Fraser’s late swipe at a man unable to defend himself
In an extraordinary attack on the memory of the late Governor-General Sir John Kerr, former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser claims the Governor-General telephoned him on the morning of 11 November 1975 before the then Prime Minister EG Whitlam saw the Governor-General to seek an early half Senate election.
The states were unlikely to offer their necessary co-operation in holding an early half Senate election and in any event the new senators would not take office for eight months. The Governor–General could not see this as a solution to the Senate’s withholding of of supply to the government.
Accordingly, he dismissed Mr. Whitlam on the ancient principle that no government may rule without supply being granted by Parliament. Shortly afterwards, the Governor-General commissioned the Leader of the Opposition Malcolm Fraser as caretaker Prime Minister pending an election on 10 December.
Malcolm Fraser claims Sir John Kerr telephoned him earlier that morning after a meeting between Prime Minister Whitlam and Mr. Fraser which had failed to resolve the political crisis resulting from the opposition holding the supply bills in the Senate pending the calling of an early election.
This claim is made in a new book by Malcolm Fraser and Margaret Simons, “Malcolm Fraser: The Political Memoirs”. Extracts are being published in The Australian and other News Limited newspapers. (These extracts are not accessible on the internet.)
The question must be asked why Mr. Fraser waited so long after the death of Sir John Kerr to make such a damaging claim. Sir John Kerr denied any such prior conversation took place.
Malcolm Fraser claims he was telephoned by the Governor-General at 9.55 am, about one hour before Mr. Whitlam was dismissed. He says he kept a signed note of the conversation, and that his principal private secretary, Dale Budd, remembers seeing this on Fraser’s desk later on November 11.”
Mr. Budd’s recollection is of course no evidence about the time of the conversation, which is crucial. The following question must necessarily be asked. Knowing this revelation, if true, would damage Sir John Kerr’s reputation, why has Malcolm Fraser waited so long to reveal this?
Mr. Fraser says that denying the conversation was a sign of weakness on the part of Sir John. “The are many signs of weakness in his character,” he says, softening the blow by adding “ and that is probably true of most of us.”
He continued:” It was an error of judgement and it was a weakness not to explain it how I’ve explained it.” Mr. Fraser does concede that Sir John Kerr thought the worst thing he could do in the eyes of history would be to involve The Queen in a constitutional crisis.
In the 1999 referendum, Malcolm Fraser made the extraordinary claim that had Australia been a republic, the 1975 political crisis would not have occurred. (He actually appeared with Gough Whitlam calling for a Yes vote. It is more likely that appearing together they increased the No vote.)
It is true that the political crisis would have been resolved under the 1999 republic, but not in a way which would have pleased Mr. Fraser. Under it, Mr. Whitlam would have been able to dismiss the President before he acted against the Prime Minister, or have claimed he had done so.
The reason is that the republican constitution which Malcolm Fraser inexplicably campaigned for would have allowed a prime minister to dismiss a president without notice, without reason and without any right to an appeal or effective review.
This was an appallingly dangerous provision, one unknown in any other republic. No one claiming to be interested in sound constitutional government and the need for checks and balances on political power could have supported it, but many did.
Malcolm Fraser says that in the conversation, Sir John asked him for confirmation of certain conditions if he were to be made Prime Minister. These were that he would immediately advise a double dissolution of both Houses of Parliament, run a caretaker administration, obtain supply straightaway, and guarantee not to pursue Gough Whitlam or the Labor ministers over the attempts to obtain foreign loans irregularly.
The question must be why did Malcolm Fraser wait so long to reveal this, and why did he reveal it at a time when the person most damaged would not be in a position to reply? In the extract published, Mr. Fraser does not explain this.
Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day
Get The Punch on Facebook
Read all about it
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
How the totally awesome weather in Australia recently is hurting retailers http://t.co/4dvDwDlNZG
The latest and greatest
Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…
I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…
In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…