Tag Archives: Menzies

Why we need a welfare state in Australia


Welfare state, a concept of government in which the state … plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the economic and social well-being of citizens. It is based on the principles of equality of opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth, and public responsibility for those unable to avail themselves of the minimal provisions for a good life. Read more here https://www.britannica.com/topic/welfare-state

An ancient idea

The welfare state as an idea has been around for thousands of years. The Romans, as an example, developed an ad hoc system for providing grain to the people when there were shortages. By the 2nd century CE it had been formalised, to include bread and other essentials, as the population became too great to be fed from local sources. The state imported the food, through the use of hundreds of ships, mainly from North Africa. They then distributed it. The program was never an afterthought. With a large and feisty population, it was considered essential to the maintenance of civic peace, and it lasted until at least the fall of the Western Empire.

In modern times

The modern version of the welfare state is generally attributed to an unlikely leader – Otto von Bismarck. In the 1880s, as the political leader of the relatively new German Empire, he passed social welfare legislation, which he described as “practical Christianity”. His programs included old-age pensions, accident insurance and employee health insurance. Many were borrowed directly from the Prussian model. Bismarck himself was from Prussia, where they had proved popular, and had underpinned a strong and cohesive society.

He was not motivated by a soft heart however, but by political opportunism. He saw that by providing social programs he could achieve several aims. He would counteract the rising appeal of the Social Democrat Party, he could make staying in Germany more attractive to those considering leaving for America, and he would vie for the allegiance of German Catholics, who were torn by divided loyalties, between Germany and the Vatican.

Other European countries followed his lead. The times were changing; Victorian England’s rapidly developing middle classes were appalled by the social inequality around them. As wealth expanded throughout North America the Progressive Era was spawned. Many in the developing Western democracies realised that private philanthropy and religiously inspired charity was ill-equipped to deal with the scope of the problem, of a newly created industrial working class.

The 1880s have gained a reputation for a change in attitude, wherein poverty was re-discovered, and individualism was finished. Poverty was identified as more of a social evil than a failure of character. The poor had been blamed for their own misery, but some early social researchers discovered that poverty was not caused by a lack of moral fibre, or even degeneracy, but more by the stranglehold of the upper classes on opportunity. Old age and sickness were especially dreaded by the poor, because they were seen as being particularly merciless, inevitably miserable, and impossible to mitigate. They were by then either too sick, or too old, to work.

Self-help had been seen as an essential element of living a life of some dignity, but it was finally accepted that governments were the only mechanism for lifting the people out of their grinding poverty. These attitudes were again driven by the middle class, who were discovering the power of their vote, and politicians were aware that sooner or later the poor would themselves obtain that right (to vote).

Legislation for pensions and social insurance began to be passed, in most of the industrialising countries. America was shocked by the problems associated with industrialisation, urbanisation, immigration and political corruption, and responded with social activism and reforming zeal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

World War I, The Great Depression, and World War II have been identified as important events, which expedited expansions of the welfare state(s). That was the defining nature of the rise of the Welfare State. It was managed differently, according to local circumstances, in many countries. There were also a multitude of reasons for its emergence and growth as a political and economic choice.

Labour aligned, or social democratic governments were more likely to institute versions of the Welfare State, due to a belief in progressive ideals. These included equality, the removal of poverty, and a general commitment to humanitarian values.

But it was also seen as a way to build national cohesion, and to promote social and civic harmony, where it might not otherwise exist. A surprising footnote from the Fascist era is the reliance of both Hitler and Mussolini, on generous social payments to their citizens. They were consciously buying industrial peace, and forging national cohesion.

Australia’s introduction to the Welfare State

While John Curtin is best remembered as a war-time Prime Minister, his work, alongside that of his Treasurer, Ben Chifley, was crucial in establishing a Welfare State on Australian lines, designed for Australian conditions. Curtin was influenced by the economic theories of Keynes, and had long wanted to transform life for Australians.

He had seen the damage caused by the Great Depression of the 1930s, and took the opportunity offered by wartime conditions to transform the nation. In 1942 he imposed uniform taxation on the states, which changed the financial relationship between the two levels of government forever. It also allowed him to increase revenue. The removal of the states’ right to levy their own income taxes was to be compensated by the Commonwealth ‘picking up’ their liability for social programs.

With a uniform income tax he was then in a position to expand his vision of a socially activist Commonwealth Government. The states, especially New South Wales and Victoria, had been adding elements of a social safety net since the beginning of the century. He and Chifley, between them, completed it. Early examples were the Widow’s Pension Act, and the Unemployment and Sickness Benefits Act.

By the end of that same year (1942) he had set up a Department of Postwar Reconstruction, which laid the groundwork for establishing a Commonwealth Housing Commission, the postwar Rural Reconstruction Commission, the Secondary Industries Commission and the Commonwealth Reconstruction Training Scheme. Many of these programs were designed to assist in re-building Australia, after the war ended.

In 1944 he set up the Department of Immigration which was to be responsible for organising postwar immigration to Australia. These changes were the basis for the enormous growth of the Australian economy in the postwar years.

John Curtin was a believer and a doer. He was lucky to be succeeded in the Prime Mininstership by another committed to the dynamic re-construction of Australia, post-war. Curtin and Chifley both maintained that the key principle of a successful re-construction was full employment.

Robert Menzies was of a similar mind. He defeated Chifley in the election of 1949, and won seven elections in a row, on a platform which included full employment. In 1961, he was lucky to be re-elected, because the unemployment rate had ‘blown out’ to 2.1%. He won that election by just one seat.

The Welfare State in Australia is under constant threat, by both sides of parliament. This is counter to the wishes of the population, and is driven by a political class who look after only themselves. They rely on the apathy of the people, who do not inspect governments closely, and who are disengaged from the political process. Politics and society are of no interest to most voters.

The Liberal Party has been infiltrated by many IPA-type neo-liberals, whose political mantra can be simplified to a “survival of the fittest” trope. The Labor Party, although not equally infested with IPA members, is slightly less crass, paying lip service to an egalitarian motif, while rubber-stamping much neo-liberal legislation. It leaves voters stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Where to from here?

In the Age of Coronavirus, with widespread economic devastation, we need action similar to that which re-constructed Australia in the period immediately after World War 11. We need to accept that we need massive stimulation, and we need to spend our way out of the coming Depression. We need Australians to be protected from hardship, because, hopefully, they will demand it.

Scott Morrison is a man shackled to his party, by his own ideology, and his heedless ambition. He needs to form a National Government, including at least the Opposition Leader, and to govern for the whole country, and all the people. You can see that he is torn between being a small-time political hack, and a real leader. He could really lead us out of this particular disaster. It just takes character, and a commitment to everyone’s welfare. That is why we call it the Commonwealth of Australia.

Scott Morrison Should Resign and Call an Early Election


Looking for a renewed mandate has been done before

It has become clear that this Government is illegitimate. The stench of corruption is overwhelming, and any decent Prime Minister should acknowledge that fact. In order to re-establish his relationship with the people of Australia, Morrison should resign, and call a general election.

It has been done before, and it can actually re-invigorate the political environment. In 1963 the then Liberal Prime Minister, Robert Menzies, called an early election for the House of Representatives because the government were struggling to govern with their narrow 2-seat majority in the chamber. The government succeeded in gaining an extra 10 seats. There was no discernible sense that the Prime Minister of the time was corrupt.

What is so wrong now?

The situation is vastly different now, in that there is almost a complete lack of trust in this Government. The personnel, from the very top, are so far outside the expectations of rational and honest voters that many of us feel we deserve some sort of refund, if not of our time then of our taxes.

How should the election be conducted?

If Morrison was able to conduct the election campaign as convention dictates, he would serve as a caretaker, and he would not spend millions of taxpayers’ funds on advertising his party’s policies; he would not bribe seemingly every coalition seat with unnecessary and cynical ‘grants’, and he might even stop lying about his climate policies. He should stop claiming illusory climate and emissions achievements, to appease his backbench rump. And additionally, he should allow the people to pre-select their own candidates, rather than intervene. This might lead to the omission of knuckle-draggers like Craig Kelly from the parliament. This would be a win for everyone.

If no election, what could change?

Further immediate improvements to consider include answering legitimate questions from the press, being open and transparent enough to release suppressed reports on ministers, and to promise not to protect those in his party room who have lost the trust of the Australian people. Imagine if he had actual standards which included not handing power to racists, to homophobes, or to those who have put personal advancement above the country’s interests. We know who they are, but he merely closes ranks when questioned. Sometimes he “rejects the premise of the question”.

Imagine if he apologised for the statement “A fair go for those who have a go”, which is one of the most divisive phrases ever uttered in Australian history. And imagine if his Government stopped torturing the poor. He could ‘man up’, swallow the fact that he has been wrong all along, and acknowledge that Newstart is degradingly low, and that the majority of Australians support it being substantially raised.

That would not only make moral sense, but it would serve as an immediate economic stimulus. And perhaps apologise for ‘robodebt‘, which we know was unlawful and unenforceable for years. Why don’t we rise up in revolt when it is suggested that between 800 and 2000 deaths have occurred because of that program. Who will take the responsibility for that?

Wow, death caused by a Government’s deliberate cruelty. That is to leave out the unimaginable monstrosity of our treatment of asylum seekers. Two names are enough. Scott Morrison, and Peter Dutton. A weeping sore for decent Australians.

As for other current issues, as an added latest twist of the knife, they want everyone who receives Newstart to have a cashless card, so that they have very limited access to cash. So firstly they assume everyone on Newstart is buying grog, cigarettes and maybe even porn with their $290 a week; after rent of course! Good luck with that. And secondly the idiots in charge of this have not even researched whether the card can be used in all parts of the country.

The main cause of the current dysfunction is Tony Abbott

How did it come to this? It is impossible to look at the decline of Australian democracy without looking at Tony Abbott. John Howard was mean and tricky, Kevin Rudd was a boring control freak, Julia Gillard was an effective legislator, but hopeless at presenting herself as a likeable achiever. And of course she encountered good old Aussie misogyny. Which brings us back to Abbott.

Serial liar, seemingly out to get the poor, hopelessly stuck in a misogynistic 1950s, elitist and yet so sloppy with language, so annoying and in the end so vengeful that we all knew he would take Australia down with him, if necessary, in his pursuit of Malcolm Turnbull.

Turnbull came to power as our saviour. Finally an adult in the room, urbane, sophisticated, he would treat us as adults. No more slogans, he would conduct a dialogue with us. But he turned out to have no convictions. He was over-turned, or actually complicit, on the issues of climate change, obstructing gay marriage, gutting the NBN, tax cuts for the rich (including himself), and even slogans – Jobs and Growth is notorious for its sheer meaninglessness, and he used it a lot. He also became very focused on National Security, and he was the fool who handed the keys of the ‘Interior Ministry’ to the most dangerous man in Australia, Peter Dutton.

Back to the re-set button

It is clear that the country needs to re-set, because this Government is NOT delivering on anything tangible, and there is a very strong argument that says it arrived in power by fraudulent means. It lied to every voter, and it bribed its way to a razor – slim majority.

The purpose of governments can be seen as being comparable with the underlying mission of families: To improve lives.

Governments are not elected to further their own interests, either politically, or materially. They are tasked with looking after the interests of their citizens, by advancing them along the road of progress.

So go on, Scott. Call an early election. See if God wants to reward you again, after all the shenanigans. I bet you don’t. But you should.