HIGGINS BY-ELECTION CAMPAIGN
OPENING SPEECH BY THEE PRIME MINISTER, N BR>
JOHN GORTON
Caulfield Town Hall, Melbourne 13TH FEBRUARY, 1968
Mr Ch~ airman, Mr Premier, Wr Anthony, Mr McMahon, Ladies and Gentlemen:
I come before you tonight as a candidate for t he seat of.
Higgins, seeking the endorsement of the electors of Higgins, and asking
them to place me In that situation which was previously held by a great
Australian who led this country for two years. This is, in essence, a
by-election, a request to the electors of Higgins in particular that they
should think me worthy, as I hope they will, to fill that place so tragically
vacated by Mr Holt. I would try and fill it as well as he did.
I must say to the electors of Higgins tonight, and to those
people In Australia who may be outside this hall or outside the electorate
tonight, the attitudes which I would adopt, the approaches which my Government
would adopt, towards the future progress of this, our joint country. But
there is something I must say to you at once, and that is that this is not
tonight, this speech, and I think it ought not to be, a policy speech in the
sense that policy speeches are made at general elections. This is no
time at a by-election, being held two-thirds of a way through a financial
year for which a government has budgeted, for which it has struck a rate of
taxation, for which it has assessed expenditure and income, to launch out
into new promises involving new expenditure, and either new rates of
taxation or increases in deficit.
Indeed, I think that a mini-policy at this time could well
be held to be irresponsible. Rather, I think, is this a time to express to
the electorate and to Australia, our approaches to the needs of Australia,
the goals which we will set ourselves to try and attain as and when we can,
the course on which we will seek to steer our country towards the future
years of greatness which lie in store for us.
And so I shall talk to you tonight of the settled policies
which we have adopted and will continue to adopt on defence, on foreign
affairs, on relations with our neighbours, for on these things, indeed, may
depend in the ultimate our capacity eventually, acting as a free people, to
work out our own destiny and to decide what our domestic progress will
indeed be. Having spoken of these th ings, this touchstone which may
decide the future of Australia as an Independent nation, then I shall seek to
put before you certain domestic matters, and the approaches and the emphasis
which we would put on these domestic matters.
First let me talk to you on the question of Defence.
I have said that on our efforts here may well depend our capacity in future
years to decide our own destiny and to run our own affairs. This calls now,
In the state of the world as it is at present, for a significant and an onerous
effort from the Australian people, and an effort which all of us would wish,
were circumstances different, could be put not into an Insurance policy but
into the kind of development for which our effort in defence could do so much. ./ 2
-2
However great the effort we make In defence and it is
becoming great In no future that I can foresee can we In Australa rely
on ourselves alone, or remain secure without alliance with some friendly
and significantly powerful ally, having the same approach to life as we
Australians have... ( Interjection " The same old line") and a true old
line and a line on which Australia has depended for more than a century
and a half, from the United Kingdom.
For us, though we can look to, and though I am sure we
would in a crisis be given military assistance in time of need by the United
Kingdom, who for over a century and a half has been our shield and our
buckler, and to whom, if blood be the price of protection Lord God, we
have paid in full, but who has for that period of time protected us, and to
whom we could still look for protection, yet the changing years have
ordained that In the ultimate, the security of this small nation now depends
on its alliance with the United States, and on protection from the United
States. No small nation such as ours can, in the world as it is today, I
suggest to you, iive with happiness and security and safety without
protection of that kind.
This Is a fact which places on us, as I believe, a duty of
being an ally, when we think the United States Is right, in the fullest sense
of the word, of being prepared to contribute, as we have been prepared to
contribute In the past, and not merely to receive and give nothing In return.
That, as a basis for a defence policy for Australia is, I believe, essential
for our future security. That is why the expenditure on defence In this
country has risen until it is this year 118 million, and with commitments
we have already entered Into and which will flow from the commitments
we have already entered into, will in the two years ahead Increase above that
figure. It is not a sum which alone can afford us security but It Is the
smallest sum which, I suggest to you, we can with honour expend, and as
a result of it, expect that protection which may be necessary for our future
progress. ( Interjection " Not for my son, Clive)
Well, I don't know where your son, Olive, is sir, but there
are a number of other sons of a number of other Austraan s in the past, now
and in the future who no doubt would be prepared to back what I have said
for the sake of their country.
That, Mr Chairman, leads me to a discussion on the
position which past governments have taken up and which this government
will sustain on the matter of our involvement In Viet Nam. I believe our
policy In Viet Nam, the policy of the Government, ought to be stated, or
rather, re-stated clearly, and I shall try to do this.
Firstly, we believe that the United States was right, uni er
President Kennedy in the later half of 1961, to accede to the South Vietnamese
request for military assistance to counter a military Incursion from the
North. And we believe the United States Is right, under President Johnson,
to have continued and to continue the courg-efirst mapped by President
Kennedy in this matter. We believe that when the original decision was made armed
attacks were being made on South Viet Nam, and that those attacks were
Instigated, controlled, supplied and maintained by the North Vietnamese o 9 / 3
-3
which provided regular troops to assist and command the insurgents. We
believe that in spite of the terrorist activity carried on since that time,
local support has so fallen off In South Viet Nam that more and more North
Vietnamese regular armed troops have been deployed in the South, and that
the fighting has assumed the character of an invasion of South Viet Nam by
the Government of North Viet Nam, just as there was previously an Invasion
of SoUth Korea by the Government of North Korea.
It is true thts is aggression by a communist govenment
seeking to Impose its rule by force, but the prime reason for preventing
It succeeding is not because of its source, not because it stems, as it happens
to In this case, from a communisat country, but because it Is aggression.
That Is the reason for opposing it.
For I believe, and I suggest to all you Australians that
what best promotes our national security and the national security of other
small States, what best guarantees our national survival, along with the
survival of other small powers as truly Independent nations, Is that we
should havo a world in which aggression by one nation or part of one nation
against another is shown to be unsuccessful and does not succeed In whole
or in part. For if it is seen to succeed, then It Is likely as our history
has shown " as the history In tbe lifetimze of inumy people in this hall
has shown -if it Is seen to be successful, then It Is likely to be repeated and
repeated and repeated until eventually it must be stopped at a cost greater in
de~ truction, In pain and in loss of life than would have been required had it
been stopped at its Inception.
That is why Australians fought against the aggressions of
Hitler which succeeded one another until they had to be stopped... ( Cheers)
Sir, If you are prepared to cheer Hitler, I am not, any more than I am
prepared to cheer a communist dictator or any other governing power which
seeks to impose its wish by force upon some other independent nation.
That Is why Australians fought with the United Nations in
Korea against an attack on South Korea by North Korean naked aggression.
That is why Australians opposed the militant expression
of confrontation between Indonese-a and Malaysia, opposed it In conjunction
with the United Kingdom. And that is why we are right, as I believe, to
help our ally, the United States, In South Viet Nam.
We shall continue to take the action we are now taking
for as long it is necessary to help attain the objective of preventing the
success of North Vietnamese aggression. At the same time, we have always
realised that the military effort In Viet Nam, although absolutely necessary,
is only one of the components required In this kind of war.
The other component is the raising of standards of everyday
living in the areas where military forces provide a shield for the civilian
population a shield which can, of course, be pierced but which can prevent
the destruction of what Is sought to be done to raise living standards.
Let me, ladies and gentlemen, at this time, put to you an Illustration of
what I mean by that. I', t one stage, I was in charge of running the Colombo Plan 9 / 4
-4-
for Australia, and in an attempt to help the people of South Viet Nam, quite
some years ago, we sought to take over we did take over a tract of land
of a kind which was not being used in that country because it was thought that
it could be in no way productive. By the introduction of special kinds of
legumes, of a manurial programme, we were able on that land to grow and to
show surrounding farmers there could be grown pastures on which cattle
could be grazed, and were able to set up a dairy farm at Ben Cat which provided
for the first time in history for the children of Saigorl pasteurised milk groyni
in that experimental farm and sent to the city.
This was an illustration to the people of that region of what
could be done. You can, from your own minds, Imagine what would have
happened there to inlcrease living standards had this been permitted to succeed,
but it was not permitted to succeed. It was not permitted to succeed because;
that farm was attacked, those cattle were slaughtered by the Viet Cong
regulars who did not wish living standards to be increased, because if they
were so increased, then it would show that we were able to provide a better.
standard of life than they themselves could do.
This is why there is a need for this protection of this civil
action. An d that is why from the very beginning, our army In Viet Nam has
been provided with money to carry out its own civil aid programme in the:
villages, to help with the medical treatment of the villagers, to help in the
small matters which mean so much to them the construction of a school.
house, the construction of a small culvert, the construction of a small
infirmary and the provision of village industries. These are the things which
go hand in hand with what we are trying to do, and the things which must.....
dyooue s suagnygbeostdiyn gd itshaagt rtehee? s e Itsh itnhgesr em suosmt en omt buer mduonr e, o f tdhiasta gwree emmuesnt t? n ot sAereek* to
build up the living standards of the villagers and the townsfolk? Because if
you do suggest that, then I can understand why you would oppose the policy
which we adopt. But If you dont, if you believe these should be built up and
should be shielded while they are being built up, then you must support what
we have done. To sum up our policy, Mr Chairman: We believe it right....
( interjections) Oh, yes, I think these policies should be summed up, don't
you? There has been a marked reluctance to sum them up In some quarters
on this matter. We believe It right to maintain the elementary right of the
South Vietnamese people to determine their own future, as they showed in.
recent elections they were capable of doing. We will continue to provide,
as we are providing, significant and effective military assistance to the
allied effort to achieve this aim, and we will provide it for as long as we are
called upon to help achieve this aim.
We will support, as we have supported, the many efforts by
the United States and the United Nations for discussions seeking a negotiat ed
end to the war and a settlement which provides the South Vietnamese with a
just and an enduring peace under which they can determine their own future.
The United States has amply demonstrated Its desire for such discussions,
the United Nations has sought to help the United States to obtain such discussions,
but so far every such proposal has been rejected, whether it came from the
United Nations or the United States, by the North Vietnamese.
But, TMr President, there is one thing we will not do. We will
I
not urge on the United States that there should be discussions designed
solely to negotiate methods of surrendering the South Vietnamese to thie
rule of the North, which Is a course which sometimes seems to be suggested
in this country. Nor will we urge on them that bombing designed to. impede
the flow of men and materials to the South, as distinct from bombing on a
civilian population men and materials travelling down to kill Australian
ca~ d Ameri1can troops -should be ectopped as a condition Imposed by the Viet
Cong for possible talks with no compensating conditions as to holding up the
sending of such men and material.
We will, insofar as we can, continue to seek to Improve the
economic lot and the living conditions of the villagers in the area In which
our troops operate, for we coneider this to be a vital and necessary task and
one which must, as soon as possible, be tackled through out the whole of
South Viet Nam. We will do it by continuing and expanding what we are
already doing.... ( Interjection If you hadn't Interjected you would have heard.
I will repeat It: By providing to the villagers the simple medical treatment
there required, by building school houses in the villages, by fostering
co-operatives In the villages and providing fertilisers so that their crops
can be yi by providing wells for pure water. Not by vast overriding
ioV% 49ab~ n approaches, but by getting down to the grass roots,
as we have been getting down to the grass roots In our area. That, sir, is
how we will do It, and that, sir, Is something I believe the people of South
Viet Nam understand and will appreciate, now want, and will want In the
future. I was seeking to spell out, before I was diverted, a policy
which we are going to implement, and I have sought to spell it out In simple
words, and words which can be understood by all, as I hope they will have
been. But this thing that I am discussing Is one of moment to the present
and to the future of Australia, one of moment to the association between
this nation and the United States, and therefore It is a matter of great public
concern. That Is why I have sought so carefully to try to put before* you,
whether you agree with It or not, what we are doing and what we will continue
to do. I bd ieve that on matters of this moment clear statements of
policy ought to be made.
But I do suggest this. Australians are denied or have so far
been denied any clear statement of policy on this matter by the Opposition.
It is true that last year the Federal Labor Confcrence, by resolution
( Interjection) adopted a policy which you clap which requires that the
United States should cease bombing North Viet Nam e~ n conditionally
( Cheers' Fine, fine, you express your opinion. This is what the Federal
Labor Conference adopted, and no doubt those who applauded agree with it,
as Is your right. They adopted a policy that the United States shctild
recognise the National Liberation Front the Viet Cong as a principal
party to negotiations ( boos... I don't know who you are booing, but I takce
it you are booing the Viet Cong. They adopted a policy that the United
States should transfcrm operations In South Viet Nam Into holding operations,
which means staying where you are and repelling attacks and allowing attacks. to
be concentrated and mounted against you and just pushing them back but not
doing anything to prevent them from materialising, or to move out Into
country surrounded by the enemy.
Now that is the policy that was adopted, I agree, by the
Federal Labor Conference. A further policy adopted was that If the United
States-did not accept this ultimatum on all these three points, then the / 6
-6
Australian Government must withdraw Its armied forces' ( Interjections)
which, of course and those of you who clap, if you are Intellectually
honest must admit this means abandoning the expression of the United.
States / Australian alliance In Viet Nam.
Now these were resolutions adopted at the 1967 Conference
of the Australian Labor Party, and the Rules and Standing Orders of that
party state " The Federal Conference shall be the supreme governing
authority of the party.. : XInterjector " Hear, hear")
Well I think there is at least one man in Australia who disagrees with you,
f I heard him properly on
0 and its decision shall be binding upon every member and
every section of the party.
So it would seem, would it not, that this policy of presenting an ultimatum
and withdrawing all Australian troops, if It is not accepted, is the policy
of the Opposition, one would think.
But the present Leader of the Opposition refuses either to
confirm or to deny that this is the policy by which he is bound and which he
and his supporters are bound to carry out, and indeed, has Indicated that
no matter what the Federal Conference says, he is supreme and not bound
by It. I don't know whether that is true or not, but the people of
Australia ought to be told whether it Is true or not, because I think it fair to
say that there is an attempt here to blur the issue, to slither away from
questions and to be evasive. And further, I think it fair to say
( Interjector " Where Is your policy?) Where's my policy? I stated
it in explicit terms we are continuing to do what we have decided to do
because we think It right. Now that is clear, explicit and cannot be
misunderstood. I think It fair to say that if the Leader of the Opposition
is bound by the official policy, as I believe he Is, then carrying out that
policy would severely damage our relations with the United States and would
weaken, If not destroy, that Australian/ United States alliance on which our
future security could so much depend, and which the Opposition policy pays
is so important that they are going to withdraw Australian troops unless
the United States accepts an ultimatum in order to maintain the alliance
they regard as so important.
There is, therefore, I do believe, In the Interests of
proper ly-informed democratic debate, an obligation on the Leader of the
Opposition clearly to state whether he is inund to adhere to official Labor
policy, and whether he will do so, and if not, how he can avoid doing so,
assuming he wishes not to do so. And that ought to be a question which
could be answered In as simple terms as I have spelt out our policy tonight,
and is a question to which the Australian people have a right to an answer,
when forming a judgment, even In H-glns where there is an opponent
adopting some sort of policy I don't know what against the Government.
They ought to know precisely what that policy is if they are to form a
considered judgment in the way a democracy should do so.
Mr Fresident, moving on from that particular matter, I come
to another area which is of great import ance to this nation and to the future / 7
-7
of this nation, and that is the effect of what Is happening now, or what
Will happen in the future, in Malaysia, in Singapore, countries so close to
us; indeed, the closest countries to our shcv., s, I think, except that of our
closest neighbour, Indonesia.
In this field, there are questions of maintaining a military
presence in Malaysia and Singapore, and of assistance in raising the
economic activity and helping the economic progress of that region.
Why? Because we hope that by assisting the economic progress of that
region we will see, and we must see if this assistance Is to be fully
effective, that that assistance leads to an incmiase in the standards of
living of the people In the villages, the hamlets and the towns of those
countries. That is the end result that we are seeking.
On the military side, Great Britain has for long maintained
In Malaysia and Singapore naval, air and ground forces and the bases from.
which they can operate, and has maintained them as a stabilising force'In
that area. They have been Intended to prevent, and they have prevented
with Australian forces participating, local armed insurgency and attack~ s by
one country in the region on any other. And so they were Instrumental
in preventing the communist insurgency Irn Malaysia when it took place,
supported at the time by many of the people who now support the same sort
of insurgency elsewhere, and the Australians helped In that. They were
able, If not to stop it, to discourage it to the extent that It ceased, the
armed expression of confrontation of k1donoin against Malaysia.
Now for some time, It has been planned that these forces
should be run down, and should be withdrawn at the end of 1975, and we
in Australia knew that and planned on that. At that time, it was envisaged
when these plans were made, that British ground troops would have left the
region by the end of 1975 but that there would be still instantly availa1le
and earmarked for the purpose, a British Air and Naval capability able
swiftly to return and to bring back ground troops should a situation require
i t. But more recently, on what I understand are economic
ground, it has been decided that the withdrawal of British Forces will be
completed not by the end of 1975 but by the end of 1971, some four
years earlier. At the same time as this decision was made known, the
swift availability of that naval and air capability which was previously
planned is clouded by doubt, and we do not know what its composition will
be, what its capacity to fill the role previously planned for it will be,
what time will be necessary for it to be available, and whether it would
indeed be available on the decision of the United Kingdom alone.
This has put into this situation entirely new matte is for
discussion which were unknown to us until the recent visit of the British
Cabinet Minister. There has therefore been not merely a quite cons ider able
alteration of the date by which withdrawal Is to be completed but also
what appears to be a significant difference in planning for the situation
which will obtain after withdrawal.
It is clear to everyon e, of course, that Australia and New
Zealand cannot step in and fill the role which Britain has vacated. But the
Prime Minister of Singapore and the Prime Minister of Malaysia have both
indicated a strong desire that there should be some continuing Australian
military presence in the area after 1971. They wish this, they have asked
e a / 8
8-
for this. They see it as a contribution to stability In their region, and
their wishes must, of course, have great weight with us.
For these reasons, the Minister for External Affairs has
recently been on an exploratory mission to Singapore and Malaysia to discuss
In more detail what those countries are able to do to help thernselvqs, what
contribution they see Australia making, what role they see for a contribution
Australia might make, and matters of that kind. This will be followed by
further technical military discussions and Five Power discussions at a time
to be arranged. Many of the military factors in this matter are as yet unknown.
They are not known clearly enough for final decisions to be taken now, but
it is clear that the rulers of Malaya and Singapore have indicated that they
wish a continuing Australian presence after 1971, and It Is the feeling of my
Government that these wishes having been so expressed, we should seek
as far as possible, according to our own resources, to fall in with them.
We have, of course, provided other aid to these countries.
We have provided already, and earmarked funds already, to provide
million in aid to Malaysia and to Singapore to enable them to help
defend themselves. But still the matter does remain that it will be there
a different situation than that which existed before, that in that situation
we are asked by our neighbours to contribute, and that we must pay attention
to the wishes which our neighbours so put forward.
But it must be made clear, and it has been made clear,
that any Australian military presence In these countries is not in any way
directed against Indonesia, that other great country In our immediate region
and our nearest neighbour. Indeed what we would lik1e to see and what we
would seek to bring about, insofar as in our power lies, is a closer and
closer association of Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia and New
Zealand not necessarily militarily, but In the fields of economic,
co-operation, technical assistance and common action on regional grounds.
This is an objective we should like to see attained and which we shall do
all in our power to see attained. ( Sustained applauset
These are two of the important matters facing this piation
In the years ahead, but of course, again outside our borders before I turn
to problems Inside it, are matters not military but matters of helping
insofar as our resources and requirements permit, the world comm~ unity,
and particularly that part of that community which is in our region and
closest to us. That is the provision of economic assistance, of technological
training, of what we can do to help to build the economies of those countries
outside of this. We will this year, as Australians, contribute in foreign
aid, including aid to New Guinea, something like $ 143 million or about
$ 12 per head for each Australian. ( Interjection) Well If you don't think it
is enough, give me another dollar and I will see it goes there.
In the field of helping to develop the trade trade as
distinct from aid of less developed countries, a field which in the long
run can be of more significance and more assistance than mere aid we
have as a country, taken Initiatives through the Department of Trade, and
through Mr McEwen, which have been acknowledged and appreciated
greatly by those less developed countries which seek outlets for their trade
because they wish to help themselves and can only do that in this way. / 9
9-
We shall continue our efforts, particularly in aid directed
to the countries In our region and to other Asian countries not directly In
the region, for we are not only in, but of, a region where all our neighbours
are Asian neighbours. The aid should be designed, except during disaster,
not for consumption but for capital formation anft the imparting of skills arid'
knowledge and technologies which permit the end benefit of the original aid
provided to be many times multiplied in those countries in which those sk is
and technologies and efforts are expended.
This we must and will contin ue, but here, as In the field Of
Defai ce, we should balance proposals for the growth rate of such expenditur e
with proposals for the growth and development of Australia Itself. What we
are doing, and what we are committed to do in the fields both of Defence-and
of Foreign Aid, is a clear indication that we are no isolationist nation, 4n d
we will not be, that we will not withdraw into ourselves and let Defence ' and
Foreign Aid take care of themselves. But the level of what we are doing,
and the rate of growth of what we are doing in both these fields must be
regarded In the context of our own resources and our own needs, again and
all the time, and the requirement so to grow ourselves that we will be able
In the years ahead to be able to provide more and yet more into our own
protection and into the development and help of the countries so close to us.
I have spent some time on these matters of great Importance
to this nation in Its place In the world. We are, I think, providing all that
a nation of 12 million, a nation with a population not Mch~ i greater than tINt of
Greter New York or Greater London can be expected to provide towards
Defence and towards Foreign A-ssistance.
We will continue to expand what we are doing in these fields,
as indeed we must, but we will test each proposal against the requirements
for the peaceful development of our own nation and the production of
industrial musci s in our own nation to enable it to become great, to do yet
more In the world in which it finds itself.
I turn now to questions which are more domestic. What Is
it don't all answer, please, because I am going to tell you the answer
what is it that Australians throughout this nation would want to see done in
the domestic field. I will tell you what I think it is they would want to see
I believe that what they would want first to see is that there
should be maintained, as has been brilliantly maintained for 18 years for
Australians, the opportunity for full employment of all those who are willing
and able to work for the advancement of their nation. And if I may say so
to somebody from the back who called out something which sounded to me
like " Our Henry", in no State has there been more jobs provided and les s
unemployment than there has over the years been in this State of Victoria.
This, I think, is what Australians would want to see maintained and maintained
with it, I suggest, they would want to see that rates of taxation already
significantly high should not be so increased, that the incentive to work
harder or better or to earn more should be reduced, because not only would
that be bad for the Individual but bad for the nation of which the individual
is a living part. And they would want to see, I suggest, that rates of
inflation were kept to a level where they could be absorbed without d~ s comfort i/ 1c.
ic
and without leading to that kind of bust and lack of employment and industrial
chaos which can occur if they get out of control. These are the frameworks,
I believe, that Australians hawe had and would want to keep, and these are
constricting frameworks.
( Interjection " What about ccwz~ icting profits?")
Do you really want to restrict profits If somebody makes it legitimately?
If somebody invents something which benefits the community in which he
lives? If somebody discovers a better way and a cheaper way of producing
something, and is able to introduce that into a factory and to give to the
people of this country something at a cheaper ; rice while yet he makes
higher profits? Do you want to stop him making profits so that this better
article at a cheaper price is not a vailable? Because that is not Liberal
philosophy. That is the direct antithesis of It. ( Applause)
But this background which I have put to you which It is
essential to keep and which the people of this country would want to keep,
I think is restricting when we consider all the things that need to be done
both by Commonwealth and State and local governments throughout
Australia. There Is a tendency to suggest that the solution to this Is just
to make more money available here, there or the other place, and yet you
know even you who are Interjecting know If you put your mind to it that
this is true If you have your manpower fully employed, and if you have
your materials and resources fully employed, then injecting further amounts
of money does not get more things done, it only gets either a smaller amount
of things done or the same amount of things done at a greater price, unless,
of course, you take action to prevent some field of activity from continuing.
And so these are restricting matters, but within the levels
of those restrictions I should put to you what my Government will seek to do
as and when it can In these fields, and indicate the matters we think of
significance in this all-embracing word " development". I have used this
be fore, of course, " development", and It has been rightly pointed cut that
this Is a word which covers a vast area of Australia's activity. Too often
It Is assumed to be merely that kind of development which takes place In
country areas by the building of dams or the building of beef roads or some
other activity of that kind. Essential as these forms of development are,
they are not the only meaning of development even in that kind of context,
for we have here developing in Australia, cities which are going to be at
least twice as large as they are now, and cities In which the congestion of
traffic Is going to pose really vast economic problems In the future and the
beginning of studies by Commonwealth and State Governments which I would
hope would take place, which I would seek to see did take place, Into this
mater and how it could be overcome, must take Its place with development,
alongside the development of areas outside the ci ties.
This is governmental development, of course, but side by
side with It must go, as we have seen happening lately so much, development
which takes place because of private initiative, because of individual
willingness to risk, because of willingness to go out and seek and find and
develop which we have seen happening, and which Is happening now for the
benefit of all of us throughout the whole of Australia. Again, It is necessary
to see that the public sector of development, necessary though It Is, is not
so expended that no Incentive is left, that no ability Is left In the private
sector to take their share in development which ultimately Is the basis of
a nation's life. But these are material things. These are the developments
11
of industrial muscles as I have said before, and these are not in themselves
enough to make a nation great. But no nation can be great unless It seeks
not only materially to progress but also to take care of the weaker within
it, the aged within it, the ill within it.
Now this, too, must be a goal for any nation seeking to
attain greatness, and this will be the examination of these problems,
one of the first matters to which my Government would direct its attention.
Indeed, it has begun to do so already in the field health, and i-ndeed there
has already been some indication of that in announcements just recently
made. Wle have here, and I expand on this matter only as an
example of the way in which we would approach these problems, we have
here in Australia a health scheme which is good, which is amongst the
best in the world, which permits choice by the patient of the doctor,
which does not ration hospital or other accommodation. But it is a heafth
scheme which still suffers from disabilities. It ic tending to become rather
too dear for many people for them to be enabled -Lo insure themselves for
all the benefits which they should be able to achieve.
And It suffers from the further and I think crippling
disability that It does not cover those who have long-continuing illnesses
br a year or two years or three years, and does not prevent the fear not only
of that illness but the fear of the economic hardship, indeed in some cases
the economic ruin which can flow from such long-contin ued illness. This
will be a first matter to which we shortly will be directing our attention and
which wle will seek, and I believe successfully seek, to overcome.
( Cheers and applause). Mr President, I have sought at this by-election to put befcre
the people of this electorate and those who may be listening in, unequivocally
our approach to the problems of Defence, of our involvement in Viet Nam
and Malaysia, of the course we would seek to follow in Foreign Aid, and I
have Indicated, and only indicated by example what it is we would wish to
see happen at home. I cannot tell you, and no politician of any party standing
here could tell you exactly when and exactly how quickly these goals we've
set before us will be achieved because there are so many unknown factors.
We don't know what those things we produce will be sold for abroad. We
don't know what rate of capital inflow there will be. VWe don't kiow what
is going to happen in many other fields. But we do know this that t! l ase
things, as a government, are cf importance to us, and that we wffIL, i.-ying
attention to the constricting things which I said to you at the beglin:, seek
to overcome them and the first amongst them, areas where there is
injustice I won't say Injustice areas where there Is need, real need
amongst our people. This is not simple, even in the field of health of 1'. r I
have spoken to you it is not simp' e. VWe don't yet know and i. i~ c 11eve
nobody yet knows exactly what area of geriatric treatment ought*. to be
provided in existing-type hospitals, exactly what would happen we sought
more to provide visiting nurd ng assistance for the aged aa eldclerly so
they could stay in their own homes.
All these things are matters which the Department of
12
Health and the Minister for Health has been examining for weeks, and
is examining now and about w hich you will hear from us as soon as may
be. There will always be left areas in which we are not able to
provide what we would wish to provide, and you are not able to get what
you would wish to get. Right now, we are in what I call the tantalising
years. We can see coming into this country 1970, 1971 and thereafter
huge revenues from tae mineral and oil resources, and other resources
which have been discovered and which will by then shed their full benefit
on the people of Auctralia. But they are not here yet; we can see them
coming. Even when they do come, while we will be able to make great
advances, I think it probable, that as has been the case In every nation
throughout history, neither the central Commonwealth Government nor
any State Government will ever have the capacity to do all the things It
would want to do as quickly as it would want to do them and still leave
In the hands of individual citizens that which should be left in their hands.
But we are moving towards it and we will move more rapidly
towards It, and we can see coming up a time when great movement in
that direction can be made.
May I, Mr President, mention one more matter? Somebody
called out about, I thinkc, and that Is the question of education. I mention
it, of course, because it is something with which for some years I have
been personally quite concerned, and a matter for which, should you wish
to do so, I could be properly blamed if you thought it right, or I could be
accepted if you thought it right.
I want to put before you, both as an indication of what has been
done and as an earnest of what could be done in the future because of
what has been done in the past, as an Indication again of the approach of
this Government, what has gone on In this field, a field traditionally
that of the States.
I was first appointed as the Minister Assisting the then Prime
Minister In Education and affairs in the financial -year 1963/ 64. In that
year, we were expending from the Commonwealth $ 57 million. The
next year that went up to $ 94M. In 1965/ 66, it went up to $ 104 million.
About that time, I became a full Minister. In 1966/ 67, it went up to
$ 127 million, and this year, ladles and gentlemen, it has gone up to
$ 175 million. ( Interjection " Not enough"). Of course, someone wiV
" tnot enough", but in four years from $ 57 million to $ 175, with -S3tate
contribution Increasing too, with a doubling of enrolments In univ:; r--il-es,
with the introduction of colleges of advanced education, with the buil-t-n1g
within this electorate in some cases of secondary bvel technical schools
such as the one at Caulfield, these can be seen as monuments, they don't
have to be heard just as words from a platform, they don't have to be just
listened to as monetary figures. They can be seen as monuments throughout
this State and throughiout this nat ion, and I believe that if you w. 1l support
me in Higgins and I have the backing as I have the backing of the Coalition
parties to this Government that there will be throug-. out Austr alia
more and more monuments in more and more fields to the benefit of the
people of Australia, and built by co-operation between the Commonwed th
Government and the various State Governments as we have seen happen
13
in the field of education.
No promises. No specific promises.......
( Interject ion " Why not?"
I have told you why not. But you will be able to judge by what we do
between now and the next elections. You have an indication of our
thinking and of our goals,.
Perhaps there is one specific promise that I can give you.
I will ask from you for all that you can give towards building this State
and this nation, and I will in return pledge to you all that I can give and
my colleagues can give for a joint effort to see that together we can
open the door of the destiny that lies before us.