Canberra – exactly what it was intended to be | HerCanberra

Everything you need to know about canberra. ONE DESTINATION.

Canberra – exactly what it was intended to be

Posted on

With all the excellent spots that could have been chosen for the national capital why on earth was it placed here? All good logic says it shouldn’t have been.

So why did it get landed where it did?

Firstly, why wasn’t the Australian capital chosen from amongst the existing cities?  That reason is simple: the states all hated and distrusted each other.

The idea that an established city – Melbourne or Sydney for example – would take on the role of Capital was one that the smaller states didn’t like.  Further, Melbourne and Sydney couldn’t – or wouldn’t – compromise either.

So it was declared that the new capital would be built in New South Wales, so long as it was at least 100 miles from Sydney, with Melbourne to be the temporary seat of Government while the new capital was built.

This is where things get really weird.  At the turn of the 20th century sea transport was king (and it is still pretty important today too).  It would then seem logical that the capital would therefore be placed on the coast.  Right?

Wrong.

Although the deep water harbour of Eden was in early contention – and it is almost right on the border dividing New South Wales from Victoria – it got cut early on.

The story goes that there was a prevailing fear that the nation would be invaded and it was therefore best to keep the Capital away from the coast.

In 1908 Canberra was chosen as the site.

All of Canberra’s problems begin and end with its site.  It’s not on the coast and it isn’t even on the main road or rail line between Sydney and Melbourne.  For any city to thrive it needs to have at least one of these things, if not both.  They make it a viable location for the private business and industry.  They in turn make the city viable, sustainable and capable of growth.  Blind Freddy knows that – and those who chose Canberra’s location surely knew that too.

Our political forefathers deliberately choose a place that no business or industry would go to.  Then they managed to sell the choice of location to the public partly because it would be safe from invasion.

So why would they do that?  Well, although they didn’t agree on much, the powerbrokers from Melbourne and Sydney surely did not want to create a city that could become powerful in its own right.  If the new capital had a deep water harbour and viable industry it could very possibly become more powerful and influential than their cities were.  Further, if it was to be planned properly then people would probably actually like living there and move to it.  People equal voters. Voters equal representation. Representation equals power.

While Lady Denman named the place in 1913, Menzies had to force the Government departments, still based in Melbourne up until the mid ‘50’s, to relocate up to the ‘National Capital’ to actually get the place going.    However, apart from the universities and institutions, the Government departments are all that ever really did come on any decent scale.  Business and industry haven’t really ever come.  Why would they come to a place so far from any practical transport routes?

As a result Canberra never had a chance to become a normal city. It was created as a Government town. It can only really be a Government town.

It’s not our fault, it’s not even what we want, yet we take the blame for that.

One can’t help thinking that, as well as them not wanting Canberra to become a powerful city in its own right, the forefathers also intended Canberra to take the blame for all of their political decisions.  It’s a great idea – and if you can get away with it then why not?

I reckon that they pulled it off too.  Australians mostly hold Canberra in contempt.

Many Australians don’t even understand that most politicians don’t actually come from Canberra.  Most, if not all, would never have even heard of Gary Humphries, Gai Brodtmann, Andrew Leigh or Kate Lundy. The reality is Sydney and Melbourne combined account for 33% of the seats in the House of Representatives – and over 50% of the origins of Australia’s Prime Ministers.

However, this blame appropriation hasn’t just fooled the proletariat.  Recently Martin McKenzie-Murray, writing for the Age with a glorious pomposity, called the city sterile and then proceeded to lay the blame for the sterility of the town squarely on the shoulders of Walter Burley-Griffin and his “diabolically impaired vision.”

He is miles off the mark with his allocation of blame.  Burley-Griffin’s plan won a competition.  His entry, in all its impracticality, was chosen by – you guessed it – the forefathers.

Martin, however, actually gets to the heart of the matter when he says this:

“The Bush Capital must now be cursing its weird remoteness, and the fact that outside its borders ”Canberra” is not the name of a city, but shorthand for political bastardry.”

And then this:

“Cities require imagination and leadership – long-term plans – but in few places in the developed world will you see a city so damagingly beholden to its original vision as Canberra. In open societies, cities normally express the power of pluralism – the fluent vitality of the fullest range of professions, personalities and nationalities.”

Absolutely Martin, we are cursing, we are damagingly beholden.  For the reasons you detail, but also because we constantly have to endure herds of superior toadies swanning in and telling us all why we suck like it is something we had missed and that you think you are so damned clever for pointing it out.

What you have totally failed to grasp though is that the “imagination and leadership” that called for the creation of Canberra in this image deliberately fashioned the place to achieve the exact shortcomings that you are deploring.   They meant for Canberra to be totally dependent on Government and they meant for you not to get it and not to like it.

The long term plan for the city was to manufacture a powerless shell, beholden to the will of external forces.  A place that was unable to truly attract “the fullest range of professions, personalities and nationalities.”  A city to take responsibility for decisions made elsewhere, by others, and that had no ability to create real power of its own.

And I reckon they totally succeeded.  That is exactly what Canberra is.

However, amongst all of that some of us have managed to forge good lives here. Go figure…

Happy birthday Cambra.

Related Posts

4 Responses to Canberra – exactly what it was intended to be

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2026 HerCanberra. All rights reserved. Legal.
Site by Coordinate.