WILL THE NATIONAL PARTY COMMIT SUICIDE?

The debate concerning the proposed amalgamation of the National and Liberal Parties is one whose outcome well may have a decisive bearing on the future of Australian politics. We have long held the view that if the National Party, originally the Country Party, was to prevent the destruction, not only of traditional rural Australia, but also of its natural allies, small businessmen and conservatively minded Australians everywhere, it could best serve that purpose by moving to the cross benches in the Federal Parliament and exert pressure on whichever party was in office.

We notice with interest that Mr. B.A. Santamaria, well known columnist, is advocating a similar policy at a time when the Liberal Party is led Federally by a man who takes no firm stand on any basic issue, like Mabo, while his deputy, Dr. Michael Wooldridge, is urging the Liberal Party to become trendy like the Labor Party. Wooldridge claims that the alleged "hard line" of the Opposition Parties on Aboriginal affairs was politically bad, and that there should be a re-think on the subject of the gay community and other groups.

In spite of his blind spot on finance economics, Federal National leader Tim Fischer is showing sound political judgment by opposing a formal amalgamation between the National and Liberal Parties. The fact that the total vote for the National Party declined to only 7 percent at the last Federal elections reflected, in part, the view among members of the rural community that the National Party had progressively turned away from its original basic policies.

It will be recalled by older League of Rights supporters that the National Party was first used to spearhead a nation wide smear campaign against the League. The League's "crime" was that it had generated a grassroots movement urging that the then Country Party return to its roots and sound policies, such as low interest long term finance, decentralisation and limited non-European immigration. As even the silliest of the League's many critics know that it is not a power movement, but one which provides a high standard of education and service, the real reason for the intense anti-League campaign is, of course, the fear of its influence, not its numbers, or lack of them.

Some of the League watchers and critics occasionally concede this, while at the same time claiming that as a minority movement, the League represents no one but a few "aging right-wing extremists" like Eric Butler. This was the line taken by David Greason, writing in the Australia-Israel Review on Labor M.P. Graeme Campbell's appearance on the League's platform at the 1993 League National Seminar. David Greason, who attended the Seminar, tells of how he took it on himself - or was he speaking for those Zionist Jews he seeks to serve?- to warn Graeme Campbell against speaking on a League platform.

Greason says that he made the point that the League was "not representative of country people". The reality is that the League is representative of traditional Australia, its value systems and its institutions. That is why the League supports the basic democratic principle of the Australian people having a vote, by referendum, on basic issues like MABO, immigration, and "economic rationalism". We are not informed whether David Greason also felt it necessary to warn Graeme Campbell against appearing shortly after the League Seminar, on Mr. B.A. Santamaria's National Civic Council platform.

A new political situation is emerging in Australia. If the National Party can maintain its independence from an increasingly ineffective Liberal Party, it could play a major role in a new, genuinely conservative political movement.

'THE WORLD' CONDEMNS AUSTRALIA

As the international experiment in human madness, the world state, proceeds, Australians will become accustomed to headlines like that appearing in the weekend press: "World slams suspension of family planning aid". This refers to "growing international condemnation" of the decision to trim a modest $35 million off the $130 million overseas aid programme. The aid was for "family planning" (which could cover a multitude of sins) and the Government agreed to trim this aid programme as a part of a deal with the Independent Senator Brian Harridine from Tasmania, a devout Catholic, and a critic of family planning aid programmes.

From whom is the "growing international condemnation" coming? Mainly from aid agencies and family planning groups! Also, a number of scientists at the World Scientific Academy meeting in New Delhi have condemned the move, at a conference that resembles closely a Club of Rome scare story that the world is doomed unless the human being is abolished. A number of A.L.P. backbenchers are also complaining about the decisions: Mr. Colin Hollis (A.L.P., Throsby) and Senator Margaret Reynolds (Queensland). It may be simply coincidence that Reynolds and Hollis are named, but their commitment to globalism is more than just casual. Both Hollis and Reynolds are Australian members of "Parliamentarians for Global Action" which was previously called "Parliamentarians for World Order" until some nationalists began to wake up to the fact that this was simply a world government pressure group inside Western parliaments!

An old brochure from Parliamentarians for World Order begins: "Mankind is in trouble. An insane nuclear arms race, mass hunger, over population and pollution all darken our future. Individual nations cannot control these problems. Stronger world institutions are urgently needed..." The answer? World law. International control.

From last Monday, the great globalising experiment of European Union formally began, like the first roll of the dice in a new kind of Monopoly game. Large proportions of the new "citizens of Europe" are strongly against the experiment, which is breaking down even as the dice are rolling. GATT, the international trading agreement, has been under negotiation for nearly a decade, and there is no agreement. The solution to national problems is invariably a national affair. Problems are not solved by "globalising" them. They only get bigger, more wildly out of control, and more expensive. It is a pity Senator Harradine couldn't have had the whole aid budget suspended, until Australian poverty was eliminated.

WHY REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T WORK

The results of the recent Canadian election, in which the Conservative Government was wiped out, with the Prime Minister losing her seat, saw a large protest vote go to the French Separatist Party, and the new Reform Party in the West. The opinion polls for this weekend's New Zealand election uniformly show both strong support for the minor parties, and a large proportion of voters who are 'undecided' - or unenthusiastic. And the fate of Premier Arnold in the South Australian elections next month seems certain - until one considers the alternative.

Mr. Graeme Campbell, the A.L.P. Member for Kalgoorlie, attributes the poor results from democratic government to a flight from responsibility. Certainly the numerous Royal Commissions into corruption in several Australian States indicates that Campbell is correct. However, the Queen's Council for one of the three Royal Commissioners into W.A. Inc., Mr. Peter Brinsden, is much more specific: "One of the problems is too steadfast adherence to the party, to the detriment of ones independence as a parliamentarian. That seems to be the basic cause of the problem throughout the Westminster system."

In an article entitled "Crisis in our Democracy" Samuel Jacobs, Q.C., the former S.A. Supreme Court judge who produced the devastating report into the S.A. State Bank collapse, made similar points: "The parliamentary process has changed. To a large extent we've got executive government, parliament is a sham... I just observe the fact that the man on the bus thinks all politicians are bloody idiots. If you go back 150 years ago to the days when ministerial responsibility meant something, governments changed and they resigned to go to the people. That doesn't happen any more. We talk glibly about the Westminster system but we don't practise it. So if the ordinary politician isn't prepared to grasp this nettle, then somebody else has got to." (Weekend Australian, 30/10/93.)

There are several points to be made
1) Australia is not "a democracy" at all - it is a constitutional Monarchy. Our system of government depends not upon counting heads to make decisions, but upon representative government. Under the Westminster system, the executive (cabinet) must answer to Parliament, and the executive account to the Crown for their actions.
2) If the Member of Parliament is in the grip of a force that corrupts his independence of thought and action, like the political party which is largely controlled by the members of the executive, then the executive is out of control, and not accountable to anyone. The only possible result is corruption, incompetence and voter dissatisfaction. The only possible answer to this problem is for the voters to begin to accept some of the responsibility they demand from their "representatives," sack the party hacks and appoint genuine servants who will do as their constituents want, rather than any party.

It is the role of the League of Rights to find, encourage and train those voters who want to take part in this regeneration. The Social Dynamics Seminar is a key tool in this training process. And perhaps more politicians should ride on buses for a change. We cannot complain that representative government doesn't work if we are not prepared to try it. Members of Parliament must be held personally responsible for results - or lack of results.

O'MABO, NcMABO, AND JONES

from The Australian, October 29th
The debate on native title has me thinking - what about those of us whose family names and physical features clearly identify us as belonging to the Celtic (or even Pictish) peoples who originally inhabited Great Britain? "Invaded (and enslaved) first by the Teutons in the 5th century, the Romans in the 6th, the Vikings in the 8th - llth centuries, we were finally subjugated by a horde of Viking descendants from Normandy (1066 and all that). Since that time, our indisputable ownership of the country - native title - has been contemptuously ignored by governments. Even our sacred Druid sites have been sequestered to be used as mere tourist attractions.

"The time has clearly come to remedy these injustices. Fair-minded people will, I am sure, support mounting a test case to establish native title (Loch Ness appeals to me) to commence the process of returning Great Britain to its rightful owners. In the meantime, people of Celtic origin (including all those with Scottish clan names) should help to bring our just cases to the attention of the world by boycotting the next Commonwealth Games, and by staging a peaceful protest at the Edinburgh Tattoo." (Brian Wynn, The Basin, Vic.)

BEAZLEY'S GANG STARTED IT

HOW SMART?

from The Australian, October 28th
The ABC have just been to the New England district filming a report for The Investigators on the problem of farm mortgages. The local Bankwatch group was asked to find a venue and an audience. "Finding a hall was no problem, finding an audience was a different story. Only the bravest, or most foolhardy bank clients will dare to be seen, or heard, publicly raising questions about the banks. "The fact is that the agricultural industry is fighting for its life, and it is the banks, with their intransigent attitude and excessive interest rates that are delivering the death blow.

"We cannot afford to annihilate the Australian farmer because our agricultural experience and know how are a valuable world resource. "Australian workers, businesses and farmers are constantly accused of being inefficient and uncompetitive. But, according to Professor Prasada Rao of the University of New England, Armidale, Australia's per capita agricultural output is five times greater than the world average and two times greater than that of the United States and Canada. "The comparison when output is related to manpower actually engaged in agriculture is even more favourable - we come in second, just slightly behind the United States.

"Considering that we farm under harsher natural conditions than our competitors, the New England Bankwatch Group would like to ask, how much smarter are we supposed to get? "The Australian farmer has developed skills and techniques to maximise production under harsh climatic conditions that should be shared with Third World countries to help them improve their self-sufficiency. "If we put out of business the major proportion of our owner-farmers we will lose a wealth of knowledge and expertise that will not be recovered for generations, if at all." (A. Crosson, Secretary, New England Bankwatch Group, Armidale, N.S.W.)