Download Fragment

Thursday, 13 December 1973

Mr WENTWORTH (Mackellar) - I shall not detain the House very long. I wish to draw attention to one matter which I think was raised by a Government member, that is, the implications of clause 6 of the Bill now before us, which were mentioned by the Minister for Secondary Industry (Mr Enderby) in the course of his second reading speech. This is simply a clause which is designed to change the name of the Commonwealth Public Service to the Australian Public Service. On the face of it that seems to be an innocent and insignificant proposal. I agree that none of us wants in any way to be ashamed of being an Australian. In fact just the opposite is the case. I think that all of us in this House should be proud of being Australians and would gladly use the word 'Aussie'. But the States of Australia are still Australian States and they have their own public services. Why should we arrogate to our Service the monopoly of the word 'Australian' We have the Public Service of New South Wales and the Public Service of Victoria, sure. But they are still Australian States and they have just as much right to describe themselves as Australians as have any of us here in this House. Everyone of us here in this House is a citizen not only of Australia but also of one of the Australian States.

I know that this may seem to be a small point, but I believe it has quite important implications. I believe that this is the implication: That this Government is doing a number of underhand things which seem all right on the surface but which when put together in a pattern display an underhand motive. We have spoken in the past about the way in which seemingly well meaning measures can be fitted together into a plan of socialisation. But that is not what I want to speak about now. I am wondering whether this is not part of a plan to abolish the Australian States. We know that this is a centralist Government. We know by looking at the platform of the Australian Labor Party that it not only wants to abolish the Senate and take off all the brakes on its own arbitrary actions in this House but that it has in its platform the proposition to take away all real power from the States and make them simply agents of the Central Government here in Canberra operating in one chamber and with complete dictatorial powers. We know this.

We have to be on our guard lest the present Government, without saying what it is doing, moves gradually towards that objective of abolishing the States, putting all power in Canberra and putting all power in one House of Parliament. I have seen in the year that is behind us many moves which could be interpreted in that way - moves which on the surface seem fair and reasonable and attractive enough but when they are put together into a pattern seem to move towards this funda mental Government objective of destroying the Australian States, destroying every other form of democratic government and centralising everything here in Canberra in one House of Parliament so that the man who obtained the Prime Ministership by some quirk or chance of fate will be able to perpetuate his power, be able to over-ride everything in the Constitution and have complete control of the whole Australian economy, social structure, family life and everything else that one can imagine. I know that this is the plan of the Government.

Maybe clause 6 of the Bill, this innocent seeming little clause, is a small part of that same plan. It is not tremendously significant and it does not add up to very much. But when you take to yourself the adjective 'Australian', you deny to the States the power to describe themselves as Australian States. They are Australian States; they are part of the Australian system. Ours is a federal system and our Federal Service is the Commonwealth Service. It is not the only Australian Service. The States of New South Wales and Victoria have their own public services. They are Australian States and as such they are entitled, surely, to have some kind of use of this adjective.

It is not a case of our trying to downgrade the use of the word 'Australian'. In fact, very much the opposite is the case. For my part, I would like to increase the significance of the word 'Australian'. But we do not increase that significance by denying the fact that South Australia, Western Australia, Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland or Tasmania is an Australian State. The States are part of the Australian system. The Australian system of government is not as yet a monolithic system of government. It is a federal system. It may be that the change proposed by the Bill does not mean much and that its significance is small. But even in these small things the straws show which way the wind is blowing. A little bit of twig or a leaf floating on the water shows which way the current is running. I believe that there is an underground current running through the Labor Party and the Government - the current of the desire to destroy and break down the whole system of federalism and to centralise everything. It is true that here we are dealing with a small thing - something which has only a symbolic, verbal significance. Yet I just wonder why this should be done. What is the purpose of it? What is the motive behind the things which are being done in this and other legislation?

If this were a single thing I would not worry about it. But it fits into a pattern which is shown in the legislation which this Government has brought into this House in the past year. There are many, many examples of it. We know that we are dealing with a treacherous and underhand Government. We know that we are dealing with a Government which is denying to this House the power to debate Bills of major significance and which has used the guillotine to truncate debate, in a way which is absolutely without precedent, on major matters which go right to the root of the Australian community. We have not been allowed in this House to discuss them. We know, for example, that the Leader of the House (Mr Daly) tried to falsify Hansard. We know that; it is self-confessed. We know that the standard of truthfulness which the Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam) has exhibited in this House is a little bit short of what would be desirable. We know that we are dealing with a Government which confesses that in itself it is the creature of people who are not elected by the Australian people but are responsible only to small groups.

Mr SPEAKER - Order! I think it is about time that the honourable member got back to the Bill.

Mr WENTWORTH - I do think that you are right, Mr Speaker. I know that it must be embarrassing for the Government that I should be bringing these things up. I do not want to press them too far. I just want to put them on record because it seems to me that in clause 6 of the Bill we have a small move in that same kind of treacherous and underhand direction. I was simply saying that one must always suspect the motives of this Government because it has shown itself, both in the conduct of individual Ministers and in the conduct of its policy and the way in which its policy is directed from outside this Parliament, to be untrustworthy and unworthy of the trust of the people of Australia.

Mr SPEAKER - In which clause of the Bill is that?

Mr WENTWORTH - I am referring to clause 6 which proposes that we should change the name of the Commonwealth Public Service to the Australian Public Service. It is innocent sounding. Maybe it does not amount to very much. But perhaps it is a straw which shows the way the wind is blowing.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee

The Bill.

---