REFERENDUM ISSUE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 79, 15 August 1944, Page 5

REFERENDUM ISSUE

AUSTRALIA SPLIT INTO TWO CAMPS SPECULATION ON RESULT Sydney, Aug. 14. The Commonwealth wider powers referendum will go to the polls on Saturday. Its outcome, to which no reliable guide has been offered, must be of far-reaching importance to postwar Australia. The country has been split into two camps with a small but pernaps vital percentage of "neutrals.” The latest public opinion surveys gives the "no” case a slight margin, with the so far undecided voters holding I the balance. The "yes” campaign, however, has taken a sharp reverse in i the illness of the Prime Minister, Mr j Curtin, who, heavily preoccupied with I problems of coal and manpower, has j made only two public speeches in sup- | port of the referendum. Mr Curtin has been confined to bed for an indefinite period with bronchial influenza. The cancellation of his Sydney and Brisbane engagements this week may spell the difference between success and defeat for the referendum. I Much importance was attached to Mr Curtin's visit to Queensland, where the Federal Government is reported to be out ol favour. Political observers give the Government sound prospects of carrying the day in New South Wales and Victoria. Western Australia may also vote "yes.”. South Australia and Tasmania are doubtful, with the “no” case slightly in the ascendant in the last-named State. Queensland is expected to vote “no.” CAMPAIGN OFTEN BITTER Damage to Labour prestige will be considerable unless "yes” predominates, because it would be the Government’s | first public reverse since assuming of- | fice. The often bitter referendum cami paign has seen some surprising alignments and dissensions. The chief “no” protagonist, the Leader of the Federal Opposition, Mr Menzies. has numbered among his unsought lieutenants, the former New South Wales extremist Labour Premier. Mr Lang. The Prime Minister during the first world war, Mr Hughes. has ranged himself on the “yes” platform beside the Catholit Archbishop of Melbourne, Dr. Mannlx, whose differences with Mr Hughes on the conscription issue have passed into Australia’s history. The sole surviving author of the Constitution, which the referendum seeks to amend, the first Solicitor-General of the Commonwealth, Sir Robert Garran, shares j with Sir Isaac Isaacs (former GoverI nor-General and former Chief Justice of the High Court) the legal championship of the “yes.” The “Sydney Morning Herald,” which has supported Mr Curtin consistently in the past, recommends a “no” vote as a “much needed check to growing insolence of office and to all those who value regimented efficiency higher than individual freedom.” The paper adds that it still sees "no effective rival for Mr Curtin's role of the n’ation’s wartime leader.”

Meanwhile, the influential Murdoch chain of newspapers, customarily opposed to Mr Curtin, supports the .referendum. Writing in the Melbourne “Herald,” Sir Keith Murdoch says that failure to grant the powers sought would mean “grave losses and penalties, instabilities, soaring costs, dis orderly shortages, and over-suppiles. The immediate political and social effects would be bad. but worst of all we 1 would have lost our initial impetus on | the path toward national strength: we would be seething and quarrelling | about the entrance gates instead of goin£ forward in a sensible and orderly ! unit.” Sir Keith adds: “There are some who distrust the Curtin Government so much as to deny them any increase of authority. With this view I have con siderable sympathy. One can distrust this Government, however, and contest its objectives without making the quarrel a cause of general injury and chaos in rehabilitation.” VITAL ISSUES INVOLVED The vital nature of the issues involved in Saturday’s polling are assessed by Sir Keith, who writes: “Refusal of these powers to the central Government of Australia will mean a faltering and unhappy • development of provincialism and weaknesses where there should be striding betterment and development on complete national lines. It will mean finally the destruction of the country.” “Australia must have a workable constitution,” declares the Sydney "Telegraph.” "The referendum is not a party issue. Above all parties and personalities is the fact that we cannot deal with modern problems under the limitations of a horse and buggy document. The present poistion is in absurd contrast with that in fc every other Empire Government.”