Foreign correspondents often like to boast that they watch the world unfold from a front row seat on history, but at the national apology in Canberra on Monday it was standing room only.

It was a rare privilege to be in the Great Hall of Parliament House, as Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull sought to right some appalling wrongs. It was an extraordinarily rich experience, and I hope we did not intrude on peoples' private thoughts and very public emotions.

We were close to Sandra Anker from Melbourne, a former child migrant shipped to Australia at the age of six, whose testimony many of you will have watched on television or online. 'Well done Australia,' she said as she stood to applaud Kevin Rudd at the end. 'Now its Britain's turn.' The loveliest of ladies.

What I particularly liked about the event was that it took on the personality of the hundreds of victims who gathered in the room - who cried, cheered, occasionally barracked and, collectively, seemed to derive great comfort from the soothing words of the prime minister and opposition leader.

I enjoyed the whoops of happy recognition when relatives spotted their loved ones on the big screens, and the spontaneity of the ovations for people, like Margaret Humphreys of the Child Migrant Trust, who have made seeking justice and redress their life's work. The victims owned the ceremony. They made it what it was. To use an Australianism, good on them.

The blog that appeared earlier in the week - Shamed into an Apology - was actually penned as a piece of brief analysis that was supposed to appear on the Sunday. It did not capture the special quality of the day, which was more about remembrance than recrimination. Whitlamite, who it is good to welcome back from semi-retirement, said it was day for healing rather than blame, and I could not agree more. But thanks for your comments.

After a couple of all-nighters in Canberra - on the big stories I work the Australian day, then the British day, and then repeat the whole thing again - I managed to make it back to Sydney in time to meet Jan Utzon, the son of Jorn, the architect of the Sydney Opera House.

He'd just opened the new western foyer, part of the ongoing attempts by the SOH to renovate and revitalise the building. Lovely bloke, who, like his father, has a quiet charm and charisma. I walked through the bowels of the building with him, watching him meet and greet Opera House workers who have clearly come to know and greatly admire him since his family was re-engaged by the New South Wales government in 2000. The Utzons are held in awe by the people who work in the building.

Regular readers of the blog know that I'm a bit obsessive about the Opera House, whose interior was finished by a local architect after Utzon's forced resignation. Will Jan live to see his father's glorious vision for the opera theatre finally realised? He certainly hopes so. He wants to be there on opening night in his very own front row seat on history.

My third treat of the week was to watch the recording of 'An Audience with Michael Parkinson,' a 90 minute monologue delivered without notes or an autocue, and punctuated by clips from some of his most famous interviews and near perfect grammar.

Like Richie Benaud, Parky is another unifying figure, national treasure both in Australia and Britain. In my fantasy dinner party, Parky would be an early inclusion on the guest list, and would probably have interviewed most of the others.

Sir Michael said that one of the main things which endeared him to Australia was that he rarely comes across the kind of Englishmen for whom he hasn't got much time. He didn't expound on that, but I dare say that thought will resonate with many of the Poms who have made their home down under.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

The scandal of the child migrants sent to Britain's distant dominions was uncovered over two decades ago by a British social worker, Margaret Humphreys. But no British prime minister has ever delivered an official apology, despite repeated demands from victims' group. Gordon Brown now plans to do so sometime in the new year.

Following a report from a House of Commons Health Committee in 1998, the British government said the child migrant programme, was "wrong" and expressed regret. The Blair government also helped fund family reunions, along with the Child Migrants Trust, which had been set up by Margaret Humphreys in the late1980s to help victims locate their surviving mothers and fathers, or siblings.

In the gardens of the British High Commission in Canberra, I asked the new high commissioner, Baroness Amos, why it had taken so long for the British government to say sorry.

She explained that a number of state governments in Australia had delivered apologies, that the Australian national government was on the verge of doing so, and that the time was now right for Britain to follow suit.

"We've always said that this was an absolutely shocking period in our history," she said. "And there was a lot of thinking that went on in relation to this... it has taken us some time."

She said that the Blair government expressed strong regret after the Health Committee report highlighted the appalling treatment that many child migrants had been exposed to - physical, psychological and, at times, sexual abuse.

"We're now going that one step further and apologising" she said. "And this is the next stage in the process."

But when I asked whether Gordon Brown would have apologised had not his friend and political ally, Australia's Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, decided to do so, she did not really have an answer. She rejected that formulation, but did not come up with a convincing counterpoint.

Many will form the view that the British government has decided to act because the Australian government has decided to say sorry - delivering a national apology to British child migrants at the same time as saying sorry to the so-called Forgotten Australians, tens of thousands of Australians who were abused in institutions and orphanages.

The child migrants that I have spoken to go further: they say that Gordon Brown has been shamed into apologising by the Australian government, which has exhibited what they described as greater "moral leadership".

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

With news choppers circling overhead, a scrum of reporters waiting down below and a barrage of puns waiting to be unleashed, Tiger Woods flew into Melbourne on Monday, where he will take part in the Australian Masters golf tournament, attend a gala dinner, play in a charity event for victims of the bushfires, promote Victoria as a golfing destination and pocket a personal appearance fee of A$4m ($3.7m ;£2.2m) for his trouble - more than 10 times the prize money for winning the tournament.

His first visit to Australia in 11 years has the feel of a presidential and royal visit all rolled into one. But then, Tiger has the star power of Barack Obama (I think that a strong case could be made that Tiger helped pave the way for Barack by dominating, and thus winning widespread acceptance in what was long regarded in the US as a whites-mainly sport). He is the undisputed king of golf and, arguably, of world sport.

Awaiting him in Melbourne are an array of tiger treats. A suite at a posh hotel in the central business district which has played home in recent times to Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. Tickets to the hottest show in Melbourne - Jersey Boys. And the prospect of playing without the jarring staccato of hundreds of clicking cameras. The course has banned spectators from carrying them.

I happen to be in Melbourne covering another story and the front page of the city's tabloid, The Herald Sun, pretty much sums things up: TIGERMANIA.

Admittedly, there are numerous ways to spin this story. Should taxpayers' money be spent on Tiger's appearance fee? Seems like a worthwhile investment, seeing as the four days of the tournament are already a sell-out and that it reaffirms Melbourne's position as the sporting capital of the southern hemisphere, if not the world. State Premier John Brumby, who lobbied Tiger personally, claims his visit will be worth $19m for the state's economy. A figure plucked out of the air, perhaps? But it sounds plausible.

You could view it through the prism of civic rivalries. Sydney tried hard to lure Tiger, but he went with Melbourne instead - a familiar story since the 2000 Olympics, where the Victorian capital has outstripped its long-standing rival.

But I'm going to go with what I reckon is a legacy of the old "tyranny of distance" syndrome. The way that the country lapses still into "aren't we lucky to have a big celebrity visiting little ol' Australia" mode. As I write, I'm watching a news bulletin which is not only featuring Tiger Woods, but the arrival in Melbourne of Britney Spears.

And it's not just big-name entertainers and sports stars. This year we have already had "Christopher Hitchens week", when ABC handed over large chunks of its output to the visiting British polemicist. That followed "PJ O'Rourke week" earlier in the year, when the American satirist was granted the same airtime. Both are brilliant authors, but they hardly merit the red carpet treatment in a country with writers, public intellectuals and polemicists who can rival them. Early next year, we will no doubt witness Prince William week, as he makes his first visit to Australia since crawling around on a picnic rug in one of the happier photo-ops staged by Prince Charles and the then-Princess Diana (there is still a lively Republican referendum debate: ten years on the thread is still going on, by the way).

During my first Christmas in Australia a couple of years back, I was astonished by the blanket coverage devoted to Paris Hilton, who had jetted in to celebrate the New Year in Sydney. Why wouldn't she? The pyrotechnics are worth the trip alone.

The tyranny of distance used to come with a felony of international neglect. But that is no longer the case. As the world has got smaller, Australia has got bigger. Tiger's arrival down under, and the media-driven mania which has surrounded it, speaks of both.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?