Albie,

Yes we weren't fully independent in 1901.

But, if Federation had failed, the Premiers of NSW, QLD, VIC, TAS, WA & SA would have each renamed or retitled themselves Prime Minister in 1901 just as the New Zealand Premier Seddon had, a single unified nation today simply would not exist.

Prior to 1901 we had Colonial navies and Colonial armies. The Australian Army and Australian Navy were created in March 1901. Not to mention the PMG or Aust. Post and the Telstra equivalent. Australia is 116 years ahead of either Canada or Britain when it comes to an Elected Upper House or Senate. We've had a Federal Supreme Court for 116 years, the UK only recently (2005) established their own.

All this the work of some truly great men who are totally forgotten today - it is truly a NATIONAL DISGRACE of biblical proportions to forget them and their great work year after year.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=iA0jBpSej5IC&pg=PA2&dq=informally+changed+by+Richard+Seddon+to+%22Prime+Minister%22+in+1901+during+his+tenure+in+office&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjPy8f4_7HRAhUDm5QKHe3zCZ0Q6AEIIDAB#v=onepage&q=informally%20changed%20by%20Richard%20Seddon%20to%20%22Prime%20Minister%22%20in%201901%20during%20his%20tenure%20in%20office&f=false

roderick

19 September sounds good. We don't really have a formal date in the Australian calendar to focus on the significance of Federation or the history of how it came into being. January 1 is overshadowed for obvious reasons.

As for being too cold, on the contrary, September is the loveliest month of the year weather wise.

Killarney,

I'm sold - I just found this wonderful picture of Sydney Harbour on the 17th of September last year.
https://farm9.static.flickr.com/8311/29700560216_db655dc215_b.jpg

Also, the beauty of the 17th of September is that it is already AUSTRALIAN CITIZENSHIP DAY.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Citizenship_Day

What do we do on Australia Day? We hold citizenship ceremonies. It seems to be a date ready-made to move to.

Thank you very much -- hopefully this blog may change history.

That has to be one of the worst pieces I've ever read in OLO. A great display of nothingness and historical ignorance.

'The fact is, taken in the context of its time, the landing of foreigners in any part of the world could not have been more civil than that of the First Fleet; there was no overt aggression, no destruction of native habitations, no interference with native women and children...'. What a load of rubbish. No aggression? What about the kidnappings? Or the revenge party that Phillip sent out (thankfully circumvented by incompetence and a sympathetic leading officer)?

No destruction of native habitations? Really, so the First Fleeter's simply arrived and did nothing to make a settlement did they? No trees cut down, no land ruined by foreign farming practices and introduction of cattle/sheep. And no hunting/fishing out of local stocks...yeah tell that to all those who couldn't get a roo or any fish due to over-hunting/fishing.

No interference with native women and children. Absolute rubbish. The convicts were well known for interfering with the women and also stealing from the Aborigines. It is well argued that the first white person killed, convict Peter Burn, was speared as pay-back for interfering with Aboriginal women.

There was also the possible deliberate use of smallpox against the Aboriginal people of Port Jackson that had fatality rates of up to 90%. Non-interference? What a joke of a claim.

It is clear Bob Ryan has no idea what he is talking about and hope he's not a PhD Australian history student as he would be on the way to failing.

Maybe not the best time to celebrate Canberra's pollies what with Kevin/ Julia , Slipper /Bishop / Ley rorts , Clive Palmer and friends. What would we do on September Proclamation Day , it doesn't quite have the mojo of US Constitution.

The Queen stills rules OK and the Constitution still has Privy Council power.
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 74

Appeal to Queen in Council
.. the High Court shall certify that the question is one which ought to be determined by Her Majesty in Council... and thereupon an appeal shall lie to Her Majesty in Council on the question without further leave.
.. this Constitution shall not impair any right which the Queen may be pleased to exercise by virtue of Her Royal prerogative to grant special leave of appeal from the High Court to Her Majesty in Council. The Parliament may make laws limiting the matters in which such leave may be asked, but proposed laws containing any such limitation shall be reserved by the Governor-General for Her Majesty's pleasure."

aye ma'am.