When Australia’s 21st Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, was swept into power in December 1972 there was huge anticipation for dramatic and swift change. Australia had been under the control of a conservative liberal government for 23 consecutive years, and Whitlam’s promises if social change were eagerly anticipated. Whitlam, despite his failings as a negotiator, managed to implement a huge array of reforms and changes, many of which shaped Australia into the country it is today. However is that enough to say he succeeded? Even Whitlam today admits that he regrets doing “too much too soon”, and perhaps Whitlam’s government was a government that was too socially progressive for its time, which could perchance have been a foreshadowing of things to come for the most recent labor government of Julia Gillard which has been labeled by some as the most incompetent government since Whitlam. Gough Whitlam has had the most books written and published about him than any other Australian Prime Minister to Date. This essay will argue that Whitlam was a successful leader of the Australian Labor Party (ALP), who had the ability and charisma to lead Australia in an era of prosperity; he did however succumbed to a few grave errors of judgment that ultimately led to his downfall, however his ultimate goal was to transform Australia which he achieved. Whitlam’s’ errors were seen as being due to his inability take advice from senior figures on how to turn his amateur government into a competent one and his inflexible approach to dealing with the hostile senate that the Australian public gave him, and often led to his government being labeled the worst in Australian history and as a failure.
The period of the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s in Australia was a ...
... middle of paper ...
...r the way in which he changed Australia and brought it out of an infancy dominated by British culture and turned into an adult country with its own culture, own social policies, national anthem and set of foreign policies. Thus it can be seen that even though Whitlam had his problems throughout his time office, from the PR disaster of the Khemlani loans affair to the blocking of supply and his dismissal by a Governor General he foolishly trusted, that his policy agenda and changes he enacted while in government changed Australian society and the ALP. Be it from his introduction of universal free health care, the removal of the death penalty, move towards a more multicultural nation, improved indigenous rights, introduction of no fault divorce or the introduction of Australia’s own national anthem, Whitlam did not fail at his goal, which was to transform Australia.
...The fact that Australia publically sought America’s help angered Britain, but it was all that Australia could do seen as Britain let Singapore fall to the Japanese and did not given Australia suitable reinforcements to help with the growing pressure from the Japanese. It is shown throughout the war that the fall of Singapore damaged Australia’s relations with Britain, there are even cable grams of John Curtain telling Elsie Curtain how badly the relations with Britain and that he has a fight with Churchill almost every day (National Archives of Australia). Australia had always felt the threat of invasion in WWII but when Singapore fell it was almost certain. Australia moved further away from Britain when they publicly sought Americas help with the growing threat of a Japanese attack. None of this would have happened if Singapore had remained in British control.
...nce as to how the soldiers were directly impacted by the efforts at The Home Front. As a result, the first sub question; ‘Were the soldiers fighting in the Pacific influences also?’ was removed, leaving the following, more controlled set; ‘How did the challenges faced at The Home Front impact the relationships between the Australian people? Are such correlations still recognised today?’ Unlike the sources that were used to answer focus questions one to three, the information relating to the social effect of the war efforts by the Australian public, is all still valid and relevant to today. This is mainly due to the fact that the facets that were demonstrated during this particular time period, such as mateship and determination, continue to be reflected in modern day society and are the characteristics to which Australians are linked to by outsiders.
Assess the Claim that the Labour Governments of 1924 and 1929-31 Were Unable to Achieve Anything
Both Keating’s and Rudd’s speeches are firmly based on the ideas of recognition and reconciliation for the wrongs that European settlers, and their decedents, have inflicted on Indigenous Australians. To explore this idea I believe that it is necessary to take a closer look at both the plight of Eddie Mabo and the stories of the Stolen Generation.
for the split in 1931. It was also not easy for the labour party when
Prime Minister Robert Menzies was a believer in the need for ‘great and powerful friends’ and the idea of ‘forward defence’. Before the 1949 federal election, Menzies campaigned on the representation of the Labor Party as out of touch with Australia’s postwar ambitions. He was aided by Chifley’s willpower to cover union wage stresses and control increase. Predominantly injuring for Labor was a Communist-led coal strike in New South Wales, and the government’s practice of troops to
middle of paper ... ... The willingness of the Australian people to volunteer and help out in the war effort was outstanding. Australians also showed great pride and allegiance to England. One of the problems with people being so ready and willing to volunteer is they didn’t fully understand the realities of war.
Unfortunately, with most if not all large-scale conflicts, a detrimental aftermath was soon sure to follow. Australia was by no means exempt from this, as made evident by the Australian veterans and
Of the 8 successful, the 1967 referendum which proposed the removal of the words in section 51 (xxvi) ‘… other than the aboriginal people in any State’ (National Archives of Australia ND), and the deletion of section 127, both, which were discriminative in their nature toward the Aboriginal race, recorded a 90.77% nationwide vote in favour of change (National Archives of Australia, 2014). As a result, the Constitution was altered; highlighting what was believed to be significant positive political change within Indigenous affairs at the time (National Archives of Australia, 2014). Approaching 50 years on, discussion has resurfa...
...at these several events in our nation’s history have demoralised our reputation to other countries globally. To make us known as a better country to other nations, we’ve completely abolished the White Australia Policy, gave back the aborigines their freedoms and we were also the first country in the world to give women rights. Australia today in present day is now one of the most multicultural societies on Earth, and we definitely follow our values of mateship, acceptance and freedom.
Discuss Whether Reconstruction Was a Success or a Failure. Reconstruction is the period of rebuilding the south that preceded the Civil War (1861-1865). This period of time is set by the question, now what? The Union won the war and most of the south was destroyed. Devastation, buildings turned into crumbles and lost crops.
House of Representatives. (1965, April 29). Retrieved March 16, 2014, from Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates: http://www.dva.gov.au/commems_oawg/commemorations/education/Documents/avw_topic1.pdf
As a country, America has gone through many political changes throughout her lifetime. Leaders have come and gone, all of them having different objectives and plans for the future. As history takes its course, though, most all of these “revolutionary movements” come to an end. One such movement was Reconstruction. Reconstruction was a time period in America consisting of many leaders, goals and accomplishments. Though, like all things in life, it did come to an end, the resulting outcome has been labeled both a success and a failure. When Reconstruction began in 1865, a broken America had just finished fighting the Civil War. In all respects, Reconstruction was mainly just that. It was a time period of “putting back the pieces”, as people
A political debate derived from 1990’s that held the British colonists culpable for the beginning of the ‘history wars’ that many protagonists became involved in. ‘History wars’ is divided into two views, one being a conservative view that considered the European settlement to be an achievement of taming hostile land. The progressive view on the other hand, perceives the history to be a reminder of the invasion of their land, frontier violence and dispossession of Indigenous owners. John Howard who represented the liberal party was one of the main protagonists within this controversy, representing the conservative view. Paul Keating, the labor party representative became a legacy, a Keating legacy that began reconciliation evolving in practical and symbolic ways (Ke...
“Today we honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human History. We reflect on their past mistreatment. We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were Stolen Generations—this blemished chapter in our nation’s history. The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia’s history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future. We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians” (apology by Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, 16th November 2009, Parliament House, Canberra.)