit down and attempt to persuade a Chinese student to stay longer in this country with the right type of visa.
Mr. Ross Garnaut (later Professor at the ANU) was the ambassador to China in 1985-1988. A few Chinese students from one university, including me, wrote to him on the matter of visas for our wives, which had been lodged for a long time. Unexpectedly, he soon replied to us and apologised for procedural delays and particular situations surrounding visa issuing. He might not be able to offer concrete help in his letter or promise anything, but this kind gesture illustrates a common unique tendency towards treating family reunion and other applications on compassionate grounds. This communication with him probably worked one way or another, since our wives eventually arrived in Australia by the end of the year, before Christmas.
The secretary to my university professor was Mrs. Chai, clearly an Aussie woman but got the family name from the Malaysian man she married. With this background, we often had something to share, and she did not hesitate to talk about what she felt of certain unfair treatment on Asians in and out of this country. She became sensitive to racial slurs against Asians, and related to me an occasion at the Malaysian international airport, where some Aussie blokes in front of her loudly joked about people and officers there. Mrs. Chai was deeply irritated and told me if those insulting remarks were landed on other Aussies, the guys would have got punches to their noses. Only because those local people did not hear clearly of their insults, they got away with that. She felt so shamed that some of her countrymen behaved that bad overseas and did not deserve the good reputation of Australia being fair and compassionate. Some Aussies can be called narrow-minded, rather than fair-minded, in a racial context, but considering the short time after the White Australia policy was officially dropped by all political parties, this occasional outburst against multiculturalism and Australia's own trait of compassion is understandable.
There is a growing risk that this compassion is running thin, especially in bad times and when shocks come from external sources. Under the circumstances of the "everything goes" 1990s, with economic rationalism, deregulation, and all that, compassion and tolerance were on the way being less generously offered while encountering shocks, and they risk becoming even rarer commodities.

An Australian Experience-advantages of an antipodean location

Australia was lightly disregarded in the old colonial system due to its remoteness geographically to major power centres of the civilised Atlantic. This unfavourable condition, a seemingly irremovable curse in olden days, has turned out to be an inseparable advantage for this country from the 20th century on. Australia is able to demonstrate this precious luck through, sadly, a series of man made disasters and havoc elsewhere in com temporary history.
With its vast space, established urban centres and transportation networks, Australia could be a last resort if massive disasters happen in other parts of the world. This continent is cut off from other continents, separated by seas and oceans. A few nearby neighbours are either extremely friendly (New Zealand) or posing little threats (Papau New Guinea). Only the north is exposed to external threats, which in any case have failed to materialise and pose any real danger to the heart of Australia, the south eastern coastal belt.
In modern history, Australia has faced an alert of attack only once (an invasion is too strong a word), the Japanese bombing of Darwin in 1942. These casual attacks by the imperial air force of Japanese were a side show of their grand war plans in the Pacific, not a prelude to landing or real invasion. Japanese forces were over-stretched, with millions tied up in mainland China and covering territories from Manchuria to Indonesia. That bombing hit a place far away from any significant urban centres; even Brisbane was out of the range of Japanese bombers. Without adequate naval escort and firepower, eastern coastal regions were virtually free from Japanese landing attacks, and there is no launching place to sufficiently arm numerous divisions for a Normandy scale landing battle. If Darwin were indeed been invaded by a couple of divisions mustered by the Japanese planners, that would have been most likely to establish a small colony of their at the north most tip of Australia. It is quite incomprehensible how they would sustain the captured land there, without constant supplies from their other bases and sizable local sources of production. Any attempt to march across the land from there to southern cities would be suicidal to the Japanese army under punishing conditions. Australia, like the north America, is lucky to have oceans surrounding their continent. The tyranny of distance beat countless potential aggressors.
In the case of international emergencies, Australia is a natural and logical choice of refuge for evacuees. General MacArthur did this sensible thing during WWII, when he hastily fled to Australia in the face of advancing Japanese troops, to recoup and regroup. Australia is also a generous recipient of immigrant refugees, including Italians and Greeks from war desolation and destruction of the last great war. A more recent effort was made on accepting fleeing Vietnam refugees since the 1970s. These rescuing and relocating processes are the main background themes for Australia to be commonly recognised as a safe base in international conflicts and an ideal oasis of the human society. This remote, isolated colony did not collapse under internal troubles but has provided vital sanctuary for people escaping from the world's trouble spots.
As the terrorism of the 21st century is concerned, Australia proves a safe place against this kind of new potential threat. It has no land link with any other territories, and there are no border areas where smuggling and potential terrorist activities can be launched Once airport security is beefed up and becomes routines, it is hard for initiators of terrorist attacks to pass and execute their plans. Those large areas in the north look easy to land, but harsh natural conditions there beyond beachheads could kill and bury unaware intruders. Further, modern surveillance technology has made it possible for safeguarding massive open areas with fewer number of personnel. The Australian authorities need only to concentrate on airports, not border checks, a situation much less complicated than that in the US.
The vast expanses of Australian outback is not without their worth. This wilderness contains numerous kinds of minerals in unbelievably enormous quantities for exploration and consumption to last in foreseeable future. With long history of civilisations on the Eurasia and wide exploration of the New World, Australia was little utilised for its underground mineral reserves till the 20th century.
This makes one wonder whether Australia has been purposefully reserved this way to be highly effectively explored by peoples of industrial manufacturing, and also to be subject to the demands of consumption and living of human societies of future generations. If this is so, then one of the horrifying themes in the American movie "Independence Day" rings an alarm bell. The theme depicts an alien race which roves over the universe, extracts resources from each passing planet, and moves on after those planets are totally emptied and then filled with waste. In an ironic sense, one notion that cannot be ignored is that this alien race is precisely the human race itself. The mother earth is going to exhausted eventually at current pace of development, in the name of survival, and sometimes pleasure, of this race.
This has happened to Australia in its comparatively short history of two hundred or so years. There are numerous ghost towns littered on this continent, remains and reminders of past buzzing industrial and commercial activities. All those left behind are ruins of past buildings, showing deserted skeletons, no matter how grand and crowded in those old days. Past money and achievements were swept away, along with attached structures built by those participants once gathered around certain centres. These are scenes not far from what depicted in that disaster movie, but these are real, not footage of a movie site.
Australia as an outpost and old desert-like continent may just be the much needed reserve to sustain the maddening consumption and to prolong the functioning of human race in current and future forms. Australians got their nickname "diggers" from what they do best, excavating mountains of rocks and turning them into sought after raw material commodities for the industrial world. This was, and is, extremely profitable and cost-effective. When human's appetite bulge and swell without restraint, this motionless landscape, inconvenient location and harsh conditions in Australia would cease to matter; they turn out to be unique advantages and great benefits to the nation, as well as crucial to the survival of the human race. It is here, and will be here, that Australia would finally and ultimately prove the worth of this medium sized, often neglected, country to the global community, when the desires and wants of the human race demand it and technologies for harnessing the nature allow it.
The universe works mysterious ways: if it sheds unusual spoils to a favoured place, there ought to be a catch. The proportions in Australia are equally tilted: the familiar images of expansive wilderness in the Australian outback appeal to thrill seekers, while the images of urban centres reflect true shapes and forms of life of ordinary Australians in those temperate, lush and inhabitable regions. These contrasts and balances in one setting demonstrate to the world how completely this country is blessed, with easy life style and seemingly inexhaustible resources. These rare fortunes lay the solid foundation of what successes have been achieved ans should be accomplished by the people of Australia, subsequently landing on their shoulders a more trying mission than they have realised for the betterment of future human societies.

An Australian Experience-Hu Jintao in Melbourne

Melbourne is well known for its Victorian style buildings and homes. They are in landmarks such as the Flinders Street Central Station or tall, solid stone buildings lining up the Swanston and Collins streets. The colonial past and ubiquitous links with the British Empire can be easily seen in this lovely city.
One prime example is the Hotel of Windsor, Melbourne's oldest five star hotel at the heart of central Melbourne, right opposite the State Parliament House in one direction and the Princess Theatre in the other. It was the place to stay during many royal and VIP visits in the 20th century. In contrast to many new gleaming hotels in Melbourne, this old style hotel represents a deep sense of nostalgia and reminiscence.
I have certain special attachment to this grand hotel for another reason. Sometime in 1986, I had a chance to venture into it with my wife to meet her boss at the time. That visiting Chinese official was a nice person to be with and very friendly and caring to her subordinates. We took a few pictures, with him standing behind us while we sat in armchairs for the pose. He handed over something in package, which he carried all the way to Australia on behalf of my wife's other colleagues. This was a routine run for someone to send stuff to overseas friends through members of official delegations. Fifteen years after that casual meeting, the official concerned took the position of the President of the People's Republic of China. His name is Hu Jintao, a central figure of the Chinese leadership in the 21st century.
That meeting at the Hotel of Windsor was an occasion made possible by his official visit to Australia in that particular year. You have to admit that someone in the Australian government, under the then Prime Minister Bob Hawke, had the foresight to, first, initiate a brilliant exchange programme named "future leaders of China", and, second, select Mr. Hu among others. Hu was invited to visit Australia in his capacity as the governor of Guizhou province, the poorest province in China. It still is, and the main purpose of this practice of transferring officials from central government posts to poor regions is testing their perseverance and capability before granting them eventual rises in ranks and leadership positions. The other person of this two men delegation was a son of a revolution veteran and a department head in Beijing. Apparently, he failed the test and has since stayed in relative obscurity in following years. Hu, on the other hand, has shone brightly ever since in his political career to his most recent attainment of the supreme position of all.
Judging by this eventuality, the selection by some Australian government officials 15 years back was super brilliantly made. This also signals an early intention on the part of consecutive Australian governments from the mid 1970s to get in touch with leaders of East Asian economies and form closer relations in the region. This has proved a crucial move for Australia to stand on firm ground for its sustainable development and for future security.
Since the invitation to Hu was formally issued by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, that delegation was not an official one with definite state missions. Hu was able to tour the country of Australia and meet people of various backgrounds, in an unofficial and even casual way. That was why we had the chance to chat with him privately in a room at the Hotel of Window. I am quite sure that Hu met Mr. John Howard at some functions, perhaps one with parliamentary figures. Howard was at the time the leader of the opposition Liberal Party, very much overshadowed by the energetic and intelligent partnership of Bob Hawke and Paul Keating of the Labour government. I wonder if at several official meetings between President Hu and Prime Minister Howard in recent years, they could recall anything of their first meeting in 1986. Someone in the current federal Liberal government ought to dig out the files and unearth those precious photos of these two political figures trading pleasantries informally in a year of insignificance, long before they emerged as national leaders of two great countries.

An Australian Experience-the Lucky Corner of Victoria

Only Victoria, the smallest mainland state and the size of England, has most of its territory in temperate and inhabitable conditions, with miles upon miles of green farm, pastoral land, and forests in all directions. A local Aussie student friend of mine had a farm/retreat house in the north of Melbourne, where she also owned thick woods of pine in awesome tall and dark shapes. The other bulky states all have substantial bush land, deserts, or impenetrable tropical rain forests not far from coastal urban centres. This corner of Australia is without many of the features people usually associated with wild Australia: outback, desert, barren plains, expanses of nothingness, and dried up land. This comparison in proportions of liveable regions in total territory makes Victoria, along with its capital Melbourne, the best place to live in Australia.
One feels readily at home in an oasis of Victoria than in the other places. I am not referring here to busy commercial life or surfing paradise, which are accessible in Sydney or Gold Coast; it is the sense that you are in a vast region of green surroundings and leisurely life style that one feels quite sure of being in a good place to live. This surrounding in Victoria gives one a vague sense of being somewhere in England or France.
The state of Victoria is called the "garden state" for its uncountable numbers of greeneries and gardens. For a long time, proud Victorians used this name on every car number plate issued in the state, painted in green letters. A Liberal Party Premier in the 1990s was determined to make a big bang of everything after coming to power and subsequently had the words replaced with "on the move". The opposition Labour Party jokingly related the new slogan to the fact that Victorians left the state for sunny northern state of Queensland in droves, so they were indeed "on the move", to flee, to be exact, under his rule. Luckily, this name-changing drive did not catch up with me, and my number plate remained "garden state" till my time of leaving Australia. The Labour Party in power then changed words not back to "garden state", but to "place to be". In the end, the perfect and affectionate words of "garden state" are lost forever. In reality, political tussles don't change much of the amazing beauty this state and Melbourne contain. Nothing is able to snatch that precious scene away and make it disappear.
Melbourne is well known for its Victorian style buildings and homes. Driving through central Melbourne and nearby areas is indeed a pleasant experience. One passes tree lined boulevards with sunlight falling through tree leaves, flashing contrasting golden and green colours. Banks still operate in old buildings with solid foundation of granite. Now and then a tram in old shape passes with the distinctive bell ringing. With mild slops up and down, trams move gently as pre-historical monsters or giant worms. I once took a picture of the central Bourke Street at dusk, with dark golden sunlight, dim street light, grand building of Myer department store, and a slow-moving tram sliding down the empty street. The result is pretty much an oil painting of landscape at pre-or-early industrial age, tranquil, serene with little want.
A tree lined divided street of central Melbourne district is worth mentioning, not just for its beauty, theatres, and sparkling hotels, but more for its name. The Exhibition Street directs towards a fabulously constructed and decorated building, the Royal Exhibition Building. This grand and ornate building sits at the centre of large, expansive and well manicured gardens, the Carlton gardens. A long an wide walk path leads to the grand southern entrance, with large squares of gardens and tall, leafy trees at both sides. The view from there resembles that standing at the back door of the French palace Versailles, though the length of this walk is a little short of that between Fountain of Latona and Fountain of Apollo.
This building was constructed in 1879, for an express purpose, the Centennial International Exhibition in 1888, showing off, among other things, the achievements Australian and in particular Melbourne made. Another stately purpose was added on some year later. The building became the venue for the first Commonwealth Parliament of Australia at the time of the Federation in 1901. Since a new capital was to be built to house MPs, this building served the purpose of temporary Parliament House faithfully for 27 years. This building is a standing testament to glorious past when Melbourne was the undisputed political and cultural centre of the nation from very early years onwards, discarding later quarrels from other states of the significance of this past.
Melbourne is in fact very lively at day time, with office workers and shoppers roaming around the city centre. Beautiful arcades and department stores, which resemble the scenes in the British TV series "Are you being served?", feed customers with huge quantities of goods. Night clubs along several streets, especially King Street, are the places for fun and indulgence after the dark. These may look just like other big cities, in terms of noise, activities, traffic flows, and vibrancy.
Many other cities undertook frenzy redevelopment projects to improve their image and attract big businesses. Melbourne is not totally immune to this drive, with Dockland and South Bank as the prominent examples. Once on a flight back to Melbourne, a Singaporean executive sitting next to me asked about interesting places to go. Guessing him not a tourist of Phillip Island penguin parade type, I had to mention Crown Casino as something new, entertaining, and perhaps posh. How could I persuasively tell him that the good life in Melbourne is the ordinary life of ease, rather than theme-park like excitement? Vanity clouds people's judgement from time to time.
Amidst this kind of development drive, some projects bound to be built in unpleasant fashions. The Melbourne Exhibition Centre is in no way near the Royal Exhibition Building in style and function, and God knows why it is there. The building is in a standard rectangle shape, so rectangular that one wonders it might not require any specialised design work. I had a chance to walk in the building for a look. The overwhelming impression was a large box more fitting for Airbus 380 hangar or shipyard. In fact, it is called "Kennett's sheds", perhaps due to the fact that it was built during his terms in office and with push from his ministers. On that day, watching small numbers of people searching through piles for cheap books in this gigantic, near empty concrete complex, I felt what a waste this is. I thus became clear to me that redevelopment frenzy can easily go overboard and create monstrous projects, not just in developing or totalitarian societies.
Fortunately for Melbourne, the city as a whole has not been dramatically re-figured after those development projects were under way. The difference from others is in degree and style. Melbourne has managed to retain its unique characters, depth and flows. Change here is largely incremental. It is still a great pleasure to drive through many of Melbourne's leafy streets of nice residential suburbs, unhurried and distant to crowdedness, stress, noise, and eagerness to please.
Being in Melbourne in a city comparison is quite unlikely to be affected by fast expanding and intruding cane toads which immensely irritated northern neighbours. You can have plenty of sunshine and blue sky everyday, and you receive cane toads and other strange forms of animals as well in a bundle. The climate is not harsh at the other extreme, winter cold, either. Victorians don't worry about winter blizzards or snow storms, because they don't exist. Considering the ordeals and lengthy troubles Canadians get themselves into during winter, this is a blessing fro this state. As such, cars built in Australia are for normal driving conditions, without the routines such as filling anti-freeze liquid.
State rivalry in Australia and counter claims have deep roots. The state of NSW was the first English colony, marked by Captain Cook's landing and the First Fleet. To be fair, that is the state of origin. It was precisely because that colony (state) was so massive, encompassing the entire continent minus Tasmania, that its territory could not be sustained and had to be subdivided. The Port Phillip district went the same course as Queensland and South Australia and declared its separate colony status in 1851 as Victoria. The split of this small sate seemed insignificant of those days and not disturbing to NSW, but dramatic changes occurred later to cause continued jealousy. From the time of gold rush, Victoria quickly caught up and established its leading place in the nation, becoming prosperous and populous, in relative terms. There were more civilised and cultured development in the state, typified by freemen immigration against the initial convict roots of NSW. By the time of the 1888 Exhibition, the tiny state of Victoria and its capital Melbourne displayed amazing qualities of the centre of the nation. The first Parliaments also stationed in Melbourne. This must be a bitter reminder to Sydney as the first colony, the mother of all colonies, where it all began.
Melbourne lost its leading industrial and commercial positions to Sydney essentially because its early trade came from the British side and the European Atlantic. In the last century, trade moved to the American side and the Pacific, so that Sydney's position became prominent.
This state (city) rivalry is unavoidably reflected in an early writing of Donald Horne's. His obvious dislike of Melbourne at that time indicates his disgust of money, political elite, and accompanying control and organisation, thus he praised Sydney's free spirit and roughness. Time has indeed changed. It is ironic that big businesses and international businesses have favoured Sydney as their camp for organising production and services of the world. This is a reversal of roles and in views: as Sydney goes on to pursue money and fancy, Melbourne has adequate resources and depth to retain its old charm, intellectual strength, and stylish and worry free atmosphere, unfazed by the presence of money or international conglomerates.
Melbourne's advantage is in the maintenance of its calm metropolitan beauty, unhurried posture and elegance among more flashy, ambitious, and noisier sister cities. Melbourne needs none of the unhealthy habits or showcasing to be a great city, with a mild patronising attitude while looking at other competition frenzy territories. "Been there, done that", and the city stands to be among the best and most pleasant in the world.