Embargoed until delivery A~,, USTRALIA
PRIME MINISTER
FOR PRESS 11 MAY 1977
ADDRESS AT HOBART CAMPAIGN LUNCHEON
I should begin by saying something about the air conLrollers
strike which has so gravely harmed Tasmania over the last
weeks, the most recent of a number of irresponsible strikes
that have completely disregarded the hardship that they imposed
on large sections of the Australian community.
A large number of people have been harmed by the air controllers
strike, because of school holidays, Australians overseas who
had plan., ed on returning to Australia, and the normal travelling
public. The air life-lines of our nation are being stifled by a
few selfish men who are trying to circumvent the accepted procedures
for settling disputes in this country.'
Australians are sick and tired of small, affluent and powerful
minorities using industrial muscle in the attempt to impose
their will on. the whole community, and this is precisely the
trend which tne air controllers strike exemplifies.
The air controllers make twice as much money as the average
Australian and thsy are now demanding a 36% increase. Perhaps
they think that this is modest compared to their initial
demand of 76%.
By their actions these few men are posing the most direct possible
threat to the jobs of over 30,000 Australians. The Australian
public will no longer tolerate a continuance of this sort of
disruptive strike, and neither will the Australian Government.
The air controllers strike, witn all its selfishness, with all
its disregard for the interests of the overwhelming majority of
other Australians, is the strongest possible argument for the
Industrial Relations Bureau legislation that the Government
will soon be bringing down.
We are now all coming to realise that every encroachment on the
well-established procLedures for settling disputes only leads to
further encroachments. Powerful vested interest groups must
realise that we are living in a civilised community one in
which there are rights and obligations. not a jungle in which
the most intransigent get their own way no matter what the uost
to others. / I make
I make one final appeal to the air controllers. End the hardship
and misery being caused to tens of thousands. Return to work and
let the highest arbitral tribunal in the land assess the merits of
the case.
The air controllers have nothing to fear if their case has ierit,
the full bench of the A--bitration Commission no doubt will recognise
it. Let all parties accept the verdict of the ful. l benich, and resolve
this dispute by reasoned argument, not by coercion.
Any decision which is made by the full bench will be supported by the,,
Government with all the powers available to it. This strike, like
so many strikes in recent years, has emphasised that Tasmanian
industry and Tasmanian peoplev do have special problems. Problems
arising from the costliness and vulnerability of communications with
other states. I can assure you that the Government is well aware of
your special position, and the policies we have initiated in the
first eighteen months of office amply demonstrate this awareness,
Wle have decided to relocate the Antarctic division at Kingston,
involving an investment of over $ 7 million and the transfer here
of over one hundred permanent positions. The Secretaria'L: iof the
Advisory Council on inter-governmental relations will be established
in Hobart this year, emphasising our concern to protect the interests
of the smaller states in our federal system.
To enable Tasjmanian business to compete more favourably on interstate
markets, we have introduced a freight equalisation scheme, which this
year will involve a total subsidy of about $ 16. W. e have authorised
the importation of four aircraft for the Tasmanian air freight trade.
Two of these are for a new service to be operated by IPEC, which,
subject to a High Court challange which has been made, will provide
considerable extra capacity for the Bass Strait route,
As a result of our concern for the unique problems of Tasmanian
industry, an inquiry commenced last December under SiiL Bede Callaghan
~. nto the structure of Tasmanian industry and development. I expact tc
receive an interim report within-the next few weeks.
Other measures which we have introducud specifically to assist
Tasmania have included a grant to assist the establishment and
management of the internationally acclaimed South West National Park,
the payment of some $ 36 million to restore the Tasman bridge and
related works, continued support for the Apple and Pear Stabilisation
Scheme at a cost of over 53 million this finanicial year, and the
establishment of the Australian Mlaritime College. These programmes
taken together provide ample proof that the confidence which Tasmaniarns
showed in us at: the last election when for the first time in memory
every electorate returned a Liberal Mlember was not misplaced.
I would now like to turn to the referpndums which Australian--will
be voting on in ten days time. It-is important that we talk about
this ' because the success of the referendums will make a major
contribution to the constitutional development of our country.
The foir constitutional referendums propose fair, sensible a nd just
changes to reform the constitution, and I am sure they will btw
successful. In the past, people have tended to vote No on
constitutional questions.. Out these referendums are different.
They do not seek more power for politicians. They do not seek more
power for Canberra. They do not weaken the statea. These referendums
meet all the requirements Australians have set for constitutional change.
/ The proposals
-3
The proposals have been carefully considered. The principles of
all four referendums were adopted overwhelmingly at the Constitutional:
Convention here in Hobart last year, which included representativer
of the Commonwealth, all the states, local government and all the
major parties. The changes are suoported on a bi-partisan basis by
all the major federal parties. Each of the four proposals passed
in the House of Representatives without a single dissenting voice,
and all were supported by all five Tasmanian Members Michael
Hodgman, Ray Groom, Bruce Goodluck, Kevin Newman and Mlax Burr.
Each waas passed by an overwhelming majority in the Senate,,
including support for all four proposals from Senator Brian Archer
of Tasmania.
Putting the four proposals forward is evidence of our concern to
make necessary constitutional refurms, and of our Lsupport for the
Constitutional Convention which was initiated, -and this should be
emphasised, by the states.
The four changes are these. First, that elections for the Senate
and House of Representatives should be held.' simultaneously. It is
simply common sense that elections always be hold at the same time,
and that the only tire you have to vote in a federal election is
when you have to choose Australia's Government. This proposal
means we will not have to vote in as many federal elec'Gions.
Otherwise we could have as many as four elections in the neit
four years. Simultaneous elections also proter~ t the smaller states
like Tasmania. When there are separate elections for the House of
Representatives, political leaders will be tempted to confine their
campaign to New South Wales and Victoria which have over 60% of
the seats. But if there is at the samc time an election for the
Senate, in which all szates are equally represented, the campaign
must be extended with vigour to all states.
It is sometimes said that simultaneous elections can be achieved * by
bringing the House of Representatives election forward to coincide
with that o'l the Senate. Unless the constitution is changed, the
only way to bring the elections tcgether would be repeatedly to cut
short the term of the House of Representatives. The three year term
is however aLready relatively short, one of the oiiortest
parliamentary terms in the democratic world. Further reducing it,
would damage good government. Most importantly, this proposol will
maintain and strengthen the Senate and its capacity to prctect the
states. If this proposal is not passed, the future of the Senate will
ultimately he put in jeopardy.
It was an accident that in 1975 there were bills enabling the Governor
General to dissolve both Houses and make them both face the people.
Had the Senate not been able to face the people themselves, so that
their actions might be judged, a nuiliber of Senators would not have
agreed to block supply. This attitude was soundly based because any
House of Parliament that sends another House to the polls while not
itself being judged by the people, will not Curviv2. I myself woul. d
never have sought the blocking of supply from a Senate that wculd not
itself have also faced the people of Australia. The only way, other
than double dissolution, to ensure that the Senate does face the voters
is to have a normal half-Senate election, but that can only be held
every third year. For two years out of every three, the Senate
/ could not,
-4
could not, even if it uanted to, face the people to explain and
justify its actions, The Senate's powers are great, and anyone
who uants them to remain a living reality will campaign for
simultaneous elections, and vote for them on Sa-Lurday week.
For, unless the present system is changed, I can foresee tuo
alternative consequences. The S--nate might refuse to check a bad
Government unless there happened to exist the circumstances which
would permit a double dissolution. Alternatively, if Senators
were to make the House of Representatives go to an election
without facing the people themselvesy, then there would be a
public outcry against the Senate which could lead to the Senate's
powers being restricted or aboli shed. Either of these alternatives
would be bad for democratic government bad for the states, bad
for Australia. That is why it is important that this referendum
be passed.
A* No vote on May 21 is a vote for the ultimate des truction of the
Senate and one of the world's best constitutions,
The second referendum proposal is that whenever a Senator dies
or resigns, he will be replaced, for the remainder of his term,
of office, by a member of the same party. This will guarantee that
your choice of parties for the Senate cannot be altered by accident
or design; Under the constitution as it now stands, a Senate
vacancy can completely change the party balance. It is fundamental
to oui: democracy that only the people should determine the balance
of the parties in the Senate. Once this proposal is accepted, the
peoples choice will be preserved until they have an opportunity to
make another choice at the next slection.
The third referendum proposal is that voters in the Australian
Capital Territory and Northorn Territory should have a vote in
all futurc referendums. This is 2 fundamental right all other
Australians have. I know of no rational or reasonable argument for
denying Territorial vciers this basic right. Territorial voters
have the same obligations as other Australians. They pay taxes,
they are obliged to observe the laws of the Commonwealth, they vote
for members of parliament, and the outcome of referendumns -effect
them as much-as they do other Australians.
The fourth and final referendum proposal is to set a retiring age
for federal justices. High Court.' justices would retire at
and the retirement age for other federal court Judges would be
determinoed by Parliament. The proposal does not affect the telrms
of judg'--s already appointed t%-oth e bench. fMost~ jobs have retirement
ages, and for good reason. Judges are as affected by old age as
the rest of us. It ic-only fair that after the age of
responsibility should be handed over to younger people,
This is even more important now that the new system of federal
family courts has been set up.
All four referendum proposals are fair, just, and reasonable,
They meet all the requirements for success. They have been
extensively considered. They have the support of all major
federal parties. Thay do not involve more power for Canberra,
and they will make our constitution work better. / The polls
5
The polls show that all referendums have significant support in
all states. But those people who think the referendum propositions
should be passed, cannot afford to be complacent. The referendums
will not pass themselves,
The proposals were first put forward at the Hobart Constitutional.
Convention, and in this respect the people of Hobart and Tasmania
have a special responsibility to ensure their success.
All people who care about constitutional and political reform in
this country have a responsibility to work for the referendums.
If we all do this, then the referendums will be passed, and we
will have a constitution which serves Australia's needs more
effectively,