1:00pm, Wednesday 1 April 2020
Senator the Hon Scott Ryan
President of the Senate
(check against delivery)
Thank you for the invitation to be involved in the launch of this third volume in this tremendous contribution to our political and social history by my friend David Kemp.
The Speaker Tony Smith and I had the privilege of participating in the Canberra launch of the first volume 18 months ago.
Back then I said David tells our story; the liberal story that created modern Australia, warts and all.
Well this third volume moves into that very space – the early years of the Commonwealth brought into being by those who shared liberal aspirations and values across the new nation, from urban and rural areas, with different cultural and economic backgrounds and experiences, and all the different perspective and sometimes clashes these bring.
Of course the great political clash amongst liberals of the era was the battle over free trade. And in this battle, Victoria has a special place.
But unlike in the first volume of this series, with Victoria post-Eureka being a uniquely positive force for liberalism, Victorian liberalism in this era is overshadowed by the power and consequences of protectionism.
The rise of the labour movement, especially the utopian sectional and authoritarian element that David describes in such detail, meant that the politics of protection became too hard to beat in the short term.
Victorian protectionism created a status quo that even ardent free traders realised could not be unwound in the new Commonwealth. Too many were dependent on patronage and favouritism despite these elements increasingly poisoning politics.
Victory for a domestic free market inside the Commonwealth was hard won, but the battle for international free trade policy became increasingly insurmountable.
And not just because of domestic politics.
In a lesson Australia has repeatedly learnt, a trading nation is also subject to the world it lives in – and then as now, storm clouds were gathering against free trade.
I found David’s outline of how little interest in the tariff bills Deakin seemed to show in the contests in the early Commonwealth Parliament particularly interesting.
For a man so identified with protection, he wasn’t at its thrusting core as it was legislated into existence for the new nation. Is this partly explained by his conversion to protection by Syme? Or was it a compromise the man made to deliver his other priorities. If so, he wouldn’t be the first politician to do so. David is far more qualified than anyone else to answer these questions.
One of the particular gems of this book is its outline of Joseph Cook.
Even amongst the relatively poor knowledge of the political history of our early years Joseph Cook seems relatively forgotten.
I note he is also the only former Prime Minister not to have an electorate named after him, the current seat of Cook occupied by the Prime Minister being named after that Lt James who sighted this land from the Endeavour 250 years ago.
Joseph Cook seemed to me to encapsulate some of the challenges of the liberals of the era: uncomfortable with what we might now describe as race-baiting undertaken by other leaders, notably the Labor Party; an instinctive free-trader but conscious of the power of vested interests that entrenched protectionism; and particularly motivated by the offensiveness of preferences and discriminations amongst citizens that the labour movement and its political representatives demanded.
Upon winning the narrowest of elections he faced a Senate as hostile as any commonwealth government has ever faced, with Labor’s explicit objective of crippling the government.
Given it was only a handful of years earlier in the United Kingdom that the Commons had faced down the Lords and broken its power over financial matters, Cook’s liberal streak is illustrated by comparing Hughes and Labor to Tory oligarchs, as Labor made explicit that the Senate would be used to obstruct.
This is another reminder that no one likes losing power, particularly sectional interests.
And also a reminder that later Labor claims of Senate obstructionism were utterly opportunistic.
While I find the portrait of Cook fascinating as I can’t claim to know him, and I think his battles encapsulate many of the liberal challenges of the era, I find the Hughes portrait more challenging.
I come at Hughes as a visceral opponent of conscription, and conscious that his campaigns around that issue created social scars along religious lines that lingered for decades.
I don’t have time to go into this man’s extraordinary career here, but as anyone with an understanding of Australian political history has an opinion on Hughes, this is well worth reading as no matter one’s initial opinion, it will be challenged, and you will be forced to reconsider.
This volume will also bring the politically informed a real sense of déjà vu: as it outlines how so many of the seemingly eternal contests of Australian politics were set in the early years.
Marxist utopianism may have declined in influence, but state-driven utopianism without the overtly authoritarian streak remains in those who seek a perfect world created by politicians or, at least as often, ‘experts’.
In the early years it was the proposal for independent experts to assign protection levels, now we see it in proposals for a reserve bank-like climate authority to determine national policy where political contests don’t result in a desired answer.
The early years of the Commonwealth also illustrated he foundational role of the pledge and binding caucus, and the external control of one side of politics, seeing elected members as delegates of a sectional interest as opposed to representatives of the people and their common interests.
It not only forced out founding members of the labour movement, but it is inevitable that when one side of politics adopts these measures, it impacts how the contest of politics itself is conducted, as well as its primary competitor. This malign influence continues to exist today, where in my view the binding caucus unnecessarily limits and constrains the parliament.
And finally, the evolving labour party into an authoritarian and hostile force within the new democracy saw the artificial conflation of the union movement with workers.
In the words of Hughes’ biographer David uses “The new Labour Party was to be the party of the Trades Hall and union official, not the shearing shed and shop floor.” Off the top of my head it’s difficult to think of a single identifiable issue in Australian politics that has been contested as consistently as this.
Given the circumstances if this afternoon’s event, one cannot help but try to draw lessons from the challenges David outlines, to those we face now, and will undoubtedly do for the foreseeable future.
In the activities of the state, inertia matters. This is but one illustration of the battles liberals faced.
Following the 1890s depression, the rise of militant unionism and the purging of liberal voices from within the labour movement and then the social and human catastrophe of the first world war, there were clamours for state action that threatened the new liberal, democratic state.
Emergency measures, such as those introduced during wartime, can create a new status quo for peacetime as well – not just in granting officials powers, but also in expectations and of the people, of groups within the community and the degree of state control that will be tolerated. Protection and preferment create political constituencies for temporary measures to become more permanent.
Today we are living through an era of unprecedented state activity as well, completely unforeseen in both economic terms as well as laws governing personal and private behaviour.
So at some point, liberals will need to turn our minds to what comes next – knowing some may seek to maintain a larger state role after the crisis passes.
In conclusion, while a reader of this volume would benefit enormously from commencing with Land Of Dreams and A Free Country, it can also be read by those with a specific interest in the early years of our Federation.
As a source of material and reference to other figures and collections, it is more comprehensive than anything else I have come across.
It now gives me great pleasure to introduce my friend David Kemp.
And I will commence with a short thank you, as to be mentioned by David in his acknowledgements is quite an honour.
David’s extraordinary contribution to Australian liberalism covers every possible field from education, to the Liberal Party as its vehicle, to serving in high public office, as well as being a friend and mentor to many of us who have followed.
However, this extraordinary work will outlast all of us, and it is a pleasure to both congratulate him and introduce him today as we launch this third volume.
[ENDS]