SPEECH 13Y THE PRIh: MINISTER THE RT. HON. R. G.
MENZIES, AT HOR. SHAM, ON MON{ DY, 28TH NOVEMBEa,
_ 1960
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Rylah, Parliamentary colleagues and ladies
and gentlemen: It must be a considerable time since I : ias on this
platform last. I remember it very well. It was a very good
meeting. As I told some of you this afternoon we had a bit of
good spirited heckling, and some very lively questions. So I
remember the meeting with considerable affection.
But I also remember the place, though not this actual
hall which was thenrmt built, because in its predecessor my late
father spoke many times when he uas the Member for Lowran in the
State Parliament. By that time we lived in Melbourne, and when my
father disappeared, with a great flurry, to go to Horsham it
was almost as if a man had been called before the Judgnent Seat
to caifront his Masters.
Because, usually it had happened that he had cast a
vote that Horsham didn't like, or that Horsham was arguing
about; and so, following his usual attitude, he came up to
argue with Horsham about it. In the long run, af courselost
his seat. ( Laughter) But it is a very good example to follow.
Now, I just want to say something to you tonight, not
all as a matter of history certainly not ancient history.
But when I look back on what we have achieved in this Party I
like to remember a few things, and I would wvish you to rumember
them also. In 1943, speaking about the Federal Parliament, we
who wore then in Opposition, had the most complete thrashing,
politically, at an election that uie have ever had. In fact
somebody rang me up afterwards to ask for a comment, and I
said, " It's very difficult to make a comment when you've been
run over by a traction engine". And that was about where we
were. We looked around I was not then Leader of the
Opposition for a variety of reasons and I was asked by the
survivors, whether I would once more lead them. I said I
would; but there was one great condition to be attached to it
and that was that we . rre to get together in Australia and
become, as far as possible, one body.
At that time, the end of 1943there were no less
than 14 different organisations in Australia all professing,
broadly, the same point of view. But all different.
Fourteen' So from the office of the Leader of the Opposition at
Canberra I . convened a meeting, at C3nberra, of representatives
of all 14. They came, together with other interested persons.
' e had a very spirited session, and we passed a resolution
declaring that we would form one body and that that one body
was to be the Liberal Party of Australia.
Six months later we mot at Albury and at Albury we
had a Constitution, and a Platform and we became fully embodied.
Now that was 1944. In 1946, at the next Federal
election and you will understand it if I speak primarily in
0 2.
those terms-in 194+ 6 we won a fow seats, but we were still
hopelessly outnumbered. In 194+? we had a tremendous victory.
Now I'll say a little neror about that in a moment,
but pausing there, let me tell y~ u this, out of my own long
political axperience.
There are two periods danger in tho lifetime of a
political movement: one is when it appears to be hopelessly
outnumbered, and gives up the gho-st; the other is when it has
boen in office so long that pcoplc say, " Wlperhaps it's
time for a change; we've nothing gainst the Government; we're
doing very well, but perhaps it's t. ime for a change" l.
These are the two periods of danger.
Going back to that first oie, let me remind you that
when we first organised ourselves in-, o one body in the Federal
Parliament, there were 17 in a House of 74+ talking about the
house of Representatives 17. Numoerically a contemptible
Opposition. In point of fact, I wi-l say with all humility,
it was the greatest Opposition that v; as over seen in the
Federal Parliament. Because it had Life, and imagination and
ideas. It knew the business. It nev Parliamentary procedure.
Although it was always dooned to be outnumbered, it
did, in the course of less than five years after being
constructed, achieve the greatest vic-tory that had been seen up
to that time in Federal politics.
Then we were outnumbered of course, still, for old
reasons, in the Senate. We took a Doi. ble Dissolution in 1951,
another election in 154f, another *. election at the end of 1
when there were economic problems of great complexity; and
another one at the end of 1958. Every one of those Electiona
we have won, with fluctuating majorities the last one bythe
biggest majority we have ever had in the Federal Parliament.
I think it is worthwhile recalling those matters.
Of course I occasionally meet those candid friends who are the
curse of humanity you know what I moan who say, " Well, old
man, yes, congratulations! You've done vory well to win these
Elections. But of course you know you had the advantage of
having so-and-so on the other side". It's always somebody else
who has done it; it's never ourselves.
All I want to say is that I have no reason to doubt
that ' v~ hovor had led the Opposition in the Federal Parliament,
we would have won the elections; and we would have won them
because we have constantly maintained a positive approacil, and
a positive contribution to the solving of the Nation's problems.
There are people, of course, who sit on the side
lines, who always know all the answers they know nothing
about these problems for the most part; they have never had
to handle them. 11e have.
The result has been, or rather the history has been,
looking internally, looking at our Australian problems,
domestically, that in the course of these eleven years, we
have had the most complex variety of economic problems. ' Ve
have had booms; we have had recessions; we have had an
,_; normous expansion in the price of wool and dramatic falls in
the price of wool. Jo have had some little unemployment
not very much at any time. We have had tremendous over-full
employment, and an unsatisfied demand for labor. Our overseas
balances have fluctuated quite violently at times; and they
have fluctuated for the most elementary reasons.
0 3.
4hen at the time of the Korean Jar the boom in wool
came on, it reached absurd and embarrassing heights. That
wasn't the fault of anybody in Australia. That was the fault
of some extraordinary, incompetent mass wool buying elsewhere
in the world. But the fact was that our overseas balances rose to
an enormous height; inflation grew at a tremendous speed in
Australia, and we had to do some pretty unpopular things. But
we did them, and those who attacked theon when they were done
and I could understand them attacking them; they were very
disagreeable subsequently came to realise that they had been
right, that they had produced the right results.
Do you know that after the famous Budget of 1952
when we were supposed to be absolutely certain to be destroyed,
the Gallup Poll recorded us, I think, as having a percentage
of about 37 the all-time low. And the vreaker brethen would
come around and say, " It's hopeless; we're g6neol The people
are against us". I used to have to say, " Look by the time the
next election comes around, we will win you see' This is
going to work out well". It did uork out well, and we won the
next election; and the one after that by a bigger majority, and
so on down the line.
I have an infinite belief in the people. I think
that the people of Australia are sensible, honest people. If
I didn't believe that, aill politics would be a mere masquerade,
a worthless occupation. You can only carry this occupation on
if you believe in the honesty, and decency and fundamental
commonsenso of your own people. That belief has been
vindicated, I venture to say, over these years so far as our
party and our representatives, and our policies have been
concerned. Somebody said, of late, having regard to certain
changes that we have made, somebody coined a phrase you know
it's a great thing to coin a phrase and the phrase nou is
that this is a " stop and go" Government. Jfell, of course,
they have always said that about us. The extraordinary
thing is that Australia hasn't stopped. It has gone steadily,
steadily growing until oven the Leader of the Opposition has to
admit that of course Australia is a prosperous country. Of
course it is! So apparently these alleged fluctuations of
policy haven't brought the country to a standstill. But let us
see what they mean. I wrant you to understand this kind of
thing. Our policy has been constant, just as the strategy
of a General may be constant, his overall strategic
conception. ut just as he changes his tactics according to
the dispositions of his enemy, and the circumstances of the
time, so we, without altering our policies, of course adjust
our detailed application to the circumstances of the moment.
Jo wrould be incompetent fools if we didn't.
I gave an illustration one night about the Central
Bank, the Reserve Bank of Australia, the Bank which sits in the
middle of the entire credit structure of Australia, and upon
the capacity and honesty of which people in Australia depend
to a very largo extent.
Jhat does a Central Bank do anywhere in the iorld?
Does it say, once a year, " This is our policy for the ycr
this is what we are going to do for the year, and we will leave
it at that, and whatever happens we won't change ftr 12 months".
ihy the country would be in a state of chaos if a Central Bank
did that.
It is the duty of a Central Bank to say, " What is ourpolicy?
Our broad policy is to maintain, as far as we can,
stability, economic stability in the community. ~ Je don't want
too much credit in the i rong direction, or too little credit
in the direction in which it ought to 3o. Ie want to have a
reasonable degree of liquidity in the Trading Banks so that
they maintain an oven process of business'..
Therefore a Central Bank will sell securities this
month and buy then next month. It will release money to the
trading banks out of their special reserves this month, and
call it up in two months. Those things must occur in the
course of the conduct of a Reserve Bank. They put out, they
take in. Every Reserve Bank in the world has to do it. If it
didn't do it, that would be a calamity to the country in which
it was operating. The weather isn't the same every day, or every week.
Circumstances change. You may have a sudden rise in the price
of wool or a sudden collapse. Export sales of some other
commodity may also be affected because of drought or some other
unpredictable reason. And in two or three months the whole
of your circumstances in relation to your overseas balances
can be affected. Therefore there must be a watchful eye.
And just as the Reserve Bank is not to be afraid to
do its duty, so we are not to be afraid to change our course
to meet the new circumstances. The objective will rumain the
same. But as the Chancellor of the iEchequer in the United
Kingdom said the other day, " It is necessary very frequently,
while maintaining your course to the port of destination, to
make many movements of the wheel, this way or that, according
to the jind and the weather."
That is what you are entitled to expect. If this
country had suffered from people who, in a wooden-headed
fashion, ' ihen the Budget had been pronounced said, " Jell now
that's the whole of our financial activity for the year, and
whatever comes or goes for the next 12 months, we stand by
that document and we do nothing to meet the new circumstances"
if the country had been cursed by such stupidity, then I
would be very sorry for it and it wouldn't be the country that
it is now. That is a broad aspect of this matter, ladies and
gentlemen, that I do want to emphasise to you.
My colleague, the Treasurer, has been making some
magnificent statements on this matter. They won't satisfy a
lot of these people -ho are described as " economists" in the
newspapers. Because, you know, it's just one of the bad luck
things about political life we have economists in the
Government service; and the newspapers have economists which
are their own people. But the irony of it is, that although
the Government goes to the greatest possible pains to
assemble the ablest possible men, it turns out that Governumnt
economists are always wrong, and that newspaper economists are
always right. This is one of the strange laws of life. I h-. ve
sometimes thought that it . night not be a bad idea to take them
all over, or make a swap. ( Laughter) We would be in a
position of powerful advantage then.
Ui, cñ u juaun asiac, zne whole essence of what
we do from time to time as a Liberal administration is to aim
at stability, at development, at reconciling the highest
possible degree of national growth with the highest maximum
attainable degree of stability of the currency, to avoid
unemploynent, to preserve our international credit, to
preserve our international reserves and, so help us, to
finance the development of Australia.
Now those are groat tasks. I can honestly claim
that we have, to a substantial extent, performed them; and
are proposing to continue to perform them.
Now my opponents, your opponents, the Labour Party,
what their economic policy is I have yet to discover and so
have you. In terms of the economy of Australia they have not
condescended to tell us.
But one thing they have let drop which is very
important, and which I want you all to remember. Every time
they have a chance they complain about foreign capital coming
into Australia. It was their annual exercise, and I suppose
will continue to beo, to complain loudly and bitterly in
Parliament about profits earned by foreign companies operating
in Australia. If that complaint means anything, then I can only
assume that they don't want foreign capital in Australia; but
if it comes in, it must be, of course decent enough to make
no profits. Because their great complaint is that those
companies want to send some of their profits out of the
country. It is quite true that they spend most of theo in
Australia in developing their enterprise, but the very fact
that they want to send a few millions out of the country by
way of dividends, excites horror in the apostles of Socialism.
Now, what are the facts? This is one of the vital
facts of recent years.
Jo are a country of enormous import demand. Our
standard of living is so conspicuously high in the world that
our capacity to buy things from overseas is enormous. By and
large you can reckon, year by year, that Australia wants to
spend œ 1,000 million, œ 1,100 million, œ 1,200 million every
year on imports. These are enormous sums of money; and in
order to bring in imports we must, of course, pay for them.
I hope nobody suffers from the illusion that paying
for goods brought from overseas is a mere matter of signing a
cheque and trusting to providence. It isn't. If we haven't
got the capacity to find œ 1,000 million overseas we can't pay
œ 1,000 million overseas. It is as simple as that.
As, year by yoer, you are earning money overseas,
and you are spending money overseas, you always need to have in
reserve, to pay for things you are buying, a few hundred
million pounds. The broad principle of this thing is quite simple:
aibntlee rntoa tipoanya, l absroolavde, n cyfo rf orth eA uthstirnaglsia thdaept eknwde s guotp ont heurs e. being
Now we have a high demand for imports, very high.
But our export income fluctuates, and principally witk h ñ C
price of the products of the land. In the last years,
ladies and gentlemen, we have been kept ih-sly solvent
S
0 6.
overseas, not simply because of our export income, but
because we have attracted fron overseas scores of nillions of
pounds of private investment. And of course money that cones
in like that is equivalent, for this purpose, to export
income. I was able to stand on a platform about three years
ago and say that for some time, under our administration, and
with the confidence that we have been able to create overseas
in hard-headed circles, that we were receiving into Australia,
on private investment account, œ 100 million each year, œ 100
million. Tremendous! All over Australia. And, as has been
pointed out, in particular in the State of Victoria you will
se vast enterprises that have been established, and which
maintain enormous employment with money that cane in from the
United States and the United Kingdom rather more from the
United Kingdom than from the United States you wvill be
interested to know.
There it is. To cut it off would at once present a
problem on our overseas reserves, and our overseas balances,
of the most acute kind. But we have goneonn, whatever they
may say, or some people may say here.
The people in the world who have noncy to invest
the hard-headed people of Great Britain and the United States,
they look at us in Australia, they say, " There is a stable
country; that country appears to have the right ideas; that
country is developing; that is a cuuntry in which we are not
at danger of being nationalised or taken over. put our
money there". Last year it wasn't œ 100 million it was œ 200
million. œ 200 million sent into this country for investment
in our present and our future, in our fertility and in our
character. If there is one thing that we stand for in this
movement it is character, it is the honesty of administration.
These things count with the rest of the world,
I can remember that when we caeo in, in 1949, the
end of 1949, I don't think the reputation of Australia had
improved nuch abroad over the previous few years. The then
Governnment had had a rather untidy wrangle with the United
States of Aeorica, and had said, " Wo don't want you to
establish a base on Manus Island". The then Minister for
External Affairs had made a great point at all international
conferences of attacking, or criticising, or in the homely
phrase, " cocking a snoop" at the United States, and at the
United Kingdon because this seemed to be a rather clever thing
for us to do. Our reputation today with the United States, and
with the United Kingdon, is, I believe, higher than it has ever
been before. And that is tremendously important to us.
When we cane back into office here was Australia,
remote in the world; there was China, Communist, aggressive;
China that had become Cormunist with all the pressure going on
in South East Asia, tremendous pressure it is on at this
moment in Vietnam; it is on at this moment in Laos.
We can sit hero and talk and I can stand here and
speak, but at this very moment there are all sorts of things
going on in these countries every one of them related to
Communist pressure, to the Communist attack, to the Con-. iunist
ambition to control, if it can, every country that sits
between us and the free world,
These are treiuendously important affairs. And we
said, " Well, we must do something about it. It's no use just
having pious speeches about wanting to be friendly wJith the
United States, or friendly with the United Kingdom. T'* hat are
we to do, placed as we are down in this corner of the Pacific?
What can we do that is practical and positive?".
After all, you know, the two reat achievements in
foreign policy have been that we did get a three-cornered
treaty with the United States of America and Now Zealand in
what is called the ANZUS Pact; and we also were one of the
proroters of the South-East Asian Treaty which embraces in one
defensive organisation not only Pakistan, and Thailand and the
Philippines, and Australia and New Zealand, but also the United
States of America, Great Britain and France.
These two arc rorarkable achievements, though I
describe them in those terns myself. They have revolutionised
the position of Australia, In the old days before the war
America didn't make engagements of this kind. There was an
attitude, " No we make no cormitmnts; we don't get tied up
with obligations outside our country". It is one of the great
things that since the War, America has engaged herself with
other countries. She has behaved, I venture to say,
magnificently. Here, in our corner of the world, she stands as our
ally and associate in those two treaties, an achievement which
would have been thought, and I dare say would have boon, in
fact, impossible 20 years ago.
So far as Great Britain is concerned, Sir, I hope
that it won't be necessary for : e to justify our relations
with Great Britain. I am perfectly certain that at Whitehall,
whatever Party may be in Office at Whitehall, we are rogarded
as true, trusted and respected friends. And indeed we ought
to be, because we are of the same blood. ( Applause)
Wo had an illustration I think I ought to say a
few words to you direct it's boon discussed a good deal of
the kind of problem that arises for Australia at the United
Nations at this last Assembly, where I had the great privilege
of listening to Mr. Khrushchev, and watching his g; rnastic
exercises, even with the shoo. And it was a very interesting
experience. He cane across, I think it's always difficult to
know what a dictator is thinking because democratic leaders
like myself occasionally have to expose to the people what
they are thinking and be judged by them; but a dictator, he
hasn't to worry about that, so you don't know whether he is
saying one thing and thinking another but I rather think
that he went across with this in his mind: that he would like
to weaken, and perhaps ultinately, destroy, the United Nations.
You may say, " Well why should he do that?". Well
the answer is, I think, clear enough. The Soviet Union first
of all set out to render the Security Council which is the
only executive body in the United Nations, to render it futile,
by exercising the Veto. Every time a decision of any moment
occurred they would say, " JWe vote And then, under the
rules of the United Nations, that was the end of it. They
might be out-numberod by 11 to 1, but it doesn't mattoer they
arc one of the pernanont members and when they say the
answer is " No".
And so they have rendered this, a rather unsatisfactory
I al-ost said a rather futile body.
And then they switch into the General Assebly.
And the General Assoebly this is just a comnittoc meeting
compared to the General asscmbly. Ninetyeight nations, I
think, or there nay be 99 at the moment, but call it 100 just
in round figures, each one of then with half a dozen doleo: ates
and half a dozen advisers and you can imagine it's an amy
of people, in a huge theatre.
Australia, by the luck of the draw, sat in the back
seat, looking down the slope. It's not a bad position to be
in because you could see quite a lot. When I wanted to speak
I had to get up and do a route narch down the aisle. It
seemed to ne to be about 200 yards; I daresay it wasn't any
nore than about 80 or 90 yards. But it is an enormous place.
In the result, of course, no debates occur at all.
Speeches are nado, which is a rather different matter. Long
speeches. Two hours appears to be the rule. The day before I
arrived Fidel Castro had spoken for hours the first
minutes on his hotel accommodation and the next 2 hours and a
half on the story of his life. ( Laughter) Now you wouldn't
read about it. It's trneendous. I know that because I read
the translation the day I arrived.
But this is the sort of thing that goes on.
Khrushchev was out to do two things in that Assembly:
one was to attack the Secrotary-General, who has a difficult
enough task in all conscience. But he thought that if he
could attack him and bring hin down then he would weaken the
whole executive position of the United Nations. The other
object, of course, was to beguile, or threaten, or actually
frighten, new nations, of whom there are plenty.
About fifteen new nations from Africa arrived this
year. They are inexperienced in self-government. They haven't
yet, for the iost part, found their feet. They uay, perhaps,
be a little more disturbed by threats than we are.
And he said to hiniself, " This is it. I will make
these people feel that I am somebody to be afraid of; and
that the Suviet Union is a power to be obeyed".
, oll, I an happy to say I think he failed to
achieve that result because he didn't understand that now
nations, like old ones, have a dignity of their own. These
people don't cone to self-governnont, they don't come to
independence, they don't celebrate their Independence Day,
without feeling proud that they are now a free nation. And as
he doesn't understand free nations, never having set one free,
having only conquered then, he doesn't understand the dignity
of freedom. That is why I thought that he failed on that side
of his tactics. But one way or another, I think that he will not
rest until ho has nade the ultimate attempt to persuade people
to do sonothing that will weaken the United Nations and that
will then draw into his own orbit as nany nations as possible.
And this is a grin thing for the world.
The vorld stands outside global war today because the
free world possesses the power to destroy the ajgrussor just as
indeed the aggressor has the power to destroy nuch of what they
have thensolves. Here is the deadlock of power, of toe. riblo
pjwuutr. But he fooeels that if ho could wean away, persuade, or
9.
threaton, or infiltrate to got another ton, fifteen, twenty,
twentyfive, nations into his own orbit, then he could develop
what he would represent as such a moral body of opinion in the
world, as would weaken the will of the people of the United
States and of Great Britain, and of Australia.
Because thero are plenty of people willing to
weaken our will if they can. And this is the thing of which
we ust beware. We nust retain the initiative; we nust retain
the moral initiative; in all matters that affect the rorld's
peace we nust be united and positive inwhatevor , we are
proposing should be done.
Above all things we should know where our friends
are. What a silly lot of nonsense it is to say to somebody
like myself, " You should prefe-to get the vote of a neutral
country, when you nove something in the United Nations, to the
votes of Groat Britain, the United States and France" who are
the three most powerful allies we have in the world.
Did you ever hear such nonsense? If everybody in
Australia got into his mind that that was ny kind of " surrenderism"
to coin a word that that was ny understanding of
what the great interests of Australia needed, then I would
expect to be swept out. But before I was swept out I would
know that the Liberal movement would have swept no out and got
another loader, another S-pokesnan.
Je, Liberals', we stand for these things. io stand
for friendship witt our great friends overseas. Wo know that
it is only by.,. hving sonm security for our Nation based upon
magnificent-active friendships around the world that we can
hope to set ourselves to the great tasks that we have not to
put everybody under government control, but to put every
individual citizen, so far as we can, into a position of
developing his own life.
Liberalisn, based upon individual human freedom,
individual hunan dignity these are the things that stand in
our lives; these are the things that have no existence in
Communist countries, or among Communists in Australia itself,
or anong their dupes.
Australia is a friend of the United States. We are
of course, intimate, family people with the United Kingdom.
But when we , go to an international conference we have our own
mind. We are capable, around the corner, of having
discussions with our friends.
When I was in the United States on this recent
visit I was honourod by being askod by the President to go up
to Washington to confer with him at the 1White House with Mr.
Harold MaCmillan. I thought this no insult to Australia, that
the three of us should be sitting there, in private, discussing
these urgent current matters. But does anybody suppose we just
sat down and somebody beat time and we all said the same thing
not a bit. I think that for the first hour they probably
heartily disagreed with what I was saying: and I disagreed
with one or two other things that wore said.
We thrashed then out. W4 are grown-up people. We
have minds of our own, and duties of our own, and conceptions
of ourown. But in the end, we agreed.
But, in the United Nations Assembly, where you had
the Soviet Union, and the satellite countries, as they are
pleased to call them, or as we are you know countries like
Rumania and Czechoslovakia and Poland and so on there they
are.
When Khrushchev decided that sormething ought to be
applauded, ho always startcd applauding up here like a fellow
in a boxing ring you know always started up thero; they
all looked around from wherever they sat in this great hall
and there they were.
If on the other hand he was going to thump the
table, like that, he raised his fist high, or his shoo as the
case Day be, and they all looked around, nodded, and then
( L. ughter) Of course he had shoes and he could hit the table
with then; I didn't inspect the satellite countries closely
enough to know whether they had any. But at any rate they
thumped the table.
Now you see the difference between the complete
subjugation of these people not a man there from Poland, or
Czechoslovakia, or as the case n:' ay be, not a nan there who
would dare to have a mind of his ovm, who would dare to ar gue
with the head of the Soviet Union.
These are the things that we have to m.~ aintain. We
won't always agree with each other. I an happy to say that we
can have discussions in Cabinet and discussions in the Party
Room that reveal a wide variety of ideas. In fact I have
never seen an idea put forward yet that I hadn't first heard
in the Cabinet Room, or in the Party Room. \ Ie are not such
inexperienced people as all that, and we thrash thoe out.
A1nd when we thrash then out we arrive at a conclusion which is
part of the substance and spirit of what Liberalism stands for.
When we do, we go forward with it, as you would
expect us to not apologetically, but with some0 courage and
determination, and belief, in what the result will be.
Now, as I said to you at the beginning, it was a
dangerous time back in 1944-, 14 because we were a remnant,
and remnants are inclined to be disposed of at a rumnant sale..
But we weren't a remnant in that sense, and we arrived.
tWo are now getting towards the end of our 11th year.
The very prosperity of Australia detaches th~ e minds ofa lot of
people from political affairs: they think that they can
safely leave these things alone. This is a point, therofore,
of danger for any Government, and any movement.
I am addressing one or two mootins for the prime
purpose of saying to our own people, " You believe in the
things we stand for; you have your pride in what is going~ on
in Australia; you are maintaining your interest in the
political affairs of Australia; you are not going to allow
the citadel to be captured by inadvertence, or idleness. Go
out and persuade as many thousands of people, Liberals, as you
can find, that that is their duty also".
I haven't the slightest doubt in ny mind that with
awareness of our political issues Liberalismn is destined to
serve this country in Governrient for many years to come.
( Applause)