Queensland votes no to Federation in 1899 - Consequences?

The 6 Australian colonies which federated to form today's nation IOTL in 1901 held referendums to approve their colonies participation in federation.

Of all the colonies referendums which approved their joining of the Commonwealth, Queensland had the smallest Yes margin 55%-45%.

What if the Queensland result was against federation?

An important short term butterfly is that Western Australia would probably not have held their 1900 referendum. The WA colonial government was not keen to join federation and was only pushed into holding one by the UK Government who was keen to complete the federation for defence reasons.

In the medium term would Queensland and WA have joined Australian federation anyway?

Even if they did not, would Qld and WA still have as close relations with Australia today as New Zealand does with Australia IOTL?
 
It's hard to see queensland remaining separate from the commonwealth long term. Whereas WA is truly remote most of queensland lives right on the border with NSW, and furthermore northern queensland is likely to be rather malcontented being fully dominated by Brisbane. None of this is taking into account the likely aggressive policies of the commonwealth - the commonwealth of Australia is not a good neighbour to other British colonies, at least on the economic front. All in all even if QL somehow votes not to join, and has the latent public support to maintain it, it is not going to be in a good position.
 
Do you have any examples of this?

Only one specific one off the top of my head (using phone at work) but have a look at the Australian embargo of New Zealand apples which lasted about a century. Oestensibly due to fire blight, it essentially became a nasty form of protectionism. The labour movement in Australia had mixed virtues.
 
Only one specific one off the top of my head (using phone at work) but have a look at the Australian embargo of New Zealand apples which lasted about a century. Oestensibly due to fire blight, it essentially became a nasty form of protectionism. The labour movement in Australia had mixed virtues.

While you are correct about apples, this is only one product. In terms of overall trade, Australia and New Zealand had a relationship that was as good as any two separate nations are going to have in the late 20th century. Closer Economic Relations and its predecessor were ahead of their time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closer_Economic_Relations

The labour movement in both countries did not stop this from occurring.
 
While you are correct about apples, this is only one product. In terms of overall trade, Australia and New Zealand had a relationship that was as good as any two separate nations are going to have in the late 20th century. Closer Economic Relations and its predecessor were ahead of their time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closer_Economic_Relations

The labour movement in both countries did not stop this from occurring.

Oh I didn't mean to imply that there were not good relations, merely that the commonwealth (as opposed to private enterprise) was fairly aggressive in securing its interests. In particular in the early years. In so far as an independent QL would go I've no doubt that there'd be major trade relations, but also that the commonwealth would do QL no favours. But again, as I'm on my phone I don't have time to fully cover the arguments so I apologise for whatever holes in my reasoning there are.
 
Top