What the UK could learn from Australia's clear sense of identity

It was an unusual choice of words for a British prime minister and implies a clear set of defined values that the population holds dear. Yet, listening to LBC as much as I do, I can confidently say that if the UK ever did have a clear-to-define spirit and essence, we certainly don’t now.

“What is British culture?” was a debate on Ali Miraj's show earlier this week. A 2022 caller told Shelagh Fogarty that the UK has a 'fundamental problem' with black people identifying as British. There are debates about Britishness when footballers kneel before a match, whether the general population should know the national anthem, and whether immigrants are integrating into general British life or not, and what that “general British life” is.

Although meant to be clear and stirring, Sir Keir’s comment was more likely to cause confusion and further debate. As far as I am aware, he has not made reference to anything being British or un-British since. But there is one country where such a message would cut through.

I’ve recently got married to an Australian and have taken an interest (or had an interest put upon me) in the country’s news for the past few years.

One thing that sticks out when I watch Australian politics is the country’s quite defined and protected sense of identity. If something happens that bothers the prime minister Anthony Albanese, he seems to be able to take a moral, righteous stand in patriotically labelling it “un-Australian”.

This doesn’t apply to everything and nor is the phrase overused. I haven’t heard former PM Tony Abbott, or ex opposition leader Peter Dutton labelled as un-Australian for jaywalking or hogging the middle lane. There seems to be an unwritten code as to when the term is appropriate, and it usually applies to promote ethical behaviour, calling out bigotry, and working to a shared willingness for common decency. You quickly pick up what “Australian” means.

Albanese said, “That’s just not what we expect of any Australian,” after right-wing figurehead Bob Katter threatened to punch a journalist. The PM, himself, was labelled “un-Australian” by a rival party after organising a Parliamentary sitting on the day of the Melbourne Cup horse race - which is something of a national institution.

There may be some debate, but being called un-Australian is reverently, inarguably a bad thing. The term creates a clear national standard of what is acceptable and what is not is.

Albanese said that protestors attacking the US consulate in Sydney was “not the Australian way”.

A Google search of “not the British way,” brings up a top result of Tory peer Baroness Warsi saying in 2013 that the UK should not follow France in banning women wearing a veil.

It is true that calling something out not for having shared national value is not particularly British - or something associated with the far right - but maybe that doesn’t have to be the case.

We’ve learned from Sir Keir that protesting outside the Israel embassy on the October 7 anniversary is un-British. But what else is? What is British? Why do I have more of an idea of what’s “Australian” than what’s “British”?

Genuine questions. Down Under, politicians seem nearer the answers.

____________________

William Mata is SEO editor of LBC

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk