HAWKE GOVERNMENT LOSING CONTROL AND DIRECTION

"Mr. Keating doesn't seem to know the 'World's Greatest' accolade is given by the banking people to the Treasurer who borrows most at the highest interest rate; he still thinks he won on his merits. They must be in fits." - Des Keegan, in The Australian, August 30th.

All our experience forms our opinion that the Hawke Government is in serious decline and we don't think that this process can be reversed; there are so many "indicators". Never underestimate the "insight" of a metropolitan taxicab driver as we were reminded by an interstate politician most recently. One, in our own city (Melbourne) made the remark that, "Hawke is going bad:" He has the "feel" of the political climate. It reminds us of the last months of the Whitlam Government (1975) when "Whitlam was going bad!"

Many of the orthodox economic forecasters see a deepening recession (John Stone, Des Keegan) as the Keating 1986 Budget flops. Mr. Keating, no doubt, thought that his Budget was a masterpiece, with a "surprisingly" low deficit to attract overseas capital financed with a lower standard of living by the Australian taxpayer. Mr. Hawke probably thought, "he had it made" if he put on a good show with the Hawke charisma: by appealing to the ordinary Australian to "have a go and further trading on his "ocker" image. Now we must all "buy Australian", which is fair enough. We should always try to do this. But, people with limited financial resources (and this includes the majority of us) are after value for their dollar, and regrettably, will not always buy Australian if there is a sharp comparison with respect to the better quality and cheaper price of foreign merchandise.

It's all wearing thin. Hawke and Keating are killing the goose that lays the golden egg. The Kremlin can do this, because it has total control over the ballot box (the Soviet citizen has the choice of voting for this Communist, or that Communist, or the other Communist. And if any of the three trod one inch out of line; then goodbyeski!) Hawke, the Messiah, can't do this; that ballot box is in the way (thank merciful Heaven). Now is the time when those "ideological irritations" can be fatal. In times of economic expansion, when lashings of moderately priced credit are available, the businessman can overlook such pieces of "ratbaggery" as the Bill of Rights, Fringe Benefits Tax ("Farewell-Bob-Tax", someone has written recently), Affirmative Action in Commerce and Industry, and so on. But all these things do have a cumulative effect, and assume far greater proportions when the economy turns sour.

There seems to be a type of political decadence "in the air", like very good football (or other) sportsmen 'fumbling the ball' when they sense, strongly, that defeat is imminent. Things "go bad". Now Mr. Chris Hurford has "dropped a clanger" with his most foolish offer to certain media people to provide "tidbits" of inside Government information in return for his own media exposure. This "rot" started towards the end of those Whitlam years, with Khemlani, Dr. Jim Cairns and others gaining unfavourable publicity. Probably the "Hurford Affair" will be repeated by others as the decline continues. And of course there are those international money bandits of whom Mr. John Fletcher speaks (see On Target Bulletin this issue). They don't help Messrs. Hawke and Keating, and they don't care.

THAT 'CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION'

Many people who consider themselves "politically aware", including some of our friends, are talking as though the Socialist Revolution, in Australia, is all over bar the suppressed shouting, which will have to wait, we are told, until the gate is locked closed behind us to prevent, forever, our escape back into real political freedom and democracy. The clever Fabian Socialists (and they can be clever, too!) don't want to give the game away, by premature announcements of their success: so we are told. Now, we do not go along with this portrayal of the imminent eclipse of our political freedoms. We do not doubt in the least that such is the ultimate intention of the international agencies of subversion; however, we do not believe that most of the number of Fabian Socialists in positions of political power intend that Australia shall become a totalitarian State: the subversives behind the Fabian Socialists are working towards that end. Socialism has nowhere to go but Communism.

Many individuals and organisations have been asked to make submissions, either personally or in writing, to the Constitutional Commission; it is to report to the Government by June 1988. There are six areas of government, pertaining to the Australian Constitution, to be examined.

Firstly, Head of State
The issues that are canvassed, and which are quite obviously not yet decided, are "Do we need a head of state ...?: "Should the head of state be head of the government, or separate? "What powers...?: who should hold the powers? Also, Monarchy or Republic (for Australia). We all know that the Socialists/Communists want a republic: but they haven't got it yet.

Secondly, the Queen of Australia
To calm the alarmists, we quote precisely what is written under "The Queen of Australia, (a) Style, Title, Succession and Regency." "... in 1973 (under Whitlam .. O.T) the Commonwealth altered the royal style and titles by enacting that the Queen's title in relation to Australia and its territories would be Queen of Australia. The Queen is therefore Queen of Australia, independent of her position in Britain or elsewhere (our emphasis ... O.T.) The "issues" to be canvassed here, in our opinion, do not weaken the Queen's position, but under 2B) there is information which is vitally important to clarify the present position.
2b). Powers of the Queen
"The Queen as the head of state of the Commonwealth has powers conferred upon her by the Constitution, such as the power: - to appoint and dismiss a Governor General (s.2) - to assign powers and functions to a Governor General (s.2) - to approve the appointment of a deputy to the Governor General (s .126) - to assent to bills reserved for the Queen's pleasure (s.58) - to disallow any law within one year from the Governor General's assent (s.59) The power to disallow a law has never been exercised by the Queen, and some people might think it inappropriate for an independent nation such as Australia. "The Queen could formerly exercise similar powers in relation to Australian States, but since the Australia Act 1986, the only power the Queen may exercise in respect of a State is the appointment and dismissal of State Governors (Sir Brian Murray, in Victoria, resigned ... O.T.) Any such exercise of power may only be with the advice of the State Premiers. Yes, this does appear to be a weakening of the Queen's power in the States, and this "makes sense" if it could be assumed that the Commonwealth, presently, is centralist in intent and seeks to restrict the power of the Crown in the States, preparatory to restricting the power of the Crown at Commonwealth level - an assumption that we, ourselves, could accept without difficulty. It seems obvious to us that the unrestricted power of the Crown, in the States could in some future political bid for republicanism, at Commonwealth level - offer a serious impediment to such an initiative. The "issues" to be canvassed are the retention of the Queen's powers; they are still there, in spite of the effect of the Australia Act.

The Governor-General
The official Commonwealth Constitutional Commission "Issues Paper" states that "The Imperial Conference of 1930 declared that a Governor General should be appointed by the King (or Queen) on the advice of the Kings ministers in the dominion concerned and it is a convention that an Australian is appointed to the position. The appointment by the Queen is not for any fixed term, but at her pleasure (s.2). In practice, a term of office may be for four or five years and no Australian Governor General has been removed involuntarily. The foregoing is not strictly accurate with respect to the stated "convention". There were British Governors General after the War, viz. The Duke of Gloucester, field Marshall Sir William Slim, Lord Morrison, Viscount de Lisle.
The "issues" canvassed are the nationality of the Governor General, length of term, nomination and removal.

Powers of the Governor General
Quote, "Powers are conferred upon the Governor General by the Constitution and by statute. They may be exercised by him only on advice, either from his ministers or by the Executive Council. The only exception to this are the so-called 'reserve powers', which in exceptional circumstances (The Dismissal, 1975 ... O.T.) may be exercised without or contrary to advice."

THE RESERVE POWERS OF THE GOVERNOR GENERAL ARE STILL THERE
The issues to be canvassed, significantly, are all about these "reserve powers". Commander-in-Chief of Naval and Military Forces: "The Governor General is vested by s.68 of the Constitution with the command-in-chief of the naval and military forces of the Commonwealth." HE STILL IS. In a pre-revolutionary, or actually revolutionary situation in Australia, the situation could be hopeless if Communist politicians were in control of the armed forces; whereas Australia could be saved if forces, loyal to the Crown and in control of the armed forces, asserted authority. The other Sections of the "Issues Paper" mainly concern administrative matters.

DIRTY DEALS ON DOLLAR

From the West Australian August 25th, a senior Australian banking official points out the "dirty tricks" of international finance. This is so important that we shall republish as much as possible. We saw none of this in the Eastern Press of Australia:

"Foreign exchange dealers and multinational banks are using dirty tactics deliberately to run down the Australian dollar, according to Mr. John Fletcher, the chief general manager of the Commonwealth Development Bank. "The multinational bankers should never be underestimated in the lengths they will go and the dirty tactics they will employ in pursuing their profit objectives', he said. The international money market makes a rugby pack look like 'Play School'. "Mr. Fletcher is a former head of the international division of the Commonwealth Bank. He would not name the banks or dealers he thought were manipulating the Australian dollar. "The small people can't do it. It has to be the large operators', he said. "I would think it is the large overseas operators more than the Australian banks, "They know they can manipulate the Australian exchange market because it is such a small market.' "I call it dirty tactics. They would call it speculation.'
"You just come in as a buyer, the law of supply and demand operates and if you put a whole lot of buyers on one side you send the price up. Then you sell while other people are at the high price, and you take the profit. "I think they are deliberately sending the Australian dollar down. If you take a forward position and you bring it down you are in position to capitalise on it.'
"Mr. Fletcher said there were genuine reasons for the dollar's decline, but the manipulators were having an undue effect. "This week you had the Budget and the dollar jumped straight away to U.S. 64 cents', he said. "Then by the time you had the money market people on the TV. screens it was down to U.S. 62.5 or U.S. 63 cents.' "What you don't know is what the size of the transaction was in that period. I would think it was very small.'
"Mr. Fletcher also lashed out at international bankers in a post Budget address to the N.S.W. Farm Writers and Broadcasters Society.
"First-hand experience of what the international bankers did to Mexico when it was on its knees in early 1983 made me actually aware of the dangers', he said. "Those bullyboys version of the golden rule is 'whoever has the gold makes the rules'. Put another way, they believe that the rich nations should get richer and the poor nations can get poorer'.
"Mr. Fletcher said it was not only Australia which was being hit by the international trade war between the European Community and the U.S. "He said that as the elected chairman of an association 70 development banks from 30 Asian countries, he saw how the trade war hit struggling, less developed economies.
"The less fortunate Third World countries are being denied the opportunity to even emerge from absolute poverty and bondage because of the greed of the strong nations', he said. "It is human nature at its worst. Military colonialism may be all but finished, economic colonialism is not."