PRIME MINISTER' S SPEECH AT THE SANDGA'TE BOWLING CLUB,
BRISBANE, 3 OCTOBER 1975
Well, ladies and gentlemen, it was some months
ago that Denis Murphy wrote to me and said will you
launch my book on T. J. Ryan? I want to make that plain
from the outset because this visit was arranged a long
time ago in principle;, the date wasn't necessarily
set Some people will be cynical enough to think
that I mnight1--be here f or some political purpose. I resent
that sort of insinuation( interjection: he's not here
tonight). I'm very glad to be here at the Sandgate Bowls
Club because I've never been on this side of the lagoon.
I would have lost count of all the times I've been'right
round it and looked across, and at last I've made it.
And I thank the presidents very much for. being so gracious
to me, but to all of you. These are excellent premises,
and I can compliment you on the way you look after your
members and guests. Thank you very much indeed.
Now, I've been with Denis Murphy with various
audiences over the last few years at the Homestead the
only time, I want to make it plain to you I ever. go
to the Homestead is to make speeches; I wouldn't go for
any other purpose. On this occasion, of course, it's
entirely a social and literary occasion. I love
li * terary lunches and academic dinners. So naturally
I brought along, I got leave to come f rom Fred Daly,
because we've been in Parliament for over 22 years now,
next month I think it'll be 23 years in my case
but it's 31 years in his he's the father of the
Parliament and he treats us all as wayward children.
Those on our side, of course,. we instinctively love himari-
d those on the other side do as they're told. It has
warm--. ed my heart to see the way you've responded when his
nat:-e was mentioned anybody that can equal Clem and
Sylvia Jones in applause is doing pretty well.
I'm here tonight not to support Denis Murphy
as a candidate,. and he has been an outstanding candidate,
but to support him as an author. I regard him as one of
the finest young men in Australia. He qualified himself
to be a university lecturer by his own efforts he didn't
have a silver spoon, as they say, or whatever it is
and in Queensland you need a pretty long spoon. But he
qualified himself in a very competitive field and I
don't know where he finds the time to conduct so many other
activities. He' s written several books; they are excellent
books. The Department of History in the University of
Queensland is outstanding in Australia because of its
concern with Australian history. You know, whenI used to
go to university, people would be a bit inclined to say that
Australian history wasn't really a subject that you could
learn at university. But the University of Queensland has
disproved that. Arind there's another field where I think the
University of * Queensland Press is outstanding.' More than
any other publisher in Australia it publishes Australian
verse. Now we have some good history here and we write
some good verse. We have very good politicians in the
British de-mocratic tradition. I mean from time to time, I'm not
saying that they're all..
But of course: I always remember the good times, I talk
about the best. And there have beenL soine very good ones.
And also the verse, and the literat[_ ure we produce in
Australia is equal to any produced anywhere in the
English-speaking world. We ought to be pleased.
I am very happy to be at the launching of another
publication of the University of Queensland Press.
You'll notice that I'm using ' press'; I'm praising the
press in a very specialised sense.
Now Denis Murphy has had a most interesting
and admirable subject for this biography. Whatever they
might say about the reception that the press in the wider
sense gives the Australian Labor Party there's no
question the way historians regard it,~ because everybody
who writes about Australian politics this century,
writes about it in the context of what the Labor Party
has done or has aimed to do. If one looks to the past,
everybody, whatever his politics, would acknowledge
that the Labor party has been the creative and dynamic
force in Australian public life. Now people don't
necessarily believe it at any particular time they
didn't believe it when it was happening in the past.
But when it'S been achieved, when the, look back, they
all say, that is., there is nothing when people look at
Australian politics, which-: they identify with anti-Labor
politicians, or anti-Labor Governments. It's all been
in terms of what Labor politicians or Labor governments
have done. One of the charming things, reading Ryan"
is the way that in the second decade of this century all the
things were said about his government and about himself,
which are said by his successors today. All the terms
of abuse were already being used disloyal, treacherous,
treasonable, anti-monarch, and disloyal, everything like
this. The only phrase of all the ont-s which are used
about us now which was, which is with all the terms which
are used about us now, were all used in T. J. Ryan's day.
The only one that they used to use about him which we,
never copped was the word ' bolshevik'. But otherwise the
terms of abuse are precisely the same; it's most comforting
Those were the days when in Queensland the Premiers , in stead
of just standing off and hurling abuse , decided to go and
get into the action themselves. And two of Queensland's
Premiers-the ablest of them this century, Ryan and Theodore
went into the House of Representatives. Ryan died at
there is no question that if he'd lived a normal 20 years
or even more that you would have expected him to have in
Parliament he would have been Prime Minister of Australia.
Now Theodore went in in a bad time, bad economic time,
universal depression throughout the world. But everybody
now acknowledges that Theodore was way ahead of his time;
he was the only person who was a Chancellor or a Treasurer
who read Keynes and all those people that were; I mean we've
gone beyond Keynes now,. but he was* way ahead, the rigours of the
depression would have been very much less if they'd been a
few more people that had heeded Theodore, the former Premier of
Queensland, who became Federal Treasurer. These were very great
men, and of course, previously Griffith and so on in the last
century were very great men, Premiers of Queensland who
went into Federal af fairs. GriffEith, of course, was a
Minister and then in the High Court, t~ he first Chief
Justice, and a very great one; great Premier, great
literary man too, incidentally, and first Chief Justice.
You've done some great things in this State, but you've
done them in so far as you've identified with Australia
as a whole. I've never believed that Queenslanders were
different from the rest of Australia; where you're good
it's because you're Australians too.
And perhaps I might be forgiven if I made one
particular illustration of what I mean there, because
the week before last the arrangements had been made here
in Brisbane, in the Administrative Offices -the Premier
was there, and a few other Premiers, and I myself and
somebody on behalf of the Opposition in the Federal
Parliament -we were all there and we agreed that we would
meet in Melbourne the week before last, you know last
week; Wednesday, Thursday, Friday last week, Clem Jones,
the Premier, the Leader of the Opposition all of us were
to be down there. This was all arranged in June; it was
to be a Constitutional Convention and suddenly, right at
the end, it was decided up here that you wouldn't go,
and the reason was because at the Constitutional Convention
we were going to talk about local government, It was
on the agenda, arnd it was on the agenda because when the
Convention was first suggested back in 1972, there was a
House of Representatives election imminent and we said
that we would have a Convention but only on condition
that local government was represented at it as well.
Because these days it would be absurd to look at the
Constitutional arrangements in Australia and think that
they were matters solely for the Federal Government and the
State Governments. There are many things that the local
government bodies in Australia need to do; if they don't
do them, or if they can't do them well enough, then our
com. munity suffers. So we insisted that local government be
on the agenda, that was decided at the Sydney Convention, of course,
two years ago and it was again to be on the agenda for
Melbourne last week. And because it was there , the Liberal
Premiers and the Country Party Premier wouldn't go; they
didn't want to be seen to vote against the interests of
local government. But my Government believes that it is
important that that sphere of government also be mentioned
in the Constitution and that local government be given the
wherewithall, be given the opportunity, to do the things
that need to be done on a regional, or local or community basis.
Well~ that's why they didn't turn up, at the Convention.
But they were all gathered, the absentees, on the other
side of the road; -they were all in-Melbourne. They gathered
on the other side of the road and they issued a statement
on federalism. The significance is that it was a statement
on taxation and you in Queensland will realise the implications
of that statement because the core of it is to abandon uniform
taxation and to say that everywhere in Australia you will pay
two lots of tax one lot of income tax to the Federal
Government, and the other lot of income tax Ito the
State Government. ( Inter-jection: " Fraser's folly")
Well, I appreciate the phraseology I said that
everywhere in Australia you'd pay two lots of taxthat's
rnotright, in Canberra they'll only pay one lot,
they'll only be paying the Federal'tax, and they'll get
out of the other tax entirely, and the reason for that
is that the Federal Parliament can only impose taxes on
condition that those taxes are equal throughout Australia.
That is. the Federal Parliament couldn't pass a special
tax for" Canberra to bring it up to what any of the
other States were paying. So if you have two lots of
income tax, the Federal one and the State one,-the
people in Canberra will be overjoyed. When I retire
I'll go to live there along, the road, admittedly, but
it'd be a good place to retire, because I wouldn't have to
pay that second tax. But I don't think the people will cop
it because Queenslanders still will recall in many cases,
and those Who don't remember it will easily find it out,
and read about it, that in the days in Australia, that is
until 1942, when there was Federal income tax, and also in
every State a State income tax the taxes in Queensland
were higher than in any other part~ of Australia, and it
was because of that that so many people invested, and
employed and went to live in the southern States. And
Queensland's industries have never caught up because of
that tax. Queensland being an extensive State, a State
which has to have schools, and hospitals and other public
services throughout this very large area, the second
largest State in Australia -but only a third in populationthey
had to pay more to get Government services for people
anywhere where they lived in the State. By contrast
in Victoria, a compact State, the smallest of the mainland
States, the second largest in population of the
Australian States, their tax was lowest, because you don't
have to spread Government services over such a large area.
There are many more people able to use every centre of
Government service. So in those days, two taxes: Queenslanders
paid the highest tax in Australia, and they had to do that,
and even then couldn't get,... one must admit,-as good schools,
for instance, as were provided in the other States. Now
that is the core of this policy of federalism, bringing a
double tax system, instead of a uniform tax system, and the
comparison is made with Canada. Now I'm damn glad the
comparison has been made, because it's very easy for people
to see what the population of the Canadian provinces is, and
what the tax rates in the Canadian provinces is. And
the most populous, the most prosperous provinces in Canada.
Ontario, British Colombia,... they pay, they charge the lowest
provincial income tax; and the smallest, in population, or
the-largest in area, the poorest of the States, you know to
put it bluntlyof the provinces there, they pay the highest
taxes. Now this is just the wrong way you'd want to have it.
It ought to be possible for us as one nation to see that
whatever a person does, wherever he lives, governments
provide the things which governments have to provide of
equal standard. If you go to a new place you shouldn't"
have to wait until your family has grown up or has left
the district before standards in that district become good enough.
If you live in a run-down area you shouldn't have to
bear, unaided, the replenishment or the improvment, the
replacement of the standards for the things which
gJovernments -have to provide. It's important that as one
nation we should see that wherever Australians live they
are able to get as good schools, as good hospitals, or
as good public services as Australians get anywhere else.
' The only way to do that is to pool the resources of the
nation and have themi spent where they are needed * most.
Now, it's true enough, people say, say about the United
States; there are State income taxes there; but you
look at the United States. It's very eVenly developed.
There are as many people on the Wiest coast in California
as on the East coast in New York. There are as many
people up in the north, say in Illinois, as there are
down in the sou * th, such as in Texas. It's equally
taxable, it's equally prosperous. There are patches
which are much less prosperous but north and south, east
and west, the place is very even. But you look in
Australia, it's in the south-eastern part, the part say,
Melbourne and Sydney, or if you like to stretch it,
from Adelaide to Brisbane and the part down below that
lineuduch is the prosperous part. The rest of Queensland
or South Australia, or Western Australia or New South
Wales is very much more expensive to run. Now the core
of what the Liberals are putting to the people now should be
seen~ by the people. And I don't believe they'll have a
bar of it. I've always said~ when there was an election,
or when one was in the offing, and the Liberals had to be
precise, people would' see the catches. It's no use just
abusing us because of unemployment, or inflation. Sure
the-v'Ie bad; but there'Is no country in Europe or North
Ainerica where they,, aren't just as bad. They're much worse
than when we came in, but they're much worse in all those
other countries than they were three years ago you can't
bl-e us alone; you don't blame Nixon for that alone;.
or Ford or Wilson or Schmidt or Pompidou or Giscard d'Estaingor
Franco. It happens everywhere in the West, everywhere.
And of course our opponents may parry by saying well we did
it; things are crook, and every political party in opposition
says it about the government in every country in the west,
one has to admit that. If we were in opposition I think
we'd be ' itaking out a very. good claim against the government.
When you have to face the people there has to be an
alternative put, and there can be no doubt that when they
start in our O? position to specify-what they would do if they
were given the chance you'll see the catch. And I don't
believe that anybody in Queensland would want to go back to
the stage of double ta * xation, because it's only the Liberal
Party in Sydney and Melbourne that has sold this policy
to the Federal leaders. You'll notice, Gordon Chalk, he's
very unenthusiastic about it; so's Kevin Cairns -the first
time I've ever mentioned him on a platform. But
I don't propose to tal= k anything about platforms or policies.
It's once they sta-rt being precise, you can see the catch.
Then they were talkin-g about tax indexation a month ago.
Hocw would you have ax indexation on State income taxes as well
as Federal income taxes; what could the Federal people
do about tax indexation on the State income tax?
Now some people say that there will be in a few weeks,
a couple of months, an election. All I can say to you is
that before the end of June next year there will be
an election, at least, for half the Senate, there must
be. Now the Senators who are there and were elected
to go up to the end of next June, they will . be there until
the end of next June; whenever there is an election for
half the Senate the new Senators to replace them would not
take office until the 1 July. But the interesting thing
is that at the moment it is a flawed Senate, or as Jim Killen says,
a tainted Senate. There are two people there; I don't
know who owns them, but they don t belong to us. But
they succeeded people who the people elected as members
of the Labor Party. And let's remember, back at the last
elections in May last year, not only was there a very
large majority of voters for the Labor Party in the House
of Representatives we've a comfortable majority there,
but the Labor candidates for the Senate got more votes
than did the candidates of the Liberal Party, the
Country Party, the Liberal Movement, the-D. L. P. remember
the all of them combined, every party combined,
got fewer votes than we got in the Senate. But we haven't
got a majority of members in it, and to get things through
the Senate you have to get a majority. If the Senate
is evenly divided the thing doesn't go through. Now in
those circumstances, of course, it would be absurd for a
Senate not to pass legislation we put up. Now some people
say that the Senate will reject the Budget. Well if that
took place) it would be very interesting to fight a
campaign on what sort of Budget they would put instead.
It's not the Senate's job to reject Budgets; they can't
initiate money bills, the Constitution says so; they
Scan't amend money bills, the Constitution says so.
The Victorian Constitution says that the Upper House can
reject money bills, the Australian Constitution doesn't
use that word at all, so some of the comparisons made down
there have no validity in our situation. Now, I musn't
K speculate any further, because I don't,. you know, I want
to catch people with their pants down. It's an attitude
which appeals to people that boarded at the best schools.
If there was an election on the grounds that the Senate had
rejected the Budget. then the election would turn around what
sort of Budget woil; the Senate have passed? What sort of
Budget would the Liberals want? And that would be very
intriguing to find out. Because I don't believe that it is
possible in the circum. stances applying in Australia or in
comparable countries today to bring down a better Budget
than Queensland's Bill Hayden introduced. If I may draw
a comparison, he's a person very much like Denis Murphy; a
person who, without any inherited advantages, has qualified
himself superbly for an important role in this community,
and instead of just looking after his own selfish interests,
looks after the community and serves it with might and main.