MIND THE GAP

On this side of the Tasman at least, many still believe that New Zealand and Australia are joined at the hip. Perhaps it's time for a reality check.

- PAUL LITTLE

Brothers in arms. Best of frenemies. Cousins. Neighbours. The Australian-New Zealand relationship is often cited as a fine example of nation-to-nation bonding, especially on Anzac Day. But how much do we have in common, really? At the time six colonies joined together to become the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901, it had been suggested that New Zealand should also join the club. But in Wellington, a 10-man royal commission decided against the move, expressing in orotund prose its view that “merely for the doubtful prospect of further trade with the Commonwealth of Australia ... New Zealand should not sacrifice her independence as a separate colony".

“There are just so many aspects where Australia is more essential to New Zealand than we can ever be to them."

This established a pattern of on-again-off-again enthusiasm, which has distinguished the relationship ever since. It was strengthened some 14 years later when soldiers from both countries combined to form the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps, which landed at Gallipoli on April 25, an engagement in which 8141 Australians and 2779 New Zealanders died.

The two countries have many other things in common. In both cases, an inhabited nation was colonised by forces from Britain; both have Indigenous populations with strong cultures of their own; both have an abundance of natural resources; British culture was imported wholesale and only slowly adapted in each; both still pay fealty to a sovereign on the other side of the planet; unlike many neighbouring countries, both speak the same language; our populations are clustered around our coastlines. As well, Auckland is a lot closer to Sydney than Perth is. But each country has taken those traditions and moulded them in different ways, without paying much attention to how far we have drifted apart in the process.