Australian constitutional crisis of 1975

The Australian constitutional crisis of 1975 is generally regarded as the most significant domestic political and constitutional crisis in Australia's history.

The Dismissal

The situation was complicated by the relationship between Kerr and Whitlam. Kerr had long felt that he had been taken for granted and not given the respect due to his office. Originally a Labor sympathiser earlier in his life, Kerr had started to drift towards the conservatives and felt isolated from the Government.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The precedent had long been established that in normal circumstances the Governor-General was expected only to act on advice received from the Prime Minister, and Whitlam confidently assumed this would be the case during the crisis. However, according to the Constitution, and in accordance with established practice in the wider Commonwealth, the Governor-General still possessed wide ranging reserve powers to dissolve parliament and sack the government on his own initiative, in certain limited circumstances. It would later become apparent that Kerr and Whitlam were divided over whether the Governor-General had the power to act independently in times of crisis. Kerr had a much more pro-active interpretation of the office's role than the Labor Government, who assumed he would take no action unless prompted. As the government money threatened to run out Kerr came under increasing pressure from the Liberals, who insisted that constitutionally, a Prime Minister who could not obtain supply must either resign or be dismissed.

Related Topics:
Commonwealth - Reserve powers

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A precedent had been set in Australia for the use of the reserve powers at a state level in the dismissal of New South Wales Premier Jack Lang by Sir Philip Game - but in this situation Game had warned Lang that his dismissal was imminent. Kerr was unwilling to warn Whitlam that he was contemplating dismissing him, fearing that Whitlam's reaction would be to request Elizabeth II, the Queen of Australia, to remove him as Governor-General instead. Though this might appear to be an unlikely proposition, it was constitutionally possible, and in the peculiar circumstances of the crisis could not have been ruled out. Kerr subsequently claimed that he was not so much fearful of the loss of his own position but of the prospect that the monarch could become involved in Australian domestic politics, doing severe damage to her constitutional status. Kerr was also mindful of threats from Fraser that the Opposition would begin publicly criticising him unless he "did his duty".

Related Topics:
New South Wales - Premier - Jack Lang - Philip Game - Elizabeth II - Queen of Australia

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This prompted Kerr to seek advice from the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, Sir Garfield Barwick. This action was criticised after the event by Whitlam on two grounds: firstly, since the High Court does not issue advisory opinions, Barwick was not speaking with constitutional authority but only as an individual, and secondly, Barwick was in fact a former Attorney-General in a Liberal Party government and not in an impartial position personally. Whitlam claimed that he specifically instructed Kerr not to seek Barwick's advice, but Kerr maintained that he did what was necessary to resolve the crisis.

Related Topics:
Chief Justice - High Court of Australia - Garfield Barwick - Attorney-General

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Kerr also met with Fraser. Fraser argued that the Senate represented the displeasure of the Australian people with the government's management; that there was a practical impasse for the government; and, stressing the necessity for action well before government revenue dried up, that if the Governor-General did not act decisively then the Prime Minister could without notice dismiss the Governor-General and maintain the deadlock indefinitely.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

On November 11, 1975, stating that there was no prospect of the crisis being resolved otherwise, Kerr dismissed Prime Minister Whitlam and appointed Malcolm Fraser as the caretaker Prime Minister, on the basis that Fraser had promised to pass supply, then immediately advise the Governor-General to dissolve parliament and call a general election. Fraser did so, and Kerr called a general election for December 13, 1975. The Liberal and National Country Party Senators were advised of the situation and they duly voted to pass the Supply Bill, along with the Labor Senators. However the Labor Senators were not yet fully aware that Whitlam and his government had been dismissed (because Whitlam, plotting to defeat Fraser on the floor of the House of Representatives, had omitted to tell them). In any case it would have been useless for the Labor Senators to vote against supply — all through October and November two independents, Lewis's appointment Cleaver Bunton and Steele Hall, a former Liberal Party but now Liberal Movement Senator from South Australia, had supported the Labor Party — the motions for deferring the Budget bills were passed by 30-29 — an outcome which would have been 31-27 in favour of passing the Budget bills had the Labor Senators tried to reject them on November 11th. Kerr ignored two immediate motions of no confidence in Fraser from the House of Representatives as by the time he received them Parliament had already been dissolved by proclamation.

Related Topics:
November 11 - 1975 - Caretaker - December 13 - Cleaver Bunton - Steele Hall - Liberal Movement - South Australia - No confidence

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Upon the steps of Parliament House, Whitlam dramatically proclaimed to the assembled press: Well may we say "God save the Queen" because nothing will save the Governor General. . . . The proclamation you have just heard read was countersigned Malcom Fraser, who will go down in history as Kerr's Cur.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~