I'm not sure it's healthy to sustain rage for quite so long, and in any case I think Whitlam meant us to stay angry only for a matter of weeks, until we could get to the ballot box and right the mighty wrong of his unprecedented sacking as prime minister in 1975.

But I do wonder how many people maintain the rage set off all those years ago by then Governor-General Sir John Kerr, and whether younger Australians learning about the dastardly dismissal muster any rage to begin with. I hope so, but maybe I'm too optimistic.

My own rage, or at least my sense of outrage, survives intact.

Carrying anger around is not good for anyone, as Whitlam and his old political enemy, Malcolm Fraser, demonstrated amply by burying the hatchet and becoming friends.

Nevertheless, I remain convinced that Kerr acted wrongly, immorally and deceptively, and that a grave injustice was inflicted on our democracy, aided and abetted by some powerful people who were meant to protect it.

The release of Jenny Hocking's latest book on Whitlam has only confirmed this view.

I don't think it serves any purpose to dwell on the past, but I do believe it's important to revisit it occasionally to make sure history's lessons are not forgotten.

I was at the book launch and could only agree wholeheartedly with Kevin Rudd, who did the launching honours and accused Fraser and his Coalition cohorts of a "simple, naked lunge for power".

Rudd said it was shocking to read afresh of this act of "political brutality".

The author said there was no question that Kerr, who she called a "deeply damaged and devastated man", had deceived his prime minister.

He met with his friend and confidant, Sir Anthony Mason, at a North Sydney house rather than Admiralty House, the governor-general's Sydney residence. That was because Whitlam was at adjacent Kirribilli House and Kerr didn't want to risk him knowing about the meeting.

It's hard to believe the Hawke government would have appointed Mason chief justice in 1987 if it had known of his key role in the destruction of an earlier Labor government.

Mason, then a High Court judge, has confirmed he acted as an informal adviser and moral support to Kerr. But in doing so he made one critical point, insisting he told Kerr he should warn Whitlam of his intention to dismiss him if he (Whitlam) wouldn't call an election.

But Kerr ignored this key piece of advice.

I have always wondered if this would have made any difference to the election outcome. Maybe not, but Australians are traditionally loath to throw

out governments, and the advantages of incumbency are considerable.

I also wonder what might have happened if Whitlam had

followed the advice of his wife, Margaret, when he was sacked in Kerr's study at Yarralumla that fateful day, November 11, 1975: "You should have slapped his face and told him to pull himself together."

For the record, Whitlam lost in a landslide, indicating that insufficient numbers of voters maintained their rage, or had much rage to start with.

Whitlam, 96, incidentally, is still in good form. When told by Hocking that she had completed the second volume of her biography, he replied: "Only two?"