THE VICTORIAN STATE ELECTION

"Malcolm Fraser is now staring at the prospect of defeat at the next election. Unless he can unite the Liberal Party and have the economy improving rather than deteriorating by late next year, the man who led his party triumphantly out of the wilderness is likely to march it right back there." - Michelle Grattan, in The Age (Melbourne), April 5th.

Michelle Grattan's forecast (above) may turn out to be the most important implication of the Victorian State election. We forecast in these pages early last year that the then Hamer Government of Victoria was in its last term of office; having barely survived the 1979 State election. We said then that the Hamer Liberal Government was stale had been in power for far too long, and further comments along the same lines. There were a variety of issues which did militate against the Thompson Liberal Government of Victoria, but we do think that, overall, Victorian electors did want a change: that after 27 years the Victorian Liberal Government was fearfully dull and just screaming for that "new broom", which it got.

When a government loses a bundle of its Cabinet Ministers, that is proof positive that it has lost the confidence of the electorate. One of the Ministers to lose his seat is Mr. Norman Lacey, who suffered an anti-Government swing of six percent plus. Mr. Lacy incurred the displeasure of a great number of people who were most dissatisfied with his performance in his portfolio of Educational Services. Civic reform groups such as the Concerned Parents' Association, and the Women Who Want to Be Women are of the opinion that he did little or nothing to stem the tide of unsavory permissiveness, which is engulfing Victorian schools (along with those of other States). One such issue is Sex Education, and it is interesting to note that a prominent Sydney gynecologist very recently lays the blame on Sex Education for a sizable portion of teenage and child pregnancies, which are escalating alarmingly.
As everyone now knows, the anticipated Victorian election result has forced our Prime Minister to call for a showdown with Andrew Peacock.

RUNNING TOO FAST: FLYING TOO HIGH?

"The Prime Minister, Mr. Fraser, in a bid to end the crippling speculation about a leadership challenge, will effectively put his own job on the line at a Liberal Party meeting in Canberra on Thursday. - Russell Schneider, in The Australian, April 5th.

We do not intend to comment at length on speculation. We have commented in these pages only recently that both Mr. Andrew Peacock, and Mr. Bob Hawke (hopefuls and close friends) would have to make their "runs" this year to have any chance of leadership success. Our own opinion is that we don't much like Mr. Peacock's chances in his bid to topple Mr. Fraser. A large proportion of Mr. Peacock's assumed "votes" would be from disgruntled backbenchers and those few "victims" of Mr. Fraser, such as Senator Reg Withers.
Certainly, the Victorian election result has brought this to a head, but before most Liberal members will declare themselves in any leadership contest they will want to be satisfied that they are on a winner. Politicians are concerned, above all else, with survival. Most will defect to Mr. Peacock only if they are convinced that they cannot survive under the leadership of Mr. Fraser.

As we have commented before, we do not consider that Mr. Peacock is leadership material. The playboy image, now being played down; the Shirley McLean episodes, although harmless enough stuff, does not inspire us to accept him as the nation's political leader. Malcolm Fraser, whilst taking himself, as us, down the nowhere road, is made of much tougher stuff, and does definitely have strong leadership qualities; now being called into question because he can't produce the results that the electorate wants. The Bill Hayden - Bob Hawke relationship is another issue upon which we shall avoid comment here.

BOMBSHELL IN QUEENSLAND PARLIAMENT

On Thursday of last week, April 1st, the Queensland Premier tabled a most disturbing document in the Queensland Parliament. The statement was not from some "rightwing extremist, but from a well known Victorian trade union official and a former member of the Australian Communist Party, Mr. Geoff McDonald. The essence of Mr. McDonald's statement is that the Aboriginal "land rights", movement is a manifestation of a long-term Communist strategy to provide the Communists with revolutionary bases inside Australia.

Mr. McDonald says he first gained some understanding of what was planned when he attended the famous secret Communist training school at Minto, N.S.W., where he painted Aboriginal murals on the lecture hall walls. Mr. McDonald says that while he was an industrial officer for the Royal Australian Nursing Federation from 1970-76, his work took him on to the Aboriginal Reserves and he saw there evidence of the Communist involvement in the "land rights" issue.

The McDonald statement confirmed what many investigators have been warning about for some time. Mr. McDonald says he has come forward because of his concern about the defence implications of the "land rights" movements. He believes that the planned demonstrations at the coming Commonwealth Games are designed to build up to an international programme with an eventual call for sanctions against Australia at the United Nations. The statement is critical of the Fraser Government for assisting the campaign against the Queensland Government.
The Queensland Premier read to the Queensland Parliament a statement by Lady Cilento stating that when Sir Raphael Cilento came back from the United Nations (where he had been a senior official) he warned of a plan to fragment Australia by establishing black states in the North.

While the hysterical reaction of the Communists and their many dupes was understandable, it was significant that the media generally entered the campaign to pour abuse and ridicule upon Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen. But the media had a difficult task with Mr. McDonald, who said that anyone who had taken the trouble to study the Communist Press knew what had been planned over many years. The McDonald statement is of tremendous importance at this critical time and it is planned to produce most of it when it comes to hand from the Queensland "Hansard". It will appear in the April issue of the "Intelligence Survey", and copies may be ordered now (Price $1.00 posted from G.P.O. Box 1052 J, Melbourne. 10 copies for $5.00).

BRIEF COMMENTS

Our old critic, Mr. Barry Cohen, A.L.P. Federal Member for Robertson (N.S.W.) is at it again. Some few years ago Mr. Cohen was calling for the imprisonment of Australian League of Rights officers. He was a strong supporter of the Racial Discrimination Bill (1975), which was later enacted into law, although with the vicious criminal provisions amended by the Senate. We well recall the dismay of former Labor Industry Minister, James McClelland, now a judge in N.S.W. "You've gutted it", he bitterly complained to the Senate.
Mr. Barry Cohen plans to introduce a private member's bill, which will "re-criminalise" the Racial Discrimination Act, based on Article 4 of the United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination. This advocates criminal provisions for "offenders". It also effectively muzzles freedom of speech, and puts civil liberties in a straight jacket. Even Professor Naom Chomsky, prominent American Jewish academic, supports the right of Revisionist Historians like Dr. Robert Faurisson, of France, to severely question the veracity of the Holocaust on the basis of freedom of speech and civil liberties; much to the fury of International Zionism. That there is real danger to democracy in such sweeping restraints goes without saying. Who will decide what is "racist" and "discriminatory" and what is not? Obviously those with the power to "interpret" the "law".
The late Senator Ivor Greenwood pointed out the dangers in the abuse of the "external affairs" power of the Australian Constitution, and observed that there would have to come a time when such power was clearly defined and limited by the High Court. That time may not be far distant, as the Queensland challenge to the High Court on the validity of the Racial Discrimination Act is now being heard, and should this be successful, a further challenge from a State to the powers of the Commonwealth to enact legislation, based on for example, Articles of the United Nations, could be more than a possibility. Again, let us be thankful that citizens of Australia have the protection of the Senate against legislation, which restricts civil liberties, and with punitive provisions. The role of the Senate will be come more and more vital to our freedom as time passes.

There are metaphysical issues associated with the Falkland Islands confrontation between Britain and Argentina. Britons are starting to feel more "British"; are turning against that super flop, the Common Market; are sick and tired of having the Lion's tail twisted (as in Africa and the Middle East) and are in the mood to call a halt. Will Britons suffer yet another humiliation several thousands of miles (not kilometers) from home as a third-rate power, rent with social and economic ills, walks into an old British colony, fiercely loyal to the British Crown, which has no powers of resistance? This is the type of unrehearsed event, which sometimes releases all manner of unforeseen social and political currents. Such could be the case with the Falklands.
Electoral comment authorised by E.D. Butler, 273 Lt. Collins St., Melb.

Control on Parliament
The following excellent letter appeared, under the heading (above) in "The News", Shepparton (Vic.) on March 25th:
"As election day approaches, politicians are claiming the divine right of ancient kings to having their policies implemented. "If the politicians can form a 'government' in the Lower House, it is an appropriate time to consider who does govern our State or nation. "As a nation and a State we live under a Trinitarian, constitutional, monarchical system of government, well proven over centuries of practice, and based on the Christian principle of service, so completely exemplified by the Coronation Oath, whereby the incoming monarch in return for the doubtful 'privilege' of ascending the throne, and wearing the crown, swears by Almighty God to uphold the Constitution. "He obeys the laws of the people, and the will of the people, on behalf of his/her subjects wherever they may be, and with this legally binding contract between monarch and subjects, the monarch becomes the government of the people.
"The foregoing was best summed up in 1813 by the Chief Justice, Lord Erinborough, when he stated - 'every person who is returned to Parliament is bound by the law of the land to serve, to serve the people, and to serve the monarch; the monarch represents the people because the monarch is there in perpetuity; you cannot elect a government, you cannot dismiss a government, you can only elect members of Parliament. "The monarchy is there to carry out the will of the people. "The monarch, or representative - who in Victoria is the Governor - normally perceives what the will of the people is on different bills through the reflection of the people's representatives assembled in Parliament. "In a democracy these representatives should conscientiously represent the majority wishes of their constituents on all proposed legislation.
"The fact that this does not always occur was put succinctly by Dr. Evatt in 1936, when as a judge of the High Court he said - 'the Parliament is the Parliament for the time being only and does not reflect the will of the people necessarily for all people and for all times.'
"The importance of electing independently minded politicians who will not prostitute their beliefs to party politics, but instead will put the wishes of their constituents before all else, cannot be emphasised too much if we are to gain control over our Parliament. "If we cannot regain control over Parliament our sole protection against the corruption of party politics is the responsibility of the Governor to not give Royal Assent to a Bill that he considers does not reflect the will of the people. "For this reason alone may we sincerely pray God Save the Queen."
This letter appeared over the name of a "T.W. Rogers", of Healesville, Vic.