This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/24/guardian-view-on-gough-whitlam-tripped-up-rulebook

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The Guardian view on Gough Whitlam: tripped up by the rulebook The Guardian view on Gough Whitlam: tripped up by the rulebook
(3 days later)
The pantheon of the British left lacks anyone quite like Gough Whitlam, the former Australian prime minister who died this week. From healthcare to national parks and Aboriginal rights, his 1972-75 administration represents a burst of legislative creativity, which bears comparison with Clement Attlee’s glory years in the 1940s. But whereas Attlee was brusque and businesslike, Whitlam stirred the progressive soul. In his heyday – historian Manning Clark wrote – he proceeded “with a wild ecstasy and relish”, bringing Jackson Pollock’s Blue Poles to Canberra, and making “moving appeals to the intelligence and idealism of the Australian people”.The pantheon of the British left lacks anyone quite like Gough Whitlam, the former Australian prime minister who died this week. From healthcare to national parks and Aboriginal rights, his 1972-75 administration represents a burst of legislative creativity, which bears comparison with Clement Attlee’s glory years in the 1940s. But whereas Attlee was brusque and businesslike, Whitlam stirred the progressive soul. In his heyday – historian Manning Clark wrote – he proceeded “with a wild ecstasy and relish”, bringing Jackson Pollock’s Blue Poles to Canberra, and making “moving appeals to the intelligence and idealism of the Australian people”.
The abiding lesson of Whitlam for radicals is, however, not to be found in the poetry of his heyday, but in the dramatic prose of his decline. The mix of dearer oil and wage-cost spirals that was everywhere undermining the big social ambitions of the 1970s dogged his government too. But to bring him down took something more – dismissal by Britain’s representative in Australia, the governor-general, Sir John Kerr. The abiding lesson of Whitlam for radicals is, however, not to be found in the poetry of his heyday, but in the dramatic prose of his decline. The mix of dearer oil and wage-cost spirals that was everywhere undermining the big social ambitions of the 1970s dogged his government too. But to bring him down took something more – dismissal by the Queen’s representative in Australia, the governor-general, Sir John Kerr.
This was a constitutional coup against a majority government, and in the legend of Labor partisans it was a coup made more grievous by being carried out by a man in the notional employ of a queen half a world away. Kerr’s despicable failure to warn Whitlam about what was coming was indeed a fateful twist in the tale, but it should not be forgotten that Whitlam had himself originally appointed Kerr: the palace simply signed off on the name. This was, in truth, an all-Australian fight. Nor did the sacking arrive out the blue. Canberra was gripped by the sort of fiscal brinkmanship well familiar to Washington today: the Australian Senate, in which the right then held a narrow advantage, was threatening to starve the government of supply by blocking the budget. Something was going to have to give, even if that something wasn’t necessarily the elected prime minister.This was a constitutional coup against a majority government, and in the legend of Labor partisans it was a coup made more grievous by being carried out by a man in the notional employ of a queen half a world away. Kerr’s despicable failure to warn Whitlam about what was coming was indeed a fateful twist in the tale, but it should not be forgotten that Whitlam had himself originally appointed Kerr: the palace simply signed off on the name. This was, in truth, an all-Australian fight. Nor did the sacking arrive out the blue. Canberra was gripped by the sort of fiscal brinkmanship well familiar to Washington today: the Australian Senate, in which the right then held a narrow advantage, was threatening to starve the government of supply by blocking the budget. Something was going to have to give, even if that something wasn’t necessarily the elected prime minister.
Whitlam ended up the victim because, measured against his opponents and the former judge Kerr, he had failed to master the technical ground rules of politics, on which his enemies had developed a vice-like grip.Whitlam ended up the victim because, measured against his opponents and the former judge Kerr, he had failed to master the technical ground rules of politics, on which his enemies had developed a vice-like grip.
The resistance to the budget went beyond all precedent but – in an Australian constitution that predated Britain’s Parliament Act by 11 years – the upper house was free to meddle in money bills. Whitlam might never have faced such a hostile Senate in the first place if he’d fully grasped the rules that allowed hostile politicians in the states to fill its vacancies. The resistance to the budget went beyond all precedent but – in an Australian constitution that predated Britain’s Parliament Act by 11 years – the upper house was free to meddle in money bills. Whitlam might never have faced such a hostile Senate in the first place if he’d fully grasped the rules that allowed hostile politicians in the states to fill its vacancies.
Above all, if he had concentrated on the letter of the constitution, as opposed to the way it had previously tended to be read, he would have known that the governor-general could both sack the prime minister and force an election – and so was worth worrying about. Whitlam will deservedly be more remembered for dreaming big dreams than for being ensnared by technicalities.Above all, if he had concentrated on the letter of the constitution, as opposed to the way it had previously tended to be read, he would have known that the governor-general could both sack the prime minister and force an election – and so was worth worrying about. Whitlam will deservedly be more remembered for dreaming big dreams than for being ensnared by technicalities.
But, as British politicians square up for a close election, how many have studied the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, or those Whitehall memos about protocol in hung parliaments? The answer is too few. For the real lesson of Australia 1975 is that the rulebook can matter very much.But, as British politicians square up for a close election, how many have studied the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, or those Whitehall memos about protocol in hung parliaments? The answer is too few. For the real lesson of Australia 1975 is that the rulebook can matter very much.
• This article was amended on 27 October 2014 to correct an editing error which led to the governor general of Australia being described as Britain’s representative in Australia.