“NO” MAJORITY

Grey River Argus, 21 August 1944, Page 4

“NO” MAJORITY

ON THE REFERENDUM FOUR LABOUR STATES . ADVERSE Non-Labour States Vote “Yes” (Rec. 8.0) _^Ttht U Cove o rnAustralia has rejected the Govern ment’s appeal for additional powers for the post-war period. Cleai No majorities have been recorded three States, New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmania. Victoria, South Australia ad Western Australia show Yes mathe referendum the Government needed a “Yes” vote in x>ur States, as well as an aggregate majority of the electors. So far only 3,087,259 votes have been counted out of a total enrolment of 4,407,507 electors. Subsequent counting is virtually certain not to alter the position.. At the close of counting last mgh,t No had polled 1,598,415, and ‘Yes 1,418,312 votes, giving a No majority of 180,103. The ffifonmaj votes numbered 120,532. Progress figures in the various States were:— New South Wales: “No” 654,519, “Yes” 560,710; “No” majority 93,809. Victoria “No” 456,487; “Yes 458,261; “Yes” majority 1783. Queensland: “No” 210,810; Yes 129,705; “No” majority 81,105. South Australia: "No” 76,638; Yes 79,409; “Yes” majority 2778. Tasmania: “No” 60,025; Yes 37,547; “No” majority 22,478. The surprise of the polling was the strong “No” vote in New South Wales. There the Government had been confident of the largest “Yes” majority. The greatest rebuff to the Government was that in Queensland, where all ten of the electorates have returned “No” majorities. The Government had counted on strong support from farmers in all States. In New South Wales and in Victoria the rural votes went right against the Referendum, but in South Australia and Western Australia the farmers voted solidly "Yes.” It is believed that a high percentage of the electors have failed to vote at all; while the number of the informal votes registered has been abnormally large. The Service vote, numbering nearly eight hundred thousand, remains to be counted. The majority of the servicemen are expected to vote "Yes.” However, the results in the “No” States cannot be thereby affected. The rejection of the Referendum is therefore certain. Among strange features of the polling are that New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmania which all have ILaibour Governments, voted strongly for “No”, while Victoria aud South Australia, with non-Labour Governments returned “Yes” majorities. Ten New South Wales Labour electorates voted “No.” The prestige of the Curtain Government must suffer heavily as the result of the Referendum. This is its first set- . back since assuming office in October, 1941. Mr Curtin so far has not commented on the outcome. He has been accused, in some Labour quarters, of only half-hearted support of the Referendum. The only two States where Mr Curtin has appeared personally/; South Australia and Viictoria, were the two where the “Yes” vote has been the strongest. Illness during the final week of the campaign prevented Mr Curtin’s appearance in New South Wales and Tasmania.

Mr R. G. Menzies, Federal Opposition Leader, said that the “No” vote was not again constitutional reform, but against the submitting of seventeen questions for one answer. Il was a warning to the Federal Government that, democratic liberalism was not dead. The “Sydney Sun-Telegraph” in an editorial said: The chance to give Australia unified powers has been lost because people cannot trust those who would have wielded them. Those powers are still necessary. But many good Australians, who realised, that, were stung by resentment of recent mal-administration into a vote of censure. New South Wales has had the sharpest experience of Government bungling, bullying and weakness, and electors of New South Wales have given a sharp answer to the Government’s appeal for more power. Only a year ago they expressed overwhelming confidence in Mi* Curtin and his colleagues. Voters yesterday did not distinguish between Mr Curtin and wild men whom he tolerates. If he wants to regain public confidence, the inference is plain.

LATEST FIGURES ONLY TWO “YES” STATES. (Rec. 12.10) SYDNEY, Aug. 20. When the counting of votes for the Referendum ceased to-night it was shown that Victoria, which earlier had a majority for “Yes” had changed to a “No’ ’majority, so that four States, New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Tasmania have majorities for “No,” and two States, Western Australia and South Australia, have majorities for “Yes.” The figures for the Commonwealth at present are.— No 1,773,978 Yes 1,506,846 No majority 227,132 The latest figures for States are: New South Wales: No, 694,773; Yes 586,742. Victoria: No, 507,550; Yes, 491,169. Queensland: No, 225,670; Yes, 136,728. South Australia: No, 150,280; Yes, 158,373. Western Australia: No, 87,785; Yes, 92,837. Tasmania: No, 67,920; Ye 5,40,997. MR. CURTIN'S OFFER. TO "NO” ADVOCATES. (Rec. 12.56.) CANBERRA, August 20. The Prime .Minister, Mr. Curtin, expressed disappointment at the referendum result. Mr. Curtin said that he is prepared to giv e careful and sympathetic consideration to any positive proposals that may be submitted by the “No” advocates, because botn they and the advocates, of the Referendum, apparently, believed that tne present powers of the Commonwealth Parliament were inadequate. Mr. Curtin added: “The approach to the people at the referendum was made undei- all kinds- of difficulties, and was prejudiced by the Commonwealths pre-occupation with the war' and by the irrelevancies which have marked ever-y referendum that has been submitted since the Federation was established.” There is no likelihood that the Government will proceed with any of its proposals in the States which supported the referendum. Nor will it regard as operative the legislation passed by the New South Wales and Queensland Parliaments, which adopted tne constitutional amendments that were

framed by the Constitutional Convention held’in December, 1942. There already is conjecture among political observers on the possible effect of th e vote on the future of Labour policy. While it is true that tne result of the referendum cannot afreet Labour’s tenure of office, and. that tne history of most of the referenda reveals the non-party nature; of the voting, it is certain that Ministers, in carefully analysing the trend of the vote, may see a number of pointers from which they may profit, further, it is inevitable that some of tne Ministers at least temporarily, will lose prestige through the defeat of the Government’s proposals.