COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
SPEECH BY
The Rt Hon. W. McMAHON, M. P.
ON
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
[ From the ' Parliamentary Debates', 17 August 1971]
Mr McMAHON ( Lowe-Prime Minis-
-ter) ( 4.32)-On another occasion I
described the Leader of the Opposition
( Mr Whitlam) as an extraordinarily feline
person. I have no wish to change my views
after today. I have every intention of trying
to deal with the facts, and I want to
mention -the constructive actions that have
been taken by this Governmeni, whether it
has been led by the right honourable member
for Higgins ( Mr Gorton) or by myself.
I want to mention what we are doing to
ensure the greatness of this country. I have
no intention to degenerate into personalities
in the way that the Leader of the
Opposition, this feline person, has done.
Let me mention one or two facts. Not
one of the statements that the honourable
gentleman made about me is true in substance.
Let me deal first of all with the
question of my association with Sir Frank
Packer over 40 years. It is true that on 8th
November 1932 or somewhere about that
time I did sign the memorandum and
articles of association of his company. I
was then an articled clerk in Allen, Allen
and Hemsley. I had never met Frank
Packer; I had never met his associates. I
did not know who he was. The men to
whom I was clerking, Sir Norman Cowper
and Mr Arthur Hemsley, asked me to sign
the document. Of course I signed it. Any
person with a knowledge of law and a
knowledge of the way companies are
formed would have done exactly as I did.
Secondly, the Leader of the Opposition
referred to the statement relating to the so
called payment for the articles that had
been written by the right honourable mem-
1432 1/ 71 ber for Higgins. I did not ask the right
honourable member whether he was being
paid. For a fact, I did not think he was.
But I see no reason in the world why I
should ask him, particularly after I had
read the article. It was no business of mine.
If people want to ask him, he can be
asked and I am sure he will give the kind
of answer that he feels appropriate to be
given. The honourable gentleman also referred
to the fact that in some article in the
' Daily Telegraph' -there was a forecast of
some further action to be taken. I will give
the author of -that article complete liberty
to state positively, without any recrimination
from me, whether he had discussed
this matter with me or had let me know
that the article was to be written. No
member of the ' Daily Telegraph' contacted
me prior to the publication of the article,
and in fact I had not talked to Mr Alan
Reid for at least 3 weeks prior to that, and
I have not spoken to him since his return
from Fiji. This is the kind of rumour and
nastiness that are inherent in the mind of
the honourable gentleman. I intend for the
rest to ignore them completely and to get
on with the job of governing this country
and doing the best we can to contribute to
its greatness.
The Leader of the Opposition referred
to the fact that during the last session he
also moved a censure -motion on me. He
has lost no time for a second one although
we wanted to give him more time for his
censure motion. I repeat that he is not
only showing his inherent nastiness but is
also attempting to obstruct the business of
this House and is trying to prevent us
from getting on with the constructive work
of government. This is the device of a man
and a party with nothing to off er and a
great deal to be ashamed of. When the
Minister for Foreign Affairs ( Mr N. H.
Bowen) brings forward his paper on
foreign affairs, I for one will participate in
the debate, and I believe that I will be able
to show not only that the Leader of the
Opposition is dangerous to the security of
this country but that wherever he went on
his recent overseas trip he created an
impression which was bad for Australia
and which brought him into ridicule. I
believe that in every country he visited he
left a most unfavourable, even bad,
impression. Mr Shery-I raise a point of order.
The Prime Minister has just referred to the
Leader of the Opposition being a danger to
this country. This is impugning the character
and the responsibility of the Leader of
the Opposition and I ask the Prime Minister
to withdraw -the remark.
Mr SPEAKER-Orderi I do not think
that the Prime Minister at any stage
impugned the personal character of the
Leader of the Opposition. I think the honourable
member is perhaps confused as to
the substance of the Prime Minister's
remarks about security.
Mr Sherry-Mr Speaker, with all due
respect -to your ruling, if the Prime Minister.
has referred to the Leader of the
Opposition as being a security risk, this is
certainly in my view a reflection on the
character of the Leader of the Opposition
and I ask the Prime Minister to withdraw
the remark.
Mr SPERAKER-Order! Of course I
have not a verbatim note of what the
Prime Minister said, * but from listening to
him I do not think that he said that the
Leader of the Opposition was a security
risk. SMr McMAHON-This is the device of
a man and a -party with nothing to offer
and a great deal to be ashamed of. It is
the attitude of a party that has been conditioned
by 22 years on the Opposition
benches to think only destructively.
Obviously it has no mind for constructive
contributions to the work of Parliament
and it has no stomach, as I said before,
for facts. It prefers to perform by innuendo, suspicion and false statement. Let this
be known: We in the Liberal-Country
Party Government want to get on with -the
real business of government. We believe
that Australia is a country with a tremendous
future. We know that the people are
sound at heart and we know that they are
sensible. It is our task to represent them
here in this Parliament, and we must not
be diverted from that task * by tawdry personal
issues raised by the Opposition. We
must -take initiatives in nation building on
their behalf. We are doing that and we will
continue to do it.
The Leader of the Opposition is upset
because I have made some ministerial
changes. What has this to do with
him? This is the business of the Government,
and we do not want him interfering
with what are exclusively our affairs. He
has plenty -to do trying to get his own
Party into shape and, if I can go a stagc
further, in coming to terms with the
President of the Australian Council of
Trade Unions, who keeps rocking -the boat
with his excursions into what should be
the Labor Party's exclusive preserves. It
has been said-and I repeat this againthat
I am influenced by the Press. I have
been in Parliament a long time. I have held
a great number of port fol ios-more, I
think, than any other person in the House.
I make up my own mind what I personally
should do in the interests of the nation,
not in the interests of anyone else. Of
course, I listen to advice from my colleagues
in the Ministry, in the Cabinet and
in my Party. I have consultations with
industry. I meet the Press and I meet the
people. But of ' this honourable members
may be sure: I have never taken and will
never take any action designed to please the
Press people. I suppose that I have had
more quarrels with them than has any other
person in this House. Of course, on many
occasions -they have -been in praise of me.
If we look over the long term, I think the
criticism has been pretty strong too. But
who in this House has not gone through
exactly the same experiences?
The second point that is referred to by
the Leader of the Opposition is tbat of
leadership. I and . my former colleague know
-we are probably the only 2 in this
House who do kncew-that it carries very
great responsibilities. But I want to ask
this question: What leadership does the
honourable member for Werriwa give to his
Party today? This is the man who incited
young men inducted for national service to
refuse to serve in Vietnam when it was
their duty to do so. This is the man who
approved the attempt by some unions to
interfere with the legitimate trade of this
country. This is the man who gave tacit
support to the left wing unions and the
professional dissenters during the recent
rugby tour. This is the man who went to
China to play party politics with wheat
and finished up by being a total advocate
for the -policy of -a foreign power-the
greatest Communist power in Asia.
The Budget that the Treasurer ( Mr
Snedden) will bring down tonight involves
a motion of real substance. The motion
before the House this afternoon -has none.
The Budget presents fiscal policy and an
explanation of monetary policy for Australia
for the whole of 197 1-72. It is therefore
a paramount importance and should
be treated accordingly. It is right, I know,
for the Leader of the Opposition to talk
about unity and good government. We talk
about it. But we talk about it because we
know what it means and we know the contribution
we will be able to make. They
are, I believe, the qualities that a well
ordered country needs and that, I believe,
Australia is getting in full measure from
the Liberal-Country Party Government.
Let me remind honourable members of
the performance of my Government in
recent months. it * has been here just on 5
months and in that time it has brought
down a solid list of domestic legislation. It
has broken completely new ground in
foreign affairs. It has tackled a range of
problems, not of its own making, including
inflation and the fall in the price of wool,
which are pressing heavily on the country
today. I believe that they will be dealt with
effectively, providing we can have continuitv
and steadiness in government. I believe,
too, that it is of importance to make the
federal system of government work effectively.
That great spirit of free enterprise
which has served Australia so well through
all its history should not be stifled by controls
and directions from Canberra.
I have said that we believe in co-operation
as the basis for unity. In 5 months we
have established, I believe, a new relationship
with the States. What we did, in addition,
was to give them a general growth tax. We gave them payroll tax which was
designed to stop them from coming. to
Canberra cap in hand and begging us to
give them increasing access to funds. I
emphasise that what we have done all this
while is to continue the development of
this country and we have also-this will be
reflected in the Budget tonight-developed
policies which are directed at reducing
inflationary pressures because inflation is
one of our greatest problems. Success here
is the basis on which we can successfully
plan for the future.
We must contain and, I believe, we must
reverse the serious escalation of costs and
prices. We have begun investigations as to
how arbitration -procedures might be
improved. We have done this to give
greater emphasis in wage decisions to the
economic consequences of the Commonwealth
Conciliation and Arbitration Commission's
awards. We have also investigated
what broader measures we might
take to bring about the needed restraints in
wage increases and in wage costs. We have
come to grips with the crisis in some of
our rural industries, particularly in the case
of wool. Already, we have adopted reconstruction
and special aid policies in order
to assist -them. We have reduced the
migrant intake to contain costs and to
allow a greater concentration on personal
quality. We have passed legislation controlling
resale price maintenance and we are
reviewing the Trade Practices Aot so that
we can strengthen it and encourage much
more vigorous competition.
On the advice of the Tariff Board the
Government also has accepted the need for
a systematic review of tariffs and this is
proceeding. My Government has also
reviewed important aspects of social welfare.
We have done so because we consider
it a prime duty to do more for the needy
and the neglected. We want to clean out
the pockets of poverty wherever they
appear. The effective development of an
adequate social welfare system, to which I
have pledged my Government, depends
heavily on a good working arrangement
between the Commonwealth and the
States. That is another reason why our new
understanding with the States is so important.
In March we gave pensioners a supplementary
increase. We did so because we
thought social justice demanded a rise to
offset the sharp increase in living costs
which was causing unexpected hardship.
We also secured a satisfactory arrangement
with the Australian Medical Association
about fees to make the revised medical
benefits scheme operate effectively, and we
overhauled hospital insurance benefits to
give a more extensive cover to fund members.
So many of these activities bear on
the quality of life which must ' be of
increasing concern to everyone in Australia.
We are, after all, searching for a
quality of life which will be better than the
one that we have today. This is the end
objective of all our efforts, because the
quality of life is just about everything that
belongs to and relates to man. It is his
place in the environment-the good he
does, how he lives with his neighbours and
the measures of his contentment-but at
the same time we must preserve our freedoms
and our civil liberties. ( Extension of
time granted) We must tackle the congestion
and pollution of our cities. Now,
having said that, I turn briefly to our
record in foreign affairs. The Minister for
Foreign Affairs will deal with the subject in
detail later-I hope tomorrow but at the
latest on Thursday.
Mr Daly-Mr Speaker, I take a point of
order. My point of order is that this is all
very interesting, but what does it have to
do with the motion?
Mr SPEAKER-Order! There is no substance
in the point of order.
Mr McMAHON-What does the socalled
censure motion have to do with the
House? As I said, the Foreign Minister will
deal with the subject later. In the past
months we have made considerable progress
with the prospect of getting our
troops home from Vietnam as the operation
there winds down. You will recall, Sir,
that I announced further withdrawals at
the end of March. I will state the Government's
policy in the House this week. We
have completed new appraisals of our -relations
with Japan, Russia and China. These
appraisals took place over a year or more
but they have brought us to new decisions
in respect of all 3 countries in the last few
months. I will not repeat them now. They
speak well for our future in the international
community.
Our aid programmes particularly in the
Asian -and the Pacific region continue at a high level. We have also made progress
with the 5-power defence arrangements for
Malaysia-Singapore and we have become a
member of the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development. Wha~ t contribution
has the Opposition made to
national progress? Absolutely none.
Indeed, by i-ts actions and its abstentions it
has aggravated the problems of the day.
The Labor Party has encouraged a contempt
for law and order and the rights of
individual citizens. A clear example can be
seen on the industrial scene and the
increase in political strikes. We have had a
rash of industrial strikes and stoppages
which last year cost the work force nearly
$ 31m in wages. The loss to the nation in
output and the consequent effect on prices
is enormous. We must not forget that the
number of man days lost * by individual
disputes has gone up 21 times in the last 3
years. Now, I want the House to answer
this question: What has the Lepder of the
Opposition done about this? The answer
is positive-nothing at all. In all of this
he has been silent, and by his silence
he has given consent. He has stood
by help~ essly while his authority has been
eroded and his bailiwick invaded by Mr
Bob Hawke, the President of the Australian
Council of Trade Unions, another
leader who is causing responsible people in
the trade union movement a great deal of
activity. Another question I want to pose is
this: Who is really speaking for Labor? It
is not a question of who runs the country;
it is a question of who runs the Labor
Party. Mr Jacobi -Ask Frank Packer.
Mr McMAHON-He would give the
same answer on this occasion because he
cannot decide, as no-one else can decide,
who is running the trade union movement.
I want to say more about the Leader of
the* Opposition, but I think it best to leave
to the judgment of the House what it
thinks about his censure motion, and him.
I believe that answer will be given before 6
o'clock tonight.
Let me return to the overseas visit by
the Leader of the Opposition. He went on
a disastrous-I use the word deliberately-
visit to Peking after he had given
his tacit support to protests against the
South African football tour. In China he
conceded every single point the Chinese
made to him, and he did so in public. This
was a disservice to Australia without any
precedent. His performance is written into
the record for all to read and for history
to see. More will -be said about China in
the foreign affairs debate this session, but
let me say just this: I believe his visit
compromised discussions which the Australian
Wheat Board was just about to
begin with the Chinese when he announced
his intention to go to China. I believe he
compromised the -first moves we were making
through diplomatic channels to open
up a dialogue with China. As a result of
some cocktail gossip with a foreign representative
in China, he caused more havoc
than any man could have caused either in
Australia or in any other part of the
world. I believe it is the first time in Australia's
history that a Leader of the Opposition
has been the total advocate for
another country's cause. I believe it is also
the first time that any Australian political
leader has presumed to tell other countries
horw they should run their business, and he
did so publicly. He discredited the President
of the United States of America by
telling him he would be kicked out. He told
Japan that it should cancel its treaties. Later
when I have an opportunity to speak in the
foreign affairs debate I will disclose more
of his tactics and more of the mischief he
has caused.
I have visited every State in Australia-
some several times-in the last few
months. I have seen great progress in
national development wherever I have
been. As I1 went around I ' became aware
that many people are deeply troubled by
some ol the trends developing in Australia
today. They are concerned with the
increase in industrial disputes and lawlessness.
They * are concerned about the issue
of -law and order. They want to retain
their right to dissent, but they do not want
their civil liberties interfered with ' by mass
protests or professionally promoted demonstrations.
They do not want their right of
choice within the law interfered with. They
expect their parliamentarians to take note
of these issues and to give them a lead.
This, 11 -believe, my Government is doing
and is doing with strength.
May I now return to the principles relating
to constitutional law and practice? So
much doubt has been cast these days on
the Cabinet system that I felt it would ' he appropriate for * me to make some statement
about it. Of course, it is the Opposition's
policy to cheapen and denigrate
Cabinet. But I have another attitude
altogether, and a far better one. I affirm
my faith in the principle of Cabinet government.
It is central to my own Administration.
It is the practice which ' best suits
the executive in our democratic parliamentary
system. It must work effectively,
whether as a Cabinet, as a ministry or
through the system of committees which
has recently been reconstructed, if parliamentary
democracy is to ' be sustained. My
concern as Prime Minister relates to policy.
Cabinet is the proper instrument for
the development of that policy. A change
in party leadership and Ministers does not
invalidate the Government's authority. It
has not done so in the past and it does not
do so now. It is the coalition Government
of the Liberal Party and the Country Party
which the people put back into office less
than 2 years ago. ( Extension of time
granted) It is the coalition Government
that I lead, and its authority continues in
force. It has operated and will continue to
operate with due respect to law and with
due respect to process in the area of the
Cabinet system, in the relationship with the
States -and with the electorate.
I can understand the disappointment of
the Opposition that a change in leadership,
and the other changes that have been
made, have nort brought about some reduction
in our capacity to govern, our intention
to govern or our right to govern. The
motion that is before the House is, I
believe, a product of that disappointment.
A similar motion was moved in vain in
March when I took over as Prime Minister.
I repeat that today's motion will be in
vain. I am perfectly confident that the
people of Australia understand what I am
saying. They understand, firstly, that they
gave us authority to govern and that we
still have that authority. They understand.
secondly, that we are thoroughly capable
to exercise that authority to their satisfaction.
They understand, thirdly, ' that it
would be folly to transfer this authority to
another party unqualified and totally
unable to discharge it effectively. I suspect
they understand that the whole of today's
exercise by the Opposition is nothing else
but humbug.
I must remind the House that we are
known abroad in the great majority of
countries. Despite what the Leader of the
Opposition said, we have given this
country great national responsibility and
stable and progressive administration over
a period now running into 22 years, close
to a quarter of a century. This is known
and respected overseas, as it is here. This
administration is not upset by changes in
leadership, by ministerial re-arrangements or by any statements the Leader of the
Opposition might make. I want to state to
you positively, Sir, that you will see evidence
of unity in this Government. You
will find that the Liberal Party which I
lead, with the Country Party standing
behind us, will give to this country ' the
kind of government that it needs and
which will take it to a very much higher
destiny than we know at the moment or
that -the Labor Party could ever think was
realistically possible.
W. 0. MUUAY, Government Printer. Canberra