WHERE IS NEW ZEALAND HEADING?

Mr. Eric D. Butler reports from New Zealand
The shallowness of contemporary politics is even more obvious in New Zealand than in Australia. One can only be amused by the attempts of the image makers to project New Zealand's new Labor Prime Minister, Mr. David Lange, as a man following in the footsteps of Australia's much publicised Prime Minister, Mr. Bob Hawke. But Mr. Lange is no Bob Hawke. While the Lange Government enjoys influential support in the media, Mr. Lange lacks Hawke's skill for media manipulation. But eventually both leaders will be overtaken by finance economic realities that cannot be masked by public relations gimmicks. 1985 will see both Wellington and Canberra grappling with the problem of servicing their external debts.

Just as the "conservative" Fraser Government paved the way for the Hawke Government, so the "conservative" Muldoon Government generated the electoral backlash that brought the Lange Government to office. Once again it was a case of disillusioned electors voting a government OUT, not voting a new government IN. There has been considerable speculation about the role of the New Zealand Party, headed by colourful millionaire Mr. Bob Jones, originally a supporter of Sir Robert Muldoon's National Party. Mr. Jones and his colleagues offered a strange mixture of policies including the same anti-nuclear stance of the Labor Party. Although the "Social Credit" Party, currently preparing to change its name, had its vote slashed by over 50 percent, it managed to finish with two seats in the present parliament, the same as in the last Parliament. The total New Zealand Party vote was greater than that of "Social Credit", but no representatives were elected.

As a close student of New Zealand politics for many years I do not believe that the Bob Jones party was the decisive factor in defeating the Muldoon Government; if this party had not existed much of the vote that it obtained, primarily a protest vote, would have gone to Labor, increasing still further its present majority.
The dramatic reduction in the "Social Credit" vote also confirmed my view that much of this vote at the previous election was primarily a protest vote, and did not indicate any support for the vague policies described as Social Credit. The sooner the power men running the "Social Credit" movement change the label, the sooner will it be possible for any useful innocents to grasp that the New Zealand Social credit movement was hi-jacked a long time ago. Social Credit is never going to be advanced through party power politics.

The new situation in New Zealand provides the New Zealand League of Rights with the opportunity to increase its support and influence as electors discover that the Lange Government's programme offers no solutions to basic problems, but threatens to take them further down the totalitarian road. The shape of things to come has been indicated by the severing of diplomatic links with South Africa while seeking closer links with "liberated" African nations. Although it was probable that the Muldoon Government would eventually have ratified the United Nation Convention concerning "Non Discrimination Against Women", it is certain that the Lange Government will, unless met with a massive wave of opposition, ratify the Convention as soon as possible.

As I write, considerable publicity is being given to a report by the New Zealand Human Rights Commission. The Commission's report states that New Zealand moved the United Nations General Assembly resolution in 1978 for the adoption of the draft Convention. Human Rights Commissioner Diana Shand is quoted as saying, "It evolved only after serious deliberations by all parties and New Zealand played a leading role in its final adoption by the United Nations for future ratification by individual countries." Needless to say, the Human Rights Commission sees no threats to individuals by the Convention. All those opposed to the Convention are spreading unnecessary fears. The hard-nosed Marxists at the United Nations must be laughing their heads off. Well may New Zealand realists be asking where New Zealand is heading? Turbulent developments are not far ahead, the same type of developments, which are going to shake Australia in 1985.

JEREMY LEE REPORTS

The growing concern over the land rights issue has continued to result in excellent meetings in my recent tour of central NSW, Victoria and South Australia. A feature of the meetings in NSW was the presence of considerable numbers of Aborigines who, to my surprise, expressed strong agreement with the addresses so much so that I returned to one area to have a private meeting with Aboriginal leaders. They were and are extremely concerned with the radical element, which has gained control in government agencies dealing with Aboriginal affairs. This concern has been reinforced by the view of Mr. Stewart Murray, Victorian Aboriginal leader.

Mr. Murray, an ex-Digger, was reported in The Sun (August 15, 1984) as saying; "....The State Government is listening to stupid people who do not have a real affinity with Victorian Aboriginals or any historic claim to any consideration in Victoria... I become impatient when I think of the problems our young people are facing while the bureaucrats and the scavengers haggle", said Mr. Murray, the father of eight and chairman of the Victorian Aboriginal Land Council. The young people are turning to drink and drugs in increasing numbers. In my Aboriginal dialect we call them 'boogani' or 'lost souls'. The bureaucrats, who are standing in our way, are 'cookinagi' or 'crocodiles'.... There are too many people from outside Victoria, too many people with too much money and too much authority. We don't need Commonwealth offices, which we can't even find when we go to Canberra, and where no one wants to know us? For that matter we don't need regional offices here in Melbourne either. We have no need of so much money being spent staffing so many Aboriginal departments. We have enough radicals here of our own to spoil things (including Mr. Murray's son, Gary, a member of the aggressive Aboriginal Task force). The radicals want land without responsibility, land without paying rates or taxes. They want mineral rights, special privileges… they want, want, want!"

Mr. Murray is absolutely right. But he'd better watch out. Mr. Clyde Holding may well hire another journalist to "expose" him; or, even worse, the Human Rights Commission may well deal with him for alleged ''racist'' views. The Aboriginal Task Force, incidentally, took over the job originally started by Dr. Coombs and his Aboriginal Treaty Committee.

NATIONAL PARTY RESOLUTION

The Queensland State Conference of the National Party, which met in Rockhampton towards the end of August, had the following resolution passed unanimously:
"This Conference calls on the Federal leadership to commit the Party on return to office to pass laws on a referendum to return the Constitution to the control of the people".

This is an indication that the strong lead given by the Premier on this question, and vigorously championed by former Aboriginal Affairs Minister Charles Porter through his movement "People For A Free Australia" is bearing fruit. It seems, however, that there is something less than enthusiasm among certain sections of the Party hierarchy. The resolution, which was submitted to the Conference by the Cooroora branch on Queensland's north coast, did not appear on the agenda, and had to be submitted as an urgency motion from the floor. The Federal leader, Mr. Ian Sinclair, was not enthusiastic about the resolution. He has, on previous occasions, sought to forestall any definite commitment on this question by stating that his party "will not use the external affairs power" when in office, without reversing the legal position which has all but destroyed constitutional integrity. The resolution, of course, is not binding on parliamentarians, and will be ignored if possible. Only if faced with such a large national insistence that can no longer be ignored will federal politicians grasp the nettle. This has begun to happen on the land rights question. A vocal and articulate grassroots is the real key to Australia's future.

FEVERED IMAGINATION DEPARTMENT!

A letter, effectively brief, to The Australian (September 1st) over the name of a "Nigel Jackson", referred to a report in this national daily newspaper (24th August) that the Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr. Bill Hayden has made in the Federal Parliament, viz, that the League of Rights had "manufactured and disseminated" the rumour that "a band of 60 armed Vietnamese had been sighted on exercise in full military uniform near Bendigo". Mr. Hayden's assertion, apparently, was that this rumour was aired at a National Party conference held at Portland, Victoria.

The Australian's correspondent, Mr. Nigel Jackson, called on Mr. Hayden (in his letter) to put up or shut up, as he didn't believe the accusation. We have news for Mr. Bill Hayden. We don't believe a word of the report either, in the absence of hard undeniable evidence. What we do believe is that Mr. Hayden's outburst is just another "round" in the now fierce psychological warfare against the League of Rights; and we do expect this warfare to intensify as the federal "Labor" (Communist/Socialist/Humanist) Government at Canberra enters the era of fiscal/political difficulties. The "dream ride" is almost at an end, and Mr. Bob Hawke will reveal his true colours to the Australian electorate at large when he is going down. His eclipse is certain, quite possibly in the term of the next Federal Government.

THE BUDGET - KEATING' S THREE CARD CON

Government Treasurers in the Western World, working within the contrived guidelines of modern economics, are caught on the horns of a dilemma. The debt system forces them to do at least one of three things; either to raise taxes; or to increase the size of government deficits; or, finally, to introduce a brutal squeeze which depresses the economy. These three destructive alternatives are masked behind a battery of propaganda clichés aimed at confusing and disarming the populace. The ultimate in political achievements is to make the electorate believe the opposite to reality. Such an achievement would be impossible without the complicity of the media.

While it is true that one or two commentators have pointed to some of the more destructive anomalies in the Keating Budget, on the whole the galaxy of newspaper headlines proclaiming "Tax Cuts" - "Tax Relief" etc. could hardly have been better written by Keating himself. Put bluntly, this is one of the most savage Budgets in Australia's history, with a total increase in receipts of 17.7 per cent. The figures below tell the true story: Income tax on individuals has increased by $5.7 billion (+23%) Company Tax has increased by $997 million (+23%) Withholding tax has increased by $66 million (+21%) Sales Tax has increased by $539 million (+13%) Excise Duty has increased by $44million (oil & LPG) (+1.2%) Excise Duty on all other items, increased by $269 m. (+6.6%) Customs Duty has increased by $385 million (+16%) Total taxation has increased by $7.9 billion (+17.9%) or by over $500 for every man, woman and child in Australia - over $2,000 for the average family of a mother, father and two children. Total Federal taxation now averages over $3,800 for every living Australian, or $15,200 for the average family of four.

On to this figure must be added additional taxes levied by State Governments, and also Local Government rates. The figures are quite horrific. But to then describe these increases under headlines blazoned "Tax Cuts" is an exercise in word manipulation, which would have Dr. Goebbels and Uncle Joe Stalin gasping with admiration!

MORE ON THE BUDGET

Mr. Peacock's speech in criticism of the Budget was a classic case of the boy who cried "Wolf!" Although many of his points were correct, he lacked credibility for two reasons; firstly, politicians have reduced their parliamentary speeches to such a mixture of hogwash and sensationalism that nobody believes the occasional truth that slips in. Secondly, the Opposition has no credible alternative economic strategy.

Hawke has merely done on a grander scale what they themselves were doing before. The Fraser Government, which gained office on the promise of tax cuts, lifted Federal Government spending to 29.5 per cent of Australia's Gross Domestic Product in 1977-78 - the highest level in Australia's history. The Hawke Government, in the Keating Budget, has shattered the Economic Olympic record. "Higher than ever!" seems to be the goal. The current Budget has lifted Government outlays to 31.1 percent of GDP. With State and Local Government outlays added, the figure is now not far short of 50 percent. And with the perennial borrowings of Federal and State Government Statutory Authorities, the 50 percent mark has been passed. In other words, Australians one and all work over half the year for one type of government or another before they earn a penny for themselves. What a road to "recovery."

Tucked into this programme of fiscal deceit is a massive increase in the budgets of the Human Rights Commission and the Law, Reform Commission, both in essence bodies working for the United Nations rather than constitutional Australia. The Human Rights Commission now has a budget of $4.5 million - an 82.5% increase over last year; while the Law Reform Commission has a $700,000 increase up 37.4%.

OVERSEAS DEBT

GOOD OLD GOTT!

THOSE SACRED SIGHTS

THE DE-INDUSTRIALISATION OF OZ

A thought provoking article appeared in The Australian (August 25th) from the pen of Joe Thompson, M.L.C. (N.S.W.) on the decline of Australia's manufacturing industries. Our own knowledge of intended policies in the worlds of High Politics and High Finance lend us to accept the virtual certainty that Australia is to be phased right out of major industry in the Pacific Basin, and our intended role is to be that of a major supplier of key resources. This is to be in accord with the thrust of the New International Economic Order, on which many politicians, including Malcolm Fraser, heaped praise. Joe Thompson observes:
"The decline in the percentage of the workforce engaged in Australia's manufacturing industries is frightening. From 27.6% in 1965, the ratio fell to 17.7% in 1981, with projections to 16% or even lower by 1990. ….We are witnessing the de-industrialisation of a major section of our manufacturing industry, with a corresponding serious decline in technology and work skills. "It is worthy to note that the same de-industrialisation which is taking place in Australia is also occurring in the United States at an even more dramatic rate..... "....There is clear evidence that many of the multinational manufacturing companies operating in Australia are allowing our technology to run down. Yet these same companies are spending vast amounts of money on new factories being built in developing countries".

A Rochhampton Actionist (Qld.) has had a most remarkable reply from Mr. Doug Everingham, M.H.R. for Capricornia, with respect to the League of Rights' special issue of "Intelligence Survey" on the Threatened Destruction of the Federal Constitution. We can only pick out a couple of "screamers" at random:
"A High Court interpretation is not an attack on it. (He could have fooled us. O. T.) An attack on the High Court established by that Constitution is an attack on the Constitution which has stood between freedom and tyranny and should be defended". "The 'external affairs' powers do not overrule 'rights and prerogatives of States implicit" (at Federation or since). The States gave up the foreign affairs power to the Federation in the original Constitution..." We presume that Clyde Holding is playing charades when he threatens to intervene and overrule States' legislation on Aboriginal Land Rights!!