BITTER CAMPAIGN IN AUSTRALIA

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 230, 26 June 1944, Page 4

BITTER CAMPAIGN IN AUSTRALIA

Wider Powers Referendum STRONG OPPOSITION TO CHANGES

(By Telegraph.—Press Assn. —Copyright.) (Special Australian Correspondent.) (Received June 25, 9.15 p.m.)

SYDNEY, June 25. With the date for the Commonwealth's wider powers referendum only eight weeks away, a campaign of increasing bitterness is being waged. Proposed sweeping changes in the Australian constitution are being strongly opposed as well as being strongly advocated. Chief protagonist for the “yes” case is its author, the Federal Attorney-General, Dr. Evatt, who has been campaigning in Western Australia—that part of Australia traditionally least in favour of centralized Government. The Opposition parties’ leaders, Mr. Menzies of the United Australia Party, and Mr. Fadden, of the Country Party, have both talked of “sinister motives” behind the referendum.

A motion by Mr. Fadden at the Queensland conference of the Country Party, described it as the “first step” in an attempt to effect a change in Australia to a form of society which was aptly described by Mr. Churchill as one in which “nobody counts for anything except the politician and official, and where enterprise gains no reward and thrift no privileges.” In Perth Dr. Evatt hit hack attacking the arbitrary right to “fire,” which he declared was a characteristic of the social system against which Labour must fight and win. He claimed that “powerful interests” were spending a lot of money to defeat the referendum because they wanted a reserve of unemployed after the war so that the workers’ standards could be kept down. “New jobs must be found for half Australia’s working population after the war,” said Dr. Evatt. “The normal working population of Australia is about 3,000,000, but in the last five years there < have been 900,000 enlistments in all branches of the services, while another 600,000 have transferred to essential war jobs.” The placing of these 1,500,000 people in permanent peacetime employment was given by Dr. Evatt as a main reason why the Federal Government is seeking incresaed powers. Opposition Arguments.

An organization known as the Australian Constitutional League, with headquarters in Sydney, has been formed to urge the rejection of the referendum proposals. It has expressed alarm at “increasing interference with the rights' of the individual." A parallel view has been stated by the “Sydney Morning Herald,” which editorially points to “the extent to Which emergency powers vested in the Commonwealth have been abused.” and adds, “In the light of such revelations it is no longer sufficient for the Government to show that the Commonwealth is theoretically entitled to greatly enlarged powers. Its case in the abstract may be watertight. What it has now to prove is that all the powers sought are absolutely necessary on practical grounds, and, second, that no semblance of the existing system of bureaucratic regimentation and centralization will be perpetuated by means of them.” Ignored by referendum disputants are the 10,000 citizens of the Federal capital. Canberra, who will .not receive a vote in the wider powers ballot on August 19. They will, on that day, hold their own “referendum” with . ballot papers asking the question, “Do you want a Federal member for Canberra.” Sponsors are more confident of a “Yes” answer in their referendum than are champions of increased post-war powers for the Federal Government.