Should New England be our own state? Yes, definitely!

By Jack Arnold  

The NSW and federal electorates represented by the Nationals for too long and now federally One Nation until the next elections, have missed out on essential government infrastructure spending for the duration of the representation by those candidates. This is a historical situation – going back to 1859 when Queensland gained sovereignty and New England locals wanted to be part of that new state.

The reason was simple; since European settlement in the 1830s the various government instrumentalities had ignored spending any government money in the New England region. It was only after 1916 when the New England New State Movement (NENSM) was formed in Grafton NSW by Earle Christmas Grafton Page that the Macquarie Street Parliament recognised that there were voters north of the Hunter River who had got used to being ignored.

The NENSM was very successful at elections throughout the 1920s winning ten (10) seats at their zenith. However, the city politicians encouraged six NENSM MPs to abandon their party alliances and the residual four (4) loyal members forever lacked the numbers to be truly effective representatives in Parliament.

Perhaps the greatest symbol of MENSM achievement is the double decker Grafton Bridge having a road on top of the Main North Coast Railway line over the Clarence River that was opened in 1932, the same year as the Sydney Harbour Bridge.

Throughout the next forty (40) years the Movement stayed locked in the background, while the voters saw little investment in government infrastructure projects as the successive Labor governments concentrated spending in the Sydney Basin.

In the 1967 NSW elections, the Askin Liberal Party leader offered New England voters the opportunity of a referendum to form a New England state if elected. The Liberals won and the election was held amid some political skullduggery.

At that time the soldier settler dairy farmers in the Lower Hunter districts were struggling financially on small properties supplying milk by quota to the Sydney Milk Board that in turn supplied all Sydney residents.

A week before the referendum date, polling showed that the New England State would be approved, so suddenly, a Sydney announcement asserted that Lower Hunter dairy farmers would be excluded from supplying milk to the Sydney Milk Board because they were out of NSW jurisdiction. This political lie successfully killed support around Newcastle, in sufficient numbers to defeat the New England state proposal.

The referendum results showed increasing support directly proportional to the distance from Sydney with Tenterfield voting about 90% and Armidale about 67% in favour. The exception was Port Macquarie, a former convict town that supported staying in NSW. By 1970 the Nationals had abandoned support for the NENSM with a leadership deal within that party. The NENSM vanished into obscurity, forgotten by all except a few thinkers who recognised how the voters had been betrayed by Sydney political entities. Influential New Staters moved out of the region to pursue their careers and the others went back to accepting the poor standards of government infrastructure funding until the present day.

What are the benefits of a New England State?

The Australian Constitution allows a pathway for the formation of new states. Originally, Queensland was to be sub-divided into three states, each centred on an east-west railway line, NSW would divide into Murrumbidgee and Central West states adding to a much reduced Sydney Basin. Western Australia would become three or four smaller states, while even Tasmania would divide into two. At that earlier time the Northern Territory was administered by South Australia.

If the New England State is given a geographical boundary of west from the top of the Range to the South Australian border and south from the Queensland border to the Hunter Valley, then this area is a rich agricultural, mining and electricity producing region. Note that this area is larger than the original 1917 proposal and the later 1933 Nicholson Royal Commission boundary that trailed south from the Hunter down the coast to include Gosford, then a fishing village.

There are considerable benefits for having a new state because this would make few changes to the number of MPs in the House of representatives (HoR) while adding twelve (12) new Senators to Parliament having an equal say with established party groups. The new state Senators would be able to influence political decisions in favour of New England, which presently does not happen.

Why now for a New England State?

Really nothing has changed in over 100 years since the NENSM was formed. The Nationals, originally the Country Party, has abandoned its agricultural roots to suck on the financial teat of the foreign owned multinational mining corporations. The Labor politicians with few exceptions think that crossing the Hawkesbury River Bridge put themselves in danger of being eaten by Drop Bears dangling from the mangroves or Bunyips lurking in the dark waters.

Meanwhile, the Sydney and Canberra government desk jockeys think that Moree is just down the road from Armidale, “so can you pick up the Minister from Moree for the meeting in Armidale?? What do you mean, four hours drive each way!  It is only one inch on the map!!’’

This has meant that the only economic and social progress in New England has occurred when the voters have elected a local, credible Independent MPs to represent the best interests of the community, rather than the pre-selected party person representing the best interest of the unelected political hacks who control party  business and Ministry appointments.

Meanwhile the locals continue to vote the same way as their great-grand parents, hoping to create a better 19th century life in a 21st century world. Decades of little or no government infrastructure spending means that the government funded public infrastructure required by our kids to live in New England is not, and has not, been provided or built.  So, our kids become our biggest and most valuable export.

* * * * *

Jack Arnold is a retired academic polymath who commenced his professional career as a research scientist and ended as a lawyer, with too many decades of education between. To stay busy he has taken an active interest in all levels of local New England politics for the past 50 years, assisting in the election of three progressive candidates, the latter two being very busy Independent representatives for their communities.

Since the retirement of these politicians in 2013, New England has stagnated economically and socially with pre-selected Nationals being elected to Parliaments in the strange local belief that voting for 19th century ideals would yield the new government infrastructure projects that our kids will need to live in the electorates in this 21st century.

Regional Independents get things done for their communities.

Keep Independent Journalism Alive – Support The AIMN

Dear Reader,

Since 2013, The Australian Independent Media Network has been a fearless voice for truth, giving public interest journalists a platform to hold power to account. From expert analysis on national and global events to uncovering issues that matter to you, we’re here because of your support.

Running an independent site isn’t cheap, and rising costs mean we need you now more than ever. Your donation – big or small – keeps our servers humming, our writers digging, and our stories free for all.

Join our community of truth-seekers. Please consider donating now via:

PayPal or credit card – just click on the Donate button below

Direct bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

We’ve also set up a GoFundMe as a dedicated reserve fund to help secure the future of our site.
Your support will go directly toward covering essential costs like web hosting renewals and helping us bring new features to life. Every contribution, no matter the size, helps us keep improving and growing.

Thank you for standing with us – we truly couldn’t do this without you.

With gratitude, The AIMN Team