Robert,
Two points about Australia that make our experience different to Canada.
Firstly we had very few resident Japanese (mainly in the pearl diving industry in northern Queensland and Western Australia) so had little of the massive disruption caused in Canada and USA.
There were internment camps for enemy nationals but nowhere near the North American scale.
The most important difference is our Constitution has specifically written into it that the Government may take property if in the national interest (in war time or to build major roads etc) but the owners must receive "fair and reasonable" compensation.
This has always been interpreted to mean full retail value and further payment for costs suffered by the owner. Of course in this day and age Government resumptions not only pay for costs such as moving household goods etc but for various things like pain and suffering and psychiatric treatment for their traumatized dog.
As mentioned above, Australians were paid very fairly for any vehicles or property taken during WW2.
Even in wartime parliament can not alter or suspend the constitution without a full national referendum which historically has almost never approved proposed changes.
It would be interesting to know if a blind eye was turned to property belonging to enemy nationals - I suspect it was and they got little or nothing - but they all returned to their farms etc after the war so were not robbed of their possessions permanently.
The story goes on 75 years later.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-...20-gxexwf.html
This is a dramatised report but gives some more of the picture.
http://theconversation.com/why-austr...ld-war-ii-4582
Lang