il L
PIESS SiTA', E'T BY TI} PR~ I IIWISTER
Mi E. G. VIiITLiAM C, N. P.
. LAUT'C,' S1TON 23 JU,' N 1975
TiHE NATIONAL ISSUE Mii', FRASER IGNORIES
The Leader of the Opposition has asserted the national significance
of the Bass by-election but only in general, hypothetical terms.
I agree that the electors of Bass have an opportunity to express
a view on a range of national policies and national issues.
They are not general or hypothetical. They are specific issues
which directly affect the well-being of Tasmania, not least the
electorate of Bass and the welfare of all the people living here.
These issues were brought into sharp focus by last week's
Premiers' Conference and related events on the mainland. Those
events raise issues which Nr Fraser can no longer sidestep or
ignore. They are central to this by-election, because they are
central to the whole question of good government of Australia.
For the first time since Federation, arrangements between the
iederal and Tasmanian Governments have enabled Tasmania to
provide standards and services equal to those of the larger States.
The approach of the Australian Labor Government is that through new
co-operative arrangements between the Australian Government and the
State Governments, we shall be able to provide equality of standards,
equality of services, ecuality between States, and equality between
regions within the States.
In pursuit of this objective, there are now over fifty programs
for which the Aus-ralian Government makes specific purpose payments
to Tasmaniao For these, some $ 115 million is provided in the
current year. For specific purposes alone, the per capita payment
to Tasmania in 1974/ 75 was $ 284 compared with the national average
of 0220.
The biggest burden on all State budgets have been schools,
hospitals and railways.
As Miinister for Education and Science in the Mciliahon Government,
Mr Fraser was the foremost opponent of our proposal for a
Schools Commission, the establishment of which has transformed the
outlook and opportunities for education in this country.
He opposed it on the grounds of centralism precisely the same
ground on which the Liberals now oppose our proposals regarding
hospitals and railways. Yet would any Liberal, any State Premier,
or even Mr Fraser himself, now seek to dismantle our education program?
Right up to the deadline or beyond the Liberals stalled on
iMedibank, in the Senate and in their States. Now, the action of
the Legislative Council of South Australia, the most unrepresentative
and undemocratic legislative chamber in any parliamentary system in
the world, in rejecting the agreement between the Federal Government
and the South Australian government for the transfer of the South
Australian railway system, manifests in its grossest form the
obstructionism and negativism of the Liberal approach wherever
their numbers enable them to act. o../ 2
-2-
We can only judge how the Liberals would act by their performance
in the Senate, the States where they hold power, and now,
so blatantly and destructively, in the Upper House in South
Australia. Co-operation between the Australian and Tasmanian Labor Governments;
on Federal-State financial relations, on Medibank, on the transfer
of railways, will place Tasmania's finances on a permanently sound
foundation.
All this is placed in jeopardy by Liberal obstruction
The contrast between Liberal obstructionism and Labor's efforts.
to find co-operative, constructive solutions is the real national
issue which Mr Fraser can no longer ignore.
L