Ours is basically a representative democracy, and the idea that the people could... Usually when you throw an issue to a referendum, it is because it is a hot potato that you don't know what to do with--prohibition and conscription were exactly that--or you need the support of the people of your own province in your dealings with another level of government, as I think is the case of our Quebec referendums.
I wasn't aware that the election in 1933 in western Australia had been held simultaneously with a referendum. I understand indeed that secessionists, who had a whopping 66% of support, had a very bad surprise when they arrived in London to show their petition. They were told by the British lords that the Commonwealth was an indissoluble union and therefore that the petition could not be dealt with. That was a major factor. I understand that some federal money that was given to the state thereafter helped to reignite Australian fervour among the people of western Australia.
Look, the issue of whether we should have binding referendums or non-binding referendums is basically a political issue on which I do not pretend to be very informed. It seems to me the instinct of most parliamentarians is to have flexibility in this area and to assume that referendums are non-binding.
I would also add that the distinction is fine in theory, but when it comes to political practice, think of it. Can you imagine, for example, Mr. Mulroney having swallowed the outcome of the 1992 referendum, brushing it aside, saying, this is the verdict of the taverns of Moose Jaw and the brasseries of Roberval. It isn't the considered view of the Canadian electorate, and we decide to pass Charlottetown nevertheless. It's very difficult to conceive, anyway.
So it means that although I acknowledge the distinction is there and that there are examples indeed, as you suggest, that politicians can ignore some referendum verdicts... The last time was 1999 in New Zealand when 79% of the people voted for a reduction of the number of members in the assembly, in the House of Representatives, but the number of assembly seats has remained exactly the same. So some outcomes can be brushed aside, but my view is that when referendums are held on an important issue, and when, obviously, the outcome reflects what people really feel, any politician who dared to ignore this outcome would be very imprudent indeed.