S* * 1 J
PRIM] E MINISTER'S QUEENISLAhD BROADCAST NO, 18
THE SENATE INQUISITION
JULY 1975*
THIS WE-EK WE HAVE SEEN YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE
OF THE OPPOSITION'S CONTEMPT FOR PARLIAMENTARY PRINCIPLES
AND ESTABLISHED POLITICAL CONVENTIONS ONE HAS TO KEEP
RETURNING TO THIS THEME BECAUSE THESE PRINCIPLES, THESE
rCONVENTIONS AREN'T JUST DRY LEGAL FORMALITIES--THEY ARE
THE BASIC RULES OF THE POLITICAL GAME> EVER SINCE WE CAME
TO OFFICE THE OPPOSITION HAS BEEN BREAKING THESE RULES
S WHENEVER IT SUITS THEN, THEY HAVE REJECTED LEGISLATION
IN THE SENATE FOR WHICH THE PEOPLE HAVE VOTED; THEY'VE
REFUSED SUPPLY TO T-E ELECTED GOVERNMENT; THEY'VE
REFUSED TO FOLLOW THE CONVENTION ABOUT FILLING CASUAL.
VACANCIES IN THE SENATEA IT'S ALL PART OF THE SAME
WRETCHED PATTERN-LAST WEEKEND THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH
AUSTRALIA SHOWED ',-HAT THEY THOUGHT OF AN UPPER HOUSE
OBSTRUCTING POPULAR LEGISLATION WHEN THEY RETURNED DON
DU DUNSTAN'S GOVERNMENT FOR ANOTHER TERMA BUT THIS WEEK THE
OPPOSITION IN CANBERRA HAVE BEEN AT IT AGAIN, THEY HAVE
DRAGGED PUBLIC SERVANTS THROUGH A POLITICAL INQUISITION
IN THE SENATE-AND NOW THEY'RE THREATENING TO DO THE SAME
WITH PRIVATE CITIZENS/ THEY HAVE UNDERMINED THE TRADITIONAL
NEUTRALITY AND INTEGRITY OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE THEY HAVE
IGNORED THE PRINCIPLE THAT MINISTERS ALONE, MINISTERS
ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE, ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF
A GOVERNMENT.
YOU SHOULD NOT BE FOOLED BY THE OPPOSITIOIN LINE
THAT WHAT WAS AT STAKE THIS WEEK WAS THE SUPREMACY OF
PARLIAMENT OVER THE BUREAUCRACYv THE SUPREMACY OF
PARLIAMENT IS PRECISELY WHAT MY GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN
DEFENDINGMC LET'S GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING AND SEE HOW
THIS DEPLORABLE BUSINESS BEGAN, AFTER THE PARLIAMENT
ROSE FOR ITS WINTER RECESS THE OPPOSITION AND THE PRESS
BEGAN MAKING WILD ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OVER
CERTAIN OVERSEAS LOAN NEGOTIATIONs, LEAKED DOCUMENTS,
FABRICATED DOCUMENTS, DOCUMENTS FOR WHICH NEWSPAPERS HAD
PAID MANY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS BEGAN APPEARING IN THE PRESS
AMID A GREAT CHORUS OF ALLEGATIONS AND UNSUBSTANTIATED
CHARGES AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT AND PARTICULAR MINISTERS
I DECIDED THAT PARLIAMENT WAS THE PROPER PLACE FOR THESE
CHARGES TO BE MADE AND DEBATEDY So I RECALLED THE PARLIAMENT
FOR A SPECIAL SITTING, ' MIND YOU, WE HAD ALREADY GIVEN
THE PARLIAMENT MOST OF. THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE NATURE
AND PURPOSES OF OUR LOAN NEGOTIATIONS . BUT I DECIDED THAT
THE. OPPOSITION SHOULD HAVE THE FULLEST OPPORTUNITY
TO QUESTION THE GOVERNMENT, DEBATE THE ISSUE FURTHER AND
tA. KE ANY CHARGES THEY WISHEDX DURI-NG THAT SPECIAL SITTING
THE GOVERNMENT AVAILABLE SCORES OF DOCUMENTS AND PAPERS
RELATING TO THE LOANS ISSUE, WE HAVE ANSWERED NEARLY EVERY
QUESTION THAT OPPOSITION MEMBERS HAVE PUT TO ' US IN THE
PARLIAMENT AND EVERY QUESTION WILL: BE ANSWERED THROUGH THE
NORMAL PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES DURING THE SPECIAL SITTING
OF THE HOUSE THE OPPOSITION FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE ANY
SPECIFIC CHARGE OF ILLEGALITY OF IMPROPRIETY AGAINST THE
GOVERNMENT OR ANY MINISTERA No SPECIFIC CHARGE WAS
SUBSTANTIATED; NO SPECIFIC CHARGE WAS EVEN MADE. ./ 3
3,
IF THE OPPOSITION REALLY WANTED TO PURSUE THIS
MATTER IT -AD EVERY RIGHT TO DO SO THROUGH THE NORMAL
PROCESSES CF PARLIAMENT: THOSE PROCESSES WERE BY NO MEANS
. EXHAUSTED THEY CAN NEVER BE EXHAUSTED INSTEAD THEY
DECIDED TO SUBJECT SENIOR AND RESPECTED PUBLIC SERVANTS
TO AN UNNECESSARY AND HUMILIATING INQUISITIONy THEY
TRIED TO TURN THE SENATE INTO A STAR CHAMBER, IT WAS A PURE
POLITICAL STUNT, AND WE WEREN'T GOING TO HAVE A BAR OF THOSE
TACTICSy , iE EREN'T GOING TO ALLOW PUBLIC SERVANTS TO
BE DRAGGED B-FORE THE SENATE AND INTERROGATED ON MATTERS
FOR WHICH THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE AND CANNOT BE
RESPONSIBLE IINISTERS ALONE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
GOVERNMENT'S ACTIONS, MINISTERS ALONE ARE ANSWERABLE
TO THE PARLIA'ENTO So Tr: S S STHE SITUATION: THE.' SENATE HAS SAT
FOR THREE DA" YS NCW, AND THE OPPOSITION HAS FAILED TO
TURN UP A SI'-LE NEW FACT OR MAKE A SINGLE SPECIFIC
ALLEGATION CN T-IS MATTER DESPITE ALL THE OPPORTUNITIES
GIVEN TO THE&. V : ET THEY GO ON WASTING THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
A DAY IN PUBL. C KEEPING THE SENATE IN SESSION THEY
HAVE BROUGHT PUBLIC SERVANT HALFWAY ROUND THE WORLD
FOR THIS RIDIC'JLOUS PIECE OF GRANDSTANDING THEY HAVE
WASTED THE TI: E OF SENIOR PUBLIC SERVANTS AND MINISTERSA
THEY HAVE ALREADY DELAYED THE GOVERNMENT'S WORK ON THE
BUDGET) AND ALL FOR NOTHING' ALL FOR A FUTILE, CYNICAL
EXERCISE IN WITCHHUNTING AND INTIMIDATIONX ALL FOR A
FISHING EXPEDITION TO HELP THE OPPOSITION'S POLITICAL
PURPOSES, IT IS AN UTTER ABUSE OF PARLIAMENTARY PRACTICE,
I HAVE ALREADY QUOTED WHAT SIR ROBERT I'IENZIES
SAID ABOUT EXPOSING SENIOR PUBLIC SERVANTS TO A PARLIAMENTARY
INQUISITION i5ERE ARE SOME OTHER WORDS OF SIR ROBERT
MENZIES ON THIS QUESTION:
" CIVIL SERVANTS OUGHT NOT TO BE DRAGGED INTO
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE... IT WOULD BE DEPLORABLE
TO HAVE THEIR NAMES AND VIEWS BANDIED ABOUT IN
PARLIAMENT, THUS INVOLVING THE CIVIL SERVANT MUCH
AGAINST HIS WILL IN PARTY POLITICAL CONTROVERSY,"
THOSE WERE SIR ROBERT MENZIES' VIEWS AND SIR
ROBERT IS NOT THE ONLY LIBERAL POLITICIAN WHO HAS SUPPORTED
OUR STAND IN THIS MATTER> ALL GOVERNMENTS HAVE TAKEN THE VIEW 3
THAT PUBLIC SERVANITS AND THE GOVERNMENT'S LAW OFFICERS CANNOT
REVEAL DETAILS OR BE QUESTIONED ON CONFIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT
DISCUSSIONS THAT OPINION WAS SUPPORTED IN A PARLIAMENTARY
PAPER PREPARED IN 1958 BY SENATOR GREENWOOD, THE FORMER
LIBERAL ATTORNEY-: : ERAL, AND BY MiR ELLICOTT, THE FORMER
SOLICITOR-GENERAL D N: OW A LEADING SPOKESMAN FOR THE OPPOSITIONFOR
THE LIBERALS ? ERFECTLY WELL THAT ANY GOVERNMENT
LABOR OR LIBERAL -S TO DEAL CONSTANTLY WITH ' PUBLIC
SERVANTS ON EVERY : ATTER, AND IF PUBLIC SERVANTS BREACH THE
PRINCIPLES OF CC'. ODENTIALITY THE WHOLE SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
BECOMES UNWORKA3' BLE AND GOVERNMENTS ARE FORMED IN THE
HOUSE OF REPRESE: NTATIVES-YOU WON'T FIND THESE STAR CHAMBER
TACTICS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BECAUSE GOVERNMENTS
THERE ALWAYS HAVE . A MAJORITY THIS IS A TECHNIQUE THAT CAN
ONLY BE USED TO EMBARRASS A GOVERNMENT THAT LACKS A MAJORITY
IN THE SENATE.-IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FACT-FINDINGCIT
IS A PURE POLITICAL EXERCISE.
VE KVE TO RENEMB ER THAT PARLIAMENTARY INQUISITIONS
OF THE KiND THE OPPOSITION IS SEEKING OR EVEN
ROYAL COMMiSSIOIS FOR THAT MATTER, HOWEVER RESPECTABLE
THEY SOUND ARE QUITE FOREIGN TO THE FORMS AND
PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED OVER MANY CENTURIES TO APPLY
THE LAW OF THE LAND' IT'S TRUE THAT PARLIAMENT HAS CERTAIN
POWERS IN DEFENCE OF ITS OWN PRI\ VILEGES, BUT THAT'S A
DIFFERENT MATTER; AND IN ANY CASE, THE PRIVILEGES OF
PARLIAMENT ARE FOR BOTH HOUSES TO DETERMINE, NOT JUST
THE SENATP GATHER THAT WHAT THE OPPOSITION IS
-A
DESPERATELY S* EEING IN THIS CASE IS SOME EVIDENCE OF
Q CRIME OR MALPRACTICEA BUT IFA PERSON IS ACCUSED OF
A CRIME HE IS ENTITLED TO HAVE PROPER NOTICE OF THE
CHARGE AGAINST HIM, TO BE TRIED BY A COURT WHICH CAN
APPLY THE RULS COF EVIDENCE AND, IF HE'S GUILTY,
IMPOSE SOME SIMILARLY, IF A PERSON HAS BROKEN
SOIME CIVIL LK. IS ENTITLED TO THE SAME RIGHTS AND
PRIVILEGES: KS > GSE MAY BE HEARD BEFORE A JUDGE AND THE
FACTS DETEP SE-Y A JURYN THE SENATE OR A ROYAL
COIiSSIN CAN . iNE OF THESE THINGSv A ROYAL COMMISSION
HAS NO POWER TO 2 VE VE~ RICTS OR MAKE JUDGENTSj IT
CAN'T FIND PE2? LE GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY( IT CAN'T AWARD
DAMAGES -OR -I P* 3SE SE> NTENCESI ITS FINDINGS HAVE NO
FORCE IN LAW 19ATEVER, AS FOR THE SENATE
IT'S BOUND BY : O RULES AT ALL, NO RULES OF EVIDENCEI
NO RULES OF PROCEDURE2 IT CAN DO WHATEVER IT LIKES,
WHATEVER A MAJORITY OF PARTY POLITICIANS DECIDE, IMAGINE IT
TRIAL BY POLITICIANS, TRIAL BY LIBERAL AND COUNTRY PARTY SENATORS.
6,
' IE S; ULD BE DEEPLY ALARMED WHEN PUBLIC SERVANTS
OR PRIVATE CITIZENS CAN BE HAULED BEFORE A POLITICALLY
MOTIVATED CHAMBER TO SERVE THE INTERESTS OF A POLITICAL
PARTYv THIS IS A VERY SINISTER AND DANGEROUS ABUSE
f
OF PARLIAMENT'S POWERS. ONCE WE START SUMMONING PRIVATE
CITIZENS FOR POLITICAL ENDS WHERE IS IT GOING TO STOP?
WHO WILL BE SAFE FROM POLITICAL INTERROGATION? THE
SENATE HAS S T A DIRE AND PERHAPS DISASTROUS PRECEDENT
IN ITS ACTIONS THIS WEEK" PARLIAMENT HAS ITS ROLE TO
PLAY IN OUR :, MOCRACY THE PUBLIC SERVICE HAS ITS
ROLE;: THE COURTS HAVE THEIR ROLE. THOSE ROLES
ARE SEPARATE D DISTINCT I'E MUST NOT ALLOW AN
ANTI-GOVERN. N T MAJORITY IN ONE HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT
TO DESTROY T:-E INTEGRITY OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE OR
BYPASS OR THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURTS
IHAT WAY LIES C--S AND TYRANNY, 0