ANNUAL CONVENTION OF THE NSW DIVIION
OF THE LIBERAL PAR'iY OF AUiMTI
SYDNEY, N. S. W. 19 SEPTEMER 1970
Spech by the Prime Minister, MrJohn Gorton
Mr. Attwell, Ministers, Ladies and Gentlemen
It is not my intention to speak to you for very long because I hope that tonight,
having spoken to you for a short time, we will be able to spend a much longer time
in a question and answer session, in which those of you who are here and who are the
backbone of the Liberal Party will have the opportunity to raise those matter--which
are on your minds, and to give me the opportunity to try to answer the querieO and
the questions and the criticisms you may have. I feel that that perhaps is the way in
which 1; 2 can get the greatest value from this meeting, and I hope that when the time
comes you will be not at all backward in raising those matters which are foremost in
your mind3. But before that time does come, there are some things I would like to say.
Mr President, we have been in office, as a government in Australia, for twenity-one
years or a little more. They were twenty-one years in which there have been three
wars first Korea, then the Malayan emergency and now Vietnam. And they were
twenty-one years in which there was great national development and un-precendented
industrial progress. There has been a greater increase in the population of
Australia than any other country has had, except Asian countries, in a similar
period of time. It has been a period of greatly expanded trade, a period in which
our exports, particularly our secondary exports, have been greatly expanded, and
a period of growing involvement with that area of Asia to which we finid ourselves
contiguous and which will be so important for future generations of Australians.
It has been, too, a period of improvement of the living standards Of all
Australians and of improvement for the population generally. It has been a period of
greatly expanded social services and of greatly expanded opportunity for the
individual to express himself to the top of his bent. I think we have all helped to
bring this about over this period of time, because of s~ ome basic philoso'phies.
When we came into off ice, we stood for the right of the individual to engage
in the occupation of his choice, and to so conduct himself in that occupation as he
believed best. We stood against the concept that the individual ought to be told by
the state how he could conduct his enterprise or whether he could conduct his
enterprise, because at that time, as now, our opponents held to the idea that there
should be limitations on the individual in conducting his enterprise, that there should
be some fields in which he could not enter that government knew better than an
individual what is good for that individual. We stood against that. 0 0 0 0 / 2
We stood for the concept that -aie Government shou~ ld create a climate
where individual enterprise was encouraged. We didn't stand for laissez-faire,
and we don't stand for It now. But we stood for a concept that we could create a
climate where individual enterprise was encouraged and where the planning of
enterprise and its expansion was a matter for the myriad individuals engaged in
the myriad enterprises which make up Australian life. And we stood against the
concept that all planning in all fields should be undertaken by a government or
governments and forced upon the citizens of this country.
We stood for a political system where elected representatives of a
party should themselves decide the policies to be followed by that party, and v,, ie
stood against the system which made elected representatives subject to direction
and ins truction from unelected persons from outside. And that we were righit in
these attitudes is, I believe, evident from the results of this past twenty or nearly
twent" t-one years.
And those things that we stood for then, we stand for now. The things
we stood against we still stand against and our opponents still stand for the planning
by governments of all enterprise, for, in cases, the prohibition of individuals
entering an enterprise, and until just recently for the direction of elected
representatives by persons who are non-elected from outside. I say " until just
recently" t because there is an admission from our opponents that in at least ole
State that of Victoria this was what applied. And personally, I do not believe
that they will change this but time alone will tell.
Sir, in the last few years in the last three years many new problems
have appeared for Australia. We have found ourselves in a situation where the
United Kingdom, under whose protection we have, as a nation, lived, is withdrawing
from Malaysia and Singapore, the countries to our North. And although that has
been slightly altered by a change of Government in the United Kingdom, still there
is only a token force left behind compared to the responsibility previously
assumed by the United Kingdom Government.
And we have found ourselves in a situation where the United States o!
America is questioning its approach to, and its involvement in, the problems of
Asia. These two things alone have vastly changed the world in which Australia
lives. And so our defence has necessarily had to occupy our attention in a way
which has not been necessary in the past years of our history.
We have found ourselves in a situation where our involvement with the
countries of Asia, our political involvement and our economic assistance, has
necessarily had to grow because we are contiguous to, and in a sense a part Of this
region, and what happens there will ultimately and inevitably affect us.
We have also found ourselves in a situation where the markets overseas
for our rural products, which had fluctuated in the past,, but had been taken, for
granted as markets in which we could profitably sell for most of the time, are now
threatened by a possible entry of the United Kingdom into the European Economic
Community. / 3
And we have tound-our selves, too, in Australia In some strange new
situation dt politics. Because for the first time, we have nwny people in our
community who challenge the verdict of the ballot box, who challenge the worl-ings
of democracy to elect a government, who urge that people should take to the streets
if they are unhappy with what a government, democratically elected, does.
And we have an Opposition an alternative government supporting, to a
great extent, those who are taking these new approaches to politics. And this must
not be underrated. I know that our opponents pretend that they do not altogether
support the overthrow of authority as has been urged by Dr Cairns, one ofl the front
bench supporters of the Opposition. I know that they attempt hesitantly to
disengage from those who wish to make the streets the arbiter of political decisions.
But I believe that anyone who looks at what they are doing must come to
the cunclvt'son that they are frightened to come out and condemn what ought to be
condemned. It is all very well for the Premier of South Australia to dissociate
himself irom a moratorium movement which seeks to sit at city inter Cection but
having done that, he then seeks to instruct the head of his police not to prevent
people sitting at city intersections. It is all very well for the Leader of the
Opposition to make soothing noises as to what is going on, but just yesterday wie
saw him speaking to a crowd an orderly crowd but a crowd that had Vietcong
flags flying above them, and above his head as he spoke to them.
And the people of this country, I believe, need, not as a political
gimmick, but as something that goes to the very heart of politics, to make u-.
their minds as to whether they believe the verdict of the ballot box should be
accepted or whether they think it ought to be challenged in the streets. This i~ s a
great new issue between ourselves and our opponents. Let me develo-) it a little.
Some attempts have been made to suggest that we do not believe in a right
of dissent and this is completely and utterly untrue. I believe that we would be
those who, harder than anybody else, would fight to retain the right of dissent, would
fight to retain the right of criticism of a government, to fight to retain the right
of those who disagree to express that disagreement in all reasonable forms. ' Re
do not object to rather do we pledge ourselves to protect~-the right to din en. t.
But equally do we believe t hat there are civil rights of a majority OY^
Australians, that the majority of Australians have rights to use the streets ifI they
wish to without being impeded, that they have the right to use public buildings,
without having those buildings invaded and stink bombs let off as has happenied in
post offices throughout Australia.
We believe that there is a right and a need to protect the individual against
intimidation by those who disagree with what the Government is doing threats
and intimidation. And perhaps if I can encapsulate it in this way, I would say this
we would agree with Voltaire completely when he said " I1d isagree with what you
say, but I would fight to the death for your right to say it". This is our credo too.
0 * 1 4
But we would not go on, as thc'qe who would seek to take over the streets
would go on, to change that statement to saying " I disagree with what you do, but
I will fight to the death for your right to do it" because there is no rignt to interfere
with the civil rights of the majority of the Australian people. And this will be a
matter engaging the attention of our Government very, very soon, and of the
State Governments, I know.
Sir, there has been this year discussion on the question of the financial
management of this country of Australia and of the Budget for the year in front of
us, and I would like to say some words on that.
We approached the planning the financial planning for this year within
certain fixed parameters. We had already decided, in conjunction with the
Premiers, that there should be, as far as was economically responsible, greater
sums of money available to State Governments than in the past, to enable them to
tackk. those problems of education, of health, of communications, the myriad
problems with which they are initially concerned. And so, at the Premiers'
Conference, we had made a new deal which greatly increased the amount of finance
available to State Governments this year and for the ensuing years over what would
have been available had the old system and the old agreement prevailed-son-ie 12 per
cent increase in the amounts available for expenditure. And this was one parameter
which we had to regard as we approached our planning for this year.
Secondly, we had a need, an obvious need, to ensure, as far as we
could ensure, that the rate of inflation was slowed, and not allowed to continue in
the way in which it corntinued in the last quarter of last financial year. Up until the
last quarter of the last financial year, the rate had been not unreasonable 3 -) er
cent or 3 point something per cent but in the last quarter it had gone to 5, over
per cent. This has got to be stopped. We had to ensure that it was stopped for
if it were not, then the results would have been that increased wages were nothing
but fool's gold, that those in the rural industries in Australia would have been hit
and unable to pass on the cost increases that they would have had to bear; that all
those on fixed incomes all superannuants, all pensio-ners, would have had this
bleeding sore of inflation withdrawing from them their capacity to buy the thi"-gs
they needed to live. And this was another essential element we had to bear in mird.
Then, too, we had said and I think properly said that one of our
objectives would be to reduce the rate of direct taxation on people throughout
Australia. This, indeed, had been recommended to us as the most importa; t thing
to be done in the Budget by the Liberal Party organisations throughout Australia
speaking through their Federal delegates coming to Cainberra. And this, too, we
felt we ought to do, and I felt I ought to do because I had promised to do it. And
this was another necessity we had to meet. 11.
And so in the result we did this. We increased Indirect taxation and this
has caused some criticism but after all, in all other countrtes of the world that I
know of, significant countries, civilised countries economically speaking there has
been a swing from direct to indirect taxation. And surely that swing must be in line
with general liberal thinking, because there is no need for a person to buy more
cigarettes unless he makes a choice to do it, or to drink more wine unless he makes
a choice to do it, or to use more petrol unless he makes a choice to do so. What
we have done is to reduce the direct tax on the individual and if he then chooses to
buy things which are not essential, that is his choice and we, as Liberals, have
always stood for the right of choice. If he doesn't do that, he has more opportunity
to save, or more opportunity to buy the necessities for his family.
I believe that by the end of this financial year, this Budget will have been
seen to be one of the great Budgets of Australia, provided that that which we have done
to contain inflation is not damaged by organisations we do not control, increasing
wages throughout Australia without paying regard to the productivity increase
which alone can thoroughly justify an increase in wages and make an increase in
wages really valid and really essential.
May I in conclusion before we reach this question time, deal with two
other subjects and forgive me if I may seem self-centred in this, but I would like
to refresh your memory of some of the things which have been done in the last two
and three quarter years, because a great deal in fact has been done.
We have brought in a new oil pricing policy as a result of the discovery
of oil in Bass Strait, subject to great criticism at the time, but which now is
admitted to be working out to the benefit of the Australian consumer in that the price
arranged for Australian oil is now less than would be required to import oil, and
to the benefit of those seeking for oil throughout Australia, for we must find more.
We have taken steps again subject to criticism at first at the times they
were taken to preserve as much as possible for Australians the equity in the new
developments and the new mineral discoveries taking place throughout Australia.
We have not sought to legislate for this in any way because if we did if we sought
to lay down a distinct policy on it, it would be inflexible and it would be inapplicable
to an area where there are so many problems and so many different circumstances.
But we have let it be knovmwn abroad, that as a government we wish to see that
Australians are offered equity participation In the development of this country and
this has had a significant and measurable effect on the offerings that have been
made to Australia. We have laid down the guidelines in which overseas comoanies
can borrow in Australia so that there is more incentive to give equity to Australians,
because the more equity that is given to Australians the more borrowing is allowed
inside Australia. We have brought in convertible notes and we have, on a couple of
occasions you will remember one just last week protected where we thought it
was in the national interest to protect Australian companies. ./ 6
6.
We hav'e-. ineazsed-soc ial servi~ es in this country to a degree to which they
have never-beeni increased over a comparable time as much as we have done. This
tends to be obscured because in this last Budget there was just a ' hold the line'
pension increase, but fif you go back to 1968 and if you see the rise in the pensions
since that time and compare it with the rise in the coot of living, you will see that
in that 9perlod of time the actual benefits to pensioners of all kinds ha.-very greatly
increased indeed. And there is much more to be done, I know, but let us as Liberals
not think that we have dropped behind when in fact we have, in real terms, increased
these benefits. We have taken away the fear of long-term illness in hospitalS. We still
have to deal with the problem of long-term illness in nursing homes. VWe still have
things to do to help low income families with many children. This was partof our
policy at the last election. This will be carried out during our period ofZ gover-nment.
This I Rm sure you would, as Liberals, wish to see us carry out and indeed we will.
Sir, I have in fact here about six pages of the things that we have done. I
won't read them out for it would take too long. But were it not for this Government,
I do not believe there would be a chance for the development of an alumninium !-ndustry
in Queensland, which could be the greatest development that that State has known in
the Ncrth of Brisbane; if it were not for this Governiment, there would be no
Institute of Marine Science which could make Australia the outstanding country in
the world in relation to marine biology; if it were not f or this Governmflent, there
would be no scheme for the provision of libraries in all secondary schools. I will
stop. But there are many things I think we can be please6d about and you caIn too
For the future, we will carry cut the programme that we put before you.
I do not think we have broken one promise yet and I car, assure you that before the
term of this Goverrment is finished, every promise made at the last election V/ ill
be fulfilled. But these are finite things, these are definite things. What is eve.-, m-, ore
important than that for us is to bear this in mind. At the beginning of my tall' to
you I said what we stood for twenty years ago and what we stand for now, what we were
againt twenty years ago and what we are against now. And I do ask ycu to study
our opponents because they have not changed one whit from the policies they held
twenty years ago. They still believe in nationalisation and it is still in their platform.
They are still swayed by unions affiliated through their conferences, many of them
communist dominated unions. They would still destroy our foreign and our dei~ ence
policy. They would still seek to interfere in the liveG of every single Australia n
in this country. e a s. 7
There has not been one single bit of constructive criticism put forward
since we have been in government. Wide statements about the need, the very
definite need for-better cities,. statements about the need for more adequate
sewerage, statements about anything which is going to require large sums of money
to implement, and of course the needs are there because no country is perfect. But
there has been no indication of how these would be carried or of what burden.-would
be laid upon Australians to try and carry them out; burdens in the form of increased
taxes or inflation or control by bureaucrats from Canberra. Their objectives-are
still the same, their controllers are still the same. If they come into government,
the results of what they would do would be the same as those results which led
them to be thrown out of government twenty odd years ago.
There is no -alteration there. There is a great attempt to pretend there
is an alteration, to pretend that the nationalisation programme has been~ drorned,
to preand that they are not influenced still by outside bodies and by extreme leftwing
bodies. Look at their actions in the moratorium and I believe you would
agree with me that what they are pretending to be is not what they are. They are
seeking to hide their weapons. They are trying to pretend they are not controlled
from the areas from which they are controlled and trying to come before the
Australian people in disguise. It is up to us to strip that disguise and 1t is up to us
to go forward so that in the next twenty-one years as much progress can be mnade as
has been made in the last twenty-one. Indeed, more, because the opportunities
are there as the result of the last twenty-one. And I think that Liberal Parties
throughout Australia will see that this is done and I know that if they see that this
is done they will be rendering a signal service to their nation.
Q. Mr Prime Minister do you think that a rather over-zealous law and order
campaign along American models could lose more votes than it could gairn, particularly
amongst young people? And if so, what steps would you be thinking of taking in
this direction?
PM I don't know what you mean by " an over-zealous American-tyue campaign
on law and order". I don't therefore know whether that would lose more votes than
it would gain. But as I said in the main body of my address, I believe that the civil
rights of Australians, the majority of Australians, must be protected against
disruption from a minority. And I don't believe that we can or should continue to
allow people to invade Commonwealth Government off ices, to intimidate peorple
working in those offices, to pour ox blood over records in those offices, to esiter
Commonwealth Ministers' rooms and lock them in the rooms and sit around and insult
them. I don't believe we should allow people to enter into such buildings as vie
control such as post offices and interfere with the rights of citizens using those
post offices. These things need to be stopped. Certa inly they need to be sto'; oed
by due process of law. I believe that the penalties that should be applied in these
instances should be such as to prevent people from continuing to do them. w
whether that would lose more votes than it would gain, I couldn't say. I believe 0 0 0 0 ** 8
8.
that it would gain more votes than it woubi4osebut, more importantly than that, I
believe it to be the right and proper. thing to do and the proper ' way to govern a
country to see that this -was notallo-wed to continue-to happen. Because I thinklthat
all history shows that once a group takes to the streets to try and impose their
will which they can't impose through the sources open to them, then groups which
oppose that group will take to the streets too, to battle them and the streets wil become.
a battleground and this is not the way in which a democracy or a country oughat to be
run when there is a free vote available every so often to elect a government and
to decide these questions, and that's my answer.