Speaker 1: Robert.
Speaker 2: Tomorrow marks fifty years since this infamous moment when a
Speaker 2: clearly nervous spokesperson for the Governor General stood on the
Speaker 2: steps to Parliament House and announced that Gough Whitlam had
Speaker 2: been dismissed.
Speaker 1: Why his Excellency's commanded, Malcolm Fraser pray, Minister John Arker,
Speaker 1: Governor General, God.
Speaker 2: Save the Queen. But what happened that day in nineteen
Speaker 2: seventy five wasn't just an unprecedented political crisis. It was
Speaker 2: a warning one that exposed the fagility of our constitution
Speaker 2: and the lingering power of assistant design to serve the
Speaker 2: monarchy ahead of the people.
Speaker 1: Well, may we say, God save the Queen?
Speaker 3: Well cause nothing well say with the Governor General.
Speaker 2: Since then, nothing has changed to stop this from happening again.
Speaker 2: I'm Daniel James, and you're listening to seven.
Speaker 4: AM today Press Gallery veteran Paul bon Jorno what the
Speaker 4: dismissal revealed about Australia's democratic foundations and why he says
Speaker 4: we need to become a republic to stop history repeating.
Speaker 2: It's Monday, November ten. Paul, where were you when yous
Speaker 2: broke that Whitlam had been dismissed.
Speaker 4: Well.
Speaker 1: I was in Woongong, New South Wales working for wind
Speaker 1: Television News and we just completed an interview for a
Speaker 1: news item that night in fairy Meadow was the suburb
Speaker 1: I remember it world And we just got back into
Speaker 1: the news car and I turned the radio on. It
Speaker 1: must have been about three o'clock and the lead story
Speaker 1: was that the Governor General had sacked the Prime Minister,
Speaker 1: Gough Whitlam.
Speaker 3: What a day it's been in Except for the most
Speaker 3: hardened of political journalists, it's been a mind bending experience.
Speaker 1: Now we were taken aback, although there had been speculation,
Speaker 1: you know, for a week or so that maybe this
Speaker 1: could happen, because the newspapers, particularly the Australian, but also
Speaker 1: the leader of the Opposition, Malcolm Fraser, were calling for
Speaker 1: the Governor General to act and to end the political
Speaker 1: crisis that was happening due to the fact that the
Speaker 1: opposition in the Senate was blocking the supply bills for
Speaker 1: the government.
Speaker 3: I asked the Prime Minister for the second time whether
Speaker 3: he and his government would resign for the second time.
Speaker 3: He replied that he would not. The opposition now has
Speaker 3: no choice. We will use the power vested in us
Speaker 3: by the Constitution and delay the passage of the government's
Speaker 3: money bills through the Senate until the Parliament goes to
Speaker 3: the people.
Speaker 2: And in the days that followed you actually interviewed with
Speaker 2: them about what had hun folded. Can you tell me
Speaker 2: about that interaction that interview.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, Whitlam had agreed while he was Prime Minister
Speaker 1: to turn up to a multicultural event in the Woollongong
Speaker 1: Town Hall on the Saturday night and he stuck to
Speaker 1: this appointment. And the news editor who said you better
Speaker 1: take a crew and see if you can nab Whitlam.
Speaker 1: So we went over to the Woollongong Town Hall and
Speaker 1: only by the time we got there there was an
Speaker 1: ABC four Corners set up with Kerry O'Brien being the reporter,
Speaker 1: and they'd organized to do a live interview into four Corners,
Speaker 1: which in those days went to air on Saturday night.
Speaker 1: So while they were setting all that up, I went
Speaker 1: up to Whitlam and I said, mister Whitlam, I'm from
Speaker 1: the local TV news. Can we do a quick interview
Speaker 1: with you after mister O'Brien has finished with you, And
Speaker 1: he said certainly, And he asked me my name, and
Speaker 1: I told him, and he said, ah, Italian, and I
Speaker 1: nodded my head. I didn't say see, I could have anyway.
Speaker 1: When the interview began, he started off and he said,
Speaker 1: you know, there has been a coup data or in
Speaker 1: Italian a colpa Dustato, and then he went on to
Speaker 1: smell out that in his view, Sir John Kerr had
Speaker 1: not only acted improperly, but that he'd used powers that
Speaker 1: were at best moot, and that certainly Labor didn't believe
Speaker 1: existed any longer. So in Whitlam's mind, and in the
Speaker 1: mind of course of many, this was the equivalent of
Speaker 1: a violent, although non bloody, change of government.
Speaker 2: The coup Data had succeeded, the punch had come off,
Speaker 2: so Whitlam called it a coup. How was it that
Speaker 2: dismissal was able to happen in the first place.
Speaker 1: Well, a dismissal was able to happen in the first
Speaker 1: place due to the fact that we share the same
Speaker 1: constitutional arrangements as what they call a constitutional monarchy. And
Speaker 1: that means that the monarch who is the head of
Speaker 1: state or indeed her depth or representative in Australia, acts
Speaker 1: on the advice of their prime Minister, and the legitimacy
Speaker 1: of the government is established in the lower house of
Speaker 1: Parliament in our case the House of Representatives, and the
Speaker 1: leader who has the confidence of the House, if not
Speaker 1: a majority, forms government and this is then recognized by
Speaker 1: the Head of State. But in our system the Senate
Speaker 1: can block crucial money bills, something that can't happen in Westminster.
Speaker 1: They knocked that power out of the House of Lords
Speaker 1: at the beginning of the twentieth century. So Malcolm Fraser
Speaker 1: and his leader in the Senate, the toe cutter, they
Speaker 1: used to call him Reg Withers, they decided to play
Speaker 1: hard ball after a year, it has to be said
Speaker 1: of political shambles coming from the Whitlam government, and they said,
Speaker 1: unless Whitlam calls an election, supply will be blocked.
Speaker 2: The Senate cannot.
Speaker 3: Determine who the government shall be.
Speaker 1: Now, Whitlam was trying to stare them down in the
Speaker 1: Senate and it was dragging on. But there is evidence
Speaker 1: to say that it was at least two or three
Speaker 1: weeks before the money actually ran out, and Whitlam was
Speaker 1: under the understanding he had political intelligence to say that
Speaker 1: Fraser couldn't hold his troops and at least two would abstain.
Speaker 1: We now know subsequently from the archives five Liberal senators
Speaker 1: said they wouldn't block supply. So we now know with
Speaker 1: hindsight that Fraser, in pushing the Governor General to intervene,
Speaker 1: did so peremptorily and before the crisis of the money
Speaker 1: not being available had actually happened. And we also know
Speaker 1: during the political standoff in the Senate, Fraser had his
Speaker 1: shadow Attorney General write and opinion that said that the
Speaker 1: Governor General must sack the Prime Minister. When Whitler mask
Speaker 1: Kerr about it, Kerr said, according to Whitlam, and he
Speaker 1: told others this, including Paul Keating, that Kerr said bullshit.
Speaker 1: So that led Whitlam to believe that indeed Kerr was
Speaker 1: on the government side rather than the opposition side. Whitlam
Speaker 1: is on the record of saying Kerr won't sack me.
Speaker 1: One quote was he hasn't got the guts. Another quote
Speaker 1: was he's more sympathetic to us. So all of those
Speaker 1: assessments from Whitlam were as history chose us completely wrong.
Speaker 2: Coming up, If Albanez he wants Australia to become a republic,
Speaker 2: why isn't he holding a referendum. Paul, it's been fifty
Speaker 2: years since the dismissal. Why do you think this particular
Speaker 2: moment in our political history still resonates so strongly today.
Speaker 1: It's unique in our democratic history. That's for starters. But
Speaker 1: why it resonates today is that Kerr's ability to literally
Speaker 1: trash the foundational conventions of a constitutional monarchy still go unchecked.
Speaker 1: There are no safeguards in our constitution or anything we
Speaker 1: have done since nineteen seventy five to prevent a dismissal
Speaker 1: happening again. Kerr has set the precedent and it seems
Speaker 1: that things that could not happen in Britain can now
Speaker 1: happen in Australia, where our system, at the whim of
Speaker 1: a tyrant, literally can be turned on its head.
Speaker 2: Paul. Anthony Alberanezi has ruled out a referendum on the
Speaker 2: Republic in this term. Given what we've just heard about
Speaker 2: the unresolved problems at the heart of the constitution. How
Speaker 2: does he justify that?
Speaker 1: Well, he just advised in two ways. One, in an
Speaker 1: interview he gave on Insiders after he saw the King
Speaker 1: at Balmoral, he said we wanted to hold one referendum
Speaker 1: while I was Prime minister, and we did.
Speaker 2: That, and that's it. We did that, so one referendum
Speaker 2: the entire time you're Prime minister. We did that, and
Speaker 2: I think we're concentrating.
Speaker 1: On Interestingly enough, the evaded answering David Spear's next question
Speaker 1: on whether that meant forever while he remained Prime minister. Now,
Speaker 1: I checked this out and a source close to the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister and people in the Prime Minister's office made
Speaker 1: clear to me that Alberonizi has not ruled out revisiting
Speaker 1: these issues while he's Prime minister. He's ruled it out
Speaker 1: for this term, and whether he revisits it in another
Speaker 1: term in the next term is a decision that has
Speaker 1: not yet been made.
Speaker 2: What do you think becoming a republic would mean for Australia,
Speaker 2: Paul Well.
Speaker 1: In the first instance, it would show that Australia had
Speaker 1: finally grown out of its colonial past, that it was
Speaker 1: now a self respecting, independent, sovereign state with its own rules,
Speaker 1: its own head of state, and its own ability to
Speaker 1: determine the direction that it wants to take constitutionally, and
Speaker 1: not have the head of state of what is now
Speaker 1: a foreign power, namely Great Britain be able to interfere
Speaker 1: in such an egregious way as we saw in the
Speaker 1: lead up to the dismissal fifty years ago.
Speaker 2: In the meantime, then what else could be done to
Speaker 2: stop something like nineteen seventy five happening all over again.
Speaker 1: Well, there are a number of issues in the Constitution
Speaker 1: that do need addressing, but primarily the so called reserve
Speaker 1: powers need to be codified. We need a referendum that
Speaker 1: either codifies it, lays down strict rules how they can
Speaker 1: be used, or a referendum to say they no longer
Speaker 1: exist in that way. But also I think we definitely
Speaker 1: do need a broader conversation on renovating the Constitution and
Speaker 1: in fact making sure that an Australian can be a
Speaker 1: head of state and not someone from a British family
Speaker 1: of a particular religious belief.
Speaker 2: And finally, Paul, it's been half a century. How is
Speaker 2: history judged to three main players in the dismissal Kerr,
Speaker 2: Fraser and Whitlam.
Speaker 1: Well, the further away we get from nineteen seventy five,
Speaker 1: the worst that Kerr looks, and one word sums up
Speaker 1: Kerr deceit. People get confused, They think the fact that
Speaker 1: Fraser then won the subsequent election in a landslide gave
Speaker 1: the tick to Kerr. Well, no it didn't, because during
Speaker 1: the crisis, public opinion was against Fraser. It was only
Speaker 1: after that crisis was settled that the voters went back
Speaker 1: to the point that the Whitlam government had during that
Speaker 1: year performed very poorly and a hostile media never let
Speaker 1: them off the hook. And the other point to make
Speaker 1: is that Kerr, by making Fraser the Prime Minister, immediately
Speaker 1: nobbled Whitlam. So Kerr comes out of it badly when
Speaker 1: it comes to Fraser. Well, I think we can listen
Speaker 1: to what Whitlam said about Fraser. He said, Fraser was
Speaker 1: my opponent. He did what oppositions do in our system,
Speaker 1: and he never deceived me. I always knew he was
Speaker 1: trying to knock me off and going for it. And
Speaker 1: as we know, the two men actually became friends and
Speaker 1: allies calling for an Australian head of state back in
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety nine. And as for Whitlam, well, Whitlam is
Speaker 1: a giant in Australian history for what he achieved in
Speaker 1: dragging Australia into the contemporary world on so many issues.
Speaker 1: But he's also a flawed giant. His judgment of people
Speaker 1: and his handling of the broader political issues during his
Speaker 1: prime ministership went a long way to make him extremely
Speaker 1: vulnerable to the political tactics of Fraser. One commentator said
Speaker 1: of Fraser, he actually rang rings around Whitlam when it
Speaker 1: came to the crucial and final political crisis.
Speaker 2: Paul, thank you so much for your time at Rivederci.
Speaker 1: Out of Adecci, Daniel Tanti Belle cause so many beautiful
Speaker 1: things to you and your family.
Speaker 2: Also in the news, a neo Nazi rally outside New
Speaker 2: South Wales Parliament on Saturday was allowed to go ahead
Speaker 2: by police. Organizers from the White Australia Group notified police
Speaker 2: more than a week ago about their intention to hold
Speaker 2: the protest and nothing was done to stop them. Police
Speaker 2: Commissioner Mal Lanyon has confirmed. Commissioner Lanyon said he was
Speaker 2: not personally aware that the protest would be taking place
Speaker 2: and therefore had not alerted the government. He confirmed a
Speaker 2: review would now be undertaken to investigate what he described
Speaker 2: as a communication error, and the coalition's Housing spokesperson and
Speaker 2: leading moderate Andrew Bragg says he will quit the front
Speaker 2: bench if the coalition walks away from net zero. Bragg,
Speaker 2: who was a key supporter of Susan Lee, said getting
Speaker 2: rid of net zero would make it impossible to stay
Speaker 2: in the Paris Agreement. The right of the Party are
Speaker 2: pushing for any reference to net zero to be removed
Speaker 2: from the Liberal Party's climate policies when the Party Room
Speaker 2: meets this Wednesday. I'm Daniel James. This is seven am.
Speaker 2: Thanks for listening.