I too am old enough to remember this coup as that is what it was. The opposition blocked supply and then Fraser moved to get rid of the current Government. You only need to search to find it. They could not be removed on performance otherwise since then we would have changes of Government every two weeks or so.

By blocking supply the government at the time were stuck they could not do anything and so they got removed in what was the most underhanded and undignified way ever in Australian politics and all those involved in removing a Govt like this should have hung their heads in shame over it. From memory after it the rules or laws were changed so it cannot happen again, it has to be thrashed out in parliament till supply is approved from memory even if it means drastic changes to supply have to made. It could take a bit longer this way, but it stops a coup happening like it did.

Someone had worked all this out before hand and knew exactly who would do what and to who, you cannot say it was a spur of the moment thing though. This plan had been worked out in great detail and just needed certain people to do certain things and Gough Whitlam fell into the trap set. The timing of everything tells you that it was planned as well as time periods for things also ran out as some one pointed out for somethings.

Absolute rubbish.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/gough-whitlam-left-a-long-list-of-achievements-20141021-119cpu.html

Howard is a mean splrited individual. The only good thing he did was ban automatic weapons. Unfortunately it takes a massacre for governments to do that. I will not shed tears if he dies before me( I shed a few last Friday watching the Hawke memorial).
I will never forgive Howard for making same-sex marriage so much more difficult to achieve in Australia than in New Zealand. I guess I can thank him for making me decide to quit Australia and move to NZ although, by the time I managed to achieve that, Key had become PM over here and I worried I had made the wrong decision. However although a banker and therefore not someone who would ever get my vote, Key was not a social neanderthal like the Australian conservatives. Thankfully NZ now has a progressive government again. The NZ population saw through the conservative's tax bribes although in these modern days a dynamic vibrant leader helps. I have not felt so proud of my country's leader since 1975 as I do today. I am now a very proud Kiwi.

Brian,
we all know you love your beloved NZ and good luck to you. Very few people make the tough choice to move to a place they love, rather continue to complain about where they are and not having the balls to do something about it. I can also high-lite of the positives of living in Dubai over Australia, but I can never be a citizen here and have no intention to stay 1 day longer than I need too as there is a lifestyle I miss too much and it could be NZ or Aust, parents and children will likely have final say in where that is. Dubai is purely a means to an end and along the way do some travelling and enjoy the best of what Dubai has on offer and it is alot, but not in summer.

As for the Howard SSM, yes he's religious and frequently eco'ed his religious beliefs in the house and it didn't need to be done, also note that ALP made no attempt to undo it either because it wasn't until only a few years ago the Australian population would have supported a SSM vote in the majority. If you are of that persuasion then yes I'd be pissed off too, but alas Govt's are not single policy govt's. If Howard got you to where you want to go by giving you the kick up the smeg to make a decision then join a long list of people who have changed jobs, location, partners because of something that happened they had no input or control over.

I would have thought Hawke did far more for Australia than Whitlam, purely because he was there about 6 x as long and didn't face an early election. At the end of the day, there is more to being in govt than a few good ideas and being a nice guy/girl, you need to work the system and failing to do so means you will ultimately fail. Tony Abbott was heavily critised by many in this group because he couldn't work the upper house, so he too failed.

Yes, you basically stated the govt was fired for being incompetent and overall a poorly performing PM. I agree with that.

I posted facts. If that's how you read them, I'm happy for you. However, the fact remains that the government was dismissed because of failure to guarantee supply. It was a coup orchestrated by Withers, Fraser, and Kerr. This is a matter of historical record. As has been pointed out, this was the Coalition's second attempt to overthrow the elected government.

In summary, Whitlam was sacked by a compliant Governor General helping an Opposition which would stop at nothing to regain power.
It may well be that Whitlam was not re-elected because his government was perceived as incompetent, but that is not the reason he was dismissed, because it couldn't be.

Brianr and I both watched it all happen in real time - you didn't.

Sounding a bit exasperated there Valvegear... I know how you feel.

Fraser saw his opportunity and took it, Gough should never have gone to lunch before he resolved the constitutional crisis... it's all in the alternative universe now...

I posted facts. If that's how you read them, I'm happy for you. However, the fact remains that the government was dismissed because of failure to guarantee supply. It was a coup orchestrated by Withers, Fraser, and Kerr. This is a matter of historical record. As has been pointed out, this was the Coalition's second attempt to overthrow the elected government.

In summary, Whitlam was sacked by a compliant Governor General helping an Opposition which would stop at nothing to regain power.
It may well be that Whitlam was not re-elected because his government was perceived as incompetent, but that is not the reason he was dismissed, because it couldn't be.

Brianr and I both watched it all happen in real time - you didn't.

Valvegear
You posted along list of mistakes by Whitlam, not me, starting with giving Kerr the job in the first place.

End of the day, right or wrong he was outplayed by an ambitious opposition, you know that being a sucessful PM takes more than just being a nice guy, you need to play the game.  

- Whitlam was forced to go to a general election 18mths after winning the first time because bills blocked
- The 1975 general election held by Fraser before Whitlam could try another tacit Whitlam lost over 30 seats in a 127 seat house, so the people validated the GG decision. And really, even though Fraser was 2 steps ahead of Whitlam in dissolving Parliament, based on his history, did we think things would improve if he again took control of the govt? Fraser and the general election that followed at least allowed things to stablise.
- The 1977 election Whitlam picked up just 2 seats, so after two years the people still said F-U so clearly the 1975 vote was not a knee jerk.
- Then only after dumping Whitlam, only then did ALP with Hayden at the helm start to crawl back from Fraser, but took Hawke to take over to win.

Whitlam was a failure at being a PM and a failure as opposition leader. May have been a nice guy, who meant well, but wrong job. Very few PM's know their expiry date and need to be shown the door, so he's not entirely alone, just for him it was earlier than later.

Fraser saw his opportunity and took it, Gough should never have gone to lunch before he resolved the constitutional crisis... it's all in the alternative universe now...

Exactly

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gough_Whitlam

Gough picked up 5 seats in '77. Nothing to write home about.
Although losing in '69 and' 77 did manage to win in '72, so failure as opposition leader is a personal view.

Billy Shorten and John Hewson top my list as opposition leader fails.
As for failure as PM, the list is LONG.

You posted along list of mistakes by Whitlam, not me, starting with giving Kerr the job in the first place.

.
1. I did not post a list of mistakes. I said they made silly mistakes. Please quote my "long list".

2. Any comment on failings by the Whitlam government was quite clearly stated in the context of the loss in the election following the dismissal.
3. At no time have I said that Whitlam's appointment of Kerr was a mistake. You did say it, and history proves it to be correct. Please put up the quote where I said it.

You say Whitlam was outplayed - it's precisely what I've been saying from square one. Read what I said, namely that Fraser knew how to handle Kerr and Whitlam didn't.

Let's say it one more time. The government was not dismissed on the grounds of incompetence. It is not in the Governor-General's prerogative to do so.
The government was dismissed because it could not guarantee supply. It was a coup by Fraser, Withers, and Kerr.

By the way, what is your opinion of the roles played by Senator Bert Milliner, Senator Cleaver Bunton, Senator Vincent Gair, and Senator Albert Field?

You may think that the dismissal was well deserved - that is your opinion and you are welcome to it. Obviously a lot of other people thought it was.
But; at least stick to facts when you discuss it. I'm not sure whether you are playing Agent Provocateur, or are genuinely trying to make a fool of yourself.

My parents were typical of many people of that era (and many today). Dad was a commercial traveller, he had owned a grocer shop (his father raised the money to purchase when dad left the army at the end of WW2) but that had to be sold in mid 60's due to the rise of supermarkets. Mum worked casually in those supermarkets mainly to support me in education. While bright, I did not gain a scholarship (long story of a dreamy teenager) and my father paid for my first year at university (before the Whitlam free university times). I paid my 2nd year (worked 3 months (1 year in total over 4 years ) as a bus conductor in Sydney (even then I was fascinated by transport systems). I gained a teachers scholarship for years 3 and 4. My mother was over the moon that I was the first in our family to gain a degree but so disappointed that I began to vote Labor. To her, even until her death in 2006, only lower class workers voted Labor.
That was typical. Menzies was the god who could only do right for the country and save us from the Red menace and Calwell, for all his decent ideas, did not inspire as an alternative. I was too young to remember Curtin and Chifley.
It took the Liberal leadership struggles after Holt's disappearance and the pitiable McMahon plus the more statesmanlike (than Calwell) Whitlam to finally tip the conservatives out in 1972.
They had ruled for 27 years and there was so much to be done. In hindsight we can see that they moved too quickly for the population and some ministers were reckless in their frustration as the Senate blocked as much as it could. My greatest regret is that they did not win in 1969. By 1972 the world economic ill winds were blowing and, having an economic degree, I will admit that Whitlam was not an economist.
The Hawke/Keating government learnt from their mistakes and largely were able to take the population along with them as they built on (an in some cases - medibank - restored) what Whitlam had started.
Of course the conservatives always try the same tricks. Howard used refugees as reds could no longer be used as a threat and also bribed the middle classes with unnecessary welfare. These welfare handouts are difficult to reverse. I was bemused by the fracas over dividend franking. I have a modest share portfolio but, as a tax resident of NZ, I not only do not receive the franked amount but have to pay tax (17.5%) on the dividends I do receive from Australia. However, like all Kiwis over 65, I receive the full aged government superannuation (nearly 25,000 before tax), however it is taxed (10.5% to $14,000 then 17.5% after that). There is no free tax threshold in NZ. Centrelink pay my Australian pension to the NZ government but due to the assets test it is about half what NZ pay me although I have never worked a day for pay in NZ.

You posted along list of mistakes by Whitlam, not me, starting with giving Kerr the job in the first place.

.
1. I did not post a list of mistakes. I said they made silly mistakes. Please quote my "long list".

2. Any comment on failings by the Whitlam government was quite clearly stated in the context of the loss in the election following the dismissal.
3. At no time have I said that Whitlam's appointment of Kerr was a mistake. You did say it, and history proves it to be correct. Please put up the quote where I said it.

You say Whitlam was outplayed - it's precisely what I've been saying from square one. Read what I said, namely that Fraser knew how to handle Kerr and Whitlam didn't.

Let's say it one more time. The government was not dismissed on the grounds of incompetence. It is not in the Governor-General's prerogative to do so.
The government was dismissed because it could not guarantee supply. It was a coup by Fraser, Withers, and Kerr.

By the way, what is your opinion of the roles played by Senator Bert Milliner, Senator Cleaver Bunton, Senator Vincent Gair, and Senator Albert Field?

You may think that the dismissal was well deserved - that is your opinion and you are welcome to it. Obviously a lot of other people thought it was.
But; at least stick to facts when you discuss it. I'm not sure whether you are playing Agent Provocateur, or are genuinely trying to make a fool of yourself.

Valvegear
1. I previously highlited your comments of his mistakes that you listed a few days back.

1b. There is no such thing as "silly mistakes" for the CEO/PM, if this were actually true a few PM's would have lasted alot long, TA likely being one of them.

2. His mistakes started before, The Dismissal and extended beyond.

3. No you didn't say hiring Kerr was a mistake, I did. He hired his I believe friend, a lawyer, known to have an alcohol problem and he even wouldn't accept the role until he did extensive reading on the role and what he thought the role should be.

3. The GG dismissed the govt because it was failing at its job to govern, FULL STOP!

4. Yes, Fraser knew how to handle Kerr, Fraser also knew how to play the game better than Whitlam. In the context of Survivor TV, he was Outwitted, Out Played and Out Lasted . Do I personally think politicians should stoop to this level fighting each other and not focus on running the country? No, but that's politics. Even my current home of a benevolent absolute Monarchy has the same, we just don't see it, nor do are the media allowed to cover it but talk to the locals and you find out whats happening behind closed doors due to the relatively small local population compared to the population of the country.

5. Regarding those Senators, I have no idea. As you said, I was too busy playing in the playground when all this took place. However I appreciate that many adults at the time were sitting on the couch singing "It's Time", you can decide who's time was actually.

As I said before,
Elected 1972
Forced to election 18mth later, retained roughly same seats
Forced election 1975, ALP lost nearly 50% of their seats
Election 1977, picked up a few seats still under Gough
Election 1979/80, under Hayden, picked up alot more seats
Election 1982, under Hawke, took govt

the people have the final decision and they voted him out in 1975 because he was incompetent and wouldn't let ALP to crawl back until he finally resigned. 90+ seats in a ~127 house is 75% saying good-bye in a big way, even Howard wasn't shown the door with such vengeance, although Rudd was.

EDIT: I think I'll agree to disagree that Whitlam was one of the worst PM's in last 50 years, there is likely others.

Lets get down to nuts and bolts and say no matter who gets in as the government mistakes have happened since the first parliament was opened in Australia and continues to be made by who ever gets in. So no party is really immune from it.

Fraser knew that if he did the right things at the right time then the outcome would almost be guaranteed and it was, so if that is not a plan I do not know what is. The backroom boys would have been running around day and night to find out what needed to be done and the info was then passed on to Fraser to execute the plan in parliament and execute is the right word to use as it executed the elected government of the time.

But do not point the finger at anyone party though both sides have made mistakes some really bad and some not so bad. Today though I doubt there is any parliamentarian in Australia that is as good as in the older times the answer to that is no.

1. I previously highlited your comments of his mistakes that you listed a few days back.

Patently untrue.

1b. There is no such thing as "silly mistakes" for the CEO/PM, if this were actually true a few PM's would have lasted alot long, TA likely being one of them.

Opinion. In addition, I said the Whitlam government made silly mistakes; not the PM.

3. The GG dismissed the govt because it was failing at its job to govern, FULL STOP!

My dilemma is solved. You are not an Agent Provocateur. You are determined to make a fool of yourself. Congratulations on your success.

You wish to write your own biased and inaccurate  idea of history, despite evidence from at least four writers who lived through it and took notice.

Now go your own way; on your own. It's a waste of time dealing with someone who is determined not to learn.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gough_Whitlam

Gough picked up 5 seats in '77. Nothing to write home about.
Although losing in '69 and' 77 did manage to win in '72, so failure as opposition leader is a personal view.

Billy Shorten and John Hewson top my list as opposition leader fails.
As for failure as PM, the list is LONG.

Gough picked up 2 seats in '77. Nothing to write home about.

1. I previously highlited your comments of his mistakes that you listed a few days back.

Patently untrue.

1b. There is no such thing as "silly mistakes" for the CEO/PM, if this were actually true a few PM's would have lasted alot long, TA likely being one of them.

Opinion. In addition, I said the Whitlam government made silly mistakes; not the PM.

3. The GG dismissed the govt because it was failing at its job to govern, FULL STOP!

My dilemma is solved. You are not an Agent Provocateur. You are determined to make a fool of yourself. Congratulations on your success.

You wish to write your own biased and inaccurate  idea of history, despite evidence from at least four writers who lived through it and took notice.

Now go your own way; on your own. It's a waste of time dealing with someone who is determined not to learn.

1. Valvegear,
Your comments
Kerr's only Constitutional reason was that the government could not guarantee supply.
.... Labor government which did make silly mistakes. . (yes you did say the ALP, my bad)
.. hamstrung by a hostile Senate in which Senator Reg Withers ....
... Washington, desperately wanted Whitlam out.
.... Fraser knew how to handle Kerr, and Whitlam didn't.

It is the job of the PM to handle his/her own party, provide leadership for the country, deal with a Senate without the balance of power etc etc etc. The buck stops with you and no one else. The voters hold you solely responsible, the party holds you responsible and your supporters hold you responsible. That's why the PM gets the big bucks, The Lodge, The ex PM benefits and pension.

Whitlam was incapable of completing this task and basically incompetent and was fired, not once, but three times by the GG,  the people in 1975 and again in 1977. A better ex PM would acknowledged their mistakes and baggage to the party and have resigned before the 1975 election, if not practical, then immediately after the election and certainly never ever have contested the 1977 election.

Whitlam's competence in his roles outside the house is not in dispute and this includes his performance in UNESCO for which he did well.

Yes, I'm interested in history and the details behind, but the end result is still the same.

My parents were typical of many people of that era (and many today). Dad was a commercial traveller, he had owned a grocer shop (his father raised the money to purchase when dad left the army at the end of WW2) but that had to be sold in mid 60's due to the rise of supermarkets. Mum worked casually in those supermarkets mainly to support me in education. While bright, I did not gain a scholarship (long story of a dreamy teenager) and my father paid for my first year at university (before the Whitlam free university times). I paid my 2nd year (worked 3 months (1 year in total over 4 years ) as a bus conductor in Sydney (even then I was fascinated by transport systems). I gained a teachers scholarship for years 3 and 4. My mother was over the moon that I was the first in our family to gain a degree but so disappointed that I began to vote Labor. To her, even until her death in 2006, only lower class workers voted Labor.
That was typical. Menzies was the god who could only do right for the country and save us from the Red menace and Calwell, for all his decent ideas, did not inspire as an alternative. I was too young to remember Curtin and Chifley.
It took the Liberal leadership struggles after Holt's disappearance and the pitiable McMahon plus the more statesmanlike (than Calwell) Whitlam to finally tip the conservatives out in 1972.
They had ruled for 27 years and there was so much to be done. In hindsight we can see that they moved too quickly for the population and some ministers were reckless in their frustration as the Senate blocked as much as it could. My greatest regret is that they did not win in 1969. By 1972 the world economic ill winds were blowing and, having an economic degree, I will admit that Whitlam was not an economist.
The Hawke/Keating government learnt from their mistakes and largely were able to take the population along with them as they built on (an in some cases - medibank - restored) what Whitlam had started.
Of course the conservatives always try the same tricks. Howard used refugees as reds could no longer be used as a threat and also bribed the middle classes with unnecessary welfare. These welfare handouts are difficult to reverse. I was bemused by the fracas over dividend franking. I have a modest share portfolio but, as a tax resident of NZ, I not only do not receive the franked amount but have to pay tax (17.5%) on the dividends I do receive from Australia. However, like all Kiwis over 65, I receive the full aged government superannuation (nearly 25,000 before tax), however it is taxed (10.5% to $14,000 then 17.5% after that). There is no free tax threshold in NZ. Centrelink pay my Australian pension to the NZ government but due to the assets test it is about half what NZ pay me although I have never worked a day for pay in NZ.

Interesting and informative

I went to primary school in the 70's and highschool in the 80's.

I went to Uni, but waited 2.5 years after school, paid the whole thing myself, even to the point refusing money from may parents as I didn't want them holding the same thing over me as they did at school. initially with a scholarship and later changed to a different degree and worked for the rest of uni to pay my rent, car and save to buy a house in my final year, yes I worked long hours stuffing catalogues in newspapers at 1am in the morning and went to uni 50% load.

I disagree with Whitlam's move to free tertiary education and I incurred the early stages of HECS and graduated with a $15k debt in 1994. My Engineer, Honors wife was about $25k if I remember a few years later. Opening the door to free education at this level opens the door to I believe it being abused and more likely people studing the wrong courses. As it is I believe in 100% gap year for all as I saw so many changing courses away from their parents choice or other. However the system shouldn't be rigged to the wealthy and anyone should be able to get basic funding and loan to complete their degree, but should be capped. The process should also acknowledge that some will never pay it off.

Whitlam had a number of good ideas, but I don't believe knew how to implement them well or at all and Hawke/Keating basically finished much of what he started. To keep it rail focused, the ANR concept was great, but should not have proceeded with the half arsed approach that followed picking up the basket cases of TGR and SAGR.

I don't agree with alot of the money Howard was handing out, but then again its not like it was borrowed money. The govt was debt free, they were banking more money than banked in the previous 50 years combined, over full employment and they were facing a dying birth rate.  The primary reasons given were driven by a rapid change in the previous 10 years from house loans being borrowed against one income to two, so basically the lady of the house could not afford to take time out. I know it was a major challenge for us. The baby bonus should have been done alot differently, but I suppose they were trying to prevent the creation of a new govt department.

I went to primary school in the 70's and highschool in the 80's.

Just out of curiosity, what were your memories of computers during your primary and high school years ? Did only front office staff have access to them? when were they rolled out at your school? could they be used for much without the internet existing at the time?

I was a high school teacher (Geography and some Economics) from 1966 to 1991 when I took time off (part-time taught at TAFE) to do a post grad diploma in Library and Information Science and returned to schools as a Teacher/Librarian from 1995 to 2009. I have seen big changes. In 1966 I typed sheets of notes and roneoed them on a Fordigraph machine. These did not do much more than a 100 copies so needed to be retyped every few years.
In 1976 I started teaching at a senior catholic high school and had 4 classes in year 12 so the notes had to be retyped every year. You could type a stencil for a Gestetner but that was very messy. I bought my first computer in the mid 80's but only used it for typing and do not think many or any students had access to one. The printer was probably the biggest time saver for a teacher.
My first experience of the internet was when I began my diploma course (correspondence) at Charles Sturt Wagga 1993 and went to a weekend residential course. it was still very primitive and slow. In 1995 I obtained a position as a librarian at a catholic school in the western suburbs of Sydney. There was one computer in the library (probably one or two in the staff room) and my modem commuted to school with me for several months until I was able to convince the principal to buy one. I lived in the Blue Mountains so my dialup was restricted by the need to pay for long distance calls to my ISP in Sydney. The next year I increased the number of computers in the library to 4 and over that year or the next established a network in which I dialed up on arrival in the morning and shut down when leaving. We gained a deal with the ISP because the connection was not used at night. I remember arranging to leave it on one evening for Parent-teacher night so parents could be shown the internet (with an advert for the ISP on the desk).  My biggest task was convincing teachers to include internet searching as a teaching tool. I taught the students Boolean searching as Google had not been invented and the search engines that did exist were less powerful.

So in the 80's any student who had a computer would probably only use it for typing up notes and essays and not while at school. Probably some other uses for calculation in science and mathematics classes but I cannot remember seeing them in labs but that was not my area.

Heath,
I was at Banksia Park High in the late 70s.   Computer class existed of filling in cards, a system called basic if IRC, and going in a bus to Angle Park (20 km away) to a room size computer to put the cards through.
I think my calculator at the time was faster and could do more.

Whitlam was incapable of completing this task and basically incompetent

Hardly surprising you're punching out these posts.

Whitlam's government wanted to do to much and upset too many vested interests in the process. Also it wasn't the best time to take government as the global economy tanked. However many reforms we take for granted are now entrenched including universal healthcare and consumer protection. Predictably opposed by the LNP!

For the record I was ecstatic when Whitlam was sacked but then again John Laws was required listening.

I went to primary school in the 70's and highschool in the 80's.

Just out of curiosity, what were your memories of computers during your primary and high school years ? Did only front office staff have access to them? when were they rolled out at your school? could they be used for much without the internet existing at the time?

I have no recollection of computers at school, certainly not in class. We did get a camcorder (B&W) in 1978.

I went to primary school in the 70's and highschool in the 80's.

Just out of curiosity, what were your memories of computers during your primary and high school years ? Did only front office staff have access to them? when were they rolled out at your school? could they be used for much without the internet existing at the time?

my old man tells me that they got 'the useless commodore 64s' sometime in the mid 1980s when he was in high school. There were only 5 of them and it was easier to use a typewriter. They were not connected to the internet as its precursor at the time was only being used by the US government and its departments. The Commodore 64 you had to program your self and use the classic text commands to navigate it. the Computer its self was in the keyboard and the screen had to be supplied by the user

Heath,
I was at Banksia Park High in the late 70s.   Computer class existed of filling in cards, a system called basic if IRC, and going in a bus to Angle Park (20 km away) to a room size computer to put the cards through.
I think my calculator at the time was faster and could do more.

Interesting. Were their any computers at Banksia Park high school while you were there ?

No, Heath, the computer at Angle Park didnt even have a screen, just produced print outs.

Years back when I was in High School the only computer you had was your brain, although old fashioned main frame industrial type computers existed back then but only really well off companies could really get them.  Nailsworth High School at one time did have one of these space consuming computers set up but that was mainly used to collate exam results from all over the state for the education dept and produce print outs. It was either a hand me down or was donated I cannot remember now, I can remember a few of us students being taken there one day by Dean Hutton and shown the set up. Yes the same Dean Hutton that later would be on "The Curiosity Show" on TV.

I went to primary school in the 70's and highschool in the 80's.

Just out of curiosity, what were your memories of computers during your primary and high school years ? Did only front office staff have access to them? when were they rolled out at your school? could they be used for much without the internet existing at the time?

NSW Govt Primary school there was nothing. Y6 was 1980

Govt high school yr 7 and 8, nothing

Catholic school, first Commodore 64 and Apple 2 started to appear around 1983-84

Starting Uni July 1989,
We had boot up disks
No network in computer labs
Word was monochrome
Spreadsheet was Lotus 123
email was the mail you got an election time.

1991, we got compute labs (weird label by today's standards) the Apple Mac, cute little all in one computers. Great for doing assignments in Word with colour (WTF moment)
Uni Computer department changed from Business and Computing Department to
Business Department
IT Department
Note, few lecturers actually had degrees or degrees in Computing, most had Science/Engineering or Post Grads

1992, first Windows 3.1 labs, colour
Started to use Sunsystem and my first chatting to people overseas when Tasmania was connected with Optic fibre around 1992
We used Unix to program C/C++ etc

(years quoted maybe 1 years off)