JEREMY LEE REPORTS FROM QUEENSLAND

"This morning, July 23rd, the State Conference of the National Party opens at Caloundra. A number of crucial issues, notably whether or not the Party will rescind its policy for a State Bank, are due for discussion. This conference will surely decide whether Premier Joh's leadership is waxing or waning. Two nights ago, the A.B.C.'s "Nationwide" featured a segment on a recently formed Queensland Association called "The Enterprise Queensland Association" led by a Darling Downs grain grower, Mr. W. Jauncey. The programme pointed out the Association had some prominent sponsors, including a former State President of the R.S.L., the Chairman of the State's biggest Dairy Co-op, and a Director of a Meat Processing Company. According to its leader, Mr. Jauncey, the organisation was concerned at the undermining within the National Party of the Premier's position on a number of issues.

As far as the public is concerned, the claim seems obvious enough. The State President, Sir Robert Sparkes, appears to have deliberately canvassed a number of policy matters in public, and to many in the Party his actions smack of washing dirty linen in public in a manner aimed at embarrassing the Premier.
Asked to comment on Mr. Jauncey's charges, Sir Robert gave a smooth display of smear. Enterprise Queensland, he claimed, was a front for the League of Rights, which was pushing its "funny money social credit policies, aimed at printing unlimited debt-free credit." He claimed the Premier had disassociated himself from the Association, in contradiction of Mr. Jauncey, who said the Premier appreciated the efforts of his group. What the truth is on these claims is unclear. To date the Premier is "lyin' low and sayin' nothin'."

We cannot vouch for all Sir Robert's claims, but if his remarks on the League are anything to go by, he has not allowed the truth to qualify his remarks. He knows very well that the League has never advocated the printing of "unlimited debt-free credit". Of this there is no doubt, for Sir Robert himself personally invited me to give evidence, 'along with economists H.W. Herbert and Mr. Jensen, at a special meeting of the Party's management committee over ten years ago.
Sir Robert has never bothered to ascertain whether there is any connection between the League of Rights and Enterprise Queensland Association. He is therefore open to the charge that he is using the League of Rights as a club to attack anyone within his own Party who disagrees with him, thus stifling discussion of major issues on their merits.

I have appeared as a guest speaker on Mr. Jauncey's platform in his battle to defend Section 92 of the Constitution, a year or two ago. Thus I have been a guest for both Sir Robert and Mr. Jauncey in the past! None of this has hindered Sir Robert from using an unfounded League of Rights smear when it has suited his purpose. In fact, although Sir Robert himself started a public controversy over National Party policy, I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Jauncey is expelled from the National Party by the imperious Sir Robert for his public response to Sir Robert's actions.
None of this petty intrigue within the National Party would be worth much attention were it not for the fact that behind it is a much more serious move to shift the clear cut position the Premier has taken in times past, and replace it with the "progressive" image that has become such an infection in other parties throughout Australia.

At the moment Joh Petersen appears to be being led by the nose within his own Party, and rank-and-file members, who are much closer to general opinion in Queensland than a power hungry party executive, are becoming increasingly concerned at the Premier's reluctance to "tell it like it is" within the National Party.
Of greatest concern would be a compromise on the State Bank issue, allowing Sir Robert's concept of a "merchant bank partnership" to slip in. Such a compromise would be seen as a serious blow for the Premier, from which he would find it increasingly difficult to recover, as Sir Robert consolidates his own increasingly autocratic power base within the Party.

THE DISAPPEARING BRITISH STOCK

BRIEF COMMENTS

The Age (Melbourne), July 24th, ran a half page, semi smear article on Mr. Bruce Ruxton, President of the Victorian Branch of the Returned Services League (R.S.L.). What struck us was the old, old, old confusion technique of advancing opinions as facts - e.g.: "But his (Ruxton's) unsolicited, outrageous (our emphasis) views which flow freely across such emotive issues as immigration, defence, Aboriginal land rights, and many, many more, are true to form."
The writer of the article does not 'mention the fact that the views of Mr. Ruxton, which are outrageous (apparently to him) are those which have been endorsed by the whole body of the R.S.L. in Victoria. Our own opinion is that such views (above) would be endorsed by the majority of Australians if put to a proper referendum. Further, our opinion (and it is at least as good as the opinion of the journalist in question) is that Mr. Ruxton should not be in the least concerned about derisory articles on himself in the newspapers. They give him further publicity, and a further broadcast of his views.

The inevitable political facts of life are emerging more quickly now in Zimbabwe. The Editorial in The Australian (July 26th) spells it out quite well. As would be anticipated, the Editorial bewails the emergence of the inevitable facts of life: politicians do this sort of thing also. First the Editorial stresses, "until 1979, Zimbabwe's political system was racist and repressive" (an opinion advanced as fact). We wonder how many of the blacks in Zimbabwe would prefer to return to those terrible days under Mr. Ian Smith, or "enjoy" Mr. Mugabe's idea of democracy?!
Then the admission: "Unfortunately, the new Zimbabwe has already given plenty of evidence that it is well along the road to becoming just as oppressive....
Now the reality: "the Government (of Zimbabwe) has announced its intention to making two fundamental changes in Zimbabwe's Constitution. The first proposal is to remove the 20 seats allocated to white representatives in the Parliament. The second is to make Zimbabwe into a One party State, thus making illegal any organised opposition to the Government."
Finally a warning of the obvious: ....the course Zimbabwe is following can only encourage those right-wing South Africans who argue that any concession to majority rule will inevitably lead to a black dictatorship."
We, ourselves, forecast the descent of government in the former Southern Rhodesia into revolutionary chaos some few years ago. But those were the 'paranoid ravings' (the trendies love that phrase) of an extremist, racist, organisation.

Mr. John Howard, the Federal Treasurer, is sweating tears of blood for us all! He loves us so much: It is all like a "Mo letter" from The Children of God. He reckons that the Federal Government expects to recover some $450 Million from us of retrospective laws governing taxation. ("Bottom of the Harbour" swifties, which aren't so difficult to follow) But how about this?! "I don't think any government can stand idly by in the face of this (tax avoidance) and allow the general public to suffer so much. The failure to pay these taxes has represented an unfair increase in the tax burden of the ordinary taxpayer, and particularly the P.A.Y.E. (pay as you earn) taxpayer.
We have commented in these pages earlier this year that the Government is throwing away countless millions of dollars in "aid" to various "developing" countries; none are "under developed", just developing in immigration that most Australians don't want, and down various other bottomless pits. Better to cut costs there than squeeze the entrepreneurs who provide employment with their various industrial projects. Squeezing the entrepreneurs is largely killing the goose that lays the golden egg. Under modern finance economic conventions this is going to happen anyway, as forecast by C.H.Douglas some 60 years ago ("The Breakdown of the Employment System"). Mr. Howard is just hurrying it along a little in Australia.

R.S.L. Speaks for the People on Migration
The following letter was published in The Australian, under the above, featured, heading, on July 20th. The writer is Mr. Bruce C. Ruxton, President, R.S.L., Victorian Branch:
"Your editorial of July 10th, entitled, R.S.L.'s Aryanist Ockerism, was rather a sad attack on a democratic organisation - the R.S.L. "Your paper has condemned on many occasions the undemocratic process of many countries and the dictatorial attitudes of many people and organisations, but really, why the R.S.L.? "The Victorian Branch of the R.S.L. does not condemn your actions in your unprecedented attack on its members, but may I point out that the motion calling for a greater percentage of European migration did come from the rank and file. "Neither the office bearers of the Victorian Branch, including myself, nor the members of its State executive took part in the Immigration motions, unlike the national president, who more or less pleaded with delegates to vote against the motions. "The vote was almost unanimous, with only one dissenter, compared with 400 (four hundred) who voted in favour of the motion.
"It's a great pity that the journalists of the Australian media don't go round the suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne, both inner and outer suburbia, and test the feelings of the Australian people. "Try the industrial suburbs of Melbourne, and ask the residents whose side they are on - yours or the R.S.L.?
"The R.S.L. members reflect, and have always reflected, the attitudes and aspirations of the ordinary people of this country, but unlike timid politicians, newspapers and other organisations, are game enough to speak out on issues such as immigration, and damn the media, or whatever, which insults them.
"Without insulting your intelligence by quoting Abraham Lincoln's description of democracy and democratic governments, let's have a referendum on the subject, or at least commission an opinion poll (one of your choice) on whether current Asian, particularly Vietnam immigration policies, are the wishes of the Australian people, or do you prescribe to the theory that governments and the press know better?
"I wish I were as sure of winning Tattslotto as I am about the outcome of such a referendum or poll. "If Sir William Keys is so sure of himself, perhaps the R.S.L. should have its own plebiscite."