Australian Political Historical Thread

[CK]

Many posters on here are older than me - sorry, gents (and equal apologies to any older female posters, but not sure we have any ladies among us here!) - and have seen plenty of political history in their time. Posters like Redandblack, Southee, Psyber, Jimmy_041 and many others I have inadvertently left out, have been fortunate enough to experience many of the historical parts of our rich political history that I was not around to see - whether that be the reign of Sir Robert Menzies, Gough Whitlam, the tragedy of Harold Holt, Prime Ministers like Billy McMahon and John Gorton...the list goes on.

I thought it was worth starting a specific thread, therefore, where some of the older posters here can share their experiences, observations, musings etc about some of the revered Australian political moments/people/scandals etc of the 50's, 60's, 70's. What triggered this, is reading about the Jim Cairns/Juni Morosi scandal, which I know was massive in its day. As a start point, what can posters tell me about this, its long term effects, the impact at the time, etc?

[GWW]

I'm not old enough to remember key events from over 30 years ago, but another figure who might be relevant to this thread is Arthur Caldwell, who I believe -and I stand corrected - was a major player in the drawing up of the White Australia policy 50 or so years ago.

I understand he was also the target of Australia's first attempted political assassination.

[Psyber]

I'm not old enough to remember key events from over 30 years ago, but another figure who might be relevant to this thread is Arthur Caldwell, who I believe -and I stand corrected - was a major player in the drawing up of the White Australia policy 50 or so years ago.

I understand he was also the target of Australia's first attempted political assassination.

I'd have to look it up later, but I think you are right about the assassination attempt.
The White Australia policy grew out of the Immigration Restriction Act in 1901, before Arthur's time. IIRC, it was however an ALP driven idea.
Its end began when the Holt Liberal Government introduced the Migration Act, 1966, and it final end came in the year 1973, with the Whitlam Labor government.

[redandblack]

Jim Cairns and Juni Morosi

Ah, they were different days. Jim Cairns' finest hour was when he addressed a huge (I'm talking really big, not just a few thousand) at a Vietnam Moratorium Campaign rally in Melbourne. I think Juni Morosi was a political staffer and Jim (very much a left winger in a 60's/70's definition of lefty) had a relationship with Juni (she was tidy enough). There was a touch of the hippies about Jim and Juni and the revelation of their 'affair' scandalised the establishment of the time, especially when Jim said he felt 'a kind of love' for her.

This would never do and Jim (a Treasurer in the Whitlam government(?) never rose to greater heights after that.

The above is from memory and my time line could be dodgy (?Psyber).

The interesting thing is that the Vietnam War protesters turned out to be right (IMO). The cry at the time from the pro-war establishment was that if we lost the war in Vietnam, communism would make its way to Australia. Maps showing nasty red arrows swooping down from Vietnam towards Australia were particularly popular

[Psyber]

That fits with my memory, R&B.
And of course John Gorton got into a similar situation with Ainslie Gotto a few years later, and used his casting vote to depose himself as leader of the party.
Both acted honourably when put on the spot, which is why I respect them both for their relative honesty when the matter emerged.
There were no "I did not have sex with that woman!" type denials..

Apropos Vietnam:
I was one opposed to our involvement there although I wasn't at the demonstrations as my future second wife was at the time. (We hadn't met yet.)
My position was that Vietnam possibly needed a period of Communism which would be gradually cast off as its economy grew, and that the Domino Theory was a joke.

[CK]

The fact that Gough Whitlam seemed to achieve so much - relatively speaking - in three years, yet was deposed always intrigued me. The blocking of supply proved the ultimate downfall, but would he have been likely to re-elected had he been able to stand again? What was the reaction of the voters at the time to this?

[Jimmy_041]

I'm not old enough to remember key events from over 30 years ago, but another figure who might be relevant to this thread is Arthur Caldwell, who I believe -and I stand corrected - was a major player in the drawing up of the White Australia policy 50 or so years ago.

I understand he was also the target of Australia's first attempted political assassination.

Before my time but Arthur Calwell "Two wongs dont make a white" A classic

The bullet missed him but there was a famous photo of him with a bloodied chin but I cant find it

He was second - Prince Alfred was the first in the mid 1800's

[redandblack]

The fact that Gough Whitlam seemed to achieve so much - relatively speaking - in three years, yet was deposed always intrigued me. The blocking of supply proved the ultimate downfall, but would he have been likely to re-elected had he been able to stand again? What was the reaction of the voters at the time to this?

That's a good question and can't be answered accurately, as more than almost any event in Aust political history, it depends on what side you're on. There's no middle ground. I doubt he would have been re-elected in 1975, but if his govt had continued, he may have been a chance in 1977. To understand this, it's necessary to re-create the tensions and political mood od the time.

Next post, I'll start and perhaps between Psyber, others and I, we can fill in the blanks, as it's necessary to start with the reign of Bob Menzies.

Great question, I'll follow up in instalments, starting ASAP.

[Psyber]

The fact that Gough Whitlam seemed to achieve so much - relatively speaking - in three years, yet was deposed always intrigued me. The blocking of supply proved the ultimate downfall, but would he have been likely to re-elected had he been able to stand again? What was the reaction of the voters at the time to this?

Gough did stand again in December 1975 and lost, and resigned from the ALP leadership after losing again in 1977.

He had a attractive dream, and I voted for him in 1972 1nd 1974.
But it became apparent that behind the visible achievements there was a complete shambles and the Khemlani affair lost him popularity with the public.
This involved behind the scene negotiations to borrow hugely from wealthy Arab sources, outside the International banking system.

Had not public sympathy already shifted there would have been no point in the opposition under Malcolm Fraser blocking supply to attempt to bring the government down and force an election in 1975.
Nor would John Kerr have had the nerve to overrule Gough Whitlam's assertions that he "had a mandate from the people" to do what he wanted.
He had to be confident Fraser would win an election to keep his job, as Gough had threatened to dismiss him without his pension if he didn't support Gough's "mandate"..

Their judgement was vindicated when Fraser had a huge win in the election on December 1975: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian ... tion,_1975
That was the first time I voted Liberal.

However, there was a touch of the recent Pink Bats affair in some of Gough Whitlam's achievements too.
Free University education was a wonderful idea which attracted me although I had already graduated under the old Full Fee system with the help of a Commonwealth Scholarship during the 60s.
During the 70s, courses seen as "soft" in Arts rapidly filled with people who found being a perpetual student convenient, and tutorials tended to become social occasions, not academic.**
There was also an increase in people going on to Disabilty Pensions, which cynics attributed to the government wanting to keep the unemployment figures looking good.

**My future wife, whom I met in December 1975, was serious about completing her Arts degree at the time.
She had been paying her way while working under the old system and was frustrated with this disruption of the course, but she still voted for the ALP in 1975.
We went out together for the first time on election eve 1975, and despite the political difference got on well enough to eventually marry.

[Psyber]

As a PS to the above:

I recall seeing interviewed on TV at the time a representative of our Military Intelligence.
The issue at hand was that the press had noticed that there were concurrent Army exercises being undertaken in Queensland based on the unlikely concept of a military takeover of the Australian government.
He insisted it was a purely hypothetical exercise and totally coincidental.
ALP supporters tended to think the CIA was behind it.
It became irrelevant once an election was called.

[redandblack]

As I said, there are polar opposites on this question and Psyber has given one account.

I'll put another soon.

I have to say that the 1975 election didn't justify anything IMO, but we'll agree to disagree.

There are shades of 1975 in the current calls for another election.

Democracy when it suits

[redandblack]

Episode 1:

The Liberal Party had ruled for a staggering 23 years by 1972. Although Labor had won the popular vote in 1958 and had come within 1 seat in 1961, they never really looked like a highly credible opposition during that time. After Mr Evatt, Arthur Calwell was the leader and was a fairly uninspiring politician. An old-style Labor man, he was pretty much a captive of the machine and few really saw him as a possible PM.

After the DLP split of the 50's, the ALP were going nowhere in the 60's, until Gough Whitlam came along. He became leader after the 1966 election wipeout and immediately took on the machine men of the ALP, putting his leadership on the line unless change was made to the party.

"Crash through or crash" was how it was put and he crashed through.

Whitlam was very much an intellectual and although his (current) opponents look back and disparage him, his main platform at that time was mainly about improving the basics of life - infrastructure, etc.

After Menzies retired, Holt took over and looked to continue the Liberal domination. His death changed things, as John Gorton, a rough and ready ex-RAF pilot (?), took over the Lib leadership. As was mentioned about Jim Cairns and Juni Morosi, questions were asked about Gorton's relationship with a staffer, Ainslie Gotto (great name).

Gorton was also reported as being out in the early hours of the morning in the company of attractive women. He was a huge change from the pro-forma Liberal leader and had come from the Senate originally(?).

The inevitable challenge to his leadership eventually came and the Liberal Party delivered Whitlam a gift - the totally inept William McMahon.

McMahon had been a competent Treasurer and was seen as a safe pair of hands.

He was anything but.


Episode 2 to follow.

[mick]

Good summary. Gorton had an interesting face having had it rebuilt after an air crash during WWII, he was a fighter pilot I think. It is interesting to speculate that if the Liberals had stuck with Gorton whether they would have won the 1972 election. McMahon was certainly a gift for Labor.

[robranisgod]

Good summary. Gorton had an interesting face having had it rebuilt after an air crash during WWII, he was a fighter pilot I think. It is interesting to speculate that if the Liberals had stuck with Gorton whether they would have won the 1972 election. McMahon was certainly a gift for Labor.

Gough got within seven seats of defeating Gorton in 1969 when the economy was booming in the "Don's Party" election after the Liberals had gone into the election with a 39 seat majority. In retrospect the biggest shock to me of that whole period is that Gough only beat McMahon by 9 seats in the 1972 "It's time election". By then inflation was starting to bite and McMahon was certainly a lot less charismatic than Gough (or Gorton for that matter). I have often wondered how Gough would have been viewed in history if he had won in 1969 and implemented many of his plans in more prosperous times. We will never know, but I fear that Gough's lack of economic credibility would have caused the same problems as did happen when he eventually came to power.
1969 and 1972 were very exciting elections to follow even though I was just too young to vote at that stage.

[Jimmy_041]

They were like kids locked in the lolly shop after all those years of looking through the window.

[redandblack]

If you were a Labor supporter in those days, the arrival of Whitlam was like the Bloods recruiting Chris Judd. Whitlam was a QC, was intellectually well above most of the rest of the Parliament and introduced a strange new idea to the ALP. Policies. Attractive policies, dealing with a range of issues and portfolios.

Labor had been routed in the 1966 election (the Vietnam election) and faced an almost impossible task in 1969. As RIG noted, this was the 'Don's Party' election, which saw Whitlam bring Labor to the brink of an unlikely victory. He fell about 4 or 5 seats short, giving the coalition a margin of 7 or 9 from memory, despite Labor once again winning the 2 party preferred vote.

Gorton survived only because the Country Party leader, 'Black Jack' McEwen hated McMahon, but when he retired, Gorton was replaced by McMahon (on Gorton's casting vote(?).

McMahon was a relic of a past age, really. He had a querulous voice and looked constantly nervous. Whitlam was a far more inspiring person and next to him, McMahon was no match at all.

The keynote moment between them was when Whitlam visited China. At that time, China was very much a closed shop, not recognised by Western countries. Whitlam's visit was audacious and McMahon attacked him, saying the Chinese had played him for a fool.

Very soon after that, US President Nixon visited China, totally taking the wind out of McMahon's sails and making Whitlam look ahead of the game.

[dedja]

They were like kids locked in the lolly shop after all those years of looking through the window.

LOL, Gough has always been considered the messiah by his disciples and whilst his social reform agenda was inspirational, his government's complete ineptitude with anything related to finance will haunt him to his grave.

Then the events of Remembrance Day in 1975 turned him into a martyr ...

[redandblack]

The period leading up to the 1972 election was a strange, but generally happy time. Labor were clearly going to win the 1972 election and the Libs had been in for nearly a quarter of a century and were tired and resigned to defeat.

It was time.

And so it turned out to be. The Lib majority of 7 or 9 was turned into a Labor majority of about the same numbers, although Labor scored nearly 53% of the 2PP. What happened next was exciting if you were a Labor supporter, not so if you were a Lib. Whitlam didn’t wait for the last seat to be declared. He and his deputy, Lance Barnard, a decent man, were sworn in as the only ministers, holding about half the ministries each. Whitlam immediately announced the withdrawal of Australian troops from Vietnam and freed conscientious objectors from prison. What followed was a flurry of announcements and policy decisions.

The Establishment were horrified. To understand what happened in 1975, it’s necessary to understand the lead-up. The Liberals replaced McMahon with Billy Snedden, who was no match for Whitlam. However, the Libs controlled the Senate and were quick to often use this majority to try to block legislation. Joh Bjelke-Petersen was also Premier of Queensland at the time and thwarted a plan by Whitlam to even the numbers in the Senate through DLP Senator Vince Gair.

With a hostile Senate, Whitlam decided to use the scheduled 1974 half-senate election to have a double-dissolution election. He won, with a slightly reduced majority. The Senate numbers were equalled, with the balance held by two independent Seantors.

These Senate numbers were to prove vital over the next 18 months in determining the course of history. Whitlam’s government was a brilliant reforming government, but their rush to reform left them economically vulnerable. When the economy started to nosedive, things changed for the worse.

The period leading up to 1975 had everything, in a political sense. Today’s talk of trashing Westminster traditions is nothing compared to those events.

Whitlam ended 1974 totally dominating Snedden, who was reduced to making ‘woof woof’ noises in Parliament instead of an answer. His colleagues knew he had to go, but Whitlam’s domination of him was to plant the seeds of his own destruction.

(As an aside, Billy Snedden was years later found dead in a hotel room, with a smile on his face).

Perhaps Psyber can correct any mistakes I’ve made, before the next, exciting episode.

[Psyber]

Sounds about right to me R&B.
I wasn't a fan of McMahon or Sneddon either, and was happy with Gough's dream in 1972, and all for the pull out from Viet Nam.
The "It's time!" campaign was brilliantly done and backed by some big names in Australian entertainment.
It was a pity about the financial ineptitude.

I had a little fun with the Libs "Turn on the lights.." campaign in 1975 too.
Though I wasn't a member of any political party until the 1990s I gave out Liberal "How to Vote" cards at a booth on Crittenden Rd, Findon, in 1975.
I was asked to do so by the local branch President whom I knew socially.
He didn't want to leave a woman doing the job there as the last one who did, at the previous election, got her jaw broken.
He said, "We need a largish fellow.."

Interestingly, the guy giving out ALP cards and I got on well, passing across each others cards, and trying to predict who'd take both or who'd take only his or only mine as they approached.
It wasn't as acrimonious as some wanted it to become or feared it would...

[redandblack]

I have to confess that I once handed out how-to-vote cards for Susie Creamcheese for about half an hour