I?AUSTRALIA

Speech byTHE HON. E. G. WHITLAM, M.P.

Prime Minister

on

The Constitutional Crisis and The WhitlamGovernment

(From the 'Parliamentary Debates', 16 October 1975)

Mr WHITLAM (Werriwa-Prime Minister)(10.24)-Mr Speaker, I move the resolution:

Considering that this House is the House of the AustralianParliament from which the Government of Australia ischosen;

Considering moreover that on 2 December 1972 the Aus-tra lian Labor Party was elected byjudgment of the people tobe the Government of Australia; that on 18 May 1974 theAustralian Labor Party was re-elected by judgment of thepeople to be the Government of Australia; and that the Aus-tralian Labor Party continues to have a governing majorityin this House;

Recognising that the Constitution and the conventions ofthe Constitution vest in this House the control of the supplyof money to the elected Government;

Noting that this House on 27 August 1975 passed the LoanBill 1975 and on 8 October 1975 passed the AppropriationBill (No. 1) 1975-76 and the Appropriation Bill (No. 2)1975-76 which, amongst other things, appropriate moneysfor the ordinaiy annual services of the Governiment;

Noting also that on 15 October 1975, in total disregard ofthe practices and conventions observed in the AustralianParliament since Federation, the Leader of the Oppositionannounced the intention of the Opposition to delay thoseBills, with the object of forcing an election of this House; thaton 15 October 1975 the Leader of the Opposition in the Sen-ate announced that the Opposition parties in the Senatewould delay the Bills; and that on IS October 1975 the Sen-ate, against the wishes of the Government, decided not toproceed further with consideration of the Loan Bill 1 975:

Considering that the actions of the Senate and of theLeader of the Opposition will, if pursued, have the mostserious consequences for Parliamentary democracy inAustralia, will seriously damage the Government's efforts tocounter the effect of world-wide inflation and unemploy-ment, and will thereby. cause great hardship for the Aus-tralian people;

1. This House declares that it has fall confidence in theAustralian Labor Party Government.

2. This House affirms that the Constitution and the con-ventions of the Constitution vest in this House the con-trol of the supply of moneys to the elected Governmentand that the threatened action of the Senate constitutesa gross violation of the roles of the respective Houses ofthe Parliament in relation to the appropriation ofmoneys.

3. This House asserts the basic principle that a Govern-ment that continues to have a majority in the House ofRepresentatives has a right to expect that it will be ableto govern.

4. This House condemns the threatened action of theLeader of the Opposition and of the non-&.overnmentparties in the Senate as being reprehensible and asconstituting a grave threat to the principles of respon-sible government and of Parliamentary democracy inAustralia.

5. This House calls upon the Senate'to pass without delaythe Loan Bill 1975, the Appropriation Bill (No. 1)1975-76 and the Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 1975-76.

This motion brings to the formal notice of theHouse a situation of grave constitutional crisiswithout precedent in the Australian Parliamentand the Australian nation-without modemprecedent in the parliamentary democracies ofthe world. That situation arises from statementsmade outside this chamber by the Leader of theOpposition (Mr Malcolm Fraser) yesterday thatthe Opposition parties will use their numbers inthe Senate to delay the Government's annualAppropriation Bills, which have been passed bythis House.

Subsequently the Leader of the Opposition inthe Senate (Senator Withers) moved, and the

Senate passed, an amendment to the Loan Bill1975 that the Bill be not further proceeded with.It is transparently clear from what he said thatthe Opposition proposes to take the unpre-cedented step of blocking the Budget of thedemocratically elected Government of Australia.

In the face of the Leader of the Opposition'sattempt to sabotage the foundation of our parlia-mentary system, this House must, in unmistake-able terms, make clear its rights. For the rights ofthis House are nothing less than the rights of theAustralian people. This House must expose thepolitical opportunism of the Opposition in theSenate for what it is. And what it means is consti-tutional revolution-the proposition that govern-ments can be unmade by the Senate and not bythe House of Representatives-the people'sHouse.

Let me recall the words of the Leader of theOpposition:

The basic principle which I adhere to strongly is that agovernment that continues to have a majority in the Houseof Representatives has a right to expect that it will be able togovern.

He has professed that principle again andagain. He knows the course of honour, ofdecency, of democracy. Yesterday he espoused acourse of action which can only mean that he iswilling to overturn his principles and overturnthe basis of our system. There is the really'reprehensible circumstance' today-a man whoknows what is honourable, yet who does thethoroughly dishonourable-the exact definitionof a man without honour, a man without prin-ciple. As another self-indulgent wool grower saidin putting personal interests ahead of thenation's interest, video meliora proboque;deteriora sequor.

The House of Representatives-the people'sHouse-alone determines who shall governAustralia. Only 17 months ago, the people forthe second time in less than 18 months, electedthe Australian Labor Party to govern for afurther 3 years. I state again the basic rule of ourparliamentary system: Governments are madeand unmade in the House of Representatives-inthe people's House. The Senate cannot, does not,and must never determine who the governmentshall be.

The Leader of the Opposition himself hasasserted that basic principle again and again. Ina very real sense he owes his present position tothe assertion of that principle. He wasonly ableto destroy his predecessor because the righthonourable member for Bruce (Mr Snedden)had fatally weakened himself by his attempt tosubvert the principle iii April 1974 and his failure

to pledge that he would never again be party toanother attempt.

By appearing as the champion of this basicparliamentary principle the present Leader ofthe Opposition drummed up support among Lib-eral senators who wanted security of tenure, andamong the business community who wantedstability in politics more than they wanted achange of government. That was how he wasable to destroy his leader-the second time hehad destroyed a Liberal leader by posing as aman of principle. He enjoyed his honeymoonwith the Australian people precisely because heprofessed the principle-the principle that theelected government had the right and responsi-bility to govern for its full term of 3 years. This isthe man of principle, the man of honour, whostood up in this place on 9 March 1971 when hefor the first, but not for the last time, destroyedhis leader and said of the former Liberal PrimeMinister of Australia, the present Independentmember for Higgins (Mr Gorton) and the nextsenator for the Australian Capital Territory:

This man is unfit to be Prime Minister of Australia.

His own reproach will be his own epitaph. Andit will be my exquisite duty soon to ram this mes-sage home to the people of Australia, in termsthat neither they nor the Leader of the Op-position will ever forget.

The Leader of the Opposition announces withsome pride that departments are running or willrun short of funds. Of course they will run shortof funds. The Leader of the Opposition is refus-ing to pass the Appropriation Bills in the Senatewhich provide for the ordinary annual services ofthe Government. He will be responsible for billsnot being paid, for salaries not being paid, forutter financial chaos, and this will continue aslong as the Leader of the Opposition refuses toallow the Senate to pass the Supply already auth-orised by this House, the people's House. Andnow, like a pyromaniac he dances around thefire. He will get burnt.

Let us cut through the humbug. The Leader ofthe Opposition has been planning this actionever since he was elected. And all the nonsenseabout 'reprehensible circumstances orextraordinary circumstances' was so much eye-wash, so much a smokescreen for his real inten-tions. Look at the terms of the Senate resolutionyesterday-the reasons it gives for delaying Sup-ply, for not proceeding further with the Budget.It mentions the Government's overseas loan rais-ing efforts. There is nothing in that resolutionwhich raises matters which were not fully knownon 9 July when the House met to thrash this

whole matter out. Yet neither then nor sub-sequently has the Opposition in this House evermoved a motion of censure or no confidenceupon the Government on this matter, any morethan it has ever been able to bring any specificcharge of illegality or misconduct by the Govern-ment or the Ministers in our negotiations. It is ab-solutely plain that the Leader of the Oppositiondetermined upon his course from the outset, justas the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate,Senator Withers, let the cat out of the bag, lasttime, when he said:

We embarked on a course some 12 months ago to bringabout a House of Representatives election.That is, from the time that the people ofAustralia had the impertinence to reject the menborn to rule and to elect a Labor Government.Over the period of 75 years since Federationthere have been 20 occasions on which theannual Appropriation Bills have come before aSenate in which the Government did not have amajority of its own. There has been a similarnumber of occasions in respect of the Sup-plementary Appropriation Bills and also of theSupply Bills. Not one of these Bills has ever beenrejected. They number in all 139. 1 seek leave totable a list of the Bills concerned.

Mr SPEAKER-Is leave granted?Mr Sinclair-Yes, leave is granted.Mr WHITLAM-On the other hand, numer-

ous examples can be given of governmentmeasures other than annual Appropriation andSupply Bills that have been rejected by the Sen-ate. In this 29th Parliament alone, in a bare 15months, 22 Bills have twice been rejected by theSenate and a further ten have been rejected once,deferred or unacceptably amended by the Sen-ate. The contrast between the record of the Sen-ate over 75 years in respect of Appropriation andSupply Bills with its treatment of other Billspoints to only one conclusion. The conclusionmust be drawn that the treatment by the Senateof Appropriation and Supply Bills has reflected afirm conviction that the. Bills for financing theannual services of government should not berejected.

The specious protestation by the Leader of theOpposition that it is not rejecting the Budget willfool no one. But it does at least serve to revealthat even he is conscious of the gross violation ofconstitutional principles involved. He shrinksfrom calling his action by its true name.

There are compelling reasons why the Oppo-sition cannot be allowed, in an unscrupulousgrab for political power, to shatter the principlesthat have stood for 75 years. Appropriation and

Supply Bills can originate only in this House andthe Senate may not amend them for the ordinaryannual services of the government. Responsiblegovernment on the Westminster model, uponwhich our system of government is founded,requires absolutely that the people's House-thisHouse-through which the Government ischosen, should hold financial paramountcy overan upper House. The convention has been clearlyestablished that the Senate, which has no powerto originate or amend money Bills, shall notblock or reject them either.

The principle I assert is the principle forwhich, I am certain, everybody who has stood i~nmy place in this House would also have stoodfirm in the three-quarters of a century that wehave had a National Parliament. Prime MinisterMenzies did. Prime Minister Holt did. PrimeMinister Gorton did and does. I repeat the prin-ciple: The Government is formed in this Houseand is answerable to this House and this Housemust control financial matters. This has been thesituation in every English speaking democracy.No other democracy would permit a situationwhere an upper House could reject a Budget.

In no other parliamentary democracy has theelected government been subject to the artificialpressures and intolerable stress to which thisGovernment has been subject by the unconsti-tutional threat of an election every 6 months.And that threat has been sustainable onlythrough the fortuitous, the accidental situation inthe Senate-by the actions of a Senate.describedby, the honourable member for Moreton (MrKillen) as a 'tainted Senate'.

Last night on television the Leader of the Op-position made 2 remarkable assertions, breath-taking in their audacious distortion of the truth.He said that the people of Australia had given hiscoalition a majority of senators at the last Senateelection. The truth is of course that at the lastSenate election the People not only recorded200 000 more votes for the Australian LaborParty candidates-the. Government-than for allother Parties represented in the Senate com-bined, but elected 29 Labor senators and 29 Op-position senators and 2 Independents. Because 2State Premiers flouted another great consti-tutional convention, the Government now hasonly 27 senators. Yesterday's Senate vote was acomplete distortion of what the people decidedabout the Senate in May last year. The second as-sertion last night by the Leader of the Oppositionwas that the scandalous appointment of areplacement for the late Senator Milliner by theQueensland Government was not relevant to

yesterday's decision. Senator Steele Hall nailedthis once and for all when he said:

Let it be remembered that the Opposition succeeded onlybecause a Labor senator died. They did it over a dead man'scorpse.If the Premier of Queensland had acted honour-ably and constitutionally by appointing a Laborsupporter to hold Senator Milliner's place thenthe Opposition's amendment would have had asmany senators voting against it as voting for it.Yesterday's spurious resolution in the Senatewould have been negated.

The political immorality of the Opposition isdemonstrated further by the grossly improper in-citement of non-Labor State governments to res-train the Governors of the States from exercisingtheir duties under the Australian Constitution inrelation to periodic Senate elections. On 24occasions the Governor-General has suggestedto the Governors of the States the date whichthey should set for elections of senators for theirStates. On four of those occasions-May 1953,December 1964, November 1967 and 1970-anelection for the House of Representatives wasnot held. On all 24 occasions the State Governorsmet the Governor-General's request. The years1975 or 1976 could see the first time in the 75years during which Australia has had a nationalParliament, the first of the 25 occasions on whicha Governor-General has put such requests to theState Governors, that a Premier advises a Gover-nor to disregard constitutional practice, to fail inthe duty which the Constitution imposes on aGovernor. This outrage would be at the behest ofthe Federal Council of the Liberal Party lastSunday-the faceless men of the Liberal Party.

At this time particularly when constitutionalissues are at stake it ill behoves any representa-tive of the Crown to cast aside the traditions ofhis office and throw in his lot with one or theother of the political parties in dispute onnational issues. It is a matter of grave concernthat a man in this position can be so careless ofhis responsibility, so unconscious of theprecedent, so unthinking as to the danger as theGovernor of Queensland showed himselfyesterday.

I have recently had occasion to quote manyauthorities on the perils of the course upoA which

the Leader of the Opposition has embarked-notleast Sir Robert Menzies who founded his Party.Let me now quote Quick and Garran, writing atthe time of the founding of the AustralianParliament:

The House or Representatives is not only the nationalchamber it is the democratic chamber it is the grand de-pository and embodiment or the liberal principles of govern-ment which pervade the entire constitutional fabric. It is thechamber in which the progressive instincts and popular as-pirations or the people will be most likely to make them-selves first felt by the Constitution, it is expresslyintended to be such a House, and by its organisation andfunctions it is best fitted to be the area in which nationalprogress will find room for development.

And this, with a prescience, prophetic insight,that Quick and Garran would not have claimedfor themselves, gets to the heart and the root ofthis present grave crisis. It is because thisGovernment has attempted to make this Parlia-ment the instrument for reform, for long overduechange, for progress, for the redistribution ofwealth, for the uplifting of the underprivileged,for the reduction of the privileges of great wealthand deeply entrenched vested interests, aninstrument towards equality of opportunity forall Australians, that our opponents and thosevested interests have from the very beginning, asSenator Withers revealed, embarked on a courseto destroy this Government at the earliest oppor-tunity. But what they are really doing is destroy-ing the very basis of parliamentary democracy inour country.

The Senate resolution talks about 'submittingto the judgment of the people'. Precisely! Thismatter should be submitted to the judgment ofthe people. It will be submitted to the judgmentof the people. The issue is the unconstitutionaland undemocratic conduct of a chance majorityin the Senate. The issue is the rejection by theSenate of a Budget designed to bring greatbenefits to this nation. It is the Senate which is ontrial. It is the Senate which will have to submit tothe judgment of the people. It is the Senate whichhas rejected the Budget. It is the Senate whichmust face the people. Again, in the indeliblewords of Senator Steele Hall, it is the Senate, theLiberal Party and the Liberal leader which, bythe course they are now attempting, have sownthe seeds of their own destruction.

I 388/75-LPrinted by Authority by the Government Pninter o(Australia13883/75--L