No Australian Federation?

The question of enlarging Australia, usually including New Zealand, has arisen quite often. I'm curious, though, about the other end of the spectrum. How could the federation of Australian colonies be averted? And could uniting the continent be avoided all the way to the present day?
 
IIRC Western Australia actually did reject, but were told to sit down and shut up by London (much like Nova Scotia).

But I'm more interested in it not happening altogether, with all six colonies staying separate well into the 20th Century.
 

katchen

Banned
So if WA was told to sit down and shut up, why wasn't New Zealand? Or Fiji? Or the Solomon Islands?Or for that matter, Sarawak, North Borneo and Singapore, all of whom were colonies?
 
So if WA was told to sit down and shut up, why wasn't New Zealand? Or Fiji? Or the Solomon Islands?Or for that matter, Sarawak, North Borneo and Singapore, all of whom were colonies?

Sarawak, North Borneo and Singapore weren't full of white British people. Not sure about New Zealand though.
 
Actually, in the deciding referendum, WA did vote in favour of joining; according to some Sandgropers though, that was only due to the impact of "easterners" who came for the Gold rush.
So, if no gold was found till later...?
Also, one of the driving forces was fear - of the French, Germans, Russians, Chinese, Japanese, even, to a degree Americans, so, if somehow the Australian colonists could be reassured?
Though, do not forget, there was also a real degree of idealism supporting the concept of Federation, do not underestimate its importance.
 
Sarawak, North Borneo and Singapore weren't full of white British people. Not sure about New Zealand though.
I've read that one of New Zealand's main objections was that an Australian-dominated federal government might try treating the Maori in the same way that Australians tended to treat Aborigines, provoking an uprising in which the New Zelaanders themselves would obviously be considerably more at risk than the Australians were.
 
Top