"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me"
Close-up on the Australian Constitutional Crisis of November 1975
Summary
The 1975 Australian constitutional crisis (sometimes called "the Dismissal") has been described as the greatest political crisis and constitutional crisis in Australia's history. It culminated on 11 November 1975, with the removal of the Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam of the Australian Labor Party (ALP), by Governor-General Sir John Kerr. Kerr then appointed the Leader of the Opposition Liberal Party-National Country Party Coalition, Liberal leader Malcolm Fraser, as caretaker Prime Minister. Fraser was defeated in the subsequent election campaign and forced to resign as Liberal Party leader. Soon after Kerr would resign in disgrace, and within a year Whitlam would be forced out of office by his own party.
General Background
Whitlam's Australia Labor Party (ALP) government had been elected in 1972 with a small majority in the House of Representatives, but with the Opposition controlling the Senate. Another election in May 1974 resulted in little change to the status quo, but did give Whitlam the feeling that he had a renewed mandate from voters to continue his program of reforms. While the Whitlam Government introduced many new policies and programs, it was also rocked by scandals and political miscalculations.
In October 1975, the Opposition used its control of the Senate to block appropriation bills, or supply, which finance governmental operations and which had been passed by the House of Representatives.
The Opposition stated that they would continue to do so unless Whitlam called an election for the House of Representatives and urged Kerr to dismiss Whitlam unless he agreed to their demand. Whitlam believed that Kerr would not dismiss him, and Kerr did nothing to disabuse Whitlam.
On 11 November 1975, Whitlam intended to call a half-Senate election in an attempt to break the deadlock. When he went to seek Kerr's approval of the election, Kerr instead dismissed him as Prime Minister, and shortly thereafter installed Malcolm Fraser, leader of the Opposition Liberal Party in his place.
Acting quickly before all ALP parliamentarians became aware of the change of government, Fraser and his allies were able to secure passage of the appropriation bills, and Kerr dissolved Parliament for a double dissolution election.
As established by the Constitution, the Parliament of Australia is composed of two houses, the House of Representatives and the Senate, together with the Queen of Australia. The Queen is represented through the Governor-General, who has executive powers granted in the Constitution, as well as rarely exercised reserve powers. The Governor-General ordinarily acts only upon the advice of his government, but can act independently and against the advice of his advisers in exercising the reserve powers. The reserve powers are that legal authority remaining in the Crown after most of its historic power was transferred to Parliament or to officials. The Governor-General is removable by the Queen on the advice of her Prime Minister. As Liberal Party leader Malcolm Fraser, who would play a large part in the crisis, put it, "The Queen has tenure, and she couldn't be sacked. But a Governor-General holds office at pleasure, and if he ceases to please then he can be removed by a Prime Minister."
Australia's government is formed by the party enjoying the confidence of the lower House of Parliament, the House of Representatives. However, Australia's Parliament also has a powerful upper house, the Senate, which must pass any legislation initiated by the House of Representatives if it is to become law. The composition of the Senate, in which each state has an equal number of senators regardless of that state's population, was originally designed to attract the Australian colonies into one Federation.
The Constitution forbids the Senate to originate or amend a money bill, but places no limitation on the Senate's ability to defeat one. In 1970, Whitlam, then Leader of the Opposition, had stated of a budget bill, "Let me make it clear at the outset that our opposition to this Budget is no mere formality. We intend to press our opposition by all available means on all related measures in both Houses. If the motion is defeated, we will vote against the Bills here and in the Senate. Our purpose is to destroy this Budget and destroy the Government which has sponsored it."
Prior to the 1975 crisis, the Governor-General's power to dismiss a Prime Minister under Section 64 of the Constitution had never been exercised. Twice since Federation, conflicts between state premiers and state governors, who perform similar functions to the Prime Minister and Governor-General at the state level, had resulted in the departure of one or the other. These provided Governor General Kerr with weak precedents in Australian constitutional practice for his own actions.
Among the powers granted to the Governor-General is the power to dissolve both houses of Parliament under Section 57 of the Constitution, in the event that the House of Representatives twice passes a bill at least three months apart and the Senate will not agree to pass the bill. In both instances where those circumstances arose prior to the Whitlam Government, in 1914 and 1951, the Governor-General dissolved Parliament for a "double dissolution" election on the advice of the Prime Minister.
Political Background
Gough Whitlam's Labor government was elected in 1972 after 23 years of rule by a coalition formed by the Liberal and (National) Country parties.
The ALP Government enjoyed a nine-seat majority in the House of Representatives, but did not control the Senate. In accordance with pre-election promises, it instituted a large number of policy changes, and offered much legislation. The Opposition Liberal and Country Parties, which still controlled the Senate, allowed some Government bills to pass the Senate, and blocked others.
In April 1974, faced with attempts by the Opposition to obstruct supply (that is, appropriation bills) in the Senate, Whitlam obtained the concurrence of the Governor-General, Sir Paul Hasluck, to a double dissolution. Labor was returned at the election on 18 May with a reduced House majority of five seats. The Coalition and Labor each had 29 Senate seats, with the balance of power held by two independents.
Hasluck had been Governor-General since 1969, and his term was due to expire in July 1974. Whitlam wanted him to remain a further two years, but Hasluck declined, citing his wife's refusal to remain at Yarralumla (The Governor-General’s official residence) longer than the originally agreed five years.
Whitlam offered the post to businessman Ken Myer, who turned it down. Whitlam then turned to Sir John Kerr, the Chief Justice of New South Wales. Kerr was reluctant to give up the Chief Justiceship, in which he intended to remain another ten years, for the Governor-General's post, which traditionally lasted five years. At Kerr's request, Whitlam informally agreed that if both men were still in office in five years, Kerr would be reappointed. Whitlam also secured legislation to address Kerr's financial concerns about the position, including authorising a pension for the Governor-General or his widow.
The Leader of the Opposition, Billy Snedden, was enthusiastic about the appointment and also agreed to reappoint Kerr in five years, were he Prime Minister at the time. Kerr then agreed to take the post, was duly appointed by the Queen of Australia, Elizabeth II, and was sworn in on 11 July 1974, Whitlam's 58th birthday.
Six of the bills that had been the subject of the double dissolution were introduced to the Parliament a third time and, as expected, were again rejected by the Senate. Section 57 of the Constitution of Australia provides that, after a double dissolution election, if bills that had been rejected twice by the Senate in the previous parliament were again passed by the House and rejected by the Senate, they could then be put to a joint sitting of both houses. On 30 July, Whitlam gained Kerr's agreement for a joint sitting, which was set for 6–7 August 1974. The joint sitting, the only one in Australia's history, passed all six bills, including the enabling legislation for Medibank.
Controversy and Vacancies
In December 1974, Whitlam was anxious to find new sources of money to finance his development plans. After a meeting at the Prime Minister's residence (The Lodge), Whitlam and three of his ministers (Deputy Prime Minister and Treasurer Jim Cairns, Attorney-General Senator Lionel Murphy, and Minister for Minerals and Energy Rex Connor) signed a letter of authority for Connor to borrow up to US$4 billion. This letter was described by author and journalist Alan Reid as "the death warrant of the Whitlam ALP government".
Connor and other ministers had made contact with a hitherto-obscure Pakistani financier, Tirath Khemlani, as early as November 1974. Khemlani was said to have contacts in the newly enriched Arab oil nations. None of the efforts to secure a loan, whether through Khemlani or by other routes, bore fruit, but as information about the "Loans Affair" trickled out, the government lost support.
In February 1975, Whitlam decided to appoint Senator Murphy a judge of the High Court of Australia, even though Murphy's Senate seat would not be up for election if a half-Senate election were held. Under proportional representation, Labor could win three of the five New South Wales seats, but if Murphy's seat was also contested, it was most unlikely to win four out of six. Thus, appointing Murphy would almost certainly cost the ALP a Senate seat at the next half-Senate election.
Whitlam appointed Murphy anyway. By convention, senators appointed by the state legislature to fill casual vacancies were from the same political party as the former senator. The New South Wales premier, Tom Lewis (Liberal Party) felt that this convention only applied to vacancies caused by deaths or ill-health, and arranged for the legislature to appoint Cleaver Bunton, former mayor of Albury and an independent.
By March 1975, many Liberal parliamentarians felt that Sir Billy Snedden was doing an inadequate job as Leader of the Opposition, and that Whitlam was dominating him in the House of Representatives. Malcolm Fraser challenged Snedden for the leadership, and defeated him on 21 March. At a press conference after winning the leadership, Fraser stated:
“The question of supply—let me deal with it this way. I generally believe if a government is elected to power in the lower House and has the numbers and can maintain the numbers in the lower House, it is entitled to expect that it will govern for the three-year term unless quite extraordinary events intervene ... Having said that ... if we do make up our minds at some stage that the Government is so reprehensible that an Opposition must use whatever power is available to it, then I'd want to find a situation in which ... Mr. Whitlam woke up one morning finding the decision had been made and finding that he had been caught with his pants well and truly down.”
Whitlam's original Deputy Prime Minister, Lance Barnard, had been challenged and defeated for his post by Cairns in late 1974. Whitlam then offered Barnard a diplomatic post; in early 1975 Barnard agreed to this. If the appointment went through, Barnard's resignation from the House of Representatives would trigger a by-election in his Tasmanian electorate of Bass. Party officials felt given the party's weakened state, Barnard should remain in Parliament, and be given no preferment if he resigned. ALP president and future leader Bob Hawke described the decision to appoint Barnard as "an act of lunacy" Barnard had been losing support over the last several elections, and a swing of 4% against Labor would be enough to defeat it. The Liberals had a candidate who had been nursing the electorate; Labor had no candidate selected and a bitter pre-selection in the offing. Barnard resigned, and was appointed ambassador to Sweden. The election on 28 June proved a disaster for Labor, losing the seat with a swing against it of 17%.
The next week, Whitlam fired Cairns for misleading Parliament regarding the Loans Affair amid innuendo about his relationship with his Principal Private Secretary, Junie Morosi. He was replaced as deputy by Frank Crean. At the time of Cairns' dismissal, one Senate seat was vacant, following the death on 30 June of Queensland ALP Senator Bertie Milliner. The state Labor party nominated Mal Colston, who was the highest unelected candidate on the party's Queensland list in 1974. This resulted in deadlock in Queensland; the unicameral Queensland legislature twice voted against Colston, and the party refused to submit any alternative candidates. Queensland Country Party Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen had evidence that Colston, a schoolteacher by trade, had set a school afire during a labour dispute, though the police had refused to prosecute.
After the legislature voted Colston down a second time, Bjelke-Petersen got it to elect a low-level union official, Albert Field, who had contacted his office and expressed a willingness to serve. In interviews, Field made it clear he would not support Whitlam. Field was expelled from the ALP for standing against Colston, and Labor senators boycotted his swearing-in. Whitlam argued that because of the vacancies being filled as they were, the Senate was "corrupted" and "tainted", with the Opposition enjoying a majority they did not win at the ballot box. Field's eligibility to serve was challenged in the High Court. With the Queensland senator on leave throughout the remainder of the crisis, the Coalition (Liberal and National Country Party) had an effective majority of 30–29 in the Senate.
The Loans Affair (The Khemlani Affair)
During 1975, the Whitlam Government attempted to raise a loan of approximately US$4 billion. The money was intended to be used to fund a number of natural resource and energy projects, including construction of a natural gas pipeline, the electrification of interstate railways and a uranium enrichment plant.
Tirath Khemlani played a pivotal role. He was employed by Dalamal and Sons, a London-based commodity-trading firm
The raising of foreign loans for the Australian Government at the time required the authorisation by the Loans Council. It was common knowledge that funds were usually borrowed from US Banks or financiers. Connor's attempt to secure the loan was unusual for several reasons, including:
1.The size of the loan was extremely large for the time.
2.When a project of this scale and cost is undertaken, governments often attract foreign investment and ultimately form a business partnership, whereby the foreign investor would retain partial ownership and/or rights over the resources once the project is complete. However, this option was rejected by Connor who was renowned for his desire to have Australian resources controlled and owned by Australians.
3.The Minister for Minerals and Energy was raising the loan independent of Treasury.
4.Rather than attempting to raise the loan from US financiers, Connor attempted to raise the loan from Arab financiers, with Khemlani acting as the intermediary. There are unconfirmed reports that Arab financiers offered lower interest rates on governmental loans than US Banks/financiers. The Middle East at the time was awash with "petro-dollars", as the price of oil had skyrocketed since 1973.
Connor was duly authorised to raise loan(s) through Khemlani in late 1974. Between December 1974 and May 1975, Khemlani sent regular telexes to Connor advising that he was close to securing the loan.
However, the loan never eventuated and, in May 1975, Whitlam sought to secure the loan through a major US investment bank (name undisclosed). As part of the loan procedure, this bank imposed an obligation on the Australian Government to cease all other loan raising activities pertaining to this loan and accordingly, on 20 May 1975, Connor's loan-raising authority was formally revoked.
A special one-day sitting of the House of Representatives was held on 9 July 1975, during which the then Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam tabled the documents containing evidence about the loan and sought to defend his government's position.
Beset by economic difficulties at the time and the negative political impact which the Loans Affair conjured, the Whitlam Government was very vulnerable to further assaults on its credibility. Gough Whitlam was prompted to sack Dr. Cairns from his cabinet.
Although Rex Connor's authority to seek an overseas loan was withdrawn following leaking of the scandal, he continued to liaise with Khemlani. The Herald Newspaper based in Melbourne published documents confirming this and Connor was forced to resign from the cabinet. He was replaced by Paul Keating.
The Herald journalist Peter Game tracked down Khemlani in mid-late 1975 and following an interview, he broke the story that ultimately opened up the Loans Affair. When Connor directly denied Khemlani's version of events, as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald, Khemlani flew to Australia in October 1975 and provided Peter Game with telexes sent to him from Connor that refuted Connor's denial.
On 13 October 1975, Khemlani provided a statutory declaration and a copy of the incriminating telexes sent from Connor's office, a copy of which was forwarded to Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. Upon receiving the documents, Whitlam dismissed Rex Connor from his government for misleading parliament. In his letter of dismissal, date 14 October 1975, Prime Minister Whitlam wrote: "Yesterday I received from solicitors a copy of a statutory declaration signed by Mr Khemlani and copies of a number of telex messages between office Mr Khemlani’s office in London and the office of the Minister for Energy. In my judgment these messages did constitute "communications of substance" between the Minister and Mr Khemlani."
The loans affair embarrassed the Whitlam government and exposed it to claims of impropriety. The Malcolm Fraser-led Opposition used its numbers in the Senate to block the government’s budget legislation in an attempt to force an early general election, citing the loans affair as an example of “extraordinary and reprehensible” circumstances. Whitlam refused, and this led to the Australian constitutional crisis of 1975.
Deferral of Supply
On 10 October, the High Court ruled that the act passed at the joint sitting that gave the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) and the Northern Territory two senators each was valid. A half-Senate election needed to be held by June 1976; most senators-elect would take their seats on 1 July but the territorial senators, and those filling Field's and Bunton's seats would take their places at once.
The ruling meant that it was possible for the ALP to gain a temporary majority in the Senate, at least until 1 July 1976. To do so, the ALP would have to win Field's and Bunton's seats, and one seat in each territory, and have the second ACT seat fall to either a Labor candidate or an independent, former Liberal Prime Minister John Gorton, now estranged from his party. If this happened, Labor would have an effective 33–31 margin, be able to pass supply if that was still an issue, and also could pass electoral redistribution laws (which had been passed by the House, though twice defeated by the Senate) which would give it an advantage at the next election.
The journalist and author Alan Reid described the position of the Government and Opposition as the crisis became acute in mid-October:
“While it was possibly an overstatement to describe the 1975 position as a choice between evils, neither of the two major political groupings reached the October 15, 1975 crunch position with completely clean hands. Fraser and the Liberal-CP senators ... lacked the numbers to defer the Budget until the arrival in the Senate of Albert Patrick Field, whose arrival was not due to any decision by the Australian voters but to a decision by one of the rulers, the Whitlam-hating Bjelke-Petersen ...
Whitlam for his part had decided even before the Budget was deferred to embark upon the bold, Cromwellian project of changing the Australian Constitution, not through the vote of the mass electorate ... but through prodigious personal exertions backed by the support of his parliamentary followers.”
In the wake of the High Court ruling, and with the appropriation bills due to be considered by the Senate on 16 October, Fraser was undecided whether to block supply. His biographer, Philip Ayres, contends that had there been no further government scandals, he would not have done so. Khemlani, however, had alleged that (contrary to government statements) Connor had never revoked his authority to obtain loans and had been in regular contact with him even into mid-1975.
On Monday 13 October, the Herald printed documents in support of Khemlani's allegations, and on the following day, Connor resigned. Fraser determined to block supply, convened a shadow cabinet meeting and received the unanimous support of the Coalition frontbench. At a press conference, Fraser cited the poor state of the economy and the continuing scandals as reasons for his decision. Without the passage of fresh appropriations, supply would be exhausted on 30 November.
The Governor of Queensland, Sir Colin Hannah, gave a speech denigrating the Whitlam Government on 15 October, in violation of the convention that state governors remain neutral. Hannah held a dormant commission as Administrator of the Commonwealth to act as Governor-General in the event of Kerr's death, resignation, or absence from Australia. Whitlam immediately contacted Buckingham Palace to arrange for Hannah's dormant commission to be revoked, a process which took ten days to complete. Although Whitlam later alleged that he never contemplated dismissing Kerr during the crisis, on 16 October, while speaking with Kerr and visiting Malaysian Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak, he told Kerr that if the crisis continued, "It could be a question of whether I get to the Queen first for your recall, or whether you get in first with my dismissal." Kerr saw the statement as a threat; Whitlam later stated the comment was "flippant" and designed to turn the conversation to another subject.
On 16 and 17 October, the Senate, with the unanimous support of the Coalition majority, deferred the appropriation bills.
The Coalition took the position that Kerr could dismiss Whitlam if the Government could not secure supply. Whitlam's former solicitor-general Robert Ellicott, now a Liberal member of the House, issued a legal opinion on 16 October stating that the Governor-General had the power to dismiss Whitlam, and should do so forthwith if Whitlam could not state how he would obtain supply. Ellicott indicated that Whitlam was treating Kerr as if he had no discretion but to follow prime ministerial advice, when in fact the Governor-General could and should dismiss a ministry unable to secure supply. Ellicott stated that Kerr:
“... should ask the Prime Minister if the Government is prepared to advise him to dissolve the House of Representatives and the Senate or the House of Representatives alone as a means of assuring that the disagreement between the two Houses is resolved. If the Prime Minister refuses to do either, it is then open to the Governor-General to dismiss his present Ministers and seek others who are prepared to give him the only proper advice open. This he should proceed to do.”
Consultations and negotiations
Kerr rang Whitlam on Sunday 19 October, asking permission to consult with the Chief Justice of the High Court, Sir Garfield Barwick, concerning the crisis. Whitlam advised Kerr not to do so, noting that no Governor-General had consulted with a Chief Justice under similar circumstances since 1914, when Australia was at a much earlier stage of her constitutional development.
On 21 October, Kerr phoned Whitlam regarding the Ellicott opinion, and asked, "It's all bullshit, isn't it?" Whitlam agreed with Kerr's view. Kerr then requested that the Government provide him with a written legal opinion rebutting Ellicott's views. Kerr would receive no written advice from the Government until 6 November.
Journalist and author Paul Kelly, who wrote two books on the crisis, paints this delay as a major mistake by Whitlam, given Kerr's judicial background. Kerr also asked on 21 October for Whitlam's permission to interview Fraser, which the Prime Minister readily granted, and the two men met that night. Fraser told Kerr that the Opposition were determined to block supply. Fraser indicated that the Opposition's decision to defer the appropriation bills, rather than defeating them, was a tactical decision, since then the bills would remain in the control of the Senate and could be passed at any time. He stated that the Coalition agreed with the Ellicott opinion, and proposed to continue deferring supply while it awaited events.
The media were not told of the substance of the conversation, and instead reported that Kerr had reprimanded Fraser for blocking supply, causing the Governor-General's office to issue a denial
Throughout the crisis, Kerr did not tell Whitlam of his increasing concerns, nor did he suggest that he might dismiss Whitlam. He believed nothing he said would influence Whitlam, and feared that if Whitlam perceived him as a possible opponent, the Prime Minister would procure his dismissal from the Queen. Accordingly, though Kerr dealt with Whitlam in an affable manner, he did not confide his thinking to the Prime Minister. Labor Senator Tony Mulvihill later related that "Whitlam would come back to each caucus meeting and say, 'I saw His Excellency ... No worry. He's got to do it his way.' ... at no time did he hint that the Governor-General was frowning."
There was intense public interest and concern at the stalemate, and Fraser and his Liberals acted to shore up support. Liberal frontbenchers worked to build support in state organisations. The former long time Premier of South Australia, Sir Thomas Playford, was speaking out against the blocking of supply, causing South Australia Senator Don Jessop to waver in his support for the tactic. Fraser was able to coordinate a wave of communications from party members which served to neutralise both men. Fraser sought the support of the retired Liberal Prime Minister, Sir Robert Menzies, and went to see Menzies in person, taking with him a 1947 statement by Menzies supporting the blocking of supply in the upper house of the Victorian Parliament. He did not have to use the paper; Menzies stated that he found the tactic distasteful, but in this case necessary. The former Prime Minister issued a statement in support of Fraser's tactics.
Kerr invited Whitlam and Minister for Labour Senator Jim McClelland to lunch on 30 October, immediately preceding an Executive Council meeting. At that meal, Kerr proposed a possible compromise. If the Opposition were to allow supply to pass, Whitlam would not advise a half-Senate election until May or June 1976, and the Senate would not convene until 1 July, thus obviating the threat of a possible temporary Labor majority. Whitlam, who was determined to destroy both the Senate's right to block supply and Fraser's leadership, refused any compromise.
Decision
Fraser chaired a summit of leaders of the Coalition parties on 2 November. The resulting communiqué urged the Coalition senators to continue deferring supply. It also threatened, should Kerr grant Whitlam a half-Senate election, that the Coalition state premiers would advise their governors not to issue writs, thus blocking the election from taking place in the four states with non-Labor premiers. After the meeting, Fraser proposed a compromise: that the Opposition would concede supply if Whitlam agreed to hold a House of Representatives election at the same time as the half-Senate election. Whitlam rejected the idea.
On 22 October, Whitlam had asked the Attorney-General, Kep Enderby, to have a paper drafted rebutting the Ellicott opinion for presentation to Kerr. Enderby delegated this task to the Solicitor-General, Maurice Byers, and other officials. On 6 November, Enderby was to see Kerr to give him a legal opinion regarding the Government's alternative plans in case supply ran out (vouchers were to be issued instead of cheques, to be redeemed from banks after the crisis ended), and decided to present Kerr with the rebuttal to Ellicott. When Enderby reviewed the document, he found that, while it argued for the Government's position, it recognised both that the Senate had the constitutional right to block supply, and that the reserve powers were still extant—matters with which Enderby did not agree. He presented Kerr with the rebuttal, but crossed out Byers' signature on it and told Kerr of his disagreement. Enderby told Kerr that the Byers rebuttal was "background" for formal written advice, to be presented by Whitlam. Later that day, Kerr met with Fraser again. The Opposition leader told him that if Kerr did not dismiss Whitlam, the Opposition planned to criticise him in Parliament for failing to carry out his duty.
Kerr concluded on 6 November that neither Government nor Opposition would yield, and that supply would run out. The Governor-General decided that as Whitlam could not secure supply, and would not resign or advise an election for the House of Representatives, he would have to sack him. As Kerr feared that Whitlam might advise the Queen to dismiss him, he considered it important that Whitlam be given no hint of the impending action. Kerr later stated that were Whitlam to seek his dismissal, it would involve the Queen in politics.
Seeking confirmation of his decision, he contacted the Chief Justice, Sir Garfield Barwick, met with him and asked for his views of a dismissal of Whitlam. Barwick furnished him with written advice containing his view that a Governor-General could and should dismiss a Prime Minister who was unable to obtain supply.
On 9 November, Fraser contacted Whitlam and invited him to negotiations with the Coalition aimed at settling the dispute. Whitlam agreed, and a meeting was set for 9 a.m. on the morning of Tuesday 11 November, at Parliament House. That Tuesday was also the deadline for an election to be called if it were to be held before Christmas. Both Government and Opposition leaders were in Melbourne on the night of 10 November for the Lord Mayor's banquet. To ensure the Opposition leaders could reach Canberra in time for the meeting, Whitlam brought them back in his VIP aircraft, which arrived in Canberra at midnight.
Meeting at Yarralumla
At 9.00 a.m. on 11 November, Whitlam, together with Deputy Prime Minister Crean and Leader of the House Fred Daly met with the Liberal and Country party leaders. No compromise could be reached. Whitlam informed the Coalition leaders that he would be advising Kerr to hold a half-Senate election on 13 December, and he would not be seeking interim supply for the period before the election. Thinking it unlikely that Kerr would grant the election without supply, Fraser warned Whitlam that the Governor-General might make up his own mind about the matter. Whitlam was dismissive and after the meeting broke, telephoned Kerr to tell him that he needed an appointment to advise him to hold a half-Senate election.
Both men were busy in the morning, Kerr with Remembrance Day commemorations, and Whitlam with a caucus meeting and a censure motion in the House which the Opposition had submitted. The two discussed a meeting for 1.00 p.m., though Kerr's office later called Whitlam's and confirmed the time as 12.45. Word of this change did not reach the Prime Minister. Whitlam announced the request for a half-Senate election to his caucus, which approved it.
After hearing from Whitlam, Kerr called Fraser. According to Fraser, Kerr asked him whether, if he were commissioned Prime Minister, he could secure supply, would immediately thereafter advise a double-dissolution election, and would refrain from new policies and investigations of the Whitlam Government pending the election. Fraser states that he agreed. Kerr denied the exchange took place, though both men agree those questions were asked later in the day before Kerr commissioned Fraser as Prime Minister. According to Kerr, Fraser was supposed to come to Yarralumla at 1.00 p.m.
Whitlam was delayed in leaving Parliament House, while Fraser left a bit early, with the result that Fraser arrived at Yarralumla first. He was taken into an anteroom, and his car was moved around to a side entrance. Whitlam maintains that the purpose in moving Fraser's car was to ensure that the Prime Minister was not tipped off by seeing it, stating "Had I known Mr. Fraser was already there, I would not have set foot in Yarralumla."
Kelly doubts Whitlam would have recognised Fraser's car, which was an ordinary Ford LTD from the car pool. According to Fraser biographer Philip Ayres, "a white car pulled up at the front would signify nothing in particular—it would simply be in the way".
Whitlam arrived just before one o'clock, and was taken to Kerr's office by an aide. He brought with him the formal letter advising a half-Senate election, and after the two men were seated, attempted to give it to Kerr. In their accounts of their meeting, both men agree that Kerr then told Whitlam that his commission as Prime Minister was withdrawn under Section 64 of the Constitution, and handed him a letter and statement of reasons. Kerr later wrote that at this point, Whitlam got to his feet, looked at the office's phones, and stated, "I must get in touch with the Palace at once."
Whitlam, however disputes this, and states that he asked Kerr if he had consulted the Palace, to which Kerr replied that he did not need to, and that he had the advice of Barwick. Both accounts agree that Kerr then stated that they would both have to live with this, to which Whitlam replied, "You certainly will." The dismissal concluded with Kerr wishing Whitlam luck in the election, and offering his hand, which the former Prime Minister took.
After Whitlam left, Kerr called in Fraser, informed him of the dismissal, and asked if he would form a caretaker government, to which Fraser agreed. Fraser later stated that his overwhelming sensation at the news was relief. Fraser left to return to Parliament House, where he conferred with Coalition leaders, while Kerr joined the luncheon party which had been waiting for him, apologising to his guests and offering the excuse that he had been busy dismissing the Government.
Parliamentary strategy
Whitlam returned to The Lodge, where he had lunch. As his aides arrived, he informed them of his sacking. Whitlam drafted a resolution for the House, expressing confidence in his Government. No ALP Senate leaders were at The Lodge, nor did Whitlam and his party contact any when they drove back to Parliament House, confining their strategy to the House of Representatives.
Prior to Whitlam's dismissal, the Labor leadership decided to introduce a motion that the Senate pass the appropriation bills. With ALP senators unaware of Whitlam's sacking, that plan went ahead. Senator Doug McClelland, manager of the ALP Government's business in the Senate, informed Coalition Senate leader Reg Withers of Labor's intent at about 1.30. Withers then attended a leadership meeting and learned of Fraser's ascension; he assured the new Prime Minister he could secure supply. When the Senate convened, the ALP Senate leader, Ken Wriedt, made the motion. Even as Wriedt did so, he was told that the government had been sacked, which he initially refused to believe. Authoritative word did not reach Wriedt until 2.15 pm, by which time it was too late to withdraw the motion. At 2.24 pm, the appropriation bills passed the Senate.
In the House, desultory debate on Fraser's censure motion ended with it being amended by the ALP majority into a condemnation of Fraser and passed.
By 2.34 pm, when Fraser rose and announced that he had been commissioned as Prime Minister, word of the dismissal had spread through the House. Fraser announced his intent to advise a double dissolution, and moved that the House adjourn. His motion was defeated. Fraser's new government suffered repeated defeats in the House, which passed a motion of no confidence in him, and asked the Speaker, Gordon Scholes, to urge the Governor-General to re-commission Whitlam. Scholes was initially told that an appointment might not be possible that day, but after stating that he would reconvene the House and tell them of the refusal, was given an appointment with Kerr for 4.45 p.m.
Dissolution
Protest occupying the width of George Street, Sydney, outside the Sydney Town Hall, about 6.45 p.m. 11 November 1975 following news of the dismissal. With the appropriation bills approved by both Houses, they were sent over to Yarralumla where Kerr gave them Royal Assent. With supply assured, he then received Fraser, who advised him that 21 bills (including the electoral redistribution bills) which had been introduced since the last election fulfilled the double dissolution provisions of Section 57. Fraser asked that both Houses be dissolved for an election on 13 December. Kerr signed the proclamation dissolving Parliament, and sent his Official Secretary, David Smith, to proclaim the dissolution from the front steps of Parliament House.
At 4.45, Kerr received Scholes, and informed him of the dissolution. Kerr wrote that "nothing else of relevance" took place between the two men, but by Scholes's account, he accused Kerr of bad faith for making an appointment to receive the Speaker, and then not waiting to hear from him before dissolving Parliament. Whitlam later stated that it would have been wiser for Scholes to take the appropriation bills with him, rather than having them sent ahead.
Even as Scholes and Kerr spoke, Smith reached Parliament House. The dismissal was by now publicly known, and an angry crowd of ALP supporters had gathered, filling the steps and spilling over both into the roadway and into Parliament House itself. Many of the demonstrators were ALP staffers; others were from the Australian National University. Smith was forced to enter Parliament House through a side door and make his way to the steps from the inside. He read the proclamation, though the boos of the crowd drowned him out. He concluded with the traditional "God save the Queen". Former Prime Minister Whitlam, who had been standing behind Smith, then addressed the crowd:
“Well may we say "God save the Queen", because nothing will save the Governor-General! The Proclamation which you have just heard read by the Governor-General's Official Secretary was countersigned Malcolm Fraser, who will undoubtedly go down in Australian history from Remembrance Day 1975 as Kerr's cur. They won't silence the outskirts of Parliament House, even if the inside has been silenced for a few weeks ... Maintain your rage and enthusiasm for the campaign for the election now to be held and until polling day.”
Election Campaign (Nov 11 – December 12, 1975)
The news that Whitlam had been dismissed spread across Australia during the afternoon, triggering immediate protest demonstrations. On 12 November, Scholes wrote to the Queen, asking her to restore Whitlam as Prime Minister. The reply from the Queen's Private Secretary, Sir Martin Charteris, dated 17 November 1975, stated:
As we understand the situation here, the Australian Constitution firmly places the prerogative powers of the Crown in the hands of the Governor-General as the representative of the Queen of Australia. The only person competent to commission an Australian Prime Minister is the Governor-General, and The Queen has no part in the decisions which the Governor-General must take in accordance with the Constitution. Her Majesty, as Queen of Australia, is watching events in Canberra with close interest and attention, but it would not be proper for her to intervene in person in matters which are so clearly placed within the jurisdiction of the Governor-General by the Constitution Act.
On 12 November 1975, the Interim Fraser Ministry was sworn in by Kerr. By some accounts, Kerr sought reassurance at that meeting that the Coalition senators would not have given in before supply ran out, "The Senate would never have caved in, would it?"
According to those accounts, Senator Margaret Guilfoyle laughed and said to a colleague, "That's all he knows." Guilfoyle later stated that if she did make such a remark, it was not meant to imply that the Coalition senators would have broken. However, Kelly lists four Coalition senators who stated, in subsequent years, that they would have crossed the floor and voted for the appropriation bills.
Labor believed it had a chance of winning the elections, and that the dismissal would be an electoral asset for them. However, some Labor strategists believed the party was heading for a disaster, with few economic accomplishments to point to and an electorate whose emotions would have cooled before polling day. Nonetheless, Whitlam, who began campaigning almost immediately after the dismissal, was met with huge crowds wherever he went; 30,000 people over-spilled the Sydney Domain for the official campaign launch on 24 November.
That evening, Whitlam made a major speech at Festival Hall in Melbourne before 7,500 people and a national TV audience, calling 11 November "Fraser's day of shame—a day that will live in infamy".
Polls were released at the end of the first week of campaigning, and showed a nine point swing against Labor. Whitlam's campaign did not believe it at first, but additional polling made it clear: the electorate was turning against the ALP. The Coalition attacked Labor for the economic conditions, and released television commercials "The Three Dark Years" showing images from the Whitlam government scandals. The ALP campaign, which had concentrated on the issue of Whitlam's dismissal, did not begin to address the economy until its final days.
There was little violence in the campaign, but three letter bombs were placed in the post; one wounded two people in Bjelke-Petersen's office, while the other two, addressed to Kerr and Fraser, were intercepted and defused.
The Italian Bomb With a French Twist
On November 21 the left-wing, pro Whitlam The Age dropped a bomb into the election when it reprinted a story which the left-wing Italian daily Il Manifesto had published the previous day.In the lengthy article the Italian paper claimed to have interviewed a source inside the French signals intelligence service CNCIS (Commission Nationale de Contrôle des Interceptions de Sécurité) – the French equivalent of the American NSA or Britain’s GCHQ – who claimed that a CNCIS listening post on the Tuamotu Islands in the Pacific had intercepted encrypted satellite signals from the U.S. Embassy in Canberra (specifically the CIA station within it) to Washington which purported to show that the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency was actively working to undermine the Whitlam Labor government (see The United States and the ALP government below) with which it had major disagreements. Il Manifesto’s source provided copies of the decoded intercepts which the Italian paper printed. The material did not state that the Liberal Party was the recipient of direct U.S. covert support, but the implication was there.
Acting on information also published in Il Manifesto and The Age, Australian Federal Police were able to identify a bank account being operated by a consultant to the Liberal Party which was receiving funds from the United States. These funds had been used to support the Liberal Party’s campaign.
Australian opinion, both official and among the general public, was mixed about the credibility of all this. Signals intelligence experts in the U.S., some of them former NSA employees, doubted that the CNCIS could have cracked American codes so rapidly and so effectively as to produce a complete cable. The U.S. government denied the whole thing. The French government also called it “preposterous” and immediately set-out to find Il Manifesto’s alleged source (see Results of the French Mole hunt below).
Despite the doubts and concerns about the authenticity of this, the ALP launched a series of last minute advertisements implying that Fraser was unpatriotic and possibly a stooge of the Americans.
The bank account scandal gained more traction, because it appeared to be a genuine case of the Liberal Party receiving funds from the United States, leading to questions as to who was providing them. It wasn’t until after the election that the donors were identified by the FBI and the SEC as a group associated with right wing politics in the United States; individuals with no direct ties to the CIA, but of a kind known to be used by that agency for its “black bag” work in the past.
In the run-up to the election the allegations did begin to turn a segment of voters against the Liberals.
During the campaign, the Kerrs purchased a Sydney apartment, as Sir John was prepared to resign in the event that the ALP triumphed.
Election Result – December 13, 1975
The result of the controversy was a hung Parliament. The ALP won 55 seats, making them the largest single party in the House of Representatives, but this was 9 seats short of a majority (and 11 fewer seats than they had won in the May 1974 election).
The Coalition won 63 seats (37 Liberal and 26 National Country) which made them the largest block, but 1 seat short of the majority required to govern.
The remaining seats were filled by 6 independents, 2 members of the Australia Party (a fusion of dissatisfied former Liberals and ALP members) and 1 seat for the Democratic Labor Party, a left-wing breakaway group from the ALP.
In the Senate the ALP elected 22 members, to a total of 32 for the Coalition, giving the Coalition 50% of the seats. This was a very fractious control for the Coalition, as just one defection from its fractious caucus would cause the Coalition to lose a vote in the Senate. There were also 9 Independents in the Senate, guaranteeing a fractious Senate in the next session.
Immediate Aftermath
When Parliament reconvened Whitlam was able to return as Prime Minister with the support of all 9 Independents, who wanted nothing to do with the tainted Liberals under Fraser. Gough Whitlam thus replaced Malcolm Fraser as Prime Minster on December 19, 1975.
Fraser was compelled to resign as Liberal Leader soon afterward, due to the scandal created by the bank account affair. Although the Starke Royal Commission inquiry into the whole mess (see below) exonerated Fraser from any personal wrong doing, his political career was ruined. The Liberal party replaced Fraser with Phillip Lynch, who was himself felled by an unrelated financial scandal in 1977 (and ironically, later exonerated).
Legacy
In his survey of the events of the crisis, November 1975, Paul Kelly places blame on Fraser for initiating the crisis and on Whitlam for using the crisis to try to break Fraser and the Senate. However, he places the most blame on Kerr, for failing to be candid with Whitlam. According to Kelly:
“[Kerr] should have unflinchingly and courageously met his responsibility to the Crown and to the Constitution. He should have spoken frankly with his Prime Minister from the start. He should have warned wherever and whenever appropriate. He should have realised that, whatever his fears, there was no justification for any other behavior.”
The dismissal has been considered the greatest political and constitutional crisis in Australia's history.
In 1977, the Hayden Government proposed four constitutional amendments via referendum, three of which passed—the last time that the Australian Constitution has been amended. One of the amendments requires that a senator appointed to fill a casual vacancy be from the same party as the former senator. The Senate retains the power to block supply; the Governor-General retains the power to remove the Prime Minister, however both houses of Parliament can jointly pass a veto of the measure (the veto must pass both Houses with a 60% majority in each House to succeed). Since 1975, however, those powers have not been exercised. Talk also began in earnest of replacing the appointed Governor General with some sort of elected official, to be elected either directly by the people or indirectly by the State and Territorial Legislatures.
In the wake of the dismissal, the ALP turned its anger on Kerr. Demonstrations by ALP supporters greeted his public appearances for the rest of his term. ALP lawmakers who had been friends of Kerr broke off their relationships, feeling Kerr had betrayed the party and had ambushed Whitlam. Lady Anne Kerr stated that she and her husband confronted a "new irrational scene swarming with instant enemies".
Since the ALP was returned to government, it was inevitable that he and Prime Minister Whitlam would have to work together. Their relations were described as “crispy” at best, and Kerr usually dealt with a subordinate of Whitlam’s on all but the most urgent matters. Seeing no future in the situation, Sir John Kerr tendered his resignation as Governor-General on February 4, 1976. Whitlam replaced Kerr with Keith Aickin (later Sir Keith Aickin) a respected legal scholar and former diplomat. The new Governor-General implied in his first address after taking office that he would not be repeating his predecessor’s mistake.
The country at large, according to polls taken over the next year, blamed Kerr, Whitlam and Fraser about equally: Kerr was seen as scheming and venal, Fraser as opportunistic and possibly a dupe of the United States, and Whitlam as a clueless bungler who nearly caused his own downfall.
“Dumb as Gough” became a popular expression of the period to denote an oblivious fool.
Of the three Whitlam lasted the longest in public office, remaining Prime Minister until September 12, 1976, when the ALP turned on him and ousted him as leader. He was replaced by Bill Hayden as Labor leader, and Hayden succeeded Whitlam as Prime Minister.
Labor’s ruling compact (called “the Compact” to distinguish it from the Liberal-National Country Coalition) was unwieldy and lasted only until the end of January 1977 (slightly over one year) before it collapsed.
Labor seemed certain to lose the next election, which occurred on March 1, 1977, except that the new Liberal leader Phillip Lynch was caught-up in a financial scandal and the Opposition leadership fell to the Coalition’s deputy leader Doug Anthony, leader of the National Country Party, while the Liberals scrambled to elect a new leader.
On March 1, 1977 Labor under Bill Hayden received 61 members in the House of Representatives, and were able to enter into a new Compact with 3 Independents and 1 Democratic Labor Party member. The Coalition won 60 seats, with the remaining 2 going to the Australia party, which this time around sided with the Coalition. The Coalition however, gained effective control of the Senate, thus putting a block on the Hayden government.
Tony Street eventually became leader of the Liberal party, although the overall performance of the Coalition under less than ideal circumstances tipped political influence heavily toward Doug Anthony and the National Country Party.
After Kerr resigned as Governor-General, he still sought a position, reasoning that it had been his intent to remain for ten years as Governor-General. However, neither Prime Ministers Gough Whitlam nor Bill Hayden were inclined to offer him an appointment; Whitlam for personal reasons, and Hayden because he was unwilling to court the political controversy such an appointment would have stirred-up. The Kerrs spent the next several years living in Europe, and when he died in Australia in 1991, his death was not announced until after he was buried, to forestall any public protests at his funeral.
Freudenberg summed up Kerr's fate after the dismissal:
“Kerr only succeeded in undoing himself with the Dismissal, just as it undid Fraser and eventually Whitlam himself. In the personal sense, Sir John Kerr himself became the real victim of the Dismissal, and history has accorded a brutal if poignant truth to Whitlam's declaration on the steps of Parliament House on 11 November 1975: "Well may we say 'God Save the Queen' - because nothing will save the Governor-General."
The Starke Royal Commission
After the December 1975 election an independent Royal Commission was created under The Rt. Hon Judge Sir John Starke of the Supreme Court of Victoria to investigate the series of charges relating to the supposed CIA involvement with the Liberal Party and potential outside interference in Australian affairs.
Judge Starke found that there was no credible evidence that the information published in Il Manifesto and subsequently by The Age was authentic. Both the United States Secretary of State Kenneth Rush and the United States Attorney General J. Clifford Wallace gave sworn testimony to Judge Starke at the Australian Embassy in Washington that it was false. Lt. General Lew Allen, the Director of the (U.S) National Security Agency, gave Judge Starke a briefing to indicate that the CNCIS couldn’t possibly have done what Il Manifesto’s source claimed for it.
The French government also provided Judge Starke with the results of its own investigation which debunked the story. Il Manifesto refused to co-operate with Judge Starke, and it was supported by the Italian government.
Starke concluded based on this and other evidence and testimony, that the allegations of CIA involvement were unverifiable and likely false.
On the question of U.S. based funds being given to the Liberal Party, he did find that there was a connection between a Liberal Party consultant, several fund raisers and certain private right wing groups in the United States. He referred all these individuals for prosecution. But, he concluded, that neither Malcolm Fraser nor any of his senior advisers was involved. Fraser was thus exonerated, but too late to resurrect his position as leader of the Liberal Party.
As a result of Judge Starke’s findings The Age published a front page apology to the Liberal Party of Australia and to Malcolm Fraser personally.
Results of the French Mole Hunt
After the story first appeared in Il Manifesto, the French counter-intelligence service, the DST, conducted an extensive investigation of CNCIS personnel, to determine who might have been leaking this information. In this they received little co-operation from Il Manifesto or the Italian government.
However, DST investigators determined that the French signals service could not have decoded the documents that Il Manifesto’s DST therefore concluded that Il Manifesto either lied about its source – and knowingly fabricated the incriminating cables – or that it had been taken by a conman posing as a French intelligence officer. source claimed that it did in the time frame involved.
The DST conclusion (for reasons of French domestic politics) tried to cover-up the fact that Il Manifesto’s source’s second cable (the one which exposed the bank account) had proved to contain genuine information. The French government wanted the whole matter swept under the rug as a fraud and to remove them from the whole matter. This inconvenient fact, however, was at odds with the conclusion that the French could decode American signals, unless one considered another source that neither the French nor the Americans were willing to name, much less discuss.
It was the former Gaullist head of the French foreign intelligence service, Count Alexandrer de Marenches, who put the point bluntly when he accused Il Manifesto De Marenches’ contention was that the purloined cables had been fed to Il Manifesto by the Soviets to cause trouble in the Australian election, and as a covert action, he judged it to be an unqualified success. Other intelligence officials in France, Australia and the United States disagreed with the Count’s conclusion. of either being a dupe or an accomplice in a Soviet disinformation campaign.
The Falcon and Soviet Involvement
Oleg Gordievsky, a KGB officer who was a personal assistant to KGB Chairman Vitaly Fedorchuck in the mid 1970’s, while at the same time acting as an agent for Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, was aware that the KGB was receiving copies of U.S. intelligence transmissions from a source at the TRW Corporation in Southern California (which was a contractor for the U.S. government’s intelligence community). Gordievsky, who passed what information he had onto the British who in turn gave it to the Americans, didn’t know who the source was, he only knew it was coming out of TRW because some of the documents he saw had the TRW corporate logo embossed on them. Gordievsky did inform his British handlers that Il Manifesto’s documents were genuine (as he had seen them in Moscow) and he concluded that de Marenches’ conclusions about the matter were spot on. The British chose not to inform Judge Starke or the Australians of this.
Gordievsky’s information lead to the unmasking of Christopher Boyce (known as “The Falcon” in popular culture), a low level employee at TRW’s “black vault” in Redondo Beach, California as a the source of the documents.
All of these details were not made public until more than a decade after the events.
The United States and the ALP Government
Prime Minister Gough Whitlam clashed with the Administrations of United States Presidents Richard Nixon, Spiro Agnew and James Gavin over a series of bilateral and international issues. Upon taking office in 1972 Whitlam withdrew the last Australian combat troops from Vietnam in December 1972, and he refused to support the subsequent military campaign in Vietnam under Presidents Agnew and Gavin. Whitlam denounced President Agnew’s re-introduction of U.S. combat troops into South Vietnam in the Spring of 1973 in a speech before the United Nations. The American President was reportedly apoplectic with rage when he read the text of Whitlam’s remarks on the subject.
Whitlam blamed Agnew and his successor James Gavin for upsetting the balance in Asia, and held them both to be responsible for mainland China’s withdrawal from global affairs, which he forecast as “ominous” and “a tragedy which will haunt Asia for decades to come.”
He did welcome the success of South Vietnamese President Ngo Truong in stabilizing a democratic South Vietnam in 1975, and by the end of his time as Prime Minister had mellowed somewhat on the question of the U.S. role in Southeast Asia.
Whitlam was critical of President Gavin’s “open hand” to China speech, made in Taiwan after Chiang Kai-shek’s funeral in April 1975. He considered it unnecessarily provocative to give it in Taipei, although even Whitlam conceded that the post-Chou Enlai rulers of China, including Mao’s mysterious nephew the Lesser Mao, were impossible to deal with.
The main point of contention however was Whitlam’s desire to re-arrange the strategic relationship of Australia and the United States as part of his crafting of a more “made in Australia” foreign policy.
There never was any truth in the rumours that Whitlam was going to close down the U.S. satellite communication facility at Pine Gap, South of Alice Springs, or that he was going to close off other Australian military facilities to U.S. use. Whitlam made no move to repudiate the ANZUS treaty or other bilateral arrangements with the U.S.
He did plan to renegotiate the terms under which the U.S. military made use of Australian facilities, and he was seeking greater Australian input into U.S. policy in his corner of the world. Whitlam wanted to pursue an independent Australian policy with neighbouring countries, and this brought him into conflict with Washington over policy not only toward South Vietnam, but also Indonesia, Malaysia and relations with France over their Pacific atolls. Whitlam tired to develop closer relations with France’s Socialist President Francois Mitterrand.
Whitlam also denounced the U.S. role in the overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile and declined to provide Australian troops or police in support of U.S. led military actions in Syria and Cyprus, even when, as in Cyprus, they had U.N. sanction. Whitlam also refused a request from the British government to station a garrison force in Hong Kong.
All of this would have set-off alarms in Washington and would have caused the CIA to keep a closer eye on Whitlam and his government, more so than they would have with his Liberal Party predecessors. It is also possible that the CIA may have contributed to Whitlam’s troubles by aiding in the fomenting of labour strikes and other unrest which may have cast Whitlam’s government in a bad light.
Notably, Whitlam’s successor Bill Hayden continued many of these policies and yet didn’t seem to suffer any harm at the hands of U.S. covert intelligence operations.
During the constitutional crisis, Whitlam had alleged that Country Party Leader Doug Anthony had close links to the CIA. Subsequently, it was alleged that Kerr acted on behalf of the United States government in procuring Whitlam's dismissal. The most common allegation is that the CIA influenced Kerr's decision to dismiss Whitlam.
In 1966 Kerr had joined the Association for Cultural Freedom, a conservative group that was later revealed to have received CIA funding. Christopher Boyce, who was convicted for spying for the Soviet Union while an employee for TRW (a CIA contractor), claimed that the CIA wanted Whitlam removed from office because he threatened to close US military bases in Australia, including Pine Gap. Boyce said that Sir John Kerr was described by the CIA as "our man Kerr", and that this motivated him to send the first set of cables to the Soviets in the early fall of 1975. Out of these, which Gordievsky saw in Moscow, came the two which made it into Il Manifesto during the Australian election.
Whitlam has written that Kerr did not need any encouragement from the CIA. Kerr denied that he knowingly associated with or accepted orders from any member the CIA.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
With Source Material from Wikipedia
Prime Ministers of the Commonwealth of Australia:
21. Gough Whitlam (Labor): December 5, 1972 – November 11, 1975
22. Malcolm Fraser (Liberal): November 11, 1975 – December 19, 1975
21. Gough Whitlam (Labor): December 19, 1975 – September 12, 1976
23. William (“Bill”) Hayden (Labor): September 12, 1976 -
Governors-General of the Commonwealth of Australia:
17. Sir Paul Hasluck: April 30, 1969 – July 11, 1974 (appointed by Prime Minister John Gorton)
18. Sir John Kerr: July 11, 1974 – February 2, 1976 (appointed by Prime Minister Gough Whitlam)
19. Sir Keith Aickin: February 7, 1976 – (appointed by Prime Minister Gough Whitlam)
Leaders of the Liberal Party of Australia
5. Billy Snedden: December 5, 1972 – March 21, 1975
6. Malcolm Fraser: March 21, 1975 – February 12, 1976
7. Phillip Lynch: February 12, 1976 – February 8, 1977
8. Tony Street: February 8, 1977 –
A song about the period to the tune and structure of Waltzing Matilda.
Once a grubby beak-man camped in Canberra
Under the shade of Yarralumla,
And he sang as he watched and chilled his poofter beer
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me"
Waltzing Whitlam, Waltzing Whitlam
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me"
And he sang as he watched and chilled his poofter beer,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me".
Down came a pollie called Gough to play one in the Yogi,
Up jumped the beak-man and grabbed him with glee,
And he sang as he threw that pollie a chewy,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me".
Waltzing Whitlam, Waltzing Whitlam
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me"
And he sang as he threw that police a chewy,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me".
Up rode a fossicker, sitting high on his jackass,
Down came the party roomers, Libs and Countries,
"Where's that Gough pollie, a chicken wing for he"
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me".
Waltzing Whitlam, Waltzing Whitlam
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me"
"Where's that Gough pollie, a chicken wing for he”
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me".
Up jumped the beak-man and gave the fossicker the Yogi,
But the battlers said no, “it’s with Gough and Billy we be”,
And the beak-man was shown a wombat was he,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me".
Waltzing Whitlam, Waltzing Whitlam
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me"
And the beak-man was shown a wombat was he,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me."
"Oh, You'll come a-Waltzing Whitlam, with me."
Australian slang:
Beak-man = from Beak, an old slang reference for Magistrate (a reference to Sir John Kerr’s judicial career)
Poofter-beer = a derogatory term for any of a variety of canned and bottled pre-mixed coloured alcoholic drinks if drunk by a man; taking a shot at Sir John Kerr’s supposedly aristocratic tastes, if not his manhood.
Pollie = a politician
Yogi = a reference to the Australian Capital Territory
Chewy = chewy on your boot - a call by opposition supporters or players to a player usually when he is taking a set shot for goal. It is designed to upset his concentration when kicking. In this case it also implies that Sir John Kerr was a closet Liberal supporter. (Australian Rules Football)
fossicker – a prospector, e.g. for gold; in this case to describe Malcolm Fraser as an opportunist, also a play on Fraser’s name
Party roomers = party room – group of members of parliament belonging to the same party, equivalent to parliamentary party (in British English) – in this case used to describe Malcolm Fraser’s coalition
Chicken wing = used to describe a tackle where one or both arms are pinned and the player is then usually thrown to the ground, unable to break their fall (Australian Rules Football)
battler – a socially–respected, hard–working Australian who is struggling to "make ends meet", because their income is only just enough to survive on; someone working hard and only just making a living – in this case a reference to the Australian voters who did not give Malcolm Fraser a mandate in December 1975.
wombat – somebody who eats, roots (has sex), shoots (ejaculates) and leaves (departs). A term to describe a selfish male. This is a clever play on words as roots, shoots and leaves are the actual parts of a plant that wombats might eat. In this case it’s an insult of Sir John Kerr and his behaviour during the constitutional crisis.
The original:
Once a jolly swagman camped by a billabong
Under the shade of a coolabah tree,
And he sang as he watched and waited 'til his billy boiled
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me"
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me"
And he sang as he watched and waited 'til his billy boiled,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me".
Down came a jumbuck to drink at that billabong,
Up jumped the swagman and grabbed him with glee,
And he sang as he shoved that jumbuck in his tucker bag,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me".
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me"
And he sang as he shoved that jumbuck in his tucker bag,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me".
Up rode the squatter, mounted on his thoroughbred,
Down came the troopers, one, two, three,
"Where's that jolly jumbuck you've got in your tucker bag?"
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me".
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me"
"Where's that jolly jumbuck you've got in your tucker bag?",
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me".
Up jumped the swagman and sprang into the billabong,
"You'll never take me alive", said he,
And his ghost may be heard as you pass by that billabong,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me".
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me"
And his ghost may be heard as you pass by that billabong,
"You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me."
"Oh, You'll come a-Waltzing Matilda, with me."
