LOOKING AHEAD IN AUSTRALIA'S POLITICAL DRAMA

By Eric D. Butler
The greatest disaster, which could overtake an embattled Australia at the present time, would be the election of Peacock-Sinclair Government mainly because of the default of the Hawke Government. While Mr. Malcolm Fraser has been generally blamed for the defeat of the Liberal-National Party Coalition last year, it has been over looked that there was no basic policy differences between Mr. Peacock and Mr. Fraser. In his resignation speech from the Fraser Cabinet, Mr. Peacock said little about policy matters.

In his role as Foreign Minister, Mr. Andrew Peacock played an active role in Australia's participation in the infamous betrayal of the brave little nation once known as Rhodesia, Peacock was the man, who tried to close down the Rhodesian Information Centre at the behest of the United Nations.
Prime Minister Bob Hawke's promotion of a major aspect of the New International Order, a Pacific Common Market, in which Australia's economic independence would be further reduced, is but a continuation of the activities of Mr. Andrew Peacock, who gave a number of lectures, and who issued a number of statements, praising the New International Economic Order concept. In spite of public party political controversy, there has been a close rapport between Mr. Hawke and Mr. Peacock over many years. The election of a Peacock Government would merely see an extension of the same programme being advanced by Mr. Hawke.

Over 40 years ago the then Mr. Robert Menzies made the prophetic statement that he and his colleagues were the "practical Socialists"; that people would accept from them what they would not accept from what he called the "theoretical Socialists". It was Mr. Andrew Peacock who said something very similar when, perhaps rather significantly, addressing a Melbourne Jewish audience. Under the guise of conservationism, the Peacocks can impose policies, which a Labor Party, even today, would find difficult to advance. The whole multicultural revolution was set in motion by the Coalition Governments in which Mr. Peacock was prominent. Mr. Peacock has managed to avoid any firm stance on the Constitutional crisis, one whose outcome will play a major part in deciding the future of Australia.

There is little doubt that Australia has started to countdown to the next Federal Elections, to be held late this year or early next year. Probably Mr. Hawke will decide to attempt to have his postponed referenda carried during an election, which, in the absence of any major political or economic upheaval, Mr. Hawke will win easily in the House of Representatives.

While the three by-elections demonstrated once again that it is not possible for the high personal rating of a Prime Minister to be translated into votes for his party's candidates, they also demonstrated that there is little erosion of support for the Labor Party headed by Mr. Hawke. Ironically, the very factional struggle inside the Labor Party, with the "Socialist Left" in Victoria being the most aggressive, could actually assist Mr. Hawke, who is being projected by many who should know better, as the only political leader who can check the more extreme radicals in the Labor Party. As a result of this dialectical play, Mr. Hawke can advance an even more long-term radical programme for Australia.

As observed by a number of political commentators, the National Party was the real loser in the by-elections. Those who looked for a resurgent National Party to capture the support of that broad stream of Australians who are instinctively conservative, were completely misled by the last Queensland State election results, Mr. Ian Sinclair is no Joh Bjelke-Petersen and the Federal National Party is going to learn that whatever the truth may be concerning Mr. Sinclair, he is going to prove a political liability.

State Secretary of the Queensland National Party, Mr. Mile Evans, apparently about to be removed from his position, came down to Victoria and tried to create the impression that it was his brilliant campaign which was responsible for the National triumph. The truth is, of course, that there were virtually two campaigns being conducted during the Queensland Elections: one by the National Party machine, and the other by Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen backed by a broad non-party campaign which responded to the Premier's lead on basic issues like the constitution and associated issues. It is also important to note that the Queensland electorate is still more decentralised and basically homogeneous than other electorates throughout Australia.

There are good men and women in both the Liberal and National parties throughout Australia. But at the Federal level neither has anything to offer Australia at the present time. We cannot expect figs from thistles. Both are afflicted with a deep philosophical rot and to elect them without that rot being first removed, if this is at all possible, would be fatal.

Two major developments are essential for traditional Australia to survive: the development of a broadly based national movement which seeks to challenge at every level the betrayal of the nation's basic traditions and institutions, which demands that control of the Federal Constitution be returned to the Australian people; such a movement ensuring that Mr. Hawke's referenda are defeated and that more Independent Senators be elected to the Senate. Developments along the above lines could lay the ground for an Australian renaissance. The Peacocks and the Sinclairs have nothing to offer to such a renaissance.

BRIEF COMMENTS

Melbourne "Sun" columnist Mr. Tom Prior quotes Premier Brian Burke of Western Australia as saying that "Aboriginal land rights will be our biggest problem by far. Somehow, we have to change people's heads.... Fundamentally, we have to change the view Australians have of each other. Australia has always been a very racist country ... "(16/2) Like so many who use the term "racist" as a type of political swear word, never defining it, Premier Burke apparently does not understand that the basic concept of Aboriginal land rights is a form of unjust discrimination against the European.

Experts on the realities of the Middle East, men like Dr. Alfred Lilienthal, Jewish author of the basic work on the Middle East, "The Zionist Connection" (Price $18 posted) warned the American policy makers about the folly of American military intervention in Lebanon. No form of diplomatic table talk can alter the fact that President Reagan has suffered a major defeat in Lebanon, with a blow to American prestige throughout the Arab world. Following his meeting with President Reagan, President Mubarak of Egypt upset White House officials by stating that Israel was "the root and the cause" of the problems in Lebanon, insisting that America open negotiations with the Palestinians. There is no hope of peace in the Middle East until the Palestinian question is constructively resolved.

The Australian media paid little or no attention to Mr. Enoch Powell's criticism of the Queen's last Christmas message, in which her Majesty upset a wide range of people in Britain by departing from the usual theme of some type of seasonal and religious greetings. She spoke about the duty of the affluent nations to help the Third World, and was shown in the company of Mrs. Ghandi at last November's Commonwealth Summit in Delhi. Enoch Powell said, "Ministers have increasingly of late permitted themselves to place in the Sovereign's mouth speeches which suggests she has the interests and affairs of other countries as much or more at heart than those of her own people."
After initial expressions of amazement and horror, Powell started to receive influential support. Well-known commentator, Mr. Paul Johnson, writing in the "Spectator", described the Queen's speech as a "colossal clangor" with a "high political content". He asked, "Who was responsible? My suspicions centre on that increasingly pushy organisation, the Commonwealth Secretariat".
Mr. Powell has once again showed great courage by drawing attention to a major issue of far reaching implications.

The same Labor Government pledged to land rights for an Aboriginal minority, is in the Cocos Keeling Island attempting to strip land ownership from a white minority descended from the original occupants, allegedly for the benefit of the Asiatic immigrants brought to the islands by the white minority. Isn't that strange?

FOISTING LAND POLICIES

The following excellent letter appeared in The Chronicle (Toowoomba) recently. The correspondent is an "A.T. Leahy", of Toowoomba:
"Mr. Clyde Holding, the Federal Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, has serious doubts about the acceptability of the Hawke Government's land rights policies among the majority of Australians. Hence his letter to A.L.P. branch secretaries. He seeks to mobilise the branches in a propaganda drive to make his policies more acceptable in what his letter describes as 'the broader white community'.
Among other things, Mr. Holding's letter states, 'there is, unfortunately, in the broader white community, misunderstanding about land rights, sacred sites, and Aboriginal relationships with the land'.
Despite this admission that his land rights policies are not supported by the bulk of the population, he still goes on to say: 'We are intending that the implementation of these policy objectives will be largely achieved in the lifetime of this Parliament'.
He further goes on to solicit support from members of the A.L.P. branches for propaganda drive to popularise his policies. It has always been my conception that members of Parliament were the representatives of the people. Mr. Holding, in his letter, has reversed the roles. Wake up Australia! We are being taken for suckers.

BIG BROTHER IS GRINNING

In Brief

FROM HANSARD : SENATE (September 8th)
Senator Shirley Walters (Lib.- Tasmania)
".... Senator Grimes ... When he took his leader (Mr. Hawke) down to the west coast of Tasmania last week, he was not game to have a public meeting. He was not game to go out on the Crotty Road, to visit the men doing the work. He slunk in and walked up the streets. The Prime Minister (Mr. Hawke) was kissed by three women in Queenstown and we were told that this was a warm welcome. The people of Queenstown kept off the streets. The only people who did appear wore black armbands. The Warden invited the people along to a reception, the majority of whom refused the invitation. The ones who did go wore black armbands. Senator Grimes said that I am incorrect in saying that the feeling in Tasmania is still very high on this issue. He knows darned well that he is not game to go down the west coast or call a public meeting. He is not game to go out on the Crotty Road, nor is Senator Tate nor are any of the other Tasmanian Senators in the Government.
We have only to look at the popularity of the Government in Tasmania at the moment to know that if an election were held now we would not have one honourable Senator from Tasmania sitting in the Government.... Our own view is that Tasmania could be the key in depriving Mr. Hawke control of the Senate in the forthcoming Federal elections. If Tasmania DID return ten non-labor senators, then this would give the Senate almost certainly the numbers to reject Senator Gareth Evans' Humanist/Socialist legislation, now in his pipeline.

WHAT CAN ONE DO?
The following letter was published in The Advertiser (Adelaide) - January 20th over the name of a "Catherine O'Grady", of Williamstown (S.A.):
"I've decided my life is worth living. I value it. My top priority is my liberty so I can live fully, maximise my potential. Likewise for my children. "The things our politicians and men in power overseas are doing prove there are many people working very hard to take away my liberty and demoralise me as a thinking individual. They would like to demoralise you too. Lump us all under the general term 'the masses' - mindless and incapable.
"Mr. Hawke has such a low estimation of us that he deems us incapable of managing our own health care. He has made the decision for us. Dr. Blewett completed the insult by congratulating us for partaking. He may pretend, but I don't, that there's any justice in Medicare. I have had my individual rights walked on.
"There's a man called Davy making suggestions about how my children should be educated. I would like him to know that it is not his business. Nor is it the Government's. If the Government would do the only thing it does not do - protect the rights of the individual - and refrain from barging into our lives, manipulating them and charging us a lot of money for doing so, we could afford to select teachers for our children, doctors and hospitals for our own health needs, build our own houses, employ ourselves, and everyone would learn that you can't get something for nothing. THEN a man could stand up…."