Suchergebnisse

Gough Whitlam was deeply committed to the preservation of history, and keenly attuned to the importance of the documentary record in the writing of it. For Whitlam, the written record — the contemporaneous documentary record of government activity — was central to the production of historical knowledge and the "verification" of history. As he reflected on the release of his government's 1975 Cabinet papers, "the publication of these records confirms my belief in the contemporary document as the primary source for writing and understanding history". This paper takes us through the shifting historiography of the dismissal of the Whitlam government by Governor‐General Sir John Kerr. In doing so, it is a reflection also on the role of archives in the writing of history, recognising as Peters does, that the construction of an archival record is "a deeply political act". This is particularly so for contested, polarised, episodes — of which the dismissal is surely the exemplar — for which archival records have been transformative. In this process of historical correction, revelations from Kerr's papers in the National Archives of Australia have been pivotal. Kerr's papers were also central to my successful legal action against the Archives securing the release of the "Palace letters" between Kerr and the Queen regarding the dismissal. This paper explores some critical "archival encounters" during that research journey — revelations, obstructions, missing archives, and even burnt archives. From the destruction of Whitlam's security file, missing Government House guestbooks, the denial of access to records, to royal letters of support for Kerr's dismissal of Whitlam "accidentally burnt" in the Yarralumla incinerator, these encounters illuminate the critical relationship between archives, access, and history which continue to shape our understanding of the dismissal of the Whitlam government.

The election of the Whitlam government in 1972 marked a turning point in 20th century Australia. Shaking off the vestiges of two decades of conservative rule, Gough Whitlam brought new ideas, new policies and new people to the task of governing

Governor-General Sir John Kerr's dismissal of the elected Whitlam Government in 1975, more or less at the behest of the Liberal-Country Party Coalition led by Malcolm Fraser, was among the most momentous events in Australian political history. Born into a privileged life Whitlam joined the Australian Labor Party, rose to be its Parliamentary leader and took it into power after twenty-three years in the wilderness. But the pace of change scared too many people, and sudden changes in the world economic environment threw down challenges he just could not overcome. Nor could he overcome the local political challenges thrown down by the conservative forces,and he and his colleagues seemed determined to keep providing him with the ammunition they needed to shoot him down. On 11 November 1975, they did.

AbstractThe Whitlam government played a significant role in introducing progressive new policies in Aboriginal Affairs following the 1972 election. Yet, Aboriginal activists based in Redfern soon expressed disappointment with and criticism of the direction of these policies. They challenged the meaning and administration of the newly introduced self‐determination policy and the limits it placed on Aboriginal control of their organisations. These organisations, including the Aboriginal Legal and Medical Services, had been established in Redfern before the Labor government came to power. Even though they benefited under the self‐determination policy, their ability to achieve Aboriginal control was not because Whitlam and his government agreed with the activists' aims and understanding of self‐determination. Rather the generous funding under the Labor government, together with some weaknesses in its management, allowed the organisations to push the limits of self‐determination as defined by the government. Thus, even though the Whitlam government was supportive of improved Aboriginal controlled services, it had not anticipated the development towards Aboriginal self‐determination pursued by the activists in Redfern.

Australia's constitutional crisis of 1975 was not simply about the precise powers of the Senate or the Governor-General. It was about competing accounts of how to legitimate informal constitutional change. For Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, and the parliamentary tradition that he invoked, national elections sufficiently legitimated even the most constitutionally transformative of his goals. For his opponents, and a more complex tradition of popular sovereignty, more decisive evidence was required of the consent of the people themselves. This book traces the emergence of this fundamental constitutional debate and chronicles its subsequent iterations in sometimes surprising institutional configurations: the politics of judicial appointment in the Murphy Affair; the evolution of judicial review in the Mason Court; and the difficulties Australian republicanism faced in the Howard Referendum. Though the patterns of institutional engagement have varied, the persistent question of how to legitimate informal constitutional change continues to shape Australia's constitution after Whitlam