The Southland Times. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1938. Central Government In Australia

Southland Times, Issue 23675, 25 November 1938, Page 4

The Southland Times. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1938. Central Government In Australia

The approach of an interesting phase in Australian politics is foreshadowed in recent cable messages from Sydney. It was recently suggested by the DeputyLeader of the Opposition, Mr J. H. Scullin, that the Commonwealth Constitution should be revised in order to curtail the powers of the State Parliaments; and the Prime Minister, who is not often in agreement with Labour leaders, has welcomed the proposal with enthusiasm. A message printed yesterday quoted a statement by Mr Lyons that a referendum is likely to be held next year at which the people will be asked to give the Commonwealth Government “much wider powers in many directions.” There is, of course, a great deal to be said for centralized government in an age when quick action and the co-ordination of vital services may become the conditions of national survival. It could be said, indeed, that the question of wider powers for Canberra would not have arisen at this stage if it were not for the defence programme that has become the major interest in Australian politics. Much criticism has been directed against the Government’s policy, and there have been signs that a lack of co-opera-tion between the States and the Commonwealth is perhaps the principal reason for delay and inadequacy. In quieter times this clash of interests would be accepted without any widespread uneasiness. A country as large as Australia can scarcely escape the growth of local viewpoints and policies that are sometimes difficult to reconcile with what could be described as the remote control of federalism. But it is significant that the Commonwealth 'Government’s most successful period was during the war years, and the reappearance of something like a war-time mentality suggests a growing dependence on a central authority. Until 1914 the federation was in an experimental stage. The general verdict of the States was that the central Government promised to be effective in the control of trade, defence and external relations, but that it was less successful in finance and in fostering a national outlook and culture. During the war the Federal Government guided the country towards unity and national dignity, achieving an influence that promised well for the future. Economic difficulties in the post-war years, added to mistaken policies and premature legislation—notably in the case of the Navigation Act—brought increasing criticism from the States and a strong movement for secession in Western Australia. But once again there seems to have been a change in'public opinion. The European crisis confronted the Australian people with realities that are not being forgotten now that the danger appears to have passed, and the realization that a state of national emergency may have to be faced in the future has been accompanied by a general feeling that the Commonwealth Government must have additional powers if it is to provide a genuine national security. It is not too much to say, perhaps, that State rivalries might go into abeyance under the pressure of external dangers, just as the nation became unified in 1914-18. Past attempts by the Commonwealth to curtail the powers of the State Parliaments have met with steady opposition. But there is a new situation that could bring a change of attitude among the people. Its permanence may be open to doubt. In the meantime the Government has a rich opportunity for extending its authority. If it fails, in the present state of public opinion, there will be a strong temptation to interpret the voting as a verdict, not against constitutional change, but against the particular Government that recommends it.