Setbacks for Fraser
David McNicoll
Sydney 'Oh God, not again!' This was the universal reaction when Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser announced a new election for 10 December. The Liberal, Labour and Country Parties — everyone joined in disapproval of an election, a year before it would normally have been held. After all, we had voted in 1972 (when Whitlam swept in): in 1974 (when Whitlam narrowly retained office): in 1975 (when Fraser had practically annihilated Whitlam at the polls). For good measure, most states had had local elections: and on top of that there had been a federal referendum. And now it was on again. The reasons Fraser gave for his decision did not convince many people: certainly not.some of his back-benchers in shaky seats who are certain to face defeat. It IS generally accepted that Fraser wanted to get a re-affirmation from the electorate, a mandate for three more years — and knew that he had a far better chance if the Labour Party were led by the slightly tarnished Gough Whitlam rather than the man waiting in the wings, Bill Hayden, who could easily have replaced Whitlam as leader in the next year. Prime Minister Fraser believed that Australia would never 'buy' Whitlam again. The view was also held, in a gloomy way, by many of Whitlam's followers.
Malcolm Fraser was counting on electoral support for some specific reasons: inflation had come down to nine percent, and prospects for an upturn in the economy were good: left-wing resistance to uranium mining did not reflect majority Australian thinking: and incessant industrial turbulence demanded a reassurance from the voters that the Fraser government could take tough action against the Communistdominated unions who were retarding the recovery in the economy. But somehow, it hasn't yet turned out that way, although there is still some time to election day. The Prime Minister and his Party have been faced with a series of embarrassments and setbacks which have brought delight to the Labour Party organisers. The result of a by-election in the State of Victoria showed a distinct rebuff to the Liberal Party: the swing to Labour, and against the Liberals, in the Queensland election, was substantial enough to be very Worrying. But then came a crushing blow. Pressure on the Federal Treasurer, Phillip Lynch, forced him to resign because of his alleged use of taxation loopholes in land investments. In addition to this series of setbacks, all causing Fraser considerable Concern, he (and Mr Whitlam, incidentally) now have to take seriously the emergence of a new party — Don Chipp's Australian Democrats.
Don Chipp is a Liberal who came from a humble background, got into politics, and eventually became a Minister. He held, with varying success, the portfolios of Navy, tourist activities, and customs. It was in the latter that he came under considerable public criticism for what were considered his too liberal views on what constituted suitable film viewing and magazine reading.
He got a reputation with the young as a 'Trendy', and with conservationists as a most sincere individual. At the same time, he established himself with many of his colleagues as a grandstanding lightweight. It was no surprise when Malcolm Fraser left him out of his new ministry in 1975: he was not the Fraser type. The omission cut right into Chipp, and Fraser and his party had a subcutaneous carbuncle attached to them from that time. A few months ago the carbuncle burst when Chip announced he was leaving the Liberals to become of of Fraser's most vocal critics. He got to work setting up his party — the Australian Democrats — and to the astonishment of a lot of people, including the writer, gained considerable support from people disenchanted with both Whitlam and Fraser.
In the Greensborough by-election, the Democrats polled an astonishing eighteen per cent of the vote. But that was Chipp territory, and the by-election issues were very local. But in the Queensland election the Democrats fielded candidates in twelve seats and collected ten per cent of the vote. It now becomes obvious that the Democrats are going to play a significant part in the election. And altDough Chipp does not urge his followers to give their preferences to either Liberal or Labour (he calls curses on both their houses), distribution of Queensland preferences showed a slight preponderance going Labour's way. Chipp's Democrats will not gain seats. But they will be effective 'spoilers' in much the same way that the National Front may be at the next general election in the United Kingdom. To gauge the forthcoming election it is necessary to take a look at the just completed Queensland election, in which the redoubtable peanut-farmer Johannes Bjelke-Petersen swept back to power, slightly increasing his share of the vote. Joh is a formidable fighter, and he is a fanatical Queenslander, regarding the federal government in Canberra as a collection of oddballs who try to frustrate his efforts to make Queensland the earthly paradise he believes it can become. He is a high principled churchgoer, rigid in many of his views. His devotion to law and order is such that he recently banned street marches from the streets of Brisbane, infuriating his political opponents, to say nothing of antiuranium and similarly volatile groups.
During his election campaign he suspended the operations of an aboriginal trachoma unit because two of its staff were canvassing votes for Labour. The uproar in the southern states at these moves was not reflected in Queensland where the aborigines are not regarded as important anyway, and where most of the sedate burghers of Brisbane agreed with the banning of street marches. So, despite euphoric Labour expectations, Joh went marching back to office.
Gough Whitlam undoubtedly will pay a great deal of attention to Queensland in the forthcoming election. Although Bjelke Petersen's National Party (formerly Country Party) was not dented at the polls, Labour made good gains at the expense of Petersen's Liberal coalition partners. So Whitlam will stump Queensland, keeping close to his side Bill Hayden, Queensland's native son. And the only Queensland Labour politician to survive the 1975 debacle which swept Whitlam from power. Hayden is a low-key politician regarded by many Labour machine men as the party's ace in the hole. He is a sound figures man, and although Whitlam says that if Labour came to power again Hayden would not be treasurer, nevertheless Hayden would be put in charge of economic management.
For the present, Whitlam does not have to frisk Hayden for stilettos. But if Whitlam loses on 10 December, the party knives will be out, and Hayden will depose Whitlam. Already there is talk that some sort of deal has been made to keep the truce — hence the strange assertion by Whitlam that, should he become Prime Minister again, he would keep the leadership for two years only, then hand it over to Hayden. There was something awfully phony about that statement — it didn't sound like the Whitlam we have grown to know.
The overriding issues at the 10 December election will be unemployment and the economy. Already uranium has been partly swept under the carpet. Dr. Dickson Mahon, the British Minister of State for Energy, on his recent visit, infuriated his Labour counterparts when he announced, with an honesty not seen frequently enough in Australian political life,' that Australia should export uranium to Great Britain if we wished to help the British working class. Uranium was not stressed in the Whitlam policy speech, and it will not loom very large in anything put forward by the Liberals. Unemployment will be the principal whipping boy for Labour, sound economic management and the successful fight against inflation will be the platforms hammered by the Liberals. How will the election go? Six months ago, Fraser at the polls would have swept back to power, just as Margaret Thatcher probably would have zoomed to power if a British election had been held. But, just as Mrs Thatcher's chance of success would seem less now, so Malcolm Fraser's chances are less rosy. Both parties are putting tremendous effort into the campaign, and both seem to have adequate funds. Labour learnt some desperate lessons when in office —one of which that a Nuremberg-rally type election meeting doesn't mean votes. Labour this time will be low key. Whitlam is being put forward as a man of restraint, a careful housekeeper. These may be hard propositions to sell to an electorate which saw Labour throwing money around in a way which would have brought a flush of envy to the cheek of the traditional drunken sailor.
Malcom Fraser's confidence has been shaken in the past few days.T he resignation of the Treasurer, correct as it was in the circumstances, has caused considerable confusion in the electorate, some believing Lynch to be deservedly out of his job, others considering him a martyr thrown to the wolves. At all events, the setbacks of the past week undoubtedly caused Mr Fraser to vary his policy speech, and to sweeten it with some very attractive sauces.
Malcom Fraser is an immeasurably better performer than he was two years ago. He has confidence, he can handle himself in television debates, and his personal projection is better. In his policy speech he dwelt on the past and the future, and he will do so throughout his campaign.
A week ago the general feeling was that Mr Fraser would comfortably retain office with the loss of perhaps twelve to fifteen seats. But this week's polls paint a gloomier picture and indicate that if the election had been held last Saturday, Labour might have returned to office. But there is some time to go before 10 December, and the tide could easily turn, particularly now that Mr Fraser has promised the abolition of death and gift duties, and the equalisation of petrol prices in the outback — a big factor in this far-flung country. Whatever party wins, it is going to face 1978 with much better prospects for Australia — inflation firmly on the way down, and the economy improving.
Previous page
