THE PHONEY DEBATE CONTINUES

by Eric D. Butler
Only a fool would dogmatically predict who will be the Prime Minister after March 2nd. The "Great Debate" which took place last Sunday night shed little light on what might happen. The small majority vote in favour of Paul Keating - 51 percent to 49 percent - merely reflected the slightly better television performance by Paul Keating. Nothing of real substance emerged.

A feature of last week's campaigning was the blatant contest in electoral bribery. Millions were offered to different sections of the community. Neither Howard nor Keating have offered convincing evidence of how all that has been promised will be financed. Paul Keating has made the convenient discovery that the taxation system is being rorted by the super-rich and that he will get $500 million from this source.

Immigration and multiculturalism did not rate a mention, except in passing. Paul Keating raises the question of what John Howard was going to do about some of the "racists" in the Queensland National Party, instancing the National Party candidate for North Queensland, observing that by expelling Graeme Campbell from the Labor Party he had demonstrated that Campbell's kind of thinking would not be tolerated.

John Howard was not able to provide a satisfactory answer to the question of how he was going to fund his grandiose environmental policy if the Senate blocked his proposed sale of part of Telstra to obtain necessary finance. Neither Party leader relishes the prospect of operating in a Parliament where they do not have a majority in the Senate. In an address to what is now generally described as "the ethnic community", in Melbourne, John Howard adopted what could almost be described as a sickening groveling approach. He would not tolerate "racism" of any description. Millions would be spent on "educating" the Australian people against the evils of "racism" and the virtues of multiculturalism.
Both the Labor Party and the Coalition have decided that multiculturalism, immigration and associated issues should not be discussed.

During the "Great Debate," John Howard raised the question of unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, but as with the foreign debt issue, offered nothing concrete about what he was proposing to do. The best he could suggest on unemployment was that if the unnecessary shackling regulation were removed from Small Business, this would assist. No one disputes that Small Business is penalised, but the reality is that large-scale unemployment is a feature of all Western as well as the Japanese economy.

Germany, often held up as a model for other Western industrial economies, has recently announced that unemployment has now reached a record post-Second World War level. Those who believe that bigness is the solution for economic problems should note that Germany has Europe's largest economy. Calls for still greater growth ignore the reality of modem finance economics. The end of an era has come and all attempts at stimulating economies along orthodox lines can only increase trade as well as environmental problems.

One of the most revealing political statements of last week came from John Howard, who said that "The only big reform" that the Government had carried out was financial deregulation. John Howard had advocated this long before Paul Keating had accepted the policy. Paul Keating had, of course, originally opposed deregulation of the banking system, pointing out that Australia would lose its financial sovereignty if it allowed foreign banks to operate in Australia.

Neither John Howard nor Paul Keating has demonstrated what benefits Australia has gained from deregulating the banking system. Both continue to stress the necessity for Australia to develop closer economic links with Asia.
Occasionally John Howard throws Australian loyalists a small crumb of support such as a promise to make it impossible to change the Australian flag without a referendum of the people. But he is careful not to extend the concept of people having a say to really important issues like immigration and multiculturalism.

Providing that the "it's time" factor operates, the phony debate should end with John Howard falling over the winning line as a result of default. He will not be able to claim any mandate for any firm policy commitment because he has not given one. The best result for the Australian people would be a government with a small majority in the House of Representatives, but lacking a majority in the Senate.

TEMPERATURE RISING IN AUSTRALIAN MULTICULTURAL MELTING POT

by David Thompson
Last month the Australia Institute released results of research concerning Australian population growth, and added a warning that the issue was not being properly debated because of fear of the social stigma of "racism". The Director of the Canberra based Institute, Mr. Clive Hamilton, said the results of his research highlighted an urgent need for a debate free of intimidation if the immigration policy was to be based on any sensible criteria.

"Many people of integrity, such as academics, are concerned about the implications of population growth in Australia, but are reluctant to enter into public debate for fear of being branded racist, "he said.

The research was conducted by a United States based demographer, Dr. Lincoln Day, who identifies immigration as the central factor in population growth. He warns that the present high immigrant intake threatens natural habitats, water quality, lifestyle and cultural integrity. Such problems will force the debate upon us sooner or later, the academics warn.

Australia is rapidly becoming unique internationally as one of the last nations in the world to maintain a numerically high mass-immigration policy. In particular, western European countries have taken steps to reduce the number of immigrants, and crack down heavily on illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Nations such as France, Britain, Italy, Sweden, Holland, Germany and Austria are all moving towards a zero net immigration policy, apparently without the waves of liberal guilt washing over them, and hoarse shouts of "discrimination" and "racism" stifling public debate.

What is wrong with Australians that they are so readily intimidated by such abuse? The backlash against third-world migrants into Europe has been explained as an economic and environmental response. But it is clear that the issue that generates the tension and the friction is almost entirely the social issue of culture.

In Europe the European Union has a new treaty, the Schengen Agreement, guaranteeing passport free travel between member nations. However, some countries, like France, refuse to implement the agreement for social and cultural reasons, rather than the fear of economic refugees from disintegrating nations like Yugoslavia. The fear of Islamic fundamentalism is a significant factor in France, where several serious cases of terrorist bombings have taken place.

The British have been forced to try to stem the flow of bogus asylum seekers by declaring the nations of origin of many of those claiming asylum to be safe. Thousands of economic migrants are now to be returned to their countries of origin. The British Home Secretary, Mr. Michael Howard, dismissed suggestions that the measures were immoral, saying "It is not immoral to protect our asylum procedures against the current massive level of abuse."

The British are threatened with a flood of "asylum seekers" from India, Pakistan, Ghana, Poland, Rumania, Bulgaria and Cyprus in particular.

THE AUSTRALIAN EXPERIENCE

In Australia the most politically correct justification for reducing the migrant intake is for environmental and economic reasons. While these reasons are entirely justifiable on their own, it is clear that, as in other countries, the key issue, which generates rising passion on immigration, is that of culture. As yet, the climate of intimidation is such that relatively few dare to challenge the dogma that multiculturalism is "good". Relatively benign comments, such as that by a National Party candidate in North Queensland, describing naturalisation ceremonies as "de-wogging" procedures are still greeted with righteous indignation. Increasingly, however, the social friction is causing genuine frustration to be openly expressed.

Last month a tourist official on Queensland's Sunshine Coast was the target of the same kind of self-righteous abuse when he observed that the interests of tourism were not well served by high numbers of Asian visitors to the region. Don Moffatt expressed the view that the Sunshine Coast should not try to attract the Japanese tourist trade as the Gold Coast had done, because other tourists do not want to mix with them. When accused of racism, Moffatt defended himself: "I've done my own research worldwide, and I know tourists from South Africa, South America, North America and most of Europe will go out of their way not to holiday with Asians.... they don't like lining up for breakfast behind 56 Asians..." Moffatt also noted that the Asian tourist boom in the southern coastal region of Queensland was beginning to jeopardise tourism's "bread-and-butter" clients - Australian holidaymakers living within driving distance of the region.

BUCHANAN ROCKS REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFULS

The conservative Christian television commentator, Mr. Pat Buchanan, sent shockwaves through the United States political glitterati when he won a devastating victory over the heavily favoured Texas Senator Phil Gramm in the first of the presidential pre-selection primaries. These primaries are perhaps best compared to the Australian political party pre-selection process, except that the Americans will be selecting candidates for head of state as well as their chief executive.

Mr. Buchanan is well known in the United States for his pugnacious conservative views, including opposition to the U.S. open door immigration policy, Christian social policies on issues like abortion, and opposition to the free trade dogma of the global market. In making a virtue of his conservative stance, Buchanan delivered what was described as a "political thrashing" to the other "right-wing" candidate, Senator Gramm; Buchanan winning 62 percent of the vote to Gramm's 38 percent. The fact that the contest was in the Southern State of Louisiana, part of the U.S. Bible belt, obviously assisted Buchanan, but the result is regarded as a serious blow to Mr. Gramm's chances of winning the Republican nomination to run against Mr. Clinton for President later this year.

The Buchanan victory in the United States confirms a growing international trend away from globalist policies of 'free trade', the erosion of national sovereignty, and the dogma of multiculturalism. The United States has one of the world's worst illegal immigrant problems, with thousands of Mexican and other illegal immigrants pouring across its southern borders daily. Together with the recent North American Free Trade Agreement (N.A.F.T.A.), rammed through the U.S. Congress last year, such internationalisation of the U.S. is generating the same type of backlash as that in Australia.

The question is how to give legitimate political expression to such a backlash in the face of a form of monopolistic political party control of the political process. Perhaps Mr. Buchanan can provide the focus for such widespread views in much the same way that Graeme Campbell has become a household name in Australia for similar reasons.

MISGUIDED BUSINESS PUSH INTO ASIA

A former secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Duncan Campbell, has warned that the obsession with Asia as a trading region is jeopardising one of Australia's strongest markets - Europe. He pointed out that being "mesmerised by Asia" deflected effort from capitalising on trade with the European Union, which totalled 40 billion dollars, or 20 percent of all trading transactions.
"When you begin to ask questions, good reasons soon present themselves for doubting the benefit for Australia in all the emphasis on Asia and the Pacific, and the erosion of the interest in Europe," he said.

An Ambassador to Italy from 1988 to 1993, Mr. Campbell said that the Department of Foreign Affairs orientation towards Asia was lopsided, and bore little resemblance to statistical reality. It is clear, however, that the Asianisation of Australia has little to do with practicalities, and more to do with grandiose ideological dreams by those who hope to be remembered as political visionaries.

Mr. Duncan Campbell's warning tallies closely with the views on foreign trade of his namesake, Graeme Campbell, Member for Kalgoorlie. Graeme Campbell has long argued that the shortsighted obsession with Asia is jeopardising Australian interests in Europe in particular. Europe is still Australia's largest supplier of imported goods, second biggest merchandise trading partner, and biggest trading partner for services. According to the statistics, European investment in Australia exceeds one billion dollars, almost 30 percent of all foreign investment.

What is required when considering trading and immigration policy, is a sound grasp of reality, and a rejection of short-term ideological fashions. In short, put Australian interests first. Anything else is suicidal.

IN BRIEF

Commenting on the election campaign, Les Carlyon (former Editor of The Age) writes (Sun-Herald, 11/2/95)
"There are no themes, no rhetoric, no grandeur, just ragbags of niche politics. Like George Bush, Keating and Howard don't want to know about the 'vision thing'. They just want to win. The bad news is that one of them will. The really bad news is that, on what we have seen so far, the rest of us will lose."

Perhaps the applications for registration of new political parties provide a barometer for public frustration. The Electoral Commission reports that the following applications were made since Christmas: Campbell's Independent Movement, Rebuild Australia Party, Over taxed Drinkers Party, Over taxed Motorists Party and Over taxed Smokers Party.

All Election comment authorised by David Thompson, 145 Russell Street, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000.

FLAG SNUBBED

WHEN WAVING FLAGS IS NOT FOR AUSTRALIA

GET RID OF THIS HOCUS-POCUS

NO MANDATE FOR SENATE FROM POLL

DOLLAR BILL