Western Australia Secedes

[t***@go.com]

Quoting Wikipedia,

'... After all, what does the word "indissoluble" mean? Remember that it occurs only in the preamble and not in the Act itself. Is any arrangement made in this world indissoluble? Can the rulers of any country 'dressed in a little brief authority', bind the people of that country not merely to the third and fourth generation, but for all time? Is there either justice or common sense in continuing an agreement that is working badly? ...'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secessionism_in_Western_Australia

How feasible would it have been for the select committee in
the U.K. House of Commons to have accepted the referendum in
1933? What would have been the effects if the Nationalists
had won the election at the same time? How would the rest
of Australia have dealt with the issue? Could this have had
any effects on WWII?

[SolomonW]

Post by t***@go.com
Could this have had
any effects on WWII?

Like any other commonwealth country, Western Australia would declare war
against Germany. About the only, effect is that Western Australia like New
Zealand might have kept its troops in the European operation rather than
bring them home to fight Japan. This might have some impact in Italy after
1943.

[Graham Truesdale]

Post by SolomonW

Post by t***@go.com
Could this have had
any effects on WWII?

Like any other commonwealth country, Western Australia would declare war
against Germany.

Eire was the only Commonwealth country which did not do so.

[Zebee Johnstone]

In soc.history.what-if on Mon, 26 Feb 2018 12:47:24 -0800 (PST)

Post by t***@go.com
How feasible would it have been for the select committee in
the U.K. House of Commons to have accepted the referendum in
1933? What would have been the effects if the Nationalists
had won the election at the same time? How would the rest
of Australia have dealt with the issue? Could this have had
any effects on WWII?

UNlikely, WA would have gone to war too. Although what WA would have
been like without the Commonwealth work on the Nullabor is
interesting. Ship travel was the most common for freight and
passengers, next was rail. With changes of gauge, the gauge wasn't
unified until 1970. Sea freight was pretty well done with by then due
to increase of road freight all over Oz. Trucks were using the
gravelled road across the Nullabor, when it was finally sealed all the
way the truck traffic increased and took freight off the rail lines.

I remember the panic buying when floods cut the road and the rail in the
early 70s, as WA realised how little was made in the state and how much
we relied on the Nullabor traffic. Not a roll of toilet paper was left
in any shop!

Secession in 37 was after most of the rail work but before gauge
unification. (WA still has more than one rail gauge) And before the
sealing of the road. What incenitve would there be for the very poor
South Australia to bitumenise the Nullabor Highway? As fewer and
fewer good are moved by rail and sea in the rest of the country does
WA agree to pay the rather high costs of building and maintaining?

Zebee