ENOCH POWELL AND THE BRITISH ELECTIONS

"A Conservative Party victory in today's British elections would be a remarkable upset at this stage. Nobody seems quite sure why, but the reasons given most prominence are the undermining of Mr. Heath's carefully-planned campaign by Mr. Enoch Powell...." - Editorial comment, The Australian, June 18th.

It is possible that the British election opens the possibility of a new hope in the United Kingdom. Many explanations have already been given as to why, contrary to the predictions of the pollsters and the "experts" of the mass media, the British electors turned their backs on Harold Wilson. There is no evidence whatever that the British electors have shown any enthusiasm for Edward Heath; they voted against Harold Wilson on a number of issues.

The major personality to emerge from the election was Conservative Enoch Powell, the man who during the last stages of the campaign really "opened his shoulders" on some fundamental issues. He bluntly said that if the United Kingdom joined the Common Market and accepted a common currency, British sovereignty would be reduced to that of a British Municipal Council in relationship to the British Parliament. Mr. Powell charged the Wilson Government with failing to uphold law and order. He returned again to the race threat to the United Kingdom's future. But it was when Mr. Powell attacked the "enemy within", the conspirators manipulating from key positions that the mass media and the whole of the Socialist movement became hysterical with their abuse and smearing. Mr. Powell had touched a very tender nerve centre. From then on Mr. Heath and his Associates were told that whatever chances they had of winning the electrons, were now being destroyed by the "ravings" of Enoch Powell. It was charged that Mr. Powell was satisfied that Mr. Heath was going to be beaten, and that he must prepare the ground for the leadership contest after the elections. So far from causing the Conservatives to lose the elections there is considerable evidence indicating that Enoch Powell played a major role in helping them to win.

Powell doubled his own majority, obviously winning massive support from many who previously voted for Labor, while all those candidates who accepted Powell's assistance also were highly successful. The thwarted mass media is already warning of the coming era of "Powellism" in the United Kingdom. Edward Heath's refusal to criticise Enoc Powell after the elections suggests that the new Prime Minister realises that the man he has excluded from the Cabinet is the focal point of an influential section of the Conservative Party, and that Powell's influence is more likely to grow rather than decline.

As objective observers of politics over many years, we are not carried away by any wishful thinking concerning Enoch Powell. He has shifted his ground on many major issues. He is a politician, and clearly seeks the leadership of the British Conservative Party. His change of position may be one of genuine conversion. But even if it is only a question of calculated moves designed to bring him to the leadership, it is significant that he has selected issues, which suggest that Mr. Powell has more correctly assessed the views of the British people than most other politicians. If Enoch Powell can, for example, become the political spokesman for that growing majority of British electors who reject the Common Market, Prime Minister Edward Heath is going to have a difficult time in attempting to by-pass that majority. It is not too much to say that within two years Edward Heath could be fighting to retain the leadership of the Conservative Party. The challenger? Enoch Powell.

MIRACLE REQUIRED TO SAVE DEFICIENCY FUND

FINANCING ECONOMIC BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS TO COMMUNISTS

"France plans to lend $122.6 million to East Germany, a Bonn Foreign Ministry spokesman said yesterday. He said the French Government had informed West Germany and other Common Market countries. Negotiations between Paris and East Berlin have not yet been concluded." - The Australian, June 17th.

The above item provides further confirmation of the prediction by Lenin that the time would come when the "capitalist" nations would be competing with one another to export their surplus production to the Soviet Union, and would loan the Soviet the credits so that the Soviet could obtain the surpluses. The reality of the French loan is that it will be spent in France on French production, which will be sent to the Soviet Union. The Soviet will therefore get the French production while the loan money will remain in France to be spent by the French on French consumer goods. The French loan is another example of the Western nations financing vital economic blood transfusions to the Soviet. Without this economic support from the non-Communist nations, the Soviet would have collapsed a long time ago.

Several years ago two American economists argued that the main virtue of the American space programme was that it provided the American economy with an unlimited export market into outer space, without the complication of anyone trying to send anything back in exchange. It would be much more sensible for the non-Communist nations to fire all their surplus production into space than to spend it to build up those pledged to take over the whole world. But it would be even more sensible for the non-Communists to change their financial rules so that they could themselves enjoy the benefits of their own surplus production. Or they could use the surpluses in an endeavour to force real concessions from the Communist Empire.

BUREAUCRATIC ARMY MARCHES ON

"The Commonwealth Government (which was a short time ago deploring the pressures being created by the building boom) has decided to build a number of office complexes in Melbourne and Sydney to the total value of $15 million," - The Australian Financial Review, June 17th.
In a statement explaining the new Commonwealth projects, Minister for the Interior, Mr. Peter Nixon, said that they would meet the Commonwealth's need for more office space. But he also said that, "It would still be necessary to continue leasing privately owned office space in Melbourne and Sydney."

The inevitable result of growing centralisation of power in the Federal Government is a rapid expansion of the Federal Bureaucratic army of occupation, which, in accordance with Parkinson's famous laws, feverishly works at expanding itself. The Liberal Socialists have devised the sophisticated argument that, "much as we may deplore it, with the people requiring Canberra to provide more and more services from the Commonwealth, we have no other alternative but to try to meet those demands."

One junior Cabinet Minister in the Gorton Government is reported as arguing that any attack on the Welfare State by the Liberal-Country Party Governments would result in them being in the political wilderness for twenty years. If the price of staying in office is to continue presiding over the expansion of the Welfare State, and the Federal bureaucratic army, this is simply striking evidence of the truth that members of the Gorton Government are little more than Public Relations men for the real policy makers, the "generals" of the bureaucratic army.
If Mr. Gough Whitlam and his team were elected, they would also be Public Relations men for the same policy. But at least it would then be called by its correct title; Socialisation by Stealth.

Hard-pushed farmers and small businessmen are not going to be impressed by a Government which urges "restraint" for all other sections of the community while it goes ahead erecting more offices in which to house the bureaucracy. In fact if Prime Minister Gorton and his colleagues would move around the Australian community at the present time, they might realise how many of their former supporters have reached the conclusion that the only way to make their displeasure felt is to use their votes against the Government.

No realist expects the present Government to end overnight the policies of centralism which have been poisoning the Australian community for so long, but those who believe in morality are surely entitled to suggest that a Government which advertises itself as anti-Marxist, might at least start to take some steps away from the Marxist direction in which it is traveling. And they would find these steps much more politically popular than the steps they are taking at present.

PRESIDENT NIXON ON COLLISION COURSE

". . .we're heading for the dock of price stability. We have to ease up on the power of our restraint and let our momentum carry us safely into port. That's why our independent banking system has seen fit to ease up on the money supply lately. That is why I relaxed the cutback on Federally-Assisted construction projects and why I have not asked for a new surtax. Those actions are not a signal that we are giving up our fight against inflation. On the contrary, they mean that there was already enough power applied to reach the dock and now we must make sure we don't damage the boat," from President Richard Nixon 's address in Washington on the state of the American economy, June 18th.

Anyone with even the most elementary knowledge of the operations of the present finance economic system can predict with certainty now that President Nixon is not going to reach his "dock of price stability." The restrictive credit policies being imposed by the Nixon Administration were producing serious unemployment and business casualties. But there was little real impact on the steadily increasing price level. Mr. Nixon's reversal of the credit policy is designed primarily to ensure that the Republicans do not suffer electorally at this year's Congressional Elections. But so far from ending inflation they will give it a new impetus. President Nixon may not understand what he is doing. But those who fashion financial policy do. They have the President on a collision course, not on one which will carry him safely into the "dock of price stability." One of the most encouraging features about the American situation is the growing realisation amongst conservative groups that political and economic conservatism is impossible while a revolutionary financial policy is pursued.

COMMUNISTS TAKE KEY POSITIONS IN CEYLON

"Big changes in Ceylon are foreseen here following Mrs. Bandaranaikes landslide victory in the general elections," The Age, June 5th.

Mrs. Bandaranaike has appointed Dr.N.M. Perera as Finance Minister, and Mr. Colvin R.deSilva to the newly created post as Plantations Minister. Between the two it is not difficult to see a concerted attack applying communist principles of destroying private ownership and control of the plantations will be launched. The results could be disastrous for Ceylon as the plantations constitute the backbone of Ceylon's economy.

Additional portfolios going to the communists are Communications, Mr. Leslie Goonewardene, and Housing arid Construction, Mr. Pieter Keuneman. The Trotskyites and communists won 25 seats between them. It is interesting to note that the Methodist Church in Australia has launched a million dollar appeal for overseas social service programmes. Half of this amount is to go to Ceylon to finance a seeds project, which undoubtedly will be administered by the Communist Plantations Minister. The type of seed he will be concerned to plant may be quite different from those, which produce grass or food crops. Certainly as a Communist he will ensure that the money is not used to promote Christian Principles.

The election of a socialist government with communists in key positions of control in Ceylon constitutes a considerable change in the balance of power in the Indian Ocean. Ceylon with its first class harbour of Colombo stands at the cross roads of ocean going traffic from the Pacific countries and the Middle East. No doubt the Soviet will now obtain facilities for its growing sea power in the Indian Ocean, thus increasing the threat to Southern Africa and Australasia, not to mention Japan whose oil tankers supplying the vital lifeblood of Japanese industry travel to the Middle East oilfields via the Straits of Malacca and Colombo.