Kerry Taylor

CONFERENCE REPORT

'The Past is Before Us'

The Ninth National Labour History Conference was held at the University of Sydney, 30 June to 2 July 2005.	1
It was a strange week to arrive in Sydney from New Zealand. Former ALP leader, Mark Latham, spat the dummy and fi red the first salvo of his ongoing crusade against the movement he once led. Not surprisingly the media embraced his bile with gusto. The longstanding NSW drought also seemed to have broken. It rained cats, dogs and even a few dingos, and for once as a Kiwi I was thanked rather than vilified for bringing the rain across the Tasman with me. More seriously, the madcap industrial relations reforms of the Howard Government, copied from the disastrous NZ experiment of the 1990s, were in the headlines. Perhaps in contrast to NZ they were being vigorously challenged by organised labour, which was taking to the streets in massive numbers.	2
In the midst of all this a large and diverse group gathered at the University of Sydney for the Ninth National Labour History Conference. As usual the conference provided a rich source of intellectual stimulation and an all to brief moment where those attending could share their research, converse, argue, enthuse and generally enjoy the company of others committed to the field of labour history. Over the three days of the conference more than 70 papers and presentations were delivered. The overall standard was high.	3
The opening address by Meredith Burgmann, President NSW Legislative Council, set the tone well. Her talk reflected on moments from her own participation in the labour movement and linked these to some general themes in Australian labour history. The talk neatly and appropriately linked the past and the present, a dynamic cemented in the next morning when the early sessions were delayed to allow delegates to participate in the NSW march against the proposed industrial relations reforms.	4
Through most of the conference there were three streams running simultaneously, a state of affairs that made for some frustratingly difficult choices between competing sessions. Yet is it a sign of the continued strength of the discipline that so many papers were offered. Each person no doubt found different highlights amongst the kaleidoscope of choices which ranged from Scottish fishing families to communist railway workers in Western Australia; from white collar radicals to the BLF; from labour governments to memorials to the Titanic (no, there is no necessary connection here!); from women steel workers to Aboriginal workers.	5
One of my early selections was a session on practicing labour history that had speakers from Melbourne, Canada and Austria. Diversity was the key conclusion I drew from the four papers and perhaps from the conference as a whole. This was manifest in terms of methodology (from traditional archival research, to oral history and textual analysis) and in the medium of publication (from traditional paper forms to the web).	6
The strong international dimension of this session was also reflected in the conference more generally. There were at least ten scholars from outside Australia presenting papers, they came from many parts of the world including: Austria, Canada, England, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Scotland, and the United States. In part this is a spontaneous outcome of the increasingly global networking of labour historians. It was also in partly the design of the conference organisers, refl ected in Marcel van der Linden's presentation of a keynote address on labour history as an international movement. In a wide ranging discussion van der Linden put forward a vision of how labour historians can globalise their practice beyond a nationalist orientation by focussing on the global dynamics of commodities, including their production, trade and processing. There was a lively discussion. This was another characteristic of the conference as a whole, those attending engaged sometimes passionately with the subjects being discussed and with the different interpretations being provided.	7
The strong international flavour of the conference is also a testimony to the high reputation that the Australian labour history community has internationally, whether manifest in the form of its regular conferences or in the journal. Pleasingly one of the characteristics of the conference was a wide cross section of ages, in terms of both presenters and those attending. This was not a gathering of the aged, looking back to a heroic mythical past. The signs for the regeneration and future of labour history in Australia are strong.	8
While the international flavour was tangible, Australian dynamics were richly manifest. Most papers were about aspects of the Australian experience. As a Kiwi there was plenty of food for thought on how different some experiences were on this side of the Tasman, but also how spookily similar some things were. In addition to the formal papers a range of other cultural forms played a key part in the conference. An outstanding session of folk singing was a highlight for me, so too a film on 'the Split'. A session of participant reflections entitled 'More Rough Reds' included some enthralling and at times very emotional recollections from the front line of the struggle.	9
Of the 'after dark' activities for me special mention must be made of the Trivia evening, so beautifully and laconically chaired by Senator John Faulkner and very well organised by the Sydney ASSLH branch. Here we had a lot of fun and learnt many things, including that: 1) most historians know less than they think, especially about when things occurred; 2) drink adds to the enjoyment, but not to one's capacity to remember; 3) the injudicious use of mobile phones for assistance will lead to public shaming.	10
In short, the conference was a great success on all fronts. The organisers deserve our thanks for taking on the enormous job of making such an event happen. Their labour was visible and much appreciated. Roll on the next conference.	11

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.