Malcolm Fraser

(Candobetter Ed: We are putting this article back on the front page because it is obviously relevant today.) Malcolm Fraser died today, March 20, 2014. Although loathed by a large section of the population because of his role in usurping Gough Whitlam, in what many believe was a CIA coup,[1] Malcolm Fraser since redeemed himself in many ways by advocating more thoughtful and responsible policy in Foreign Affairs. The current government and opposition are unlikely to acknowledge this most valuable role because it was critical of both of them. In recent interviews Fraser deplored the gung-ho and dishonest attitude of the west in pursuing wars and warned of the dangers to the world if the West continued to dismiss the legitimate concerns of Russia, the East and the Middle East. In this video and transcript, first published on 7 August 2014, Malcolm Fraser describes US/NATO moves on Ukraine as provocative. Russian stance justified. America feels it can break international law. The West should not, under any circumstances, involve itself militarily in the affairs of Crimea, Ukraine. Ukraine should be free to make whatever economic relationships it likes with other countries, whether with Russia or the West or both, but it should not become part of a defence bloc, a military block, and therefore [...] should not be eligible to join NATO, which Russia would reasonably interpret as provocative. Agrees that most Australian politicians showing poor judgement on Ukraine, Putin. Thinks this is partly influenced by mass media through deliberate slant. (First published on 20 March 2014.)

The Age article, Murdoch editors told to 'kill Whitlam' in 1975"(27/6/14), excerpts of which appear below, confirms my own recollection of the Whitlam years, as an early teen. Back then, I had naively regarded Rupert Murdoch's Australian newspaper as progressive and on the side of justice and truth. As I recall, the Australian and Bruce Petty, whose cartoons it published at the time, had opposed the Vietnam War and had supported Gough Whitlam and the Labor Party in 1972 and 1974. So I read the Australian almost every day and believed what I read.

Suddenly, some time after the 1974 mid-term election, the Australian's editor 'informed' me and other readers that supporting the Whitlam government had all been a "terrible mistake" on their part. He apologised and promised to rectify the mistake. I was disheartened, but continued to read the Australian and trust its judgement.

Day after day the tone against Whitlam and Labor grew louder, more high pitched and more hysterical.

Little did I realise that this sudden turnaround was a direct result of Rupert Murdoch instructing his editors to "kill Whitlam". The recently released secret US diplomatic document indicating that the then US government was aware of Murdoch's covert instruction to his staff when Australians had no idea of it is shocking (see #app1">Appendix). One cannot help but wonder whether this media subversion of our democracy was a component of the CIA's campaign to overthrow a government of which it disapproved, a campaign to which Christopher Boyce and others have attested._{#fnEgw1" id="txtEgw1"> 1  #fnEgw2" id="txtEgw2"> 2} 

However, by the time of the October constitutional crisis with the help of more knowledgeable adults including my father, I had seen through the lies and had stopped reading and buying the Australian.

A feature of the campaign of destabilisation is that it included industrial action, by the ostensibly more left wing components of the Trade Union movement with the support of then ACTU President Bob Hawke. This is strikingly similar to the campaign of destabiliation from 1953 until 1964 against the government of the then British colony of British Guiana led by Dr Cheddi Jagan, which included an 80 day general strike against the government's budget, beginning in April 1963:

"The CIA arranged as it had on many similar occasions, for North American and Latin American labor organisations, with which it had close ties, to support the strikers with messages of solidarity and food, thus enhancing the appearance of a genuine labor struggle."_{#fnEgw4" id="txtEgw4"> 4} 

The 'left-wing' ideological cover for this destabilisation of both the Jagan and Whitlam governments is the circular, supposedly Marxist, argument that every worker who works for a capitalist in a capitalist society is exploited because the employer pays the worker less than the full value of his work and keeps the 'surplus value'. As no financially viable business could not be extracting 'surplus value', then, by definition, every worker is exploited. If by ending 'exploitation' businesses can no longer operate, then socialism would surely be the consequence of capitalist economic collapse.

On Sunday 13 December, the day after Whitlam was defeated at the elections, I watched, in bewilderment, on the early evening television news Bob Hawke, then leader of the ACTU meeting talking cordially with Prime-Minister-elect, Malcolm Fraser and promising him the full cooperation of the trade union movement that was never given to Gough Whitlam._{#fnEgw5" id="txtEgw5"> 5} 

This cooperation set the stage for timidity in the trade union movement's opposition to the Fraser government and the emasculation of trade union power in 1980 when Malcolm Fraser amended Sections 45D and 45E of the Trades Practices Act._{#fnEgw6" id="txtEgw6"> 6} 

#app1">Appendix: Excerpts from Murdoch editors told to 'kill Whitlam' in 1975

From the Age, 27 June 2014 by Phillip Dorling

News Corporation chief Rupert Murdoch directed his editors to "kill Whitlam" some 10 months before the downfall of Gough Whitlam's Labor government, according to a newly released United States diplomatic report.

The US National Archives has just declassified a secret diplomatic telegram dated January 20, 1975 that sheds new light on Murdoch's involvement in the tumultuous events of Australia's 1975 constitutional crisis.

Entitled "Australian publisher privately turns on Prime Minister," the telegram from US Consul-General in Melbourne, Robert Brand, reported to the State Department that "Rupert Murdoch has issued [a] confidential instruction to editors of newspapers he controls to 'Kill Whitlam'".

...

News Limited newspapers savaged Whitlam and strongly backed opposition leader Malcolm Fraser, so much so that journalists at The Australian took industrial action in protest (my emphasis).

The Labor Party was crushed at the polls and did not return to power until 1983.

Mr Fraser _{#fnEgw3" id="txtEgw3">3}  acknowledged Murdoch's support but said the newspaper proprietor's political role is easily overstated given the collapse in public support for the scandal-ridden Whitlam government.

"Rupert had influential newspapers, certainly, but I don't think it affected the election outcome," Mr Fraser said.

...

News Corporation did not respond to questions about Mr Murdoch's role in the political events of 1975. ...

Footnotes

According to this author's research, Malcolm Fraser contributed policies which would assist the dismantling of Australia's then growing democracy and aid and abet this colony's overpopulation and overshoot of its own resources. These actions should not be forgotten, despite any subsequent helpful comments on foreign policy, a long time later. After the Whitlam government was sacked, and during high unemployment, the Fraser Liberal/National Party government (November 1975- March 1983) reinstituted economic policies that were dependent on rapid population growth - through high immigration - and high energy consumption. [1]

Whitlam's concept and attempts to create a system of feedback loops from population to housing were dismantled or under-financed. Prime Minister Fraser abolished DURD very early in his government, under which Federal funding for urban and regional development declined by 86 per cent. [2] He also began to liberalise the foreign investment rules, with the Foreign Takeovers Act (1975). [3]

In Whitlam's time foreign investment had been less than 10%, but it increased steadily after 1975. Between 1980 and 1981 there was the "highest capital inflow on record." Much of this was for loans to State governments for infrastructure projects, but after 1980 more and more was borrowed by private firms with an ever greater part going to property development. By 1985-86 services, tourism, real-estate and property development were responsible for over fifty per cent of incoming capital and real-estate was the biggest borrower. [4]

The Australian housing industry continued speculative land development and reliance on high immigration to feed population growth and thus demand, with little central planning. As the economy was opened up to the ideology of free market forces, speculation and housing price inflation increased. However, from 1974-1986 economic recession affected the housing industry. [5]

Government policies assisting home ownership were identified as an impediment to economic growth by, among others, a group that included the Australian Treasury, [6] over which Federal Treasurer Philip Lynch had presided until 1977, when he was sacked for involvement in Victorian land speculation scandals. Land scandals were not confined to Victoria, however. An example of political corruption and land speculation, with the demise of DURD and the Whitlam Government, occurred when the Liberal West Australian Minister for Industrial Development, Sir Charles Court, bailed out property developer, Alan Bond [7] by purchasing a property that Bond had been trying for years to get rezoned but which had been destined, with the co-operation of the previous WA Labor Government, under the Federal department, DURD, to remain a green corridor. Instead of leaving Bond with his unrezoned rural property, Court used DURD funds to purchase the property from Bond. Bond subsequently donated $20,000 to the Liberals' 1977 election campaign. Soon after Sir Charles Court raised $250,000 in a syndicate to finance Bond's America's Cup venture. [8]

The ALP West Australian Government that followed on from the Liberal one was no better. It formed a corrupt network with WA land speculators which was subsequently to be known as "WA Inc." The Premier involved in this was Brian Burke and he was later imprisoned for corruption. [9]

The members of the Australian Treasury group wanted a reduction in all forms of housing assistance. They also called for the freeing up of the housing market to market forces, without interference from subsidies or regulated industry rates. They blamed government regulation for keeping the cost of home ownership unrealistically low, inflating ownership expectations and leading to people owning too many houses. [10]

In response to lobbying, [11] immigration began to climb again from 1979 and remained high until 1982.

As well as dismantling Whitlam's urban and rural development system, the Fraser Government commenced the first of a long series of steps to dismantle the free tertiary education system. It thereby reduced that avenue for Australia to increase its skilled and tertiary educated workforce, leaving industry few options but to import new skilled workers. The structure and finance of the industry meant that support for developing a local system to provide skilled tradesmen remained weak and unorganised. Thus the industry continued its strong reliance on imported skilled labour. As the economy was opened up to the ideology of free market forces, speculation and housing price inflation increased, with strong encouragement from the Australian Treasury.

The section in The Growth Lobby and its Absence on Australia's return to a populationist development and housing policy under the Fraser government illustrates my argument that in countries where a highly profitable property development and residential construction industry dominates, individual firms may be more inclined than government assisted housing systems to access international loans in order to finance continued expansion. Furthermore a deregulated financial environment will assist the strategy of borrowing to finance expansion.

In the end of Chapter 7 and in Chapter 8 of The Growth Lobby and its Absence, I examined evidence for the hypothesis that Australia had followed a cornucopian route and France a Malthusian one after the oil crash. My evidence consisted largely of indicators of policy and practice related to per capita and industrial energy consumption, principally in the building industry and the production of dwellings. I situated these indicators within the context of the different land development and housing systems in Australia and France and showed how the first relied on immigration but the latter did not. I gave evidence that both countries had temporarily reduced immigration at the time of the first oil shock for energy saving and economic reasons, but that the fall of the Whitlam government had brought an end to these politics in Australia and ushered in a high conventional energy using expansionist period with fast population growth. I attributed this growthist course in Australia largely to a populationist lobby in which property developers and residential construction companies were important actors. I explained the ability of France to consolidate its population and energy use to the absence of such a lobby.

There are, however, other possible additional explanations for the difference between immigration policies in France and Australia that have resulted in a higher migration intake in Australia. For example there is, arguably, a stronger ethnic lobby in Australia than in France and this lobby is able to press for extended family reunion. Because Australia has an active immigrant recruitment intake, it is difficult to justify a small humanitarian intake. A multiculturalist approach to new settlers, rather than an integrationist approach may favour the development of ethnic lobbies and the establishment of distinct communities with a variety of motives for expansion. These explanations were not explored in my thesis but that is not to say that they and others have no value. Nevertheless, the evidence pointing to a very important role for the property development lobby in driving immigration was strong in 1998 when I began my thesis, stronger in 2002 when I completed it, and overwhelming in 2014 as I update this excerpt.

Malcolm Fraser’s policies furthered the interests of the Australian property lobby and undermined the capacity of the Australian people to resist it and to self-govern. It seems likely to me that there was interference, in the form of a ‘shock doctrine’ type program that could well have been pushed onto Australia by the CIA, as the Christopher Boyce interview seems to point to and as John Pilger argued in A Secret Country, Vintage, 1992.

NOTES

This article is based on research and a modified excerpt from Sheila Newman The Growth Lobby and its absence (longer title, The Growth Lobby in Australia and its Absence in France), Swinburne University Research thesis in Environmental Sociology, 2002.
[1] Sandercock, Property, Politics and Urban Planning, Transaction publishers, 1990, p.17.
[2] Ian Manning , “Policies: Past and Present”, Chapter 2, pp10-32, Eds. Ruth Fincher and John Nieuwenhuysen, Australian Poverty: Then and Now, MUP, 1998, p.14 and Whitlam, The Whitlam Government, Viking, 1985, p.404; Leonie Sandercock, Property, Politics and Urban Planning, op.cit., p. 16.
[3] Later to be renamed the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act (1975)
[4] R.H. Fagan, "Foreign Investment" in Australian Encyclopaedia, Terry Hills, NSW, Australian Geographic, Pty. Ltd, 1995, pp. 1393-1394.
[5] Trevor Sykes describes a wave of property crashes in June 1974 and at the start of 1977 in Trevor Sykes, The Bold Riders, Allen and Unwin, St. Leonards, New South Wales, Australia, 1996 edition, printed 2000, p.267. David Hayward, "The Reluctant Landlord", in Urban Policy and Research, Vol. 14., No.1, 1996, p.23, describes the property recession as lasting from 1975-1986. There were however also small peaks in 1976 and 1982 which coincided with relative peaks in immigration. See my figure 8.1, Chapter 8 and the discussion below it.
[6] Terry Burke, Peter W. Newton, and Mary Ann Wulff, "Australia", International Handbook of Housing Policies and Practices, Ed. Willem van Vliet, Greenwood Press, Connecticut, 1990., pp.722-762: p.728 &732, citing Stone 1979.
[7] Alan Bond migrated to Perth, Australia as a child with his English parents. He began business by property speculation which relied on land rezoning and although he finished up having many other kinds of investments, the basis of his business remained property. He wheeled and dealed for three decades, generally using time payment to deal with huge loans, including one that he floated with Kumagai Gumi. He won the America's cup in 1983, thus earning great popularity for Australia and the public approval of Prime Minister Hawke. He became a multi-millionaire, increasing his fortunes greatly during the 1987-89 period, but underlying this was a 20 fold rise in debt over the last five years and, in 1989 Bond Corporation announced a loss of 980 million, which was the largest in Australia's history to that date. Bond eventually went to prison, but not for very many years. Source: Trevor Sykes, The Bold Riders, op.cit., Chapter Six.
[8] Trevor Sykes, The Bold Riders, op.cit., pp.57-58.
[9] Ibid., pp.58-141.
[10] "The push of the group [Stone writes about], including the Australian Treasury, was for a reduction in assistance for housing generally and an opening up of the housing market to market forces unfettered by subsidies or regulated interest rates that artificially lower the cost of home ownership, raise ownership expectations, and encourage overconsumption of housing." Terry Burke, Peter W. Newton, and Mary Ann Wulff, "Australia", International Handbook of Housing Policies and Practices, op.cit., pp.722-762: p.728 &732, citing Stone 1979.
[11] Birrell and Birrell, An Issue of People, Longman Cheshire, 1987, pp.236-237. Criteria for skilled immigrants were made easier to meet in unilateral decisions made by the Department of Immigration without consulting the Department of Employment. Birrell and Birrell describe the Department of Immigration as actively supporting the immigration lobby. They describe this lobby as being made up of "well-organized, financed, and articulate industry associations and companies, and vocal ethnic associations who can claim to represent and perhaps to influence the voting intentions of significant numbers of citizens."

Malcom Fraser was Minister of the Army from 1966 until 1971 as Australia was participating in the war against Vietnam.

He became Prime Minister of Australia as a result of the CIA's coup against the Whitlam Labor Government in 1975 as described in Chapter 40 of The CIA – a forgotten history_{#fnFraser1" id="txtFraser1">1} (1986) by William Blum. Christopher Boyce about which the movie The Falcon and the Snowman_{#fnFraser3" id="txtFraser3">3} (1985) was made, observed CIA interference in Australian politics at the same time.

As Prime Minister of Australia from 1975 until 1983 Malcolm Fraser acted as would be expected of a leader who had thus risen to power: He supported corporate interests and enacted anti-union legislation, including the infamous Sections 45D and 45E of the Trade Practices Act_{#fnFraser2" id="txtFraser2">2}. On the international front he continued to support the United States and its allies in wars against popular revolutions.

However, in more recent years, Malcolm Fraser, in contrast to his record as Prime Minister, has spoken out in support of forces resisting imperialist aggression. In September 2013, contrary to what was being said by the mainstream newsmedia, the Government and the 'Labor' Opposition,_{#fnFraser5" id="txtFraser5">5} he publicly opposed the proxy war by the United States and its allies against the people of Syria.

On 20 March Malcolm Fraser spoke, in a 29 minute interview with Russia Today journalist Oksana Boyko in support of Russia and against the illegitimate extreme right-wing government of Ukraine._{#fnFraser4" id="txtFraser4">4} The interview is embedded below.

Footnote[s]

(This article has been created from a comment posted on candobetter because it contains important industrial relations news.) Update, 09:33AM, 18 Aug 2013: Irish MP Clare Daly has tweeted "Well done to Bob Carnegie & the CFMEU for their historic victory for trade unionists in Australia, ..."

The ABC reported at 1.20PM today, followed by Brisbane's Courier Mail and The Australian that "Contempt of Court" charges against Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) organiser Bob Carnegie were dismissed by Federal Court Magistrate in Brisbane.

For more information, see #comments">"Fellow workers, comrades – case dismissed. WE WON!" of 16 Aug 2013 on Bob Carnegie Defence Campaign at https://bobcarnegiedefence.wordpress.com/.

The charges arose as a result of Bob Carnegie attempting to enforce a picket line at the Children's Hospital then under construction in Brisbane against an attempt by the anti-union employer AbiGroup to deny union rights to workers working there.

This is a monumental win for Australian trade unions, whose rights have been eroded since former Liberal Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser criminalised much trade union activity with his Sections 45D and 45E of the Trade Practises Act. Under the legislation, it became a criminal offence for workers to take industrial action against an employer other than their own. So, action by workers in one workplace in solidarity with another work place was forbidden.

#9cf;line-height:100%;" align="center">Former PM Malcolm Fraser, whose Sections 45D and 45E of the Trade Practices Act criminalised industrial action by workers in support of other workers

Incidentally, Malcolm Fraser, in recent years, has made great efforts to have himself depicted in the media as a "bleeding heart" friend of refugees,_{#MfFn1" id="MfTxt1">1 #MfFn2" id="MfTxt2">2}.

Vietnamese refugees were also used to undermine trade union militancy, particularly in the Melboune Postal exchange, where many were employed.

The 'Labor' Governments of Bob Hawke and Paul Keating, which ruled Australia from 1983 until 1996 and began the transformation of Australia into a neoliberal "free market" economy, chose not to repeal these laws. As a result, Liberal Prime Minister John Howard attempted to break the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) in 1998 having little fear that other unions would give effective industrial support to the MUA.

Fortunately, a determined campaign by the Australian community, including the families of seafarers and wharfies, defeated Howard's attempt to break the union. It was also helped by a the New Zealand Seafarers' Union refusing to work on on a ship which had been loaded by scab labour.

Sadly, as recorded in The Latham Diaries (2005) collaboration by unconscionable Labor politicians, including the current Australian foreign Minister Bob Carr, enabled John Howard to rort his way back into office in 1998, 2001 an 2004.

Following his 2004 election, John Howard made another attempt to break the trade unions when he introduced his "Work Choices" legislation, for which he had obtained no electoral mandate, into Federal Parliament. He then spent $124 million of taxpayers' money on propaganda campaign to promote "Work Choices". _{#MfFn3" id="MfTxt3">3}

Fortunately, the "Your rights at work" campaign of the trade union movement made it difficult fro ruthless employers to take advantage of these laws and helped to swing public opinion so decisively against John Howard that he not only lost government in the 2007 elections, but also lost his own seat of Wentworth to Labor Party candidate Maxine McKew

Update, 16 August: "case dismissed," but fight not entirely over

#comments">"Fellow workers, comrades – case dismissed. WE WON!" of 16 Aug 2013 :

...

The fight isn’t entirely over, as Bob still faces a civil case brought against him by Abigroup, but today’s news is a huge victory.

We’ll post more news and reaction later, but for now, a huge thank you to all our supporters across the world who’ve helped keep up the pressure and maintain the profile of the campaign.

Footenote[s]

#MfFn1" id="MfFn1">1 #MfTxt1">↑ As an example, see Malcolm Fraser on Coalition asylum plans: no limits to the inhumanity in the Guardian of 16 Aug 2013.

#MfFn2" id="MfFn2">2 #MfTxt2">↑ One example is refugees from Vietnam. Prior to 1975, these Vietnamese refugees had sided with occupying Australian and American military forces in the war against their own people (and, before that, the French colonists and Japanese occupiers). During the war, much of the country was destroyed as bombs with the explosive capacity equivalent to 640 Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs were dropped on Vietnam (in addition what was dropped on neighbouring Laos and Cambodia) and much of the Vietnamese jungle was destroyed with "Agent Orange" defoliant sprayed from above. Nick Turse, author of Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam (1913) estimates that 2.3 million Vietnamese civilians died in the war and 5.3 million were wounded.

After the 'South' Vietnamese American puppet regime of was defeated in 1975, many of those who had supported it fled to Australia as refugees. Here they were welcomed with open arms by the then Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser. As Minister for the Army after 1966 and as Minister for Defence from 1969 until 1971, he had conscripted Australians into the Army and sent them to fight in defence of the South Vietnamese dictatorship. After the refugees arrived, they formed an electoral bloc of support for Malcolm Fraser. With their help, he was able to stay in office until 1983.

#MfFn3" id="MfFn3">3 #MfTxt3">↑ This is described in Mark Latham's political gift to John Howard of 20 Nov 2007 by James Sinnamon. Sadly, Latham acted no better in 2007 than those of which he was rightly critical in The Latham Diaries. He actually opposed the trade union movement's "Your Rights at Work" campaign against "Work Choices" and called on Australians to vote for John Howard.