We should accentuate the positives of our great country

A tradition that keeps on growing: Jill Fitzjohn, Andrew Betts and Tracey Betts cook up the democracy sausage at the Bossley Park Public School polling booth on election day in 2019. Picture: AAP

In a world often focused on what’s wrong, sometimes it’s worth reflecting on what has gone right. Australia, like any other nation, has its imperfections. But we are also a nation that has achieved a lot. This Australia Day, let’s reflect on what has worked, and the institutions that have helped shape our nation.

Australia’s most significant achievement, I believe, lies in its democratic institutions. Historian Judith Brett, in her book, From Secret Ballot to Democracy Sausage, credits early lawmakers such as Henry Chapman for designing the secret ballot, which would become a cornerstone of our system.

Chapman’s key innovation was the private voting booth, which marked a significant step forward. The secret ballot, first introduced in the elections for Victoria’s inaugural parliament in 1856, even inspired the adoption of the “Australian ballot” in the United States.

While the Westminster system inherited from Britain has played a pivotal role in our democracy’s strength, our unique system of compulsory voting deserves credit as well. Mentioning compulsory voting to international friends may raise some eyebrows, but it ensures that even those less interested in politics have their say. This design prevents political processes from being hijacked by extremists, contributing to stability and social cohesion.

Compulsory voting also pushes political parties to appeal to the centre, ensuring policies such as a fair minimum wage, universal healthcare and border control remain intact due to their alignment with the majority’s preferences. Our majoritarian democracy also fosters graceful acceptance of election results. Despite occasional grumblings about the preferential voting system’s complexity, it ultimately produces candidates who are the least disliked by the majority. This understanding makes it easier to accept outcomes and move forward after electoral disappointments.

However, Australia’s prosperity relies not only on its democratic institutions but also on robust property rights and free trade.

Of course, one must acknowledge the tragic denial of Aboriginal land ownership during European settlement. Yet while no treaties were entered into with Indigenous populations, not all property rights were disregarded. In 1850, the Sydney Morning Herald reported the death of Botswain Mahroot, an Indigenous entrepreneur who operated a commercial fishing business with his wife. Mahroot’s industry was later replicated by the local Aboriginal community, which established successful commercial fishing fleets.

As Ash Walker writes: “In the fertile waters of Botany Bay, one local Aboriginal community operated a thriving commercial fishing fleet. After fulfilling their cultural obligations by providing for the community, they supplied excess fish to the influential colonial Wentworth and Hill families.

These families later established the Sydney Fish Markets at Pyrmont. Profits were shared evenly between the Aboriginal community and the distributors, providing a significant income to Sydney’s original inhabitants.”

Regrettably, Walker writes, intrusive government regulation, including the confiscation of Aboriginal people’s fishing nets and onerous licences for commercial fishing, disrupted Indigenous people’s ability to engage in free trade. This interference with property rights would go on to contribute to their marginalisation.

In The Fatal Shore, Robert Hughes points out that early colonial administrators made the conscious decision to respect the property rights of the emancipists – those convicts whose sentences had expired or who had been pardoned. In this way, Australia differed from the US – particularly in the South – with its policies of slavery and subjugation. In Australia emancipists were allowed to own their own land, and were allowed to hire convicts to work for them.

Property rights and middle-class entrepreneurship are the backbone of a prosperous nation, and Australia can do more in this regard.

The recent expansion of tax cuts by the Albanese government for those earning up to $150,000 per year aims to appeal to the majority, in line with our majoritarian democratic tradition. If legislated, this package will provide a welcome relief during a time of economic pain.

However, we must heed the lessons of the emancipists and early Indigenous entrepreneurs. Respecting property rights is crucial to building a great country. Many high earners in Australia have achieved success not through inheritance but through their own hard work, and should not face punitive measures for doing so. Abolishing the 37 per cent tax threshold would align with Australia’s tradition of respecting enterprise, and would ensure hard work and aspiration are not disincentivised.

Australia’s greatness does not stem from being colonised by the British, a fate shared by many other nations, including the US, Canada, and many others. What truly sets Australia apart are the innovative institutions established by our early lawmakers, but it will all be for nothing if we do not respect property rights.

As Argentina’s Javier Milei recently told the World Economic Forum: “No matter how rich you may be, how much you may have in terms of natural resources, how skilled your population may be, how educated, or how many bars of gold you may have in the central bank, if measures are adopted that hinder the free functioning of markets, competition, price systems, trade and ownership of private property, the only possible fate is poverty.”

Australia has a remarkable story of progress and success, shaped by our democratic institutions, unique voting system and respect for private property. Our greatest risk is not the absence of the right institutions but rather the danger of allowing them to deteriorate due to ignorance and complacency.