CHILLING LESSONS FROM CANADA

Mr. Eric Butler reports from Canada where he is conducting a short lecturing and fact-finding tour before attending the 1974 World Anti-Communist Conference in Washington.

A Malcolm Muggeridge can make comments, which we ordinary mortal human beings must forgo. As a visitor to Canada I would never dream of calling Prime Minister Trudeau a "totally unprincipled man". But this is how Muggeridge described him in an interview in British Columbia with Robert Stall of Weekend Magazine. However, much as I admire Muggeridge he is not always completely right. In explaining why he thought Prime Minister Trudeau "totally unprincipled", he says that Trudeau's a man admirably suited to rule Canada as long as it can more or less coast along... 'governing' involves certain policies and I don't think Trudeau's got any. I don't see any evidence of any."

Unlike Muggeridge Mr. Charles Lynch, the nationally known columnist has come to believe that Mr. Trudeau has very definite policies - Socialist policies. I am interested in Charles Lynch's comments because I well recall how during the incredible 1968 Canadian Federal Elections which resulted in the Trudeau landslide; Lynch was one of those who helped to foster "Trudeaumania."

In a recent article Charles Lynch observes that Prime Minister Trudeau, leading a minority Government, does not have to bother about pandering to the Socialist New Democrats because he knows that the New Socialists approve of what he is doing. Since Lynch wrote of "Trudeau the Socialist, emerging from the parliamentary woodwork, using the threat of the NDP to bend, if not break, the moderate Liberals in his cabinet and his caucus", reports from Ottawa state that this is what Mr. Trudeau now proposes. He is preparing to move Canada down the Socialist road at a much faster rate.

In the Lynch article the reader is provided with a direct quote from the 1968 edition of Federalism and The French Canadians, in which Mr. Trudeau frankly outlined his formula for using Federalism to advance Socialism; "Federalism must be welcomed as a valuable tool which permits dynamic parties to plant socialist governments in certain provinces, from which the seed of radicalism can slowly spread..."
When Mr. Ron Gostick and Mr. Pat Walsh attempted through the Canadian League of Rights to publicise Mr. Trudeau's real policies before the 1968 Canadian elections, they were nationally smeared as "hate-mongers"!
Australians should note the striking similarity between the Trudeau strategy using Federalism to advance Socialism and that of Prime Minister Whitlam. Socialists the world over have developed "regionalism" as a key instrument to advance the progressive centralisation of power.

There is another major policy on which Mr. Whitlam and Mr. Trudeau are in agreement. Immediately following Mr. Whitlam's visit to Red China following his election victory, reports appeared that an agreement had been made for an unspecified number of Chinese from Red China to come to Australia. There was a reference to the re-uniting of families.

This policy is being vigorously adopted in Canada with the result that there is growing alarm, not only in Canada, but also in the United States. One report states that at least 9,000 immigrants from Red China are expected to arrive in Canada this year. Two thousand have already arrived, most of these moving into Calgary, Alberta, from where this report is being written. Mr. Pat Walsh, an expert on this subject, has recently warned that Canadians are in fact being invaded by a large number of Red Guards.

Mr. Walsh asks the pertinent question of why should Chairman Mao allow thousands of Chinese to move from Red China to Canada, and makes the obvious suggestion that many of them will be trained subversives. The concern of Canadians has been increased by revelations in the recently published book, The Royal Canadian Mounted Police - A Century of History, by former RCMP Deputy Commissioner and director of Security and Intelligence, William H. Kelly in which there is a detailed exposure of the incredible scandal of the fraudulent entry into Canada via Hong Kong of 11,000 Red Chinese.

Kelly recalls how in 1969 Mr. Trudeau strongly criticised the newly appointed Commissioner Higgins for stating at a news conference that the establishment of a Red Chinese Embassy at Ottawa must result in an increase of subversive agents from Red China. It is not without significance that the increased flow of hard drugs into both Canada and the United States coincides with the increase of Chinese immigrants, legal and illegal from Red China. There is a chilling lesson in these developments for Australia.

WHAT'S IN A NAME? (A LOT!)

"The N.S.W. Education Minister, Mr. Willis has instructed his department advisers not use the title 'Australian Government' - in any correspondence with Canberra." - The Herald (Melbourne), March 27th

We have drawn attention to the arrogance of the Whitlam Socialists in usurping the title - "Australian Government" for the Commonwealth Government, many times. There are seven Australian Governments; the six State Governments, and the Commonwealth Government. We fully agree with Mr. Willis, who says that - "...it is presumptuous of the Whitlam Government to take on this title of Australian Government". The collaring of this title for itself, of course, by the Whitlam Government, is just one more childish attempt to depreciate the States.

League supporters should make their views known to all parliamentarians on this issue. The non-Socialist parliamentarians will be expected to drop this "Australian Government" nonsense as soon as the Socialists are tossed out of power at Canberra. It could be that the "trendies" in the Liberal Party, now widening the cracks in the non-Socialist parliamentary facade, may like the term "Australian Government", and would not wish to drop it; they are centralists also… but give lip service to Federalism. This is just one question that should be kept up to them when they have to face their electors next time.

THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN STATE ELECTION

"As Premier of Western Australia, Sir Charles Court will join Mr. Bjelke-Petersen of Queensland as one of the two most powerful and effective opponents of the (Commonwealth) Government at Canberra." - The Australian, April 1st.

We must not give too much space to the W.A. Elections, as they have received full and ample coverage by the political journalists of the Press. Yet again, most of them were off the beam; as they predicted a "cliff-hanger" result; this didn't happen. There is no doubt in our mind that the outcome of this election was a backlash against the Canberra centralists. Mr. Whitlam is maintaining his air of cultivated disdain; but the joke will be on him in the end. We have always believed that Gough Whitlam is a political lightweight; a clever, smooth, plausible socialist, propped up by sturdier power-men behind the scenes to do a job. As soon as he has rendered all the service to the Socialist cause of which he is capable, he will be swept aside, to make way for tougher material.

The National Alliance (merger of Country Party and D.L. P.) appears to be a flop, and, as we anticipated from the outset, these two Parties have nowhere to go, and will become increasingly desperate in their struggles to survive politically. We think that the Liberal Party itself, may be further rent by ideological divisions as the political and economic climate deteriorates; and that the turn of the A.L.P. will come; probably when it is removed from office, as will be likely, as far as we can foresee, in the 1975, or even before.

The results of the Senate Elections could bring on a situation where Mr. Whitlam may have to ask for a Double Dissolution, but this is now unlikely. We must wait and see. We do not intend to go into details here, but the fact is that the political party system as has existed in the past hundred years or so, is slowly breaking up. There are many reasons for this, and it is by no means confined to Australia.

SIR PAUL DOES SOME STIRRING

"There is a great deal to be said for Governors-General who are prepared to, and equipped to, say something when they make a speech". - Editorial, The Age, (Melbourne, ) March 30th.

What interested us particularly in this Editorial were not the references to Sir Paul's comments, which were interesting enough, and certainly were spiced with truth, but rather The Age's acid comments on certain actions of the Whitlam Commonwealth Government. We quote: - "How absurd we are as we crow at the sunrise in frustration and anger that we cannot define the nationalism we seek in so many childish ways. Like painting out the word 'Commonwealth' on Government signs, and substituting the word 'Australian'. Or holding a competition for a new National Anthem, or arguing about our Flag..."
And again:-... "Our assertiveness begins at high levels in our Government and is very often ridiculous".

In our experience, although the man in the street may have the opinion that The Age is a conservative newspaper, it is far from being this. Hence our eyebrows have been raised by the above comments. Not that these are in defence of the present National Anthem; nor the existing Flag, but at least the pettiness and childishness of Mr. Whitlam and his immature socialist colleagues has been pin-pointed by a leading metropolitan daily, as they play with the levers of power like children with a new toy. The rub is that such immature people should not be allowed to play with the levers of power to the detriment of the Australian nation.

SENATOR GREENWOOD FIGHTS BACK

"The Human Rights Bill was a mixture of uncertainties, misconceptions, and intricate legal complexities, which had the dubious claim to constitutional validity. Senator Greenwood said last night". - The Age (Melbourne) March 30th.

Senator Greenwood raised the point as to whether the External Affairs powers, which the Commonwealth Government can provisionally exercise under the Constitution, can be invoked for the adoption into law of Senator Murphy's Human Rights Bill. He doubts it himself; and sees great dangers in the exercise of this power. He points out that the scope of legislation can be greatly extended by just entering into an international treaty. Senator Murphy is on shaky constitutional ground with his Bill; and it appears that even if it passed the Senate, which is unlikely, it could be challenged in the High Court. This is a matter for constitutional experts; we would much prefer that Senator Murphy's malign Bill (presented as a public benefit) were knocked out once and for all in Parliament, and did not get as far as a constitutional challenge.

We wish that we could be confident that the Liberals will oppose the Bill; but we can't. We have no confidence in Senator Hannan's "trendies", who are fighting to gain "the middle ground", whatever that means. We believe that they will go with what they think is the tide; and if the electorate at large were, in their eyes, sufficiently softened up to expect the Human Rights Bill, then to the Devil with principle; they would vote for it - just as they voted for the Commonwealth Grants Commission Bill - to enable the Commonwealth Government to make grants to agglomerations of local councils - in spite of opposition to the principle of this Bill within the Liberal Party.

An ominous note for Senator Murphy is struck by the Chief Justice of the High Court, Sir Garfield Barwick who has said that because the Commonwealth subscribes to an international document "does not necessarily attract any power to the Commonwealth Parliament."

IS THE E.E.C. ON ITS LAST LEGS?

"The British Foreign Secretary. Mr. Callaghan is to meet Common Market leaders tomorrow for talks which could make or break the nine-nation alliance". - The Australian. April 2nd.

League supporters of some years standing will recall that we have been fighting against Britain's entry into the Common Market since as long ago as 1960. We have warned, and warned over the years that the Common Market is first and foremost a political association, and only secondarily an economic association. On both scores Britain will fare ill. At last, the truth appears to be sifting through the grass roots in the U.K. that the Common Market is a trap for the British people.

The British League of Rights has been in the van of the battles against Britain's entry into Europe. Reading between the lines it now looks as though Harold Wilson and his colleagues are using the "renegotiations" as a ploy to get Britain out; we have no argument with this. If, after the "re-negotiations" have transpired a politically acceptable length of time, the question of Britain's re-entry is put to the British people at a referendum; as promised by Harold Wilson; we have little doubt that the British people will answer with a resounding "NO!" We hope that, then, will be the end of the matter; forever!

The Increment of Association

"Through regular association two individuals in association will achieve more than they will working in isolation. The increment of association increases as the group grows until it becomes approximately six up to twelve. But growth beyond this stage results in the operation of the natural Law of diminishing returns. One hundred electors, working in twenty groups of five members each will be far more effective than four groups of twenty-five. One hundred individuals in one group would be a crowd (not a group) in which individual development and effective action would be extremely difficult.
The League of Rights exists to advise and guide electors who wish to participate in self-government in all spheres who wish to initiate policies they desire instead of apathetically accepting policies imposed on them. But political democracy cannot become a reality until sufficient electors actually take action, however faltering and uncertain they may be at first. But it is in the taking of action with their fellows that they begin to realise the influence and power that they can exert." From Saffron Walden C.V.P.A. (Constituency Voters' Policy Association) (U.K.)

The Director of this C.V.P.A. was successful in having the following letter published in the "Saffron Walden Weekly News" late September, '73... Mr. Enoch Powell said on July 7th, at Hanley Staffs. "To pretend that inflation is the result of forces coming from outside, like cosmic rays, over which a government has no control, is to attempt to practice upon the innocence and ignorance of the public."

On the strength of this we conducted a small experiment with the voluntary co-operation of seven school children aged from 9 to 13, during the school holidays. None made a mistake or hesitated. All completed the exercise in under one minute. We asked: Which is the man-made thing? Which is part of creation, or the natural order? Clouds, seas, money, living beings, earth, stars, trees, rocks, wheel, moon rocket, tractor, computer, money, trees and vegetation, boots and shoes, clocks and watches. They were quite clear in their minds that money does not grow on trees because it is not that kind of thing.

Money is a man-made system. It has no value it itself at all. A billion dollars would be useless on that desert island. It does nothing of itself. Like all man-made systems, inventions, and instruments, it requires a human hand, and a human brain behind the hand to do anything at all. If new financial credit can be created, as it is to inflate prices (the 'monetisation of debt'), why cannot the same credit be used to reduce prices? To say that it cannot is like saying that a kitchen knife can only be used for slitting throats, and not for cutting bread and butter for the family's tea.

Karl Marx set out Ten Steps for Communising a State. One of these was the centralised control of financial credit. Marx never once attacked credit policy. Debt and inflation foster centralisation, and centralisation is the essence of Marxism no matter under what label it takes place; 'Conservative ' or any other".