REFERENDUM REVIEWby
Eric D. Butler
It has been claimed that Prime Minister Fraser scored a
moral victory at the referendums on May 21 because the four proposals for changing
the constitution were given a big national YES vote.
But in fact he provide
Mr. Whitlam, the Fabian Socialists and their Communist allies with the opportunity
of mobilising support for a campaign which they openly admitted was designed to
weaken the Senate.
With the exception of Tasmania, which has a long history
of strong opposition to all Governments at Canberra, a study of voting patterns
reveals that the Labor 'Yes' vote in all States was at least 40 per cent. The
Socialists were relying upon Prime Minister Fraser and his unprincipled colleagues
to stampede sufficient of the non-Labor vote to reach the objective they failed
to reach in 1974.
What Prime Minister Fraser did was to divide the non-Labor
vote and to create divisions and bitterness inside the Liberal and National-Country
Parties. Unless the Fraser Government can quickly correct its disastrous finance-economic
policies, the long-term beneficiaries of the 1977 referendums must be the Socialists
and their allies.
Within 48 hours of the rejection of the Simultaneous
Elections proposal, Mr. Whitlam launched the logical offensive against Mr. Fraser
by challenging him to demonstrate his sincerity about holding simultaneous elections
for both the Senate and the House of Representatives by bringing the House of
Representative elections forward to coincide with the Senate elections.
With
brazen effrontery Mr. Whitlam, who had co-operated with Mr. Fraser in an endeavour
to persuade the electors that simultaneous elections required a change to the
Constitution, was now demanding that, even though not one comma in the Constitution
had been changed, simultaneous elections be held!
And, equally important,
Mr. Fraser accepted the Whitlam viewpoint, but said that he would keep his election
options open. The real purpose of the referendums exercise was a desperate attempt
by the Fraser Government to avoid holding a half-Senate Election at which, on
present indications, there will be a massive electoral revolt against the Government.
It is a fear of electoral chastisement, not a commitment to "constitutional reform"
which drove the Fraser Government to engage in one of the most cynical exercises
in Australian political history, and to resort to "stand-over" tactics of
the most reprehensible nature in an attempt to force all Liberal and National-Country
party supporters and politicians, both State and Federal to work for a YES vote
on May 21.
The 1977 referendums assisted
further in demonstrating just which politicians stand for principles instead of
cringing before the cry of "party loyalty". I have never been a strong supporter
of Senator Kathy Martin of Queensland, but she must be given full marks for her
magnificent stand. Her fellow Senators, including Independent Senator Brian Harridine
from Tasmania, who campaigned for NO, demonstrated that there is more integrity
and independence in the Senate than in the House of Representatives.
As
far as I know, there was not one Member of the House of Representatives who publicly
supported the NO case, even though privately some expressed their misgivings.
Defying their own party machines, Premier J. Bjelke Petersen of Queensland, and
his Deputy, Liberal leader W. Knox, helped to play a decisive role in the essential
NO vote in Queensland. Both leaders were subjected to severe criticism from Prime
Minister Fraser, some of whose comments indicated his close spiritual affinity
with Mr. Gough Whitlam.
The Socialists were delighted to see the man they
regard as a major political enemy, Mr. J. Bjelke-Petersen, being publicly criticised
by Mr. Fraser. In spite of the tremendous advantages the YES campaigners had,
with public opinion polls indicating a big majority YES vote on all four issues
in all States, only Tasmania being listed as doubtful on the Simultaneous Elections
issue, I consistently expressed the opinion that the major issue could be defeated
in Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia if enough work was done by League
actionists, observing that public opinion polls had a bad record in predicting
referendum results. Results confirmed my viewpoint.
The
Gallup Poll predicted a 62% YES vote for the Simultaneous Elections proposal in
Queensland, a 55% YES vote in Tasmania and a 65% YES vote in Western Australia.
The vote was 47% YES in Queensland, 47% in Western Australia and 34% in Tasmania.
The pollsters were wrong by over 30% in Western Australia and Queensland and over
40% in Tasmania.
National-Country Party Federal Members who supported
the four referendums, men like Mr. Ron McVeigh of Darling Downs, who had some
snide comments to make about the first League of Rights brochure, would be well
advised to study the vote in their own electorates, where the NO vote on the Simultaneous
Elections issue was not only substantially higher than in the metropolitan electorates,
but where in some cases there was a NO majority for the second and third questions.
A survey of the overall voting pattern reveals that the strength of the NO
vote throughout Australia was in the rural and smaller communities, where a much
more independent attitude was adopted than in the big urban centres. And that
the massive campaigning of League supporters in two States, Queensland and Western
Australia, played a vital role in holding back the most cynical assault ever made
on the Federal Constitution.
Equally cynical, and typical of the increasing
double-talk by the Fraser Government, was the inclusion of the National Anthem,
"God Save the Queen", in what allegedly was a "popular song" contest. If "God
Save the Queen" is to remain the National Anthem, then why degrade it by including
it in a contest for a "popular song"? The central lesson of May 21st is that,
even in the face of a united campaign by the "big battalions", there is sufficient
health left in the Australian community to turn back the totalitarian tide - providing
that a non-partisan movement like the League of Rights exists to give realistic
guidance. |
MALCOLM
FRASER JOINS THE INTERNATIONAL ANTI-RODESIA CHORUS"Australia
Prime Minister, Mr. Fraser, today urged an end to Apartheid, and a rapid move
to majority rule in Rhodesia. The Sun, (Melbourne) June 4th, 1977.
We
note that Malcolm Fraser did not urge "majority rule" for Uganda, nor for Cambodia,
Vietnam, nor Laos. Nor for any of the Communist countries where elections are
a farce, and only a Communist Party candidate is presented for election. Only
Rhodesia and South Africa.
What does this
mean? It means that Malcolm Fraser has been well and truly "briefed" in London
on the correct "line" to take on Southern Africa - not that he didn't know already
- and that he is flailing about him like one possessed to get into line, and stay
there. The aptly named Peacock is eagerly bringing up the rear. But we think that
the meaning of this is more ominous. Malcolm Fraser is under "international orders"
and if he is not to blot his copy book in the eyes of what has now become known
as the Conspiracy, he must join the other vultures on the bough above the entrapped
body of Southern Africa, waiting for it to commit suicide.
Southern
Africa has now been shoved into the front line in the War against the West, with
the Communist powers supporting armed insurrection and terrorism against Rhodesia,
and fomenting civil strife in South Africa. The West, "stupid and decadent" (Dmitri
Manuilski, Moscow 1930) is waging a propaganda war against Southern Africa, and
is giving material aid in the form of food-stuffs and money to the terrorist guerillas
now killing not only whites, but also blacks. To continue Manuilski's statement,
the West is..."rejoicing to co-operate in its own destruction." What contempt
Comrades Breshnev, Kosygin and Gromyko must have for political non-entities like
Malcolm Fraser, with his lap-dogs, Peacock and Lynch. And how richly deserved!
But whilst there is life there is hope. Rhodesia and South Africa are
still there. We are writing like this. South Africa will be a mighty hard nut
to crack, and the Conspiracy knows it. That's why so much hope is being pinned
on the propaganda warfare to erode Southern Africa's morale. Even on the local
scene there is still some hope. We note that Senator Sim, of Queensland, is on
his way to Rhodesia to "see for himself". We well know that many of the rank and
file in Government circles at Canberra are unhappy with the Government's anti-Southern
Africa stand. They won't DO anything, of course; they would not lay their cushy
jobs on the line for Southern Africa "over there"; but the fact that they are
unhappy means that they are having twinges of conscience. Malcolm Fraser has none:
he is merely a numbers and power man - the perfect tool for the Conspiracy. Our
best answer to the Frasers, and their wretched ilk, is to step up the distribution
of the League's "Australia's Front Line in Rhodesia" brochure. Supporters will
be pleased to know that, once again, our problem is to print them quickly enough:
orders are outstripping capacity for supply. |
