SELLING OFF THE FARM

As on so many other basic issues, The League of Rights was the first to issue cautionary comments concerning the question of whether the National Farmers' Federation, currently headed by Mr. Ian Mc Lachlan, was really going to come to grips with the basic problems confronting Australia, to use its massive fighting fund to promote constructive political action, or whether it was going to preside over the "restructuring" of Australia's rural industries in accordance with New International Economic Order strategy. We can report that a group of backbench Labor politicians are starting to become concerned about Treasurer Keating's policies, as are members of the National Party.

League speakers have been expressing their concern at well attended rural meetings, and this concern is starting to be reflected in some editorial comment, as witnessed by the following editorial which appeared in the widely read provincial daily, Border Morning Mail, (Albury, N.S.W.) of October 6th:
"Young Australians may have their work cut out buying their own farms now that foreign ownership rules have been eased. "Rural properties worth less than $3 million may now be bought by foreign investors so long as they spend one third of the price of the land developing the property. "But according to some farm leaders, this new Government policy will jeopardise the family farm because it will keep the prices out of the reach of Australian farmers' sons. "The likelihood of foreign buyers entering the market has increased because of the low Australian dollar and the depressed price, by international standards, of rural land. "But farmers wanting to get off the land because they get so little in return for their capital and work, are not too worried who the buyers are. "With an average farm debt of $60,000 on the nation's 170,000 farms, and an average weekly interest bill of $200, farmers cannot afford to be too fussy about who buys them out.

"In 1982, Labor told farmers it would use its power over foreign investment and taxation to combat speculative dealing in land and property to prevent foreign purchases of large tracts of rural land. "Farmers know where the National Farmers' Federation stands on the influx of foreign capital into rural land. "A considerable part of its fighting fund has been provided by banks and foreign companies whose interests do not appear to coincide with those of Australian farmers. "An uncomplaining acquiescence to the unrestricted takeover of Australia's family farm lands by foreign interests would be a surrender to a catastrophic development with much wider consequences than many imagine.

"The only alternative if Australia's farms are to be saved is to tackle Australia's domestic money policy. "The release of sufficient national credit to reconstruct debt to a manageable basis and to reduce internal costs and taxation should and must be done. "The courage to do this would earn the N.F.F. the undying gratitude not only of farmers but all Australians, including the unions. "A meek surrender would make the N.F.F. one of the most expensive calamities in the nation's history.'

THE GROWING POLITICAL FERMENT

It is no secret that there has been continuing tension between the National Party and the Farmers' Federation. As yet Mr. Ian MacLachlan of the Farmers' Federation has not declared his political intentions, although it has been reported to us that he intends to enter the Federal Parliament. Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen's political strategy will become clearer following the coming Queensland State elections. There is little doubt of his intention to play a major role in influencing the next Federal elections. His position will be weakened unless he polls strongly on November 1st.

Yielding to growing public pressure, Prime Minister Hawke may deprive the Premier of his proposed trump card, the Fringe Benefits Tax. Mr. Hawke is now committed to a major review before November 1st. The growing national political ferment is being further increased by the emergence of "The New Right", which we analysed in a recent issue, and conflict inside the Liberal Party concerning what its relationship should be with what small 'l' Liberals see as some type of ultra conservative movement. Confusing the position even more, chief executive of the Australian Chamber of Manufacturers, Mr. Brian Powell, has used the term "neo-Fascism" in describing "The New Right", which is slightly ironic when the large employer groups with whom Mr. Powell works, are working closely with the Australian Council of Trade Unions. Big Business and Big Unions linked with Big Government is the essence of Fascism or National Socialism.

Multinationalist Sir Peter Ables, Mr. Hawke's personal friend, insists that Paul Keating is a great Treasurer, while his fellow multinationalist Rupert Murdoch has told Wall Street that Prime Minister Hawke was doing a "great" job. Murdoch was addressing the conference hosted by Australian stockbrokers McIntosh Hoare Govett Ltd. "The Age" representative, writing from New York, writes,
"They were the elite of Australia's new capitalism, the movers and shakers, the kings of the takeover game…They had come to tell Wall Street that Australia was a good thing to invest in. John Elliot of Elders was there. He is, of course, Federal Treasurer of the Liberal Party. He also urges the international bankers to invest in Australia.

Renewed speculation about the "New Right" has been fuelled by the announcement that the Council for the National Interest announced that it has established a Melbourne office. The published list of those on the 13 member Council, chaired by former head of the Foreign Affairs Department Mr. Peter Henderson, with Mr. B.A. Santamaria listed as one of the members, suggests that this is at least a national patriotic group genuinely concerned about military defence. Chairman for the council, Mr. Barry Everingham says that one of the reasons for the establishment of the organization was because the Opposition was not tackling such vital issues as defence vigorously enough. Defence of "The New Right" by deputy Federal Liberal leader Brown, has resulted in a strong reaction from South Australian Liberal Steele Hall and others.

Tensions are growing inside the Liberal Party and there is no doubt that Labor Party propagandists will be doing everything to foster those tensions. It is in the political interests of the Labor Party to create the public perception of a ferment of opposition to the Hawke Government, but lacking any coherence. If some group with sufficient national status could come forward to foster a national programme which sought to unite the electors on basic issues, and one of those generally neglected - being the constitutional revolution, and to establish in as many electorates as possible a non-party service movement questioning candidates, it would by rendering Australia what could prove a life saving service. Perhaps this is an appropriate task for the Returned Services League of Australia?

STAR-WARS OVER ICELAND

As we go to press we hear over the A.B.C. Radio News, that Mr. George Schulz, the U.S. Secretary of State is "disappointed" that no real progress has been made in the Icelandic Summit. We could have told him that would happen months ago. What the Kremlin must achieve is abandonment of the Strategic Defence Initiative (S.D.I. - "Star Wars"). No doubt Comrade Gorbachev was dangling all sorts of bait before the Americans to get them to a conciliatory position (earlier reports suggest this) - and then slammed on the Big Bite: No Star Wars.

What's it all about? Star Wars is a defensive programme. It will protect the U.S.A. from on rushing Soviet missiles by destroying them in flight. And it works! Further to our "Thought for the Week" (this issue), the U.S.S.R. does not want a nuclear war with the U.S.A. The Soviet programme is for on going subversion against the West; demoralization, probably greatly exacerbated by the coming finance economic collapse in the West and the nuclear blackmail. "Star Wars" neutralises Soviet nuclear blackmail.

NAZI HUNTERS? - BEST TO FORGET