We Can’t?

Andrew Denton opines that, in Australian politics, “there’s before Whitlam and after Whitlam … and you can’t say that of many politicians.”
We can’t?

In Australian politics there’s before Barton and after Barton;
In Australian politics there’s before Lang and after Lang;
in Australian politics there’s before Lyons and after Lyons;
in Australian politics there’s before Chifley and after Chifley; 
in Australian politics there’s before Menzies and after Menzies; 
in Australian politics there’s before Askin and after Askin; 

in Australian politics there’s before Bjelke-Peterson and after Bjelke-Peterson;
in Australian politics there’s before Reece and after Reece;

in Australian politics there’s before Hawke and after Hawke;

in Australian politics there’s before Howard and after Howard;
in Australian politics there’s before Hanson and after Hanson;

in Australian politics there’s before Rudd and after Rudd;

in Australian politics there’s before Barton and after Barton;

in Australian politics there’s even before Bandt and after Bandt;

in Australian politics there’s before Slipper and after Slipper; and

in Australian politics there’s before-Gillard and—deis volentibus, fiat mox—after Gillard.

Oh, it seems we can.

UPDATE (26 May):  I added Jack Lang, an interesting and influential cove, to the list (at the succinct suggestion of Mark Bolton in comments).