Though much has changed since the delicate and protracted negotiations among the colonies in the 1890s, in one sense there remains a striking similarity: the west is not happy, and generally for the same reasons now as then.

While delegates from Western Australia attended the constitutional conventions in 1891 and 1897-98 to explore pathways to union, they displayed none of the enthusiasm of such Federation advocates as Alfred Deakin of Victoria and Edmund Barton of NSW. The transcripts from the proceedings reveal a constant barrage of reservations and objections emanating from the delegation.

It was not hard to see why. Close to half of the colony's entire revenues were derived from tariffs levied on inter-colonial trade, and these levies predominantly on mining and agriculture were enabling the economy to flourish, and the colony at the time was basking in unprecedented prosperity.

It was little wonder that the men from the west were wary of what was being proposed under the terms of the union – the abolition of inter-colonial tariffs. What was being demanded of them, they argued, was not just sharing the wealth they produced but acquiescing in the crippling of their economy.

With no compromise in sight, Western Australia did not take part in the referenda of 1898 and 1899 in which voters in all the other colonies were asked to approve or reject the proposed draft constitution, and it looked as though the new Commonwealth of Australia would be born without Western Australia being included.

But very late in the day, the west came to the party. In a referendum on July 31, 1900, a majority of the Western Australian electorate approved the draft constitution – but only just, and not without a strong push for the Goldfields to become a separate colony in its own right, Australia, and to go it alone into the new Commonwealth if the Perth-centred government held out.

This put pressure on the west to join the Federation, but only after special arrangements were negotiated to address its concerns. Section 95 of the constitution permitted Western Australia, on condition that it entered the Federation as "an original State", to maintain its inter-colonial tariff within the Federation for a period of five years, in a formula which progressively decreased the tariff each successive year. A further inducement involved the promise to build a transcontinental railway linking Western Australia to the eastern states. But Western Australia remained a reluctant joiner, with its Premier, Sir John Forrest, insisting that Western Australia reserved the right to withdraw from the Federation.

In 1906, with the expiry of the special tariff provision, the mood in Perth had changed little, and, sensing economic ruin, the Legislative Assembly drafted a resolution declaring that Federation had "proved detrimental to the best interest" of WA, and proposed a referendum to canvass public support for secession. The resolution, though adopted by the Assembly, was not acted upon.

In 1933 with the Great Depression, matters again came to a head when the conservative Nationalist government led by Sir James Mitchell held a referendum on secession in conjunction with the state election, resulting in a 68 per cent vote in favour of secession, but at the same time the Nationalists were voted out of office.

The threat, however, was taken seriously in Canberra, and just one month after the referendum, the Commonwealth established the Commonwealth Grants Commission to inquire into and report on applications by the states for special financial assistance, which set the pattern for fiscal equalisation – that is, the idea that all Australians should be able to expect a similar level of government services, and that the wealthier states transfer funds to states without the same ability to raise their own revenue.

It is often forgotten that under this arrangement, WA remained a "claimant state" until 1968 – that is, heavily dependent on such transfers from the east. WA Premier Colin Barnett has now called for the scrapping of the Grants Commission.

Whether this is a signal to revisit the vexed and complex area of Commonwealth-state financial arrangements – which is not without merit – more special pleading or merely a reversion to populist tub thumping remains to be seen.

But it is worth noting that for the first time since his Liberal government was elected in 2008 that it has fallen behind the Labor opposition – and what a convenient time to sing the old song again that has never really faded way in the west.

Norman Abjorensen is at the ANU's Crawford School of Public Policy and is co-author of the Historical Dictionary of Australia (4th ed.), just published.