Month: November 1996

The structural tensions which have dogged the United Nations for all of its 50-year history are again surfacing with the lone move by the United States to veto a second term for UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. The US cast the lone vote this week against Mr Boutros-Ghali in the opening round of a selection process that could take weeks, but needs to be finalised by December 31, when Mr Boutros-Ghali’s five-year term ends.

The structural tensions in the United Nations began almost at its inception. The victorious powers in World War II … the United States, Britain, France, the Soviet Union and China … assumed the dominant role with the five permanent Security Council votes, each carrying a veto. With the onset of the Cold War, the council became deadlocked against taking significant actions of world political leadership. Moreover the rise of the losers of World War II, Germany and Japan, as large economic powers and their continued exclusion from the Security Council meant that the UN could never become a body of significant economic leadership. Other international bodies, in which Germany and Japan had a more significant role, emerged.

The UN’s best work was done at the humanitarian level, but even here, the structural tensions emerged. The United States, and to a lesser extent Britain, often asserted that the UN’s humanitarian works were ideologically and politically slanted. They were also critical of General Assembly for the same reasons.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader22nov un sec-gen”

The resignation of the Federal Member for Fraser, John Langmore, to take up a position at the United Nations calls into question the method of replacing MPs who do not fill their full term and the propriety of MPs who having asked the electorate to elect them for a three-year term fail to fulfil the contract.

Far too much is made of the expense and inconvenience of a by-election. When to total sum is looked at … about $100,000 … it invites a gasp, but typically, elections cost between $1 and $2 per voter, which is a very small price for democratic rights. And voting takes no more time than going tot he bank or choosing a pair of shoes.

That said, politicians should as a general principle stay for the time they promises at the time of the election. There are obvious exceptions for illness, but there are also others. It is generally in the public interest that MPs are not precluded from public appointments to other national and international positions. Elevations to the judiciary, the governor-generalship, the diplomatic corps and to senior United Nations positions (as is the case for Mr Langmore). It is not acceptable, however, for MPs to leave Parliament just because their side of politics has lost an election and Opposition is unappealing or because an MP has lost a ministry or because an MP is just sick of it and wants to return to family life. Labor’s Ros Kelly was an example of the last two. The fact her conduct was unacceptable was shown by the voters at the subsequent by-election who delivered a record swing against her party, but who returned a Labor member at the next general election. True, there were other factors, but it is unlikely that Mr Langmore’s departure will be seen in the same way.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader21nov langmore by-election”

A by-election in a single seat is not an especially costly or inconvenient affair, but is it the most appropriate way of replacing a retiring of deceased MP?

Since federation, Members of the House of Representatives who either die or retire have been replaced by a by-election. Senators, on the other hand, have been replaced by appointment by the state Governor after approval by the state Parliament, or in the case of territory senators by a joint sitting of federal parliament. This is because at the time of federation, the Senate was designed as a House to which the states sent representatives to pursue state interests, so it was thought that casual vacancies should be filled by the state. Given the great expense of a state-wide by-election, the next best thing was that the people’s representatives in the state parliament would chose the successor.

But within a very short time, however, the Senate became, and remains, a House where members are foremost party representatives, like the House of Representatives. Moreover, since the 1977 constitutional amendment, Senate vacancies must be filled by a person from the same political party as the senator being replaced. Any idea that the Senate is a states house has gone out the window.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader21nov by-election method”

The foray into the ACT by Call to Australia Party leader Fred Nile will put an interesting complexion on the next ACT election which is due in 15 months.

The ACT has often been described as fairly socially and economically homogeneous, because unlike other states and territories it does not have significant urban-rural split, nor does it have an elite class of the very wealthy nor a pool of the very poor in the way that other states do, though this is now changing. However, the ACT is by no means politically homogeneous. In the three decades in which there have been full-time elected representatives for a legislative body, the people of the ACT have never given either of the major parties a majority and always elected a significant number of representatives from outside the mainstream. They have included people of various persuasions: environmental, moralist, independent, centrists and resident-oriented.

The Christian right, which roughly describes Mr Nile’s group, has frequently had representation in ACT Assemblies, under various different hats. At present Independent Paul Osborne fits that description. As Mr Nile says, “”Paul could work under our umbrella without compromising anything, but we realise he may have broader support as an independent.” It is likely, therefore, that the Call to Australia would leave Brindabella, where Mr Osborne has his seat, alone and concentrate on the other two seats. Mr Osborne would probably like to get the best of both worlds by staying an independent … picking up both the football and the Christian vote.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader20nov fred nile”

Federal Attorney-General Daryl Williams has put form over substance on the question of freedom of speech. Last week he committed the Commonwealth Government to intervening in a case before the High Court to argue that the court’s historic 1994 decision on freedom of speech should be overturned. That decision gave much greater freedom for discussion of political matters without the fear of an expensive defamation action. Mr Williams said the Commonwealth agreed with the practical result of the decision, but did not agree with the legal and constitutional basis of the decision … namely that it arose out of an implication in the Constitution that for a representative democracy to work political communication must be freed of the burden of the requirements of state defamation law that the defendant prove the truth of everything he or she says. Mr Williams argues that defamation laws are properly matters for state parliaments and the common law rather than for the High Court to extract out of the Constitution. He said he would urge the standing committee of state and federal attorneys-general to take up the question of defamation law reform, in particular uniformity.

That idea is a cop out. Every attempt at getting uniformity in the past two decades has failed. Every attempt at putting even a scintilla of balance into the law in favour of greater freedom of speech in the past two decades has failed. Mr Williams is wasting his time in urging his state colleagues to do anything about defamation law reform. Self-interested politicians, who are among the greatest beneficiaries of strict defamation laws, will not change the law. They benefit from it because it shields them against tough criticism and because it provides them with monetary pay-outs if a media organisation oversteps the mark.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader18nov williams on defo”

Middle-income earners must be perplexed at the response of Treasurer Peter Costello to this week’s cut in interest rates. Mr Costello urged people to spend up for Christmas given they would be saving on mortgages and be getting a tax cut in the new year. Is this the same treasurer who has be bemoaning for several years now Australia’s low rate of saving?

Sensible Australians will not heed the Treasurer’s advice. They will not gear themselves into higher spending habits on such a fickle basis. Sensible people will use both amounts to pay the mortgage off a little faster to leave a bit of padding for the inevitable day when interest rates rise again and tax cuts are eroded by stealth. Moreover the parsimony of the banks has meant that the great majority of people will not see any money from the interest rate cut until well into January. So if they want to follow the Treasurer’s advice, they would have to use their credit cards. But the banks, again with typical parsimony, have not reduce the interest rates on credit cards, largely because, unlike the housing-loan market, their conduct has not been subjected to the stiff wind of vigorous local competition.

Those people who do not pay off their mortgages a little quicker will, if they are sensible, save their extra cash for durables and necessities rather than squander money on consumer junk at Christmas just to make retail sales figures good for the Treasurer.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader10nov economics”

It was very foolish of the non-governing parties in the Senate to over-turn the Government’s immigration regulations. It was foolish in terms of the national good and in terms of their own credibility.

The aim of the regulations was to enable the Minister for Immigration to swing the composition of the migrant intake away from family reunion and towards skills. It would have meant a greater emphasis on English-language skills which have been the key determinant of the success of migrants in getting jobs in Australia.

The Labor Party substantially increased immigration during the term of the Hawke Government. There was no economic or social imperative to do so. The earlier numbers of the Fraser Government of around 70,000 a year were quite adequate to meet economic needs and the social needs of family reunion and moral duty to refugees. The increase by the Hawke Government, which had an unhealthy element of vote buying in it, has put a strain on public support for the migration program. Opinion polls are consistently showing majority support for reduced immigration. A wise Government would do something about this, and a wise Opposition would let it do something about it. If the immigration is seen to be too high or not to have a sufficient skills basis, support for it will erode. But worse than this, we are seeing that being exploited by those who oppose racial tolerance and multi-culturalism. This will be a great tragedy for Australia.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader09nov immigration”

Prime Minister John Howard and Acting Opposition Leader Gareth Evans were on hand on Wednesday night to bask in the reflected glory of Australia’s most recent Nobel Prize … that awarded to Professor Peter Doherty for medicine, but whether Australia’s political leaders have the good sense to heed is message is another matter. Professor Doherty rightly warned of the need for government to invest in basic scientific research.

Professor Doherty is himself at once living proof of what he argues and proof of the folly of not investing in basic research. Professor Doherty won his prize for work done 23 years ago at the Australian National University. It has taken that long for the true implications of his work to be revealed. Long gestation periods is the nature of the fruits basic research. It means, of course, that governments must fund the lion’s share of it. Business organisations rarely look beyond six years; and most rarely look beyond six months. The trouble is that governments are increasingly taking the short view.

In the period of the Labor Government, particularly while John Dawkins was in charge of higher education, universities were virtually directed to concentrate on research that was directed to having a quick industrial application. Funding was skewed to that sort of research. The intention may have been good, but the method was madness. The nature of scientific research is such that applications for it can be neither directed nor predicted; they are often decades away. You cannot pick winners beforehand with basic research. The only way to be sure of a winner is to back the entire field. That means Australia needs to be doing basic research in a full range of scientific endeavours.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader08nov research”

US voters have rejected Bob Dole and, with reluctance, elected Bill Clinton for a second term. Only a dozen American presidents have been given a second term. Since Independence Americans have not been backward in exercising their democratic rights in throwing out incumbents. And even when incumbents have been elected or re-elected, the second term has usually not been very auspicious. Perhaps it was the recognition that incumbency has a corrosive effect that caused the US to change its Constitution to limit a person to two consecutive terms. Franklin D. Roosevelt was the last president to have more than two consecutive terms when he was elected for his fourth term in 1944.

Americans and, indeed, Mr Clinton, should look back with trepedation at the record of second-term presidents in recent history. Roosevelt, after lifting the US from Depression with by starting the New Deal in his first term, began to stack the Supreme Court and much of the bureaucracy in his second term. Dwight Eisenhower’s second term was as mediocre as his first. Lyndon Johnson, after carrying through much of Kennedy’s civil rights program in his first term, was paralysed in his second term by Vietnam. Richard Nixon had the worse second term in the nation’s history, being embroilled in Watergate and the exposure of the mendacity of “”peace with honour” in Viet nam. Ronald Reagan, having done his best work in his first term to tackle the Soviet Union was embroiled in the Contra arms deal in his second.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader07nov us election”

The position of the British Prime Minister, John Major, gets ever more precarious. The majority of his Conse4rvative party was cut to just one seat at the weekend after the death of MP Barry Porter. If Labour wins his Wirrall South constituency at a by-election and Labour retains a seat in another constituency in Northern England, Mr Major’s majority will be lost. Mr Porter held his seat for 13 years and had what in usual times would be a fairly comfortable majority. But bigger majorities have been surrendered by the Conservatives in by-elections during the course of the present parliament. And now the Conservatives lag Labour by up to 20 points in the opinion polls.

To survive any no-confidence motion or to be sure major legislation gets through Mr Major will have to rely on the nine Ulster unionist MPs. And even then he might not be secure from defections from his own ranks. Those defections could be permanently, either to Labour (there has already been one) or to the cross-benches. Or they could be just on occasional pieces of legislation, particularly with respect to Europe, because Mr Major has a significant number of Euro-sceptics in his party who are opposed to greater union and co-operation with Europe.

With such a deficit in the polls, Mr Major is likely to want to delay the next general election until May next year, the last month on which it can constitutionally be held. The choice is Mr Major’s, unless there is a successful no-confidence motion against him in the House of Commons.
Continue reading “1996_11_november_leader05nov uk major”