BIG TALK: The Whitlam Dismissal PART TWO

Before we start today's episode, we would like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which we're recording today, the Gadigal people, and pay our respects to elders past and present. Big talk deep dives into the big news stories that you've heard of, but you don't know all the serious and salacious details about. We revisit the most shocking headlines of the past that have shaped the world we know today. And today we're looking at Goff Whitlam's dismissal part two.

First, let's do a recap of everything we learned last week because this is probably one of the most information heavy ones we've ever done. So we first looked into Goff's early life. He was born in 1916. He grew up moving around. His father was in a public service job, eventually settling in Canberra at eleven years old. He studied arts and law at Sydney Uni where he edited magazines, debated and reportedly always carried the confidence of someone

Destined for a national leadership position. And then in World War II, he enlisted in the Air Force, and the war really pushed him towards politics. When on leave he campaigned for the referendum, then formally joined the Labour Party, and he finally won the seat of Werywat.

His work on the late nineteen fifties Constitutional Review Committee was pivotal. It convinced him Australia's system was outdated and in need of major reform. That belief shaped his rise to deputy leader in nineteen sixty and leader of the Labour Party in nineteen sixty seven. And ultimately the transformative and turbulent agenda he'd pursue as Prime Minister. At this time Australia had been under coalition rule for an entire generation, twenty three years.

Australia wanted something new, especially given the backdrop the Vietnam protests, women's liberation, and multicultural change. Whitlam seized on that need in the It's Time campaign, which was truly genius marketing and the first When elected, he got to work literally straight away. He passed more than 500 bills in his first three years, a major record.

But these sweeping social and economic changes also collided with the global nineteen seventy three oil shock, soaring inflation and wage blowing. Then his own economic bold moves like twenty-five percent tariff cuts, which meant although he modernized Australia in ways we still very much feel today, he was hammered for being financially reckless. As such, Whitlam's huge reform agenda was continually blocked by the opposition controlled Senate, which refused six major bills twice.

Creating a deadlock in Parliament and forcing a double dissolution election, Whitlam scraped back into government a very close call, allowing him to finally pass the block bills. But the state of play is now very fragile and followed by A series of even more chaotic, extraordinary events. And that's where we're at.

It's a big one. It's a good one. It is. Yeah. It is. I'm actually I'm very excited to get in. Sometimes I feel with Big Talk the first part is like The setup. Yeah. Well all a lot of setup but also will be the bulk of the story. Yeah. Whereas this one genuinely feels like there's a part one, part two, which is really helpful. But Absolutely. There is so much in it. Um but yeah, do you wanna Yeah take us take it away. Okay. So

Okay, yes, so Whitlam wins again in 74, but then everything seems to fall apart in 1975. And pretty much everything that could go wrong does go wrong. Politically, economically, constitutionally, personally. As we discussed already, the Whitlam government entered nineteen seventy five with a hostile Senate, a shaky economy, internal scandals, and opponents who can smell blood in the water.

Although Whitlam had won two elections, he still never controlled the Senate, which left his government constantly vulnerable. So the opposition could block or delay legislation, stall critical votes, and essentially jam the parliament. By nineteen seventy five, with Malcolm Fraser now opposition leader, the Senate obstruction intensified dramatically. The government could govern the House, but it could not govern the country without the Senate letting bills pass.

And this hostile upper house becomes the stage for the greatest constitutional standoff in our history. Does this get you all excited when you're Look at me? I'm like literally like oh my g this is this is Nerd Super Bowl like everything here that we do at this at this podcast. So pretty much the crux is He doesn't have the Senate on board and they hate him. So they keep just saying no to everything. Yeah. Was that what it was always like for him, the Senate blocking everything?

Pretty much from day one, because Whitlam never had a Senate majority, which is unusual for a government elected with such huge public momentum. Again, he didn't have a huge majority in the House of Reps either, but to have this clear blocking where the Senate became the opposition's clear weapon was different. Malcolm Fraser, the opposition leader, essentially decided that although they couldn't beat Whitlam in the House, they could in the Senate.

This got so fucking out of hand as a weapon that the Senate and really the opposition then do the unthinkable, they refuse to pass the supply bills that fund the entire government. Basically the budget. So they block the budget. They block the budget. And up until then the Senate had never blocked supply. It was a long standing convention, a gentleman's agreement, if you will, that the elected government in the House had the right to its budget. Well that makes sense because

That's everything you've campaigned for. Well and also that's what you've been elected to do exactly. It's also clever because they know that blocking everything and stopping everything just makes Whitlam look like an incapable, incompetent leader when it's actually the opposition doing this. 'Cause to be blocking supply.

at a time of economic crisis when people are already struggling and stressed is all right. Who would cop the blame? But also, even though this is kind of a convention that this was allowed, like the gentleman's rule, conventions aren't laws. And so in nineteen seventy five the opposition thinks, fuck it, play on, let's do this.

Can you put this in a little more context for us though? I keep hearing about the loans effect. Yeah, the loans affair is Huge. The Lones Affair. Which is i it should get a better name if it's so huge. I know, it's such a boring sounding name. And then the Lones Affair. Oh my god, please explain the Lones Affair. This was like the unraveling of Willem. Yes. So between nineteen seventy-four and nineteen seventy five. Whitlam's minister for minerals and energy was a guy called Raffles.

Now, Rex took it upon himself to try and secure a massive loan. When I say massive, I mean US four billion dollars from Middle Eastern finances to fund national development. But Rex, instead of using the treasura the the Reserve Bank or any other normal parliamentary channels. Decided to turn to a mysterious Pakistani financer. On his own accord and the whole plan bypassed the usual processes. And it was secretive and it was unconventional and it broke every single rule.

legal, political, financial, cultural, just about how a government should like how a government was supposed to borrow money. Safe to assume that Rex was acting because he wanted the loan fast and the usual systems are slow and are heavily regulated, but that is by design. When the news broke that he had done this, it made major headlines and

On reflection, I think that's for a multitude of reasons. One, it looked desperate. I mean, if you're going outside the banking system to borrow US four billion, it implies that something is seriously wrong with your finances and credibility. Number two, it looked like the government didn't trust their own institutions. Three, four billion is just an eye watering number. Watering number now. Yeah.

Four, Whitlam looked bad. Even if Whitlam wasn't involved in the details, it gave the opposition the line that they'd been waiting for, that Whitlam is reckless and occ economically unstable, and how could he have not known about it? Really, Rex misled the government and parliament, and so Whitlam end up sacking both Jim Kahns, the treasurer, and Rex. Not a good look to have to sack your own team like that.

Basically, this whole drama became the political fuel that Malcolm Fraser needed to justify blocking the supply. Wait, also around this time. Didn't the Senate numbers also change somehow? Like something about a dodgy appointment? Yeah, uh not dodgy necessarily, but absolutely devastating for Whitland. The Senate, the two Senate vacancies in 1975 completely rewired the balance because state premiers broke a core contract. Convention.

So traditionally, if a senator from a party resigns or dies, the state premier appoints a replacement from the same party, right? But in nineteen seventy-five, New South Wales Premier Tom Lewis ignored the Labour's nominee and appointed an independent, Cleaver Bunton. When Labour Senator Lyon Lionel Murphy joined the High Court. Queensland premier of the time went even further. Joe Belke Peterson, who's one of the most corrupt

and controversial figures in Queensland political history. And I love that you know that. I must know. I went to Queensland it's a huge deal, right? When Labour Senator Bert Millener died Joe refused Labour's pick and instead appointed a conservative, Albert Fields, who Labour then disowned entirely. This is m can you imagine if this happened today? No, th that like that is crazy. So overnight the Senate tilted against Whitlam even further.

And I think these like these appointments weren't illegal, but they did blow up a century old convention and that breach is what then allowed the Senate to block supply later that year. So I think that's why that's that's why that's an important 'Cause it's breaking two major conventions. A don't block the supply and b don't do that to senators. Okay.

But I wanna ask you what actually happened in the nineteen seventy five with the supply block. Like how did we actually get to this crisis point? Yes, we have to go back. So in October of nineteen seventy five, Malcolm Fraser instructed the Senate to block supply, i.e. the budget, which is a huge This means no budget, no money for the public service, no salaries, no government programs, and no ability for the government to function.

It's like the US. Yes, that's what I mean. I love big talks because there's so many points which you go, aha, that's unfortunately a light bulb. The aim of the game really for Fraser was to shut down, to force Whitlam to call an election.

Right? Whitlam refused. He argued that the government still had the confidence of the House, the chamber that actually chooses the PM, and that the Senate had no democratic mandate to withhold supply, and that blocking supply violated the long-standing conventions of a responsible government. This created a constitutional deadlock unlike anything Australia had ever seen.

This is where the Governor General comes into it. A key player. Uh yes, of course. And it's so funny'cause like now we think of the G G who is like the director. to the crown as like a quite an irrelevant figure in Australian politics, but we got need to go back because this is where the story becomes surreal. At the time it's Sir John Kerr. Who is supposed to be politically neutral and again even then largely ceremonial?

But at this time, John Kerr was considering removing Whitlam as Prime Minister. Which Whitlam had no idea about. He's not a good idea. Whitlam believed they were Whitlam believed they were negotiating in good faith. He believed that this was a good faith discussion. So Whitlam proposed a compromise, a half Senate election which would refresh the upper house without ending the government in the lower one. But it was too late because John Kerr had already made his move.

Now we're at the dismissal. Whoa, we finally got there. Probably the most controversial day in Australian political history. So on November 11, 1975, the Governor-General summoned Whitlam to the government. Completely unsuspecting, Whitlam believed they were just finalising arrangements of the half Senate election. Instead, Whitlam was handed a letter dismissing him as Prime Minister.

Within minutes, the Governor General then appointed Malcolm Fraser as the caretaker prime minister on the condition that Malcolm Fraser could secure the supply and call an election. Little snake. Fraser was absolutely able to pass the supply immediately because all of the liberal seats, so all of his seats got the tip off that Whitlam had been sacked.

And so they all knew to suddenly vote yes, but nobody told the Labour seats that Whitlam had been sacked, so they also voted yes. Because they thought that the supply was finally everyone was agreeing. Yeah. So then Suddenly it looks like Malcolm Fraser was able to fix the supply and get a hundred percent vote. That's so snaky. So Meanwhile, Diva's down. Divas diva is down. Now, a prime minister had obviously never been removed by a governor.

This was completely unheard of. I guess like and we we already know about a lot of this, but was this all because of politics? Like what were the other pressures that we may not even have crossed?

I think the big takeaway researching all of this is that Goth Whitlam was in the eye of a bit of a perfect storm. Australia in 1975 still had the high inflation, rising unemployment, global economic chaos from the oil shock.

Ministerial res resignations, Labour infighting and now of course the loans affair. And the opposition used all of this to frame Whitlam's government as chaotic and incompetent, and it was really easy to do so and so the public mood So The dismissal wasn't caused by one thing, but it was the ambiguity in the constitution being utilized. economic instability, broken conventions, personal rivals rivalries, and now the Governor General who believed they had a personal duty to intervene.

Can we talk more also about what we mean when we say ambiguity of the constitution and like these broken conventions? Well it's interesting because Australia's constitution is actually incredibly vague about the Prime Minister. It doesn't even mention the office of Prime Minister by name. Most people won't know that. That is true. Yeah. But technically, according to the Parliamentary Education Office, a Prime Minister can leave office in only a few ways.

One, their party loses an election, obviously. Two, their party is replaced their their party replaced them as leader. Three, they lose the confidence of the House of Representatives, or four, the Governor General sacks them, using reserve. Okay, reserve powers is crucial here. Yeah. Are these written? No, of course not. That would make way too much sense. So the reserve powers are not in the Constitution. They're conventions inherited from the crown only to be used in exceptional circumstances.

But conventions also say that these powers should only be used if the PM if the Prime Minister loses confidence off the House, fails to obtain supply, or violates the law. So although yes there was clearly an issue with passing supply, but there was no clear rule for what to do when the government had confidence in the House.

But the Senate, which Whitlam did not control, refused to ply. That was a grey area'cause it's not like he had lost confidence he had no control over the Senate. Also, just to recap before the dismissal, this was the state of play. The House of Reps, majority Labour, fully behind Whitlam, the Senate, controlled by the opposition, plus two anti Labour appointees, thanks to convention breaking appointments in New South Wales and Queensland.

Supply bills stuck in the Senate, deliberately blocked, government funds running low, Malcolm Fraser pushing the Governor General to intervene. And in the middle sat the Governor General holding powers that nobody ever expected him to use. And as days kind of ticked by, public servants were facing the possibility of not being paid and essential services were at risk of being shut down. And because conventions, not laws, govern the PM Governor General relationship.

there was no rule book for for what Kerr should do and Whitlam obviously wanted to refresh the Senate, but Fraser was like, Let's get rid of Whitlam. You must act if he can't pass apply. Very con he's getting conflicting messages. Ultimately the government general backed in Malcolm Fraser.

Many legal scholars do argue that Kerr's actions were within his constitutional rights, but politically indefensible. Yeah, this is the thing. It's not really about whether he could utilize the powers in my mind. Yeah, it was just the principle of it. It's also like Australia at this point is a an increasingly independent nation.

And the idea that our ceremonial role that is is the highest in the country, but is really just a front-facing, public-facing role connecting us to the crown, would step in and do this. Like that could never, ever happen to me. Also, others contend that Kerr acted correctly to prevent a financial crisis when the government could not secure supply.

Actually, additionally worth noting as well, there was a release of the palace letters in 2020 which revealed that Kerr did not seek nor receive direct instruction from the Queen. Though he had kept her advisors informed of what his intentions were here. We'll come back to that. Yeah. So Whitlam is dismissed. What happens next? Like how did the country react?

Pew a shock. As we said, the the Australian Prime Minister had never been removed by a Governor General, not once, not even close. And suddenly, without real warning, Whitlam, our elected official, was out, and Fraser was in as caretaker, and the entire country was trying to process. What had just happened? As news spread, people poured onto the steps of the old Parliament House, and to set the scene

There were suddenly thousands gathered, angry, stunned, emotional people and I I agree with this. They thought this was a bad look for our democracy, which was. When the Governor-General Secretary, David Smith, came out to read the proclamation dissolving Parliament, the crowd drowned him out, yelling, We want Goss. I actually have a clip of that, I'll play. Amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree. The National Representative. Chris or without the man.

And then afterwards this was Goff's reaction to that when he came and spoke afterwards. Well may we say God save the Queen. Because nothing will save the Governor General. The proclamation which you have just heard read by the Governor General's official secretary was countersigned Malcolm Fraser. Who will undoubtedly go down in Australian history from Remembrance Day nineteen seventy-five as Kerz Kerr. Obviously that was one of the most sort of

Moving lines in Australian political history, like everyone knows it. And you can almost see in the videos the crowd's shock turn into pure anger. And then within hours protests broke out around the country. Tens of thousands marched in Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra and beyond chanting Shame, Fraser, shame and we want. People carried signs comparing Kerr's move to a coup. Kerr was labelled a traitor. Teachers cried in classrooms. School kids were let out of lessons to watch history on television.

The ABC interrupted normal programming, which was unheard of at the time, to broadcast the crisis live. The National Museum records stories of people weeping as Whitlam delivered his dismissal for the When you think of what he did for so many Australians and how his reforms changed the lives of so many, you cannot understand why. You can. But

Does that mean like not everyone was on Whitlam's side though? Of course not. Labour voters were furious, but liberal voters were relieved. They obviously were quieter in their celebration. But the divide cut across geography too. Plenty of urban progressive cities felt betrayed, while rural and conservative regions felt betrayed.

So what did the media say at this time? Well the Australian and the City Morning Herald initially backed the Governor General, arguing he acted constitutionally. The age in the Canberra Times condemned it as an undemocratic overreach. And in the following weeks, media coverage shifted from stunned reporting to fierce debate about the limits of vice regal power, whether the Senate had overstepped and also whether Australia needed.

Okay, I have to ask because there are so many rumors that the CIA was involved. Is that actually real or is that just a conspiracy theory? Look, I love a conspiracy theory. But there is no proven direct evidence that the CIA orchestrated the dismissal. Of course there's n of course there's not. As absurd as it sounds, there are very real reasons why that suspicion exists. Whitlam's government collided head-on with US intelligence interests in a way no Australian government had ever done before.

The US government was not pro Whitlam because he changed everything about Australia's post war loyalty to the US. Within months of coming to power, he pulled Australia out of Vietnam. He criticized American bombing in Indochina. He recognized China, he recognized Cuba and sh and shut down ACES operations in Chile, where the CIO was trying to destabilise the president of the time.

These are all rabbit holes for another big talk, absolutely. For another time. But there's also Pine Gap, which is one of my favourite things to talk about, actually. It's kind of crazy we haven't spoken more on this yet, because it definitely could be another big talk to add to the list.

But really, Pine Gap is the reason the CIA cared so much. And if you don't know what it is, Pine Gap is located outside Alice Springs and is still one of the most important US intelligence facilities in the world. It intercepts satellite signals, guides surveillance operations, and under Cold War programs it basically lets the US see inside Soviet missiles. What's fucking crazy about that is that for years

While the CIA ran Pine Gap, most of Australia had no idea they were there. So Whitlam came in and demanded full transparency over what Pine Gap was up to and even threatened to not renew the Pine Gap lease in December of nineteen seventy five. Which is curiously, just weeks after this mischief. But

Whitlam also clashed with our own intelligence agencies, didn't he? Yeah, which is why the CEI were shaking in their boots as well. Also, if you've been good and listened to the last big talk, Petrov Affair, you'll know this, but the well you'll know this about Asia already.

But it was deeply intertwined with the CIA and MI five for decades. And information flowed between them as allies. Then Whitlam came along and the old governor general then literally walks in demanding files related to Croatian extreme. The CIA and MI five saw this as a direct threat to the Five Eyes Alliance. In nineteen seventy four, Whitlam ordered Asio to cut direct ties with the CIA, but Asio quietly ignored him and kept sharing information anyway.

And on top of that, Whitlam discovered ACES with CIA involvement had been supporting a coup attempt in East Timor without cabinet approval. Then there was also a guy called Christopher Boyce, right? He was a young contractor working for TRW, which was a company involved in decoding pine gap signals. In nineteen seventy-five to nineteen seventy-six, he leaked classified US documents, believing the CIA was manipulating democratic allies. So Boyce

Went on to claim that the CIA considered Governor General Sir John Kerr as to quote, our man in Canberra. Shit. There was also a bunch of stuff about how Kerr ended up having a connections to organisations that were all like linked to or funded by the CIA. Also that the CIA viewed Whitlam as a threat, obviously, to Pine Gap and global intelligence systems then.

And it's crazy'cause you you're probably l listening to a loss and you're like, Oh, okay, so the CIA for sure intervened then like the rumors are true. Um but there is an important caveat. Voice's evidence was indirect, so it's pretty hard to verify. But his leaks did match public reporting and matched other claims. So yeah, we don't know 100%, but it is Suspicious for sure. But there's also documented concern from the US about Whitlam. Yeah. And then there was another alarm.

Yeah. So just weeks later, which is brutal. Oh my god. So Fraser won in a landslide, the biggest since World War Two. In saying that, it didn't quite mean that everyone accepted the way he came to power. Protests continued throughout the campaign, Fraser's events were disrupted, offices were vandalized.

But many Australians voted for Malcolm Fraser because they were exhausted by economic turmoil, although plenty still believed that his rise was illegitimate. After the election, I would say that Whitlam became like a power for like a symbol of resistance. And Malcolm Fraser really struggled with accusations of opportunism. And cu He became like a national villain, booed at public events.

heckled and eventually spent much of his later life overseas just to escape the hostility. Well I think there's something about Kerr and the dismissal, right? That even if you were not a fan of Whitlam, it's very unAustralian in nature to kind of like what would be seen, even though it was in his within his powers, to like warted the system of like how someone was chosen. Like it feels very like against our culture.

Even though it's obviously about democracy and like these these powers allow him to do that. It it goes against the people. And it's like no one likes a tall poppy vibe. Like that's really what it was, you know. If we got to the heart of why this was so no matter what you thought of Whitlam that you'd feel like this, I get that. Yeah.

Can I also circle back on something we mentioned briefly earlier, the palace letters? What were they and why were they not released until twenty twenty? They they really are like the final piece of the puzzle in many ways. I mean there's lots of pi pieces to the puzzle that I'd like more on, specifically Pine Gap. Um but th it's basically a collection of two hundred and twelve letters exchanged between the Governor General, Sir John Kerr.

And Buckingham Palace. And they had always been locked away, but people desperately wanted them so we could have these answers to the burning question. Did the palace know John Kerr would do this? Did they influence it? The letters, once they were released, gave insight to Kerr's anxieties about Whitlam, his musings about the constitutional crisis.

detailed commentary on supply, Fraser and the Senate, and most importantly, Kerr's back and forth discussions about using his reserve powers. Which this is huge, the fact that there's proof that the palace was aware. Anxieties for a while. Yeah. And from mid nineteen seventy five, Kerr was openly telling the palace that he was considering dismissing Whitlam, but feared Whitlam would sack him first and that he was contemplating acting without advance warning.

Like crazy intel to the pouch. The response was from a secretary writing on behalf of the Queen who responded politely but significantly. He reminded Co that the reserve powers were real, they could be used in exceptional circumstances, and the palace would not disavow him if he acted. That's like basically going. That's sure. I would describe that as an affirmation.

W what I don't get is why why were all these letters hidden for so long? Like was that even allowed? Yeah, so after Kerr left office, his secretary David Smith deposited the letters in the National Archives Personal papers rather than Commonwealth records.

Que it got out earlier thanks to Professor Jenny Hawking, Whitlam's biographer. In 2016, she launched a legal challenge to force the National Archives to release the letters, arguing it's not personal notes, but dealt with official constitutional duties. Honestly seems like an obvious argument, but like Jenny Hawking my hero. Like I love shit like this, right? The National Archives fought her. The palace fought her, which obviously would only intensify the public wanting them to be revered.

She lost in twenty eighteen, she lost again in twenty nineteen. She appealed to the High Court and in May of twenty twenty the h and in May of twenty twenty, the High Court ruled six one in her favour. Now all six volumes of letters are freely available online. Thank you, Jenny. Thank you, Jenny. And it was interesting because the letters destroyed the idea that the palace was a neutral bystander in this circumstance. They displayed a relationship that was supportive, even if not direct.

So what is the legacy of Golf Whitlam today? Easy one to end on. Yeah. Let's just sum all this up. I I think as we said in the original pitch, it's really mixed. my personal take and I'm keen to hear yours after this, but I would say Goth had the right idea at the wrong time. In lots like I think that's why it's a mixed legacy, just because

I wonder how different his legacy would be if it didn't have the bite of the recession. Yeah. Well I think that's hard because he went in and said, I'm going to make change regardless of the circumstances and context of the time. Like I'm not going to play it safe. And I think that that actually is

a relevant like fifty years on, it's never been more relevant that question. Like we live in politically challenging times right now and the Albanese government has more of an opportunity than Golf Whitlam did to make significant change. Mm and really from many expert accounts right now

He's not. And so I wonder like, you know, this may not be the economically right time, but he has every ability to make social and cultural conditions better for Australians. And I just wonder like a Golf Whitlam would be doing a lot more with this opportunity. Oh, and I also

It's really funny, even when you talk to people that are a bit skeptical and no but the thing is no one's skeptical of what he actually did reform wise. Everyone seems to back all of the social changes that he made because it's so obvious and important to us now. But they'll all say, oh, but you know... Well yeah, I it's also you gotta spend money to make it. Absolutely, but I think with Golf Whitlam, like what his legacy remains is not

that he spent money, it remains that he was a political visionary. And that he tried to do things that were absolutely decades ahead of his time. And even if it ended in terrible and unfair circumstances, I'd prefer to be remembered that way. It's actually really interesting'cause only It was just a week or so ago, November eleventh, which is also Remembrance Day, uh, that our current Prime Minister, Albanese, pledged to honor Gothwitlam with a statue in Canberra. And

Really interesting he described the dismissal like this. Make no mistake. November eleventh, nineteen seventy five was not a constitutional crisis. It was a partisan political ambush. Go off. Yeah. What's your final take on have you got any final words, sentiment from your favourite story? The Pine Gap stuff is hard to ignore. I was gonna say we didn't really come back to that. But I'm glad you conspiracy theory could you go with it? Oh, pretty conspiracy The Batuda advocate.

wrote a headline w on the d on the fifty year anniversary. Rudd reveals that he would have had Kersh shot as a spy and his body thrown in the lake. Oh right. Oh well, fifty years. Thank you for listening. Scoff. Thanks for everything.