William Wentworth said: ‘Every man that is honest and industrious can sit under his own vine and his own fig-tree.’ (1853 Constitution debates) He wanted the good life, not political turmoil.

Australia’s big idea was that we never saw government as the meaning of life.

British liberties were brought to our vast continent in 1788 by Captain Phillip and the First Fleet. When he stepped onto the beach at Sydney Cove, he brought ideas of government that led to our modern democracy. Agriculture led to our modern very high living standards.

Australians then built an enviable place to live for most of our history, and today.

British liberties in legal form included independent parliaments representing ‘the people’, independent courts, and a flourishing system of trade and commerce supported by contract and property law.

As Australia’s leaders drafted remarkably democratic constitutions in the 1850s, they argued for the British Constitution and British liberties, which is the language used by Tory (conservative) and Whig (centrist) candidates in 1818 speeches for parliamentary elections (Thorne).

William Wentworth suggested in 1853 that ‘in early life he was a Radical, in middle age a Whig, and he intended to die a Conservative.’ He opposed democracy.

‘Alphabet’ Foster said in 1854 that in drafting Victoria’s first self-governing constitution, ‘We have on the whole followed out the spirit of the British constitution generally.’ (Victorian Legislative Council).

Alexander Campbell said in 1853 that: ‘I contend for universal suffrage as the birthright of every Englishman.’ In 1858 he said that giving all men the vote was just ‘the grand principle of representation according to population, a principle which the ancient Saxons tried hard to workout’. (NSW Parliament).

John Darvall said Wentworth argued that Sydney ‘should not be represented because it contained so many people!’ Perhaps Wentworth enjoyed the joke.

These were the ideas Australians used for over half our modern history to build a nation. We rarely mention them now.

The Australian Constitution of 1901 adopted the British Westminster system of a Prime Minister and Cabinet which held a majority in the House of Representatives. This system was formalised in Britain only in 1841.

The Prime Minister and Cabinet are not mentioned in the written Constitution. They are instead firmly established practice (‘convention’), our informal Constitution of rule by ‘the people’. The same as our 1850s Constitution.

Liberty did not suddenly arrive in 1901 with Federation and a new nation. Australians were already a people governed by liberty. Alexander Berry told the NSW Legislative Council in 1853:

‘We have no grievances, no taxes, nothing on Earth to complain about; we have liberty of the press; and God knows we have freedom of speech enough: for if such rampant speeches as were uttered at the Victoria Theatre the other day, had been spoken in any of the countries of Continental Europe or America, the speakers would have been liable to incarceration…’

Australians knew this. Existing liberties were nearly always improved in each generation.

The European Union is a more recent project of the first world, with ‘human dignity’, ‘freedom’, and ‘human rights’ as core values.

Human rights were given legal effect. This prevented the EU adopting the ‘Australian solution’ of ‘sending migrants rescued at sea to asylum processing centres outside of Europe’, the Brookings Institute says.

These legal difficulties are almost certainly central to the rise of ‘populist right’ parties which want ‘illegal immigration’ controlled.

Australia has the benefit of avoiding many of the legal nightmares of Europe, although even here the government has repeatedly lost court challenges as it attempted to control immigration.

Our informal constitution of liberties, values and objectives works well, even very well.

Australians wanted to build a ‘great nation’ not theories, as William Wentworth said:

‘The labouring classes are better off than in any other country. Would to God the poor starving thousands in the mother country could share in their abundance, for all we want are the sinews of the labourer to make this colony a great nation.’ (Legislative Council 1853)

In the US, all legislation must pass through the ‘sieve’ of the US Bill of Rights and Constitution. With no Bill of Rights in Australia the sieve is much less demanding.

The result is that in the US, abortion, affirmative action, and gay marriage (‘marriage equality’) were policy decisions by the US Supreme Court. The Court constantly amended them. In Australia Parliament decides those issues. The US Supreme Court even ordered school students to be ‘bussed’ to other schools.

Political policy should generally be decided through democratic means, rather than unelected judges. Chief Justice Owen Dixon described this as ‘strict and complete legalism’.

Many are willing today to express admiration for Australia’s democracy, and its compulsory voting and an independent Australian Electoral Commission. But then avoid declaring how well our Constitution functions. Although the Constitution is the basis of our democracy.

We forget the replacement of absolute monarchy by Parliament. The freedom of ordinary people from imprisonment without due process. Religious freedom rather than theocracy. Those were the nightmares of old Europe and Asia, and of many places today and terrible poverty resulted.

Every generation will interpret our foundational ideas slightly differently. But the essential elements will remain. Liberty and all men and women equal in the eyes of God and the law.

Young Australians and immigrants are not taught enough about the Australian evolution of Parliament and its founding documents and ideas.

We should be capable of robust celebration of our foundational ideas, as well as abusive complaints about them. Even if Australia’s bigger, better idea, is undramatic. What exactly is wrong with the evolution of Parliament directed and maintained by ‘the people’ in free and fair elections rather than a revolution?

There is much to be said for evolving British liberties. If only someone would say it.

The Hon. Reg Hamilton, Adjunct Professor, School of Business and Law, Central Queensland University