Freedom of Speech and Freedom From Bureaucracy

Manawatu Times, Volume 69, Issue 61, 15 March 1944, Page 5

Freedom of Speech and Freedom From Bureaucracy

(By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright.) (Special Australian Correspondent.) Received Tuesday 6.5 p.m. SYDNEY, March 14. The insertion in the Commonwealth Wider Powers Bill of guarantees of freedom of speech and religion and freedom from bureaucracy are considered by Australian political observers to have increased tne Federal Government’s chances of success at the referendum. Earlier a success for the referendum had been regarded as a dismal hope. The declaration of the Government’s attitude towards a postwar continuation of wartime restrictions and regulations is now being sougno. It is wideiy Delieved that an acceptaole declaration of Government policy on this issue would ensure the referendum’s success. The Wider Powers Bill will be before the Federal Parliament again this week. “Government supporters fears of a referendum defeat nave sprung noc from a doubt that the public will realise the need for the fourteen powers sought, but from evidence of the public's distrust of the policies and ambitions of some of the bureaucrats who might administer the nevV powers,” writes the bydney Morning xieraid ’ s political correspondent. 44 it is becoming clear that only a clearcut pronouncement of the Government’s attitude to a continuance after the war of wartime control ana restrictions can improve the prospects of tne Commonwealth obtaining the postwar powers that are needeu. There has been mounting evidence from all over Australia that all the major classes of public opinion regaru the sweeping away of wartime controls and restrictions as a primary obligation on whatever Common wealth Government is in power when peace returns.” The correspondent points out that there have been snarp divergencies in recent public statements made by such Government authorities as Pro lessor Copland, economic consultant to the Prime Minister, and by Mr Dedman, Minister for War Organisa tion. While Mr. Dedman emphasised that the Government wished to end wartime restrictions as speedily as possible and to give scope to individual enterprise, Professor Copland suggested that many permanent controls would have to be established. These included: (1) Continuing high taxation; (2) rationing; (3) maximum as well as minimum wages; (4) Government control of some materials and their distribution; (5) Government control of land values; (6) nationalisation of such “monopolies as coal, banking, insurance, broadcasting, airways and shipping. “Such confusing and contradictory statements,” says the Herald writer, “demand a clear declaration of Government policy.” Other political observers believe that Mr. Curtin’s immense political prestige plus the growing unpopularity of certain State Governments will ensure success for the referendum. The political correspondent oi the Sydney Daily Telegraph assesses the present line-up of States in favour of transfer of additional powers to the Commonwealth as' New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria, certain supporters; South Australia and Western Australia, probable supporters, and Tasmania a possible supporter.