PRIME MINISTER
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY EMARGOED-UNTIL DELIVERY
SPEECH BY THE PRIME MINISTR OF AUSTRALIA,
THE HON R J L BAN" E AC MP
DINNER HOSTED BY THE LORD MAYOR OF LONDON
MANSION HOUSE, LONDON 21 JUNE 1989
My Lord Mayor,
Your Royal Highnesses,
Your Excellencies,
My Lords,
Aldermen, Sheriffs, Ladies and Gentlemen
That great citizen of London, Dr Johnson, declared more than
two hundred years ago that the man who was tired of London
was tired of life itself.
I have visited London on many occasions as a student on my
way through Oxford, as a trade unionist, and as Prime
Minister and I have never tired of it, nor failed to be
fascinated by some new discovery in it.
But perhaps this is not so surprising in a city which, as
you have said, Lord Mayor, this year celebrates the 800th
anniversary of the appointment of the first Lord Mayor of
London by King Richard I.
May I say there is something very fitting about that the
historic association of Richard the Lion Heart with this
lion-hearted city.
I congratulate you, Lord Mayor, on this very notabl e
anniversary, and I thank you for this opportunity to address
such a distinguished gathering in this historic house.
Last year we in Australia, of course, celebrated our
Bicentenary. Australia was-settled in the era of the great
revolution in America and indeed as a direct result of it;
and at the time of the revolution in Prance. But, our local
dramas of Vinegar Hill, the so-called Rum Rebellion, and the
Eureka Stockade notwithstanding, there was never going to be
a revolution of the Australian colonies. 0 I(
2.
There was instead an evolution the gradual attainment by
Australians of political and judicial authority over our own
affairs; an irresistible emergence of an independent, self
confident Australia from beneath the protective cloak of our
British founders; an ungrudging and peaceful disengagement,
characterised by a shared commitment to democratic and
constitutional government, and to the supremacy of
individual freedoms within the rule of law.
There are some commentators, in both our countries, who seen
to think that the history, heritage and traditions we share
are mere anachronisms.
They see that Britons have claimed their future as part of a
large and integrated Europe, while we Australians have moved
to enmesh ourselves with the dynamism of Asia and the
Pacific; and they wrongly conclude that Australians and
Britons are irreversibly drifting apart.
But the truth is that we still need each other as we enter
the 1990s together. For today it is our privilege and our
profound challenge to be living in a rapidly changing
world one in which the values of individual liberty we
uphold, the democratic freedoms we champion, the so 1Q
justice we enjoy, the commitment to the path of peace and
the rule of law, that we share, have never been so relevant.
My Lord Mayor,
There is no city in the world to which the cause of
democratic freedom owes so much. For 800 years London has
been in the vanguard in establishing the rights of citizens.
of no other city in the world could it have been said, as
was so truly said of London just on fifty years ago, that
upon its survival depended the survival of freedom in Europe
and far beyond.
And not least because of the steadfastness and sacrifice of
that generation of Londoners in 1940, we as free men and
women in the democratic West are now privileged to be
witnesses to the drama of democracy extending its influence
in societies previously marked by the untrammeled imposition
of centralised power.
Whether we look to the creative and, indeed, courageous
programs of Glasnost and Perestroika being implemented by
President Gorbachev, the positive nature of which was, to
her credit, identified at an early stage by Prime Minister
Thatcher; or to the emerging pluralism in other parts of
Eastern Europe; or to the dramatic demonstrations for
democracy in Beijing and their tragic supression; what we
are seeing is a political and economic system a system
predicated on a fundamental fraud on human aspirations
being strained to breaking point.
we may look briefly at just a few of the astonishing
specifics of this process of change.
In the Soviet Union, we have seen political bosses rejected
in humiliating circumstances by the people; we have heard
genuine debate for the first time in living memory in
political institutions where sterile unanimity has been the
norm, we are witnessing the open expression of views which
were once the preserve only of a courageous and persecuted
minority. In Poland, Solidarity has achieved an overwhelming election
victory. The new direction in Hungarian politics was given powerful
symbolism by the reburial last Friday of Imre Nagy. We are
seeing there the emergence of genuinely independent
political organisations sanctioned by a once monolithic
party.
we see, apparently, a new tolerance of diversity in a Warsaw
Pact alliance once marked by iron conformity.
The question we naturally ask is whether these developments
are superficial, or are they fundamental?
This much is clear. The ideology based on the centralised
command economy has not only failed it is being abandoned,
scuttled by its own disillusioned disciples. To be sure,
not yet everywhere; but in enough countries for us truly to
be able to talk of this as one of the most profound trends
of the late twentieth century.
I believe we are seeing not merely temporary setbacks to an
otherwise viable system, but profound failures in the system
itself, failure at its very heart.
In Chiina, the ruthless and repugnant supression of
democratic aspirations may succeed in the short term in
securing the power of an isolated few. But let there be no
doubt in anyone's mind that the massacre in Tiananmen Square
is a supreme expression of the failure of a system.
The democratic aspirations of the Chinese people are certain
to re-assert themselves. The Chinese leaders will have to
adapt in time to that reality or be swept aside by it.
The developments I have referred to are all symptoms of
far-reaching change which is shaking the foundations of
Marxism/ LeniisI. As an experiment which began in the early
years of this century, we know, in its closing years, that
i. t is an experiment which has failed.
My Lord Mayor, ladies and gentlemen,
As democrats, we must develop a response to these historic
developments more sophisticated and more far-sighted than
mere gloating.
Those communist countries which recognise the need for
change face a very difficult transition.
And we ourselves should never forget that the West has
reached its present position of hope by many paths, often
tortuous and difficult.
we cannot deny the trauma of our own history in trying to
adapt our political processes to the imperatives of economic
change. There was no easy or inevitable symmetry between
the evolution of the competitive mnarket economy and the
development of parliamentary democracy and social justice.
As an inheritor a proud standard-bearer of the great
Australian Labor tradition, as a life-long unionist, I know
that social democracy and trade unionism have had to
struggle and sacrifice to make their immeasurable
contribution to the social justice which characterises
western societies.
But there has never been a single recipe for success.
Within our own political and economic system, no side can
claim a monopoly of wisdom. Indeed, the contest of ideas is
the very essence of democracy.
It is precisely because, as a result of long, hard struggle,
we have as Western societies achieved the conjunction of
democracy, economic progress, and social justice, that we
can stand at the bar of history and call on others to
accomplish that same conjunction. Moreover, because we
achieved it, we can help them to do so too, albeit within
the framework of their own traditions and cultures.
So we must not merely cheer the failure of an ideology which
was always objectionable to those who cherished the liberty
of the individual. wie must, more positively, make the most
of the opportunities offered by the success of an idea the
idea of openness and diversity which is the hallmark of the
free society.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The western policy of detente of the early 1970s failed,
because, in seeking to moderate Soviet international
behaviour, it made no demands for reform or the extension of
human rights in the Soviet system itself. That policy
effectively only allowed the old Soviet rulers to delay the
inevitable reforms that Mr Gorbachev has now undertaken.
But I believe that we should continue the current policies
of the West towards the Soviet union, which are bringing
about what I see as a genuine detente. Ref ormns are occuring
inside the Warsaw Pact. Human rights are being extended to
the peoples of Eastern Europe. And at the same time, after
At ganistan, after INF, after Namibia, who can deny that
Soviet behaviour is moderating?
So the first thing'we must do is to be prepared to recognise
progress in Eastern Europe, to do what we can to encourage
it, to take the initiative in ars control as President Bush
has so outstandingly in recent days.
Further, we must ensure that our own behaviour in supporting
the values which have made our society strong remains a
model. We must ensure that we do not fail, in the standards
we set ourselves, to uphold and advance those elements of
our system on which our own prosperity and political
freedoms are based.
on many occasions, I have commented elsewhere on what I
consider the ultimate paradox of our times: the paradox
that at the very time the centralised command economies are
attempting to move towards greater competitiveness and
openness, the market economies continue to close up in key
areas of trade. Thus, at a time of optimism, based on the
increasingly intelligent political relations between the
superpowers, the vision of a saner world is distorted by a
shortsighted reluctance to liberalise the world trading
system on which the prosperity of the market economies has
been built and on which the prosperity of the world as a
whole depends.
The economic integration of Western Europe has been one of
the most bold, creative and positive developments of this
century, enhancing the living standards of its peoples in a
dramatic fashion.
In 1992, you will be moving to a new stage of your
evolution, creating a single market of vast proportions
320 million people which will further enhance the economic
opportunities and efficiency of Western Europe.
This development sends the most powerful signal possible to
the EAst that if they wish to advance they will need to
continue their own process of economic reconstruction.
I cannot say too strongly, however, that this powerful
message of efficiency and competition is blurred and muted
by Europe's equivocation on the issue of protectionism.
6.
With what effectiveness and credibility can we encourage the
emulation by, and foster the 7lobal integration of, the
so-called command economies, if we do not continue to
practice the trading rules on which our own prosperity is
built?
Now this is not the place for a technical dissertation on
the world trading system, or for detailed representations on
features of the European Community which cause concern to
Australia. But I do make the point that the West is itself capable of
economic irrationality for which, if it continues, we will
pay dearly. In agriculture, you have in Europe created a
monster that not only hurts us but hurts you.
Let me tell you now hurtful and how wasteful, is this
monster. Last year the Common Agricultural Policy accounted for
around two thirds of EC budget expenditures, or some
17.5 billion pounds.
Do Europeans realise that their agricultural producers are
receiving on average nearly 40 per cent of their total
income in subsidies from the taxpayer?
European consumers are paying two to three times world price
for many basic foods.
Let me put it even more simply: Do Europeans realise that
for every cow in their dairy farms, they are paying, in the
form of subsidies and higher prices, some 555 pounds per
cowl Let me give another example. Australia is an efficient coal
producer. But the subsidies and other support measures in
Japan and the European community especially, I point out,
in the United Kingdom and in West Germany are costing our
producers billions of. dollars in lost export opportunities.
Subsidised British coal prices are some 180% of the price of
imported coals; again, it is consumers who bear the brunt of
this inefficiency. Throughout the EC, in 1986 they
subs idised every employee in the coal industry to the tune
of some 17,000 pounds.
so, as Europe approaches the critical transformation of
1992, Australia will not simply be an uninterested
bystander. We can't afford to be.
I
Let me make it clear. We don't seek anything like a return
to the pre-Common Market days when Australian agricultural
products had preferred access to British markets.
We don't seek favours or special deals.
All we seek is fair access and the ability to compete on an
equal basis. A single integrated European market will
create tremendous opportunities for us, for you, and for the
world. It is in the interests of no-one if, at this crucial stage,
access is restricted and if efficiency is retarded, by the
creation of a fortress Europe after 1992.
But, ladies and gentlemen, my comments tonight are not meant
to have purely an economic perspective.
Because the European quest for integration was never, in the
minod fthevisionary architects of the European community
in the early post-war years, simply a narrow, technical
economic exercise. They knew it had a wider potential and
so, in practice, it has proved.
Europe is acquiring the habits, and creating the
institutions, of co-operation and that constitutes a truly
remarkable historical change.
After centuries of shifting alliances and, too often
including twice in this century bitter arnd debilitating
war, you have, together, ushered in an era of peaceful
collaboration, and of ever deepening commitment to democracy
by all the peoples of Western Europe.
I appreciate, of course, that 1992 will not provide a recipe
for political unity or even for a united European position
on international political and security questions. But I do
believe it symbolises and expresses the trend towards West
European co-operation which simply must in the future make
western Europe a more influential voice in the world. we
welcome that, without reservation.
My Lord Mayor, ladies and gentlemen,
The west must do more than set an example of an efficient
economic model at work,, important though that is. We must
continue to be responsive to the demands of our people, and
we must continue to be prepared to shape the international
agenda for change.
Perhaps nowhere is this more pressing than in the need to
ensure we bequeath to future generations not only a planet
free of the threat of nuclear holocaust but one not
despoiled by our own shortsighted habits of pollution.
Already, the roll call of environmental disaster is
appalling: Bhopal, Chernobyl, the Exxon Val~ dez, the Amazon
basin, acid rain, the depletion of the ozone layer, the
greenhouse effect.
We can't solve these by ourselves but we must solve then
together. I know your Prime Minister, Mrs Thatcher, has demonstrated
her commitment to the environment and recently, showed the
way by hosting a very important conference on the ozone
layer. I look forward to an era when Governments around the
world will be working to avoid the catastrophe we would
otherwise face.
Let me draw your attention in particular to one initiative
Australia has taken. Antarctica is the last of the world's
pristine continents and wildernesses. It must be protected.
it must not be mined.
Australia has refused to sign the Antarctic Minerals
convention because we believe a tighter safeguard is needed
a comprehensive environment protection regime, creating an
international wilderness Reserve.
Britons, from Cook on, played a leading role in the
discovery and charting of the Antarctic. I was delighted to
receive recently a letter from Sir Peter Scott son of
Scott of the Antarctic. He has, it might almost be said, an
hereditary right to speak on this issue and Sir Peter very
forcefully supports our stand.
To all people I say: join us in this vital quest to
safeguard the earth's last continental wilderness.
Ladies and gentlemen,
in this world, it is very much in the interests of both of
us that Australia and Britain work closely together to
achieve our goals.
Don't let anybody pretend that Australia and Britain have no
further use for each other.
our relationship is too close, too valuable, too mutually
beneficial, to be easily put aside.
Australians and Britons have met on many occasions and in
many circumstances. We have met always as comrades on the
battlefield; always as rivals on the cricket pitch. we have
met as friends and relatives, as tourists in each other's
countries, as partners and competitors in business.
Surely, as Australian businesses continue to look to Britain
as a doorway into Europe, and as British businesses continue
to assess Australia, rightly, to be a powerful springboard
into the vast opportunities of the Asian markets, our
commercial ties can only increase.
Tomorrow, some 300 executives of British and Australian
companies will gather in a Trade and Investment Conference
which will explore the prospects for enlarged cooperation.
Let me express my thanks to the British Government for its
active support for this very important conference.
I acknowledge, in particular, the personal commitment
Mrs Thatcher made towards the re-invigoration and
modernisation of the British-Australian relationship.
In the united Kingdom we see a strong friend, vital both to
the economic well-being and the physical security of the
world a nation with whom we can talk as partners, a
society devoted to the freedoms we believe in and an~ economy
of great opportunity.
our shared language and culture, the strong bonds of history
and of kinship, our familiar institutions of political,
economic, legal and academic life all these mean that
though Australians now arrive here as foreigniers, we can
never arrive as strangers.
Tonight I want to add one further strand to the web of our
associations. The British-Australian Bicentennial Trust
excists because of British generosity. The Australian
Government will match the British contribution with a grant
of $ 300,000 for a Scholarship and Fellowship fund to
encourage the two-way novement of young students between our
countries. My Lord Mayor,
Your Royal 1ighnesses,
Ladies and gentlemn
In this historic room, in the heart of London this citadel
of freedom the memory of all those famous names who have
been here before us forms an almost palpable presence.
it was here in this very place in 1943, that Winston
Churchill was able to describe the full extent of our
victory at El Aleiuein the turning point in the war in
which the Australian 9th Division had played so crucial a
role. It was then and here that Churchill delivered the
prophecy that has passed into history that El Alemein was
not the end or even the beginning of the end, but the end of
the beginning.
Today, we can look to new beginnings in that same spirit of
firm confidence and hope, informed by a watchful caution.
We can and must make new beginnings towards fairer and freer
world trade.
We can and must make new beginnings in the relations between
East and West.
We can and must make new beginnings to save the earth from
environmental disaster.
And our two countries, Britain and Australia, can work as
we are working for new beginnings and new opportunities to
build on the grand partnership we have had for two hundred
years. And each of those tasks, however different, however
difficult, call for special qualities of energy and
enterprise, of will and intellect. It will call, at times,
for courageous decisions; and, above all, it will crall. for
the application of the values of human dignity and human
freedom.
My Lord mayor,
I mean no idle compliment when I say that those are
precisely the qualities and values which have progressively
enriched, generation after generation, for eight hundred
years the life, the splendour and the-achievement of the
city of London.
it is with great pleasure that I reciprocate your toast.
I give you, the Lord Mayor and corporation of London.