AN ELECTION T.V. INTERVIEW NOT SHOWN!

When Mrs. Florence Bjelke- Petersen appeared at a joint League of Rights-Queensland Housewives Seminar on August 10th, a massive smear campaign was launched against her, clearly with the intention of trying to undermine her electoral prospects. Deluded by their own anti-League propaganda, those responsible for this smear campaign felt that anyone who dared to be associated with the League would be automatically damned. Mrs. Bjelke-Petersen, backed strongly by her husband, refused to be intimidated by the anti-League campaign.
The massive Queensland vote for Mrs. Bjelke-Petersen, and the strong League support for her campaign, has been a devastating answer to the anti-League smearers. It is a pity that another proposed anti-League smearing project against Mrs. Bjelke-Petersen was not shown; it might have further increased her majority!

During the election campaign a young man purporting to be a political science student at the Melbourne University came into the League office in Melbourne and claimed to be interested in studying League literature. He took away the League's brochure on immigration. Shortly afterwards a T.V. team was seen filming the building in which the League's offices are situated. Then the League office door burst open and a League officer was verbally assaulted by an Interviewer from Channel 7's Mike Willessee programme, asking why the League was distributing "this racist literature". The cameraman was filming. The League officer firmly but politely objected to the break in and insisted that the team had to leave. In answer to questions about whether the National Director, Mr. Eric Butler, was in, the League officer insisted as the T.V. team was forced to leave, that if they wanted interviews they should ring up and seek an appointment.

Immediately following, the manager of the programme was rung and told in the strongest possible language that the break in by the T.V. team was not only childish, but bad mannered and loutish. The manager apologised profusely, agreeing that what had been filmed would not be shown, but stressing that Mr. Willesee was keen to interview Mr. Butler. Arrangements were subsequently made for this interview to take place at the League office. This time a different team was sent, but while the interviewer was pleasant, once the interview got under way, it immediately became obvious that the main thrust of his questioning was to demonstrate that the League was a dangerous racist organisation and that the Queensland Premier and his wife were closely linked with the League.
Asked his reactions to Mr. Al Grassby's recommendation that the distribution of the League's "racist" literature should be stopped, Mr. Butler replied that he was not aware that Mr. Grassby had made such a recommendation, but that he was not surprised as it was a manifestation of Mr. Grassby's totalitarian philosophy.

Challenged on the immigration issue, Mr. Butler said the League's view was that the Australian people should be directly consulted on the question. When he persistently brought the charge of "racism" back to the fact that for over 70 years all the Federal Parties had strongly supported the policy designed to keep Australia a homogeneous European nation, and that if he was a "racist", the late Sir Robert Menzies and many others had also been "racists", the interviewer clearly did not know how to handle this type of response.
Mr. Butler said it was no secret that League supporters were being requested to support Mrs. Florence Bjelke-Petersen and Senator Glen Shell, not because the League agreed with them on all issues, or because they supported the League on all matters, but because it was felt they were the two best candidates offering themselves for the Senate in Queensland.
After all this effort, the Willesee programme did not go ahead with the proposed project.

A.B.C. ATTEMPTS TO LINK LEAGUE AND NATIONAL FRONT!

During the Federal elections, the Queensland segment of the A.B.C.'s "Nation Wide" attempted to link the League of Rights with the National Front, which ran a Queensland Senate team of two. In a programme interviewing Miss Sisson, the interviewer said, "It was claimed" that the League of Rights was linked with the National Front. When challenged about this statement, an A.B.C. representative said that Miss Sisson had made the claim. The League now possesses a letter from Miss Sisson in which she flatly denies that there is any link between the League of Rights and the National Front.

As Queensland "Nation Wide" refuses to apologise the League is now taking the matter further. The League has made it clear time and time again, that it does not support any political parties, and that it finds the power philosophy of the National Front, together with its National Socialist finance-economic policies, an offence to the Christian philosophy, upon which the League has been based.
Recent convulsions inside the British National Front, with Front leader Mr. John Tyndall forming a new second National Front following disclosures of a homosexual network - although there had been rumours of this network for some time - only highlight the evils of this type of politics. National Front type activities, in which many sincere idealists are misled, are essential for the revolutionary programme. And such activities are often deliberately promoted by agents-provocateurs.

POST-ELECTION BRIEFS!

Veteran political analyst Alan Reid comments that when Mr. Bill Hayden pulled the rug from under Bob Hawke over Hawke's inclusion of wages as part of an anti-inflation packet, it was felt that he had thrown away what chance he had of winning the next Federal Elections. Alan Reid comments, "I think that even though precise memory of the Adelaide events have probably faded, sufficient skepticism remained about Labor's economic policy to give Malcolm Fraser victory…" Many still recalled that Mr. Hayden was a senior Minister in the detested Whitlam Government.

The decisive defeat of the Liberal John Haslem in Canberra resulted in Home Affairs Minister Ellicott stating that Canberra people had been spoiled and threatened tough action if Canberra Unions persisted in refusing to participate in the building if they did not get what they demanded. Mr. Ellicott says that he would recommend that the project be postponed indefinitely and the money used for public works elsewhere in Australia. The great majority of Australian taxpayers, given a free choice, would opt for a tax cut rather than a new Parliament House or any other public works.

The comparatively poor showing of the Labor Party in N.S.W. must be directly attributed to the Liberal Party's last minute saturation advertising warning against a "wealth" tax if Labor won. The real estate boom in Sydney in recent times has inflated the value of homes enormously, modest bungalow style homes valued at $35,000 - $40,000 a few years back, now being valued at over $100,000. But while scaring homeowners, Mr. Fraser was quiet about the question of a proposed Value Added Tax. There is no argument that the proposal is being seriously considered.

The Fraser Government must not be allowed to forget one promise made during the last stages of a campaign, which the Liberals feared, could go against them! That revenue from any significant increases in overseas oil prices would be passed back to the people in tax cuts. Unfortunately there was no precise definition of what is a "significant" oil price increase.

The success of the Tasmanian "terrible twins", Liberal Members Hodgman and Goodluck (the "Aussie battler") in holding their seats comfortably, can be directly attributed to their grassroots activities and their willingness to adopt an openly critical attitude towards their own Government. With a smaller Government majority, the influence of both these men could be much greater.

The strong late vote for the ALP in the Northern Territory was the result of the aboriginals voting Labor almost in a solid bloc. Commentators expressing surprise that National Party Member, Thompson, should have held the Northern electorate of Leichhart, the most vulnerable Government electorate in Australia, have overlooked the fact that there are three main groups in this electorate! The whites, the aboriginals and the islanders. The big increase in the aboriginal and islander vote for Mr. Thompson more than offset the reduced white vote. Those who accept the one-man-one-vote-one-value dogma might ponder on the thought that if a Federal election were extremely close, the Government of Australia might well depend upon who could best manipulate the aboriginal vote.