Tasman, Please

Sydneysider At Home Base No Hands Across The Tasman, Please

Neutrals in Fiji and elsewhere have probably been laughin their heads off since the New Zealand storm broke on the poo deluded fellow—a New Zealander, to boot—who suggested the New Zealand become the seventh State of Australia.

THE idea in Fiji amongst the neutrals (such as Englishmen), is that Australians and New Zealand ers hate each other’s guts—which just shows their ignorance.

If they lived in Australia for a while they’d know that there was the same sort of brotherly antagon ism between Victorians and New South Welshmen. (NSW citizens think Victorians are stuffy and that Melbourne’s Yarra River smells; Victorians feel NSW has no “culture” and that Sydney’s old Bridge is ter ribly common.) The man who started the recent NZ-Australia riot is Sir John Allum who, in an article in the Auckland Star, suggested that the entry of Britain into the Common Market would force New Zealand and Aus tralia into a customs union and eventually into political union.

The flood of letters to the editor of the Star showed that New Zea landers were less than luke-warm about the idea. They shudder at the thought of New Zealand sinking its identity in that of the larger neigh bour, as they shuddered back in 1901 at the time the Australian States federated and New Zealand was asked to join.

It is said that the New Zealand parliament debated the proposition at that time and came to the conclusion that the New Zealander was superior to the Australian and that New Zea land had distinct advantages in going it alone.

A Royal Commission set up in New Zealand in 1900 to investigate the same question decided that the 1200 miles of Tasman Sea between the two countries was a good reason why New Zealand should remain in dependent. [There is more than twice 1200 miles between Perth, Western Australia, and Canberra, the Austra lian Federal Capital. And the five or six days that it took to cross the Tasman in 1900, by ship, have now

been reduced to less than four hou by air.] A couple of generations of Ne Zealanders since 1900 have carrif on the notion that New Zealande are “different” and probably bette They subscribe to the belief th Australians are rough-necks wil that terrible, strident accent; ar they are not above making refe ences to penal settlement origins.

They think Australians are extn verts and, although they really kno better, are apt to think of tl country as hot, arid and infested wil snakes, A lot of this came out in the le ters to the Star editor, after Sir Jot Allum made his horrifying propos tion.

Wrong Side of the Tasman What about the reaction in Au tralia? Some of the newspape; have kicked the idea around bi there has been no reader-reactioi One Sydney daily interviewed son people in the street and the peop. in the street were about as devoi of ideas as people in Sydney stree generally are.

Most thought it was something f< the New Zealanders to decide.

In the unlikely event that New Zealand made the 7th Australian State, this suggested as a good design for a new Co of Arms. Blame for it is taken by an arti of the Sydney "Daily Mirror".

r hat do Australians think of New anders? That they are terrible ►verts, of course. A bit stuffy xhaps; and certainly pro-English sickening degree. But on the [e they are tolerant and rather f for them because they were on the wrong side of the Tas hen they think of the country think of earthquakes—for half ntury the Sydney Bulletin never red to New Zealand as anything but the Shaky Isles, cause most New Zealanders leave home to make their for ; come first to Sydney, there large community of New Zea ;rs here, but so long as they go around insisting that they £iwis no one will recognise that are different from anyone else, they are newspapermen, being wi is the best passport to getting 3 see the man who does the g, as NZ-trained journalists are Dsed to have the edge on any variety. (NZ has more good ncial newspapers and cadets all sides of newspaper produc »

i Dropping

w Zealanders have escaped the ; aspects of the Australian accent v NZ-ers drop their aitches or “ ’Ow yer doin’, mate?”—and how the educational authorities made a better fist of teaching children correct grammatical h, Some pupils at even so -1 “good” schools in Australia consider it sissy to speak cor t if Kiwis imagine that they English with an English accent, are kidding themselves. Decant iucated Australian and a New nder onto a foreign strand, and eutral will be able to tell the snce. [Hint for neutrals: When 3ubt always ask “Are you a Zealander?” While the Austra won’t care much about being ken for a Kiwi, the Kiwi will bly be infuriated at being mis for an Aussie. Similarly, of i, if you cannot distinguish be a Canadian and an American, s make “Are you a Canadian?” opening gambit. Americans mind being taken for Cana but the reverse case drives most lians to an apoplexy.] onol Characteristics spite of cousinly backbiting the Tasman, Australians and Zealanders have more in com han any two countries on earth. have a common pioneering ge of the land, sheep-breeding

and gold mining; a love of the outdoors, beer, sport and race-horses.

For 60 years they have been fighting side-by-side in wars—of other people’s making—and when they have, it’s been the Aussies and the Kiwis who have ganged together against all other Allies.

There have been so many migrations back and forth across the Tasman in the last century that blood as well as sentiment tie together families in both countries, But there is such a thing as a national character, and it is unlikely that until things get much worse on

the economic front, New Zealand will be willing to join Big Brother in a customs union or anything else, But never? That’s a long time, Two years ago it would have been hard to believe that Britain would be willing to sink her identity in an economic union in Europe that must. if she is sincere in her approach, lead inevitably to political union, Nothing could be more nationally typical than the different attitudes, of Australia and New Zealand to- Britain’s proposed European adven ture.

For two generations New Zealand

had recurring trade troubles; currency restrictions and import ols have been almost continuous the past 20 years. The inion’s export trade, all primary ace, is entirely to Britain, and in’s entry into the Common :et, without the necessary safe is, could spell economic annihi i. it NZ has said “Yes” to Britain’s , and her Prime Minister, some back, said primly—and evident hamed at the way Big-Brother -the-Tasman is carrying on— he saw no point in New Zea rushing off to state its case; ras perfectly confident that the would do the right thing in the istralia, on the other hand, has yelling its head off since the was first mentioned, although Commonwealth is in a better Dmic position than NZ. It has g reluctant permission to be he spot when negotiations that ;rn Australia are being discussed; sent off her Minister for e, Mr. J. McEwen, to bluntly the case in Washington, to lint the leaders of the Inner Six where Australia stands, and to hrough the platitudinous assur ; of the Macmillan Government an angry buzz-saw. iat Australia is doing might be dered slightly Non-U on the side of the Tasman but Kiwis rest comfortably sure that the ; of the South Pacific will it. otnote : In case you are inter —“Sydneysider” was born in Zealand, went to school and up there; now has earned the to travel on an Australian pass and when abroad can shed a nental tear for both The Maori’s veil and Waltzing Matilda.