1II
THE SENATE v THE PEOPLE
SPEECH BY THE PRIME IINISTER,
THE HON. E. G. WHITLAM.,
TO THE LABOR WOMEN'S CONIFERENCE OF THE A. L. P.,
TRADES HALL, SYDNEY,
SUNDAY 31 MARCH 1974
THE SENATE ELECTION ON 18 MAY WILL BE THE FIFTH
SENATE ELECTION SINCE I HAVE BEEN LEADER OR DEPUTY LEADER
OF THE PARTY; IT WILL BE THE EIGHTH SENATE ELECTION,
AND THE ELEVENTH ELECTION FOR EITHER HOUSE, SINCE I
BECAME A MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT. I HOPE YOU WILL NOT
THINK IT MERE GALLANTRY ON MY PART IF I CLAIM TO HAVE
A LONGER MEMORY OF POLITICAL EVENTS THAN MOST OF THE
LADIES IN THIS ROOM. THE FACT IS THAT I CANNOT RECALL
A MORE IMPORTANT SENATE ELECTION THAN THE ONE WE FACE NOW.
THE ISSUES AT STAKE, THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PARLIAMENT,
FOR THE PEOPLE, FOR DEMOCRACY ITSELF, WILL BE CRUCIAL
AND FAR-REACHING, FOR THE FIRST TIME, AND PERHAPS FOR
THE ONLY TIME, WE WILL BE FIGHTING A SENATE CAMPAIGN
OF GENUINE AND HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.
-2-
I SAY THIS NOT MERELY BECAUSE OF THE REFERENDUMS
TO BE HELD WITH THE SENATE ELECTION, IMPORTANT AS THESE
REFERENDUMS ARE. CERTAINLY THEY WILL GIVE AN ADDED
MEANING, AN ADDED DIMENSION, AN ADDED ZEST TO OUR
CAMPAIGN. RATHERj I BASE MY CLAIM ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE
OF THIS ELECTION ON THE UNIQUE AND SPECIAL CHARACTER
OF THE ISSUES OR RATHER, THE CENTRAL ISSUE.
THIS WILL BE A CAMPAIGN, NOT JUST FOR THE SENATE,
BUT ABOUT THE SENATE. THE PEOPLE WILL BE PASSING
JUDGMENT ON THE ROLE, THE RECORD AND THE RELEVANCE
OF THE SENATE ITSELF. THEY WILL BE PASSING JUDGMENT
ON THE OPPOSITION IN THE SENATE AND THE RECORD AND
MOTIVES AND CREDIBILITY OF THE OPPOSITION AS A WHOLE-FOR
MAKE NO MISTAKE, THIS WILL BE VERY MUCH AN ELECTION ABOUT
THE OPPOSITION, IT IS THE OPPOSITION WHOSE PERFORMANCE
IS IN QUESTION. IT IS THE OPPOSITION WHOSE GOOD FAITH
AND EFFECTIVENESS WE MUST EXAMINE. IS IT UNITED?
IS IT BELIEVABLE? DOES IT SPEAK WITH ONE VOICE?
IS IT MOTIVATED BY CONCERN FOR THE NATIONAL INTEREST
OR MERELY BY SPITE, BY RESENTMENT AND A LUST TO RETURN
TO POWER? THE RECORD OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THIS ELECTION
WILL BE OF GREAT IMPORTANCE; THE RECORD OF THE OPPOSITION
AND THE RECORD OF THE SENATE WILL BE OF SUPREME
IMPORTANCE, IT IS THAT RECORD THAT I WANT TO EXAMINE
TODAY. IT IS A PATHETIC AND CONTEMPTIBLE RECORD;
IT IS A PATHETIC AND CONTEMPTIBLE OPPOSITION,
e p ,/ 3
-3-
IN DECEMBER 1972 SIXTEEN MONTHS AGO THE
AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE ELECTED A LABOR GOVERNMENT WITH A
DECISIVE MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
THE POLICIES ON WHICH THE GOVERNMENT WAS ELECTED HAD BEEN
CLEARLY STATED, THEY HAD BEEN FORMULATED OVER MANY
YEARS IN THE PUBLIC DECISION-MAKING FORUMS OF THE PARTY,
MOST OF THOSE POLICIES WERE PUT TO THE PEOPLE NOT ONCE,
BUT TWICE, IN THE ELECTIONS OF 1969 THERE WAS A SWING
OF MORE THAN 6% TO THE LABOR PARTY, IN 1972, WHEN A
SIMILAR PROGRAM WAS SUBMITTED TO THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE,
THERE WAS A FURTHER SWING TO LABOR OF THE ORDER OF 2,7,%
THOSE TWO ELECTIONS SAW AN EMPHATIC AND RE-ITERATED EXPRESSION
OF PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THE POLICIES OF A LABOR GOVERNMENT,
IN THE MONTHS SINCE THE LAST ELECTION THE GOVERNMENT
HAS ACTED WITH ALL POSSIBLE SPEED TO IMPLEMENT THE
POLICIES FOR WHICH THE PEOPLE VOTED,
WE HAVE MADE GREAT PROGRESS TOWARDS A MORE JUST,
MORE PROSPEROUS AND MORE HUMANE SOCIETY, MUCH OF OUR
PROGRAM HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED,. IWE HAVE DONE MANY
THINGS THAT WE PROMISED TO DO; WE HAVE DONE NOTHING THAT
WE DID NOT PROMISE TO-DO, IT IS TRUE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN
UNFORESEEN FRUSTRATIONS AND UNPREDICTABLE DISTRACTIONS;
BUT FOR THE MOST PART ACTING WITH GOOD FAITH, ACTING
WITH DETERMINATION AND VIGOR, BY SHEER HARD WORK AND
A VOLUME OF PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS THAT SURPASSES ALL
RECORDS WE HAVE SOUGHT TO DISCHARGE IN FULL MEASURE
THE TRUST PLACED UPON US BY THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE, a / 4
4
FOR ALL OUR ACTIVITY, FOR ALL OUR DETERMINATION
TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE PEOPLE'S WILL, THERE ARE GREAT
AND IMPORTANT THINGS WE HAVE BEEN PREVENTED FROM DOING,
THE SENATE HAS BLOCKED AND DELAYED, AMENDED AND
FRUSTRATED SIGNIFICANT PARTS OF OUR PROGRAM,
NOW THERE ARE TWO THINGS ABOUT THE SENATE
THAT I ASK YOU TO REMEMBER. THE FIRST IS THAT NO PARTY
HAS A MAJORITY IN THE SENATE, iJO PARTY, AS THE SENATE
NOW STANDS, CAN CLAIM A MANDATE IN THAT CHAMBER,
IT IS TRUE THAT THE COMBINED NON-LABOR PARTIES
THAT CURIOUS COLLECTION OF FRUSTRATED LIBERALS,
COUNTRY PARTY BACKWOODSMEN, SPLINTER GROUPS AND
DISAFFECTED INDEPENDENTS WHO SUPPORT THEM
CAN MUSTER A MAJORITY; OF COURSE THEY CAN,
BUT IT IS MEANINGLESS TO SUGGEST THAT THIS CONSTITUTES
AN OPPOSITION MAJORITY IN THE TRUE SENSE, OR THAT ANY
MANDATE EXISTS FOR A POLICY OF OBSTRUCTION.
AND THAT BRINGS ME TO THE SECOND ESSENTIAL
FACT ABOUT THE SENATE AS IT STANDS, THE SENATORS WHO
HAVE BLOCKED AND FRUSTRATED THE GOVERNMENT'S PROGRAM
WERE ELECTED YEARS BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT IN THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES, HALF OF THEM WERE ELECTED IN
DECEMBER 1967; THE REST OF THEM WERE ELECTED IN
DECEMBER 1970, TRULY THEY ARE VOICES FROM THE PAST;
TRULY THEY ARE YESTERDAY'S MEN, YET THESE SENATORS,
SOME OF THEM ELECTED U YEARS AGO, PRESUME TO SIT IN
JUDGMENT ON A GOVERNMENT WHOSE POLICIES HAVE BEEN
TWICE ENDORSED BY THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE WITHIN THE
PAST 42 YEARS, I CAN THINK OFNO MORE FLAGRANT
ANACHRONISM THAT THIS, I CAN THINK OF NOTHING THAT
MAKES A GREATER MOCKERY OF A SUPPOSEDLY DEMOCRATIC
LEGISLATURE,
-6-
I HAVE SAID THAT THE PERFORMANCE AND
CAPACITY OF THE OPPOSITION IS CENTRAL TO THIS
SENATE CAMPAIGN, SIXTEEN MONTHS AGO THE AUSTRALIAN
PEOPLE PASSED JUDGMENT ON OUR OPPONENTS AS A GOVERNMENT;
ON 18 MAY THEY WILL HAVE THEIR FIRST OPPORTUNITY TO
JUDGE THEM AS AN OPPOSITION, I MUST SAY THE PROSPECT
IS A DAUNTING ONE, FOR THE LIFE OF ME I CAN'T DECIDE
WHETHER THEY ARE WORSE IN OPPOSITION OR WORSE IN
GOVERNMENT. AT LEAST THEY CAN'T DO AS MUCH HARM
IN OPPOSITION, IN GOVERNMENT THEY ARE EXPERT IN
DAMAGING THE COUNTRY, BUT IN OPPOSITION THEY HAVE
A POSITIVE GENIUS FOR DAMAGING THEMSELVES,
ON BALANCE I THINK I PREFER THE LATTER, ,/ 7
-7-
I KNOW SOME OF YOU MUST BE AS CONFUSED AS I
AM ABOUT RECENT EVENTS IN THE OPPOSITION PARTIES,
THE FACT IS THAT WE HAVE NEVER HAD A MORE CONFUSED,
MORE DIVIDED, MORE DISCREDITED OR MORE DEBILITATED
OPPOSITION THAN WE HAVE NOW, I THINK WE CAN BEST
APPROACH THEIR PROBLEMS ON A STATE BY STATE BASIS
THAT IS A GOOD SENATE PRINCIPLE, AFTER ALL BUT
THERE ARE ONE OR TWO GENERAL QUESTIONS TO CLEAR UP
FIRST, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH PARTIES BELONG TO THE
OPPOSITION AND WHICH DO NOT? I AM NOT CLEAR WHETHER
THE DLP BELONGS TO THE OPPOSITION, MR ANTHONY
APPARENTLY THINKS IT DOES, BUT SIR CHARLES CUTLER
IN NEW SOUTH WALES THINKS THE DLP IS FINISHED,
NEVERTHELESS, THE DLP HAS MERGED WITH THE COUNTRY
PARTY IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA AND QUEENSLAND, AND WHAT
IS THE POSITION OF THE AUSTRALIA PARTY, WHICH MR SNEDDEN
HAS INVITED TO JOIN FORCES WITH THE LIBERALS?
OF COURSE IT WAS AN EXCELLENT IDEA AND IT WAS WELL
RECEIVED BY EVERYONE IN THE LIBERAL PARTY EXCEPT
MR MALCOLM FRASER, MR FRASER DECLARED THAT THE
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE AUSTRALIA PARTY AND LIBERAL
PARTY WERE " TOTALLY UNBRIDGEABLE". SENATOR
HANNAN SEEMS TO THINK THAT THE DIFFERENCES IN THE
LIBERAL PARTY ARE ALSO TOTALLY UNBRIDGEABLE, I,/ 8
0
SENATOR HANNAN HAS FORMED HIS OWN PARTY TO GET RID OF
THE TRENDIES IN VICTORIA, AND FIR STEELE HALL HAS FORMED
HIS OWN PARTY TO ATTRACT MORE TRENDIES IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA,
I AM STILL NOT SURE WHETHER LIBERAL VOTERS IN QUEENSLAND
WILL BE VOTING FOR THEIR OWN SENATE TEAM OR FOR A JOINT
TICKET WITH THE COUNTRY PARTY OR IS IT THE INATIONAL
COUNTRY PARTY? OR THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE, AS THEY CALL
IT IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA?
I MUST SAY THERE ARE SERIOUS DILEMMAS FOR
OPPOSITION SUPPORTERS IN THIS SITUATION; IF THE DLP
MATES WITH THE COUNTRY PARTY AND THE AUSTRALIA PARTY
MATES WITH THE LIBERALS AND THE LIBERALS MATE WITH THE
COUNTRY PARTY, DOES THIS MEAN THAT THE DLP HAS MERGED
WITH THE AUSTRALIA PARTY? DOES SENATOR HANNAN SUPPORT
THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE? DOES GORDON BARTON GIVE HIS
PREFERENCES TO THE IIATIONAL LIBERAL PARTY? DOES
MALCOLM FRASER SUPPORT STEELE HALL? DOES THE DLP GIVE
ITS PREFERENCE TO CUTLER OR COURT CHARLES THE FIRST
OR CHARLES THE SECOND? IT MAY SIMPLIFY MATTERS IF I
LIST ALL THE OPPOSITION PARTIES, NOT NECESSARILY IN ORDER
OF IMPORTANCE. AT LAST COUNT WE HAD THE LIBERAL PARTY,
THE COUNTRY PARTY, THE LIBERAL COUNTRY LEAGUE, THE
NATIONAL COUNTRY PARTY, THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE, THE
NATIONAL LIBERAL PARTY, THE DLP, THE AUSTRALIA PARTY
AND THE STEELE HALL PARTY, I HEARD MR ANTHONY SAY THE
OTHER DAY THAT HE WANTED A SINGLE ANTI-SOCIALIST ALLIANCE
THROUGHOUT AUSTRALIA. I CAN ONLY SAY THAT AT THE RATE
THINGS ARE GOING, WE'LL SOON HAVE MORE ANTI-SOCIALIST
PARTIES THAN ANTI-SOCIALIST SENATORS. / 9
DOES ANYONE SERIOUSLY SUGGEST THAT THIS
SQUABBLING COLLECTION OF BITTER AND DISAPPOINTED MEN,
THESE BRAWLERS AND BACKBITERSi TRENDIES AND NON-TRENDIES,
PHONY PROGRESSIVES AND UNREPENTANT REACTIONARIES, HAVE
ANY CLAIM TO THE CONFIDENCE OF THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE?
WHO SPEAKS FOR THE OPPOSITION? WHO LEADS THE OPPOSITION?
YOUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS MINE. JUDGING FROM THE PRESS
IN RECENT WEEKS, THEIR MOST PROLIFIC AND CONSISTENT
PROPAGANDIST IS SIR ROBERT M'ENZIES. ONLY LAST WEEK
PlR fICMAHON WAS-LAMENTING IN THE PRESS THAT HE WISHED
HIS PARTY HAD DONE AS MUCH FOR EDUCATION AS WE HAVE.
NIOT LONG AGO HE SAID IT WAS A GREAT PITY THAT HIS
GOVERNMENT HAD NOT ABOLISHED CONSCRIPTION AND SET UP
THE INDUSTRIES ASSISTANCE COMMISSION. I REMIND YOU THAT
WHEN THE LEGISLATION FOR THAT COMMISSION WAS BEFORE THE
PARLIAMENT THE LIBERALS SUPPORTED IT WHILE THEIR SO-CALLED
ALLIES IN THE COUNTRY PARTY OPPOSED IT. AND IF YOU TAKE
THAT OTHER GREAT LANDMARK IN THE GOVERNMENT' S FIRST YEAR
OF OFFICE OUR ADDITIONAL GRANTS TO SCHOOLS IT
WAS THE COUNTRY PARTY THAT SUPPORTED IT WHILE THE LIBERALS
VOTED AGAINST IT. WHAT UNITY! WHAT A COALITION!
WHAT A COMMENTARY ON AN OPPOSITION THAT IN 16 MONTHS
HAS PRODUCED NOT A SINGLE NEW POLICY, NOT A SINGLE FRESH
AND CONSTRUCTIVE IDEA. VIE ALL KNOW WHAT 111R SNEDDEN
IS AGAINST[ HE IS AGAINST EVERYTHING.. BUT WHAT IS
MR SNEDDEN M~? / lo
10
HE'S FOR REDUCED GOVERNMENT'SPENDING, BUT WHAT
GOVERNMENT SPENDING DOES HE WANT TO REDUCE?
HE DOESN'T SAY. HE SIMPLY WANTS US TO SPEND MORE
ON DEFENCE, MORE ON UNNECESSARY SUPERPHOSPHATE BOUNTIES,
MORE ON PRIVATE SCHOOLS THAT ARE ALREADY WELL OFF,
THE CONSISTENT THEME OF THE OPPOSITION IS A NEGATIVE
THEME. THE CONSISTENT VOICE OF THE OPPOSITION IS A
WHINGER'S VOICE. THEY ARE A PARTY OF NARKS AND KNOCKERS
AGAINST EVERYTHING AND IN FAVOUR OF NOTHING.
I BELIEVE THERE IS A CLEAR REASON FOR THE CHRONIC
DISUNITY AND DISARRAY IN THE OPPOSITION PARTIES. AND IT
IS THIS: THEY HAVE NOT ACCEPTED THE FACT OF THEIR DEFEAT.
THEY GO ON BELIEVING THAT THE VERDICT OF THE PEOPLE IN
DECEMBER 1972 WAS A TEMPORARY ABERRATION; THAT SOONER
OR LATER NO MATTER HOW DIVIDED THEIR RANKS, HOW BARREN
THEIR IDEAS, HOW MUDDLED THEIR POLICIES ON BASIC ISSUES
THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE WILL RETURN THEM TO OFFICE. THEY
HAVE A DEEP CONTEMPT, NOT ONLY FOR THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE,
BUT FOR THE GOOD SENSE OF THE PEOPLE. THEY BELIEVE THEY
CAN FLOUT THE CLEARLY EXPRESSED WISH OF THE ELECTORATE FOR
A PROGRAM OF ORDERED CHANGE AND SOCIAL REFORM, FOR
ENLIGHTENED POLICIES TOWARDS OUR NEIGHBOURS, FOR SOCIAL
JUSTICE AT HOME AND MORE MATURE AND INDEPENDENT POLICIES
ABROAD, ,/ 11
11-
THE SENATE HAS BEEN'THE GREAT INSTRUMENT
FOR THIS CAMPAIGN OF OBSTRUCTION. SINCE WE TOOK OFFICE
THE SENATE HAS REJECTED 15 BILLS, DEFERRED ANOTHER
AND AMENDED 21, I LIST THE 15 BILLS THEY HAVE
REJECTED:
COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL TWO BILLS;
CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION;
REPRESENTATION TWO BILLS;
LAND ACQUISITION ( AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY);
SEAS AND SUBMERGED LANDS ( ROYALTY ON MINERALS);
HEALTH INSURANCE;
HEALTH INSURANCE COMMISSION;
AND, FOUR CONSTITUTION ALTERATION BILLS.
IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO FIND A COMMON THEME IN THEIR
OBSTRUCTIVE TACTICS. THE OPPOSITION MAY LACK A COMMON
VOICE BUT IT HAS NEVER LACKED A COMMON CAUSE; AND THAT
CAUSE IS THE DEFENCE OF VESTED INTERESTS. ,/ 12
12-
IN DEFENCE OF THESE VESTED INTERESTS THEY
REJECTED THE DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL ELECTORATES,
THEY COMPLAIN ABOUT INDUSTRIAL UNREST IN THE COMMUNITY,
YET THEY BLOCKED OUR ATTEMPTS TO MODERNISE AND
DEMOCRATISE THE TRADE UNION MOVEMENT AND PROMOTE THE
CONDITIONS FOR GENUINE INDUSTRIAL STABILITY, THEY
SOUGHT TO DENY REPRESENTATION IN THE SENATE TO THE
PEOPLE OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY AND THE AUSTRALIAN
CAPITAL TERRITORY; THEY SOUGHT TO DENY TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT DIRECT ACCESS TO NATIONAL REVENUES AND BORROWINGS,:
THEY PRESERVED FOR FOREIGN MINING INTERESTS THE RIGHT
TO EXPLOIT OUR OFF-SHORE RESOURCES; THEY FOUGIIT TO
PRESERVE THE INEQUITY AND INEFFICIENCY OF AN ANTIQUATED
HEALTH SERVICE, BY SHELVING THE TRADE PRACTICES BILL
THEY LEFT THE DOOR OPEN TO MONOPOLIES AND CARTELS TO FIX
PRICES, ORGANISE CARTELS AND EXPLOIT THE AUSTRALIAN
CONSUMER, BY SHELVING THE AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRY
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BILL THEY BLOCKED THE MOST
EFFECTIVE INSTRUMENT FOR ENSURING AUSTRALIAN CONTROL OF
OUR INDUSTRIES AND DEVELOPING NEW INDUSTRIES, THEY HAVE
LEFT THE DOOR OPEN TO FOREIGN TAKEOVERS AND FOREIGN
CONTROL OF THE AUSTRALIAN ECONOMY, YET FOR ALL THE
LEGISLATION I HAVE MENTIONED THE GOVERNMENT HAD A
CLEAR MANDATE FROM THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE,
13
DESPITE THE EFFORTS OF THE SENATE TO OBSTRUCT
OUR REFORMS, THERE IS ONE AREA IN WHICH THEY ARE POWERLESS,
THEY HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO PREVENT US PUTTING OUR REFERENDUM
PROPOSALS TO THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE AT THE SAME TIME AS
THE SENATE ELECTIONS, THIS WAS NOT FOR WANT OF TRYING,
THE SENATE WAS DETERMINED THAT WHATEVER THE SENATE MIGHT
THINK OF OUR REFERENDUMS, THE PEOPLE WOULD BE DENIED
AN OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE THE ISSUES FOR THEMSELVES,
THE CONSTITUTION, HOWEVER, ENABLES REFERENDUMS TO BE
PUT TO THE PEOPLE EVEN IF THE SENATE OBSTRUCTS THEM.
THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING, OUR REFERENDUMS ARE
DESIGNED TO GIVE A NEW DEAL TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND
TO ENTRENCH IN THE CONSTITUTION THE BASIC DEMOCRATIC
RIGHTS OF THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE, I SUMMARIZE WHAT
OUR PROPOSALS SEEK TO ACHIEVE:
1. i, To ENTRENCH THE RIGHT TO VOTE FOR ALL
ADULT CITIZENS IN BOTH STATE AND AUSTRALIAN
ELECTIONS,
2, To ESTABLISH THE DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLE FOR
BOTH THE AUSTRALIAN AND STATE PARLIAMENTS
THAT MEMBERS SHOULD REPRESENT EQUAL NUMBERS
OF PEOPLE,
3, To ENSURE THAT STATE UPPER HOUSES ARE ELECTED
DIRECTLY BY THE PEOPLE, / 14
1' 4
4. TO GRANT CITIZENS IN THE l'IlORTHERN TERRITORY
AND THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY THE
RIGHT TO VOTE IN REFERENDUMS.
TO ENSURE THAT THE PARLIAMENT OF AUSTRALIA
REFLECTS THE POPULAR WILL AT THE TIME-THAT THE
PEOPLE OF AUSTRALIA DETERMINE THEIR GOVERNMENT,
THE SECOND BROAD OBJECTIVE OF OUR REFERENDUM
PROPOSALS IS TO BALANCE THE FUNCTIONS AND FINANCES. OF
THE THREE LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT. THREE FURTHER PROPOSALS
WILL REMOVE CONSTITUTIONAL OBSTACLES TO THE RATIONAL
CO-ORDINATION OF INTERGOVERNMENT RELATIONS.
THEY WILL ENABLE US:-
1. TO FACILITATE THE REFERENCE OF LEGISLATIVE
POWERS FROM THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT TO THE
STATES AND VICE VERSA IF BOTH-AGREE THAT THE
OTHER LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT WOULD EXERCISE
THOSE POWERS MORE EFFECTIVELY.
2. TO ENHANCE THE ROLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT BY
EXTENDING THE PROVISIONS IN THE CONSTITUTION
WHICH GOVERN THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT' S
RELATIONSHIP WITH STATE GOVERNMENTS TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS AS WELL.
3. To INVOLVE THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE MORE CLOSELY
IN DETERMINING THE BALANCE OF FUNCTIONS BY
FACILITATING ALTERATIONS TO THE CONSTITUTION.
15
NOW TWO OF THESE PROPOSALS THE ONE FOR SIMULTANEOUS
ELECTIONS OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
AND THE ONE FACILITATING AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION
WERE RECOMMENDED 1C YEARS AGO IN THE REPORT OF THE
CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SET UP UNDER SIR ROBERT
MENZIES. THEY COULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE PEOPLE
AND THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE PEOPLE AT ANY
TIME SINCE THEN. THE PROPOSAL TO FACILITATE AMENDMENTS
TO THE CONSTITUTION WAS CLEARLY EXPLAINED IN THE REVIEW
COMMITTEE'S REPORT IN THESE TERMS:
A CLEAR MAJORITY OF THE ELECTORS WHO
VOTE AT A REFERENDUM ARE IN FAVOUR OF A PROPOSED
LAW, THEIR WILL SHOULD NOT BE FRUSTRATED BECAUSE
SEPARATE MAJORITIES OF ELECTORS HAVE NOT BEEN
OBTAINED IN A MAJORITY OF THE STATES, IT IS,
IN THE COMMITTEE'S OPINION, MORE IN ACCORD
WITH DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLE AND THE DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE FEDERATION THAT IT SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT
TO OBTAIN SEPARATE MAJORITIES IN AT LEAST ONE
HALF OF THE NUMBER OF STATES': / 1G
1G
THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF OUR REFERENDUM.
INSTEAD OF REQUIRING A MAJORITY IN FOUR STATES OUT
OF SIX, A MAJORITY OF ALL THE PEOPLE. THE TWO THIRDS
MAJORITY IS UNREASONABLY HIGH. IN THE WORDS OF THE
CONSTITUTION REVIEW COMMITTEE, IT MEANS THAT
" FOR EVERY STATE IN WHICH THERE IS AN ADVERSE VOTE
THERE MUST BE A FAVOURABLE VOTE IN TWO STATES
A CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE HAS TO BE SUPPORTED NOT
ONLY BY A MAJORITY OF STATES BUT BY TWO THIRDS
OF THE STATES."' / 17
17-
OUR REFERENDUM ON EQUAL ELECTORATES THAT IS,
ELECTORATES HAVING THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE RESULTS
FROM THE SENATE'S FAILURE LAST YEAR TO PASS OUR
LEGISLATION FOR ELECTORAL REFORM, THE SENATE TWICE
REJECTED OUR BILL TO REDUCE THE PRESENT DISPARITY
IN THE SIZE OF ELECTORATES, HIAD THIS LEGISLATION BEEN
PASSED OUR REFERENDUM WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY,
IN THE SAME WAY, IF THE PREMIERS LAST YEAR HAD ACCEPTED
OUR PROPOSAL TO GIVE LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIRECT ACCESS
TO THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES OF THE NATION, OUR
REFERENDUM ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY,
EVERY ONE OF OUR REFERENDUM PROPOSALS IS A CONSEQUENCE
OF THE FAILURE OF THE STATES OR THE SENATE TO AGREE
TO MEASURES FOR WHICH THE GOVERNMENT HAD A MANDATE,
OR THE FAILURE OF OUR PREDECESSORS TO PUT REFORMS
TO THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE WHICH WERE APPROVED IG YEARS
AGO BY AN ALL-PARTY COMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION, / 1I;
1
So LET ME SUMMARISE THE ISSUES AT STAKE ON
18 MAY, THEY ARE CLEAR AND SIMPLE ISSUES AND THEY
INVOLVE QUITE BASIC QUESTIONS OF DEMOCRACY, HAS THE
SENATE THE RIGHT TO OBSTRUCT A PROGRAM CLEARLY ENDORSED
BY THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE? CLEARLY IT HAS NOT,
SHOULD A SENATE ELECTED IN 1967 AND 1970 BE ALLOWED TO
OBSTRUCT A GOVERNMENT ELECTED IN 1972? CLEARLY IT SHOULD NOT,
SHOULD AN OPPOSITION GUILTY OF THIS OBSTRUCTION
AN OPPOSITION BEREFT OF LEADERSHIP AND DEVOID OF PURPOSE
BE ENCOURAGED TO PURSUE ITS OBSTRUCTIONIST TACTICS
FURTHER? IT SHOULD NOT, SHOULD A SENATE THAT
HAS DONE ITS BEST TO PREVENT THE PEOPLE DECIDING
BASIC QUESTIONS OF DEMOCRACY BE ENTITLED TO THE
PEOPLE'S CONFIDENCE? IT SHOULD NOT, / 19
19
THESE ARE NOT ACADEMIC OR TECHNICAL QUESTIONS,
THEY AFFECT THE ESSENTIAL RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE
AND THE PEOPLE ON 18 MAY WILL BE ABLE TO DECIDE THEM,
I LOOK FORWARD TO THIS CAMPAIGN, PERHAPS, LIKE ME,
YOU HAVE FOUND SENATE ELECTIONS IN THE PAST SOMEWHAT
ARID AND POINTLESS AFFAIRS, THE REASON HAS BEEN
THAT NO CRUCIAL ISSUES WERE INVOLVED; NO GOVERNMENT'S
FUTURE WAS AT STAKE; NO BROAD POLITICAL PRINCIPLE
WAS TO BE RESOLVED, ON 13 MAY THE REAL ISSUE,
THE REAL PRINCIPLE, WILL BE UNMISTAKABLE, IT IS
WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT OF THIS COUNTRY IS TO BE
RESPONSIBLE TO THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED IT, OR
WHETHER IT IS* TO REMAIN AT THE MERCY OF A SENATE
ELECTED YEARS BEFORE, AND DOMINATED BY THOSE
WHO HAVE FORFEITED ALL CLAIM TO BE A UNITED AND
CREDIBLE OPPOSITION.