|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
17 June 1977. Thought for the Week: "If all the physical elements required for production are present (man-labour, materials, machinery, and so forth), any financial limitation placed on the full use of these elements is senseless, and the belief in the necessity for such limitation is an illusion. To say that the unemployed cannot be put to work, or that our quarter time factory output cannot be raised to whole time output because of the expense is just like saying, 'We could make a thousand yards more of serge, only we have no yards left'!
Arthur Brenton, in "The Veil of Finance" (1926)
MORE SUBSIDIES FOR SOVIET CONSUMERS
"Murray Goulburn Co-operative Co. Ltd. of Victoria, manufacturer and marketer of dairy produce for more than 6000 Victorian and southern NSW dairy farmers, announced last week a huge sale of butter and full cream milk powder, worth almost $50 million, to the Soviet Union and Venezuela". The Australian, 27/5/77
The article went on to say that the Soviet butter order amounted to 6,000 tonnes, which would return a net $A750 a tonne to equalisation. This amounts to approximately 35 cents a pound. With freight costs and handling taking a further 10 cents a pound, this means that the Australian butter will be landed in the Soviet at about 45 cents a pound. Australians have to pay over twice as much. The price to the Soviets could be even less.
The equalisation price is an average taken from the Home price and the Export price. The Home price is currently well over $1100 per tonne. If the Soviet order is "netting to equalisation $750 per tonne" then what is the actual price to the Soviets making up the export half of the average?
Not content with capitalising on the despair of crisis ridden beef producers, resulting in the virtual give away of meat to the Soviets eighteen months ago, Australia is now subsidising butter exports to the Soviet as well.
Murray-Goulburn, about the biggest dairy manufacturer in Australia, numbers at least one Federal Cabinet Minister amongst its shareholders, and is one of the few private concerns to obtain finance directly from The Reserve Bank. It would be constructive to know whether the Soviet Union was given credit for the butter deal, and whether Reserve Bank Credit was involved?
There are, at last, signs that industry leaders
can see the need to drop prices on foodstuffs to Australians before
overseas customers. The Australian (9/6/77) reported: "The Federal
Government has been asked to make a percentage of its pension and dole
payments in food coupons. Under the scheme, pensioners and dole drawers
would still get cash payments, but would also be entitled to special
concessions on essential food items such as meat. The plan was suggested
yesterday by a prominent meat exporting industry executive, Mr. Kevin
Bowtell, as a means of providing cheap meat for the under privileged,
and boosting Australia's home consumption of beef.... Mr. Bowtell, the
vice President of the Meat Exporters' Association of Victoria, predicted
that Australia could increase its home consumption by more than one
million head of cattle by implementing the plan."
QUEENSLAND CONSUMER LEADER TALKS SENSE
"The Housewives' Association will lead a deputation to the Premier (Mr. Bjelke-Petersen) next week on milk and butter prices. Association President (Mrs. Gabby Horan) said last night she wanted the State Government to subsidise milk and butter to "provide consumer access." "The consumer can no longer afford to pay what the producer cannot afford to sell at a fair price, she said. "The Courier Mail"(Qld.) 9/6/77
Mrs. Horan gave figures to show that consumption of dairy products in Australia had dropped considerably. She also claimed that the number or Dairy farmers had dropped, and if this went on it would result in "milk rationing and sky high prices.'' It is hoped that Queensland housewives will lend their support to Mrs. Horan, in her bid for price discounts on dairy products.
SOCIALISTS FULLY AWARE OF POWER OF THE CROWN
"The Opposition Leader, Mr. Whitlam, has claimed that the Governor General, Sir John Kerr, talked to military commanders about possible action if the Labor Government refused to accept its dismissal."' - The Age (Melbourne) June 11th.
The League of Rights has always claimed that one of the major reasons, perhaps the major reason for the desire of the Socialists and the Communists to abolish the British Monarchy is to remove control of the Armed Services away from the Crown to the Government of the day. The implications of such a disaster need no elaboration; and especially if the Socialists were also successful in the abolition of the Upper House (Senate).
Whether Gough Whitlam is correct or not in his claim that Sir John Kerr "talked" to military commanders in Australia at the time of the November, 1975 political crisis, (it was not a constitutional crisis) there is no doubt in anyone's mind that the Governor General (Crown) does have the position of Commander-in-Chief of Australia's Armed Services, as the Queen has the position of Commander-in-Chief of Britain's Armed Services. Gough Whitlam also claimed, in London recently, that Sir John Kerr would have acted in his capacity of Commander-in-Chief had not his (Whitlam's) Government accepted the dismissal. Our reply is: ''We hope so."
FINAL REFERENDUM FIGURES CONFIRM LEAGUE'S ASSESSMENTThe final figures of the May 21st. Referendum on amendments to the Australian Constitution were published in The Australian (June 11th). We have asserted more than once that the Simultaneous Elections Referendum was lost in Western Australia. The figures show that the margin for the "No" vote there was approximately 2.5%. This also confirms our belief that the campaigning by the League actionists in W.A. deprived Messrs. Whitlam and Fraser or their cherished objectives.
League actionists in Western Australia printed and distributed one hundred and twenty thousand "No" League brochures, apart from all the other "No" activity engaged in. The Queensland figure for the "No" margin was approximately 6%, and the "No" margin for Tasmania was over 30%; again confirming our statements that the Tasmanians are suspicious of "the mainlanders". We don't blame them for being suspicious of the Canberra "mainlanders" one bit; we are suspicious ourselves - with good reason.
A major feature or the propaganda build up of Jimmy Carter before the last American Presidential elections, was to present him as a qualified nuclear engineer. An investigation by a number of Americans does not confirm this claim. Mr. Carter studied nuclear physics at Union College, Achenectady, New York, in the early fifties, at a time when nuclear physics was in its embryonic stage. It is not known what courses were completed. No degree was granted. Except for his experience in the navy, Mr. Carter has not worked in any engineering capacity for at least 22 years. He is not a licensed professional engineer.
The Australian Defence Minister addressed the Australian Chamber of Commerce Annual Conference in Brisbane on May 30th. He complained about the use of ''incomprehensible'' jargon to describe the state of the economy. We agree. But Mr. Killen should take his own advice. He says that Australia can "work" its way out of trouble, but then said that it would be a long haul to get Australia's economy "'back where it was." Whatever that means, it was the state of the economy under Mr. Killen and his colleagues, which resulted in the Whitlam Government coming to office.
BHP has announced the closing of another blast furnace while Mr. Killen has been telling Australians that an increased defence programme is not possible because of the state of the economy. There is nothing basically wrong with the economy. It is the destructive financial policies of the Government which are the real problem.
Dr. Peccei, President of the Club of Rome, one of the front movements behind which the international power groups are operating to achieve their "Brave New World", has recently stated that the economic and social future of the world is too serious a problem to be left to politicians. What is envisaged is an international bureaucracy. But it is significant that Dr. Peccei praises President Jimmy Carter. Presumably he understands why Jimmy Carter was selected as a suitable candidate for the American Presidency when the Rockefellers invited him to join their Trilateral Commission.
It is really astonishing to see Mr. Don Chipp,
a smooth, sophisticated political operator, stumping the country, drawing
large crowds at meetings that would be the envy of any of the "yes men",
and hacks of any of the major parties. Don Chipp has the tide working
for him, and he is smart enough to know it. The general disillusionment
with the major parties is considerable, and mounting. The Whitlam Socialists
frightened many voters during their three-year binge. The rapid courting
of the Third World nations; the glad handing of the Yogoslav Prime Minister
(Bijedic, recently killed in a plane crash) with monstrous security
arrangements, jarring to Australians. The Morosi "spectaculars"; Lionel
Murphy's raid on A.S.I.O. in Melbourne, which we now know from Mr. Angleton
(ex C.I.A. almost chief) brought about a severing of security and intelligence
relations between Australia and the United States of America. The loans
Affair; all these political disasters were more than most Australians
could stomach, and they gave their verdict in December 1975. As for
Malcolm Fraser: he was welcomed with fervent hope by most Australians;
but he has turned out to be a disaster also.
It is necessary to give a warning about expressions used by superficial observers, and by international salesmen of mass produced political ideas. These men speak of there being a "trend" towards this or that; a "trend" towards a "centralisation of power in the hands of a few men", which in vulgar language really means the need of dictators to liquidate their rivals. Those of us who have taken the trouble to look behind the scenes know that to speak of a "trend towards centralisation of control" is a deliberate attempt to hypnotise people into accepting something they very much dislike, and which, if they understood it, they would fight against to the bitter end.
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|