The passing of Malcolm Fraser ends a tumultuous chapter in Australian political history. It comes only five months since Gough Whitlam passed away. While in government, both leaders diverged massively on economic policy. Whitlam was an economic progressive, whereas Malcolm Fraser was the economic conservative. However the two shared a social progressiveness.
Looking at their economic platforms first, Whitlam’s Government got involved in highly risky economic policies, while Fraser’s was fiscally conservative. Beginning in October 1974, and not wanting to upset the electorate by implementing tax increases proposed by Treasury, Whitlam’s government sought overseas loans to fund its development plans. These plans included a national highway network, national standard gauge rail, and turning Albury-Wodonga into an industrial-based super-city. This led to Pakistani, Tirath Khemlani, being made intermediary in the hope of securing US$4 billion in loans from the newly oil-rich Middle East. In contradistinction, after taking over as Prime Minister from Whitlam in 1975, Fraser maintained tax and spending levels of the Whitlam administration, but attempted to limit their rate of increase by implementing the so-called ‘Razor Gang’ budget cuts throughout the Commonwealth public sector, including the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC).1
Turning to social policy, the differences between Whitlam and Fraser were much more muted, the only significant differences being on the issues of conscription and medical insurance. Fraser was deeply involved in conscription during the Vietnam War as Minister for the Army beginning in 1966. In contrast, after becoming Prime Minister in 1972 Whitlam terminated military conscription. Whitlam introduced universal bulk-billing for healthcare, which Fraser’s Treasurer, John Howard, later restricted to those on Pensioner Health Benefit cards and patients the doctor deemed ‘socially disadvantaged’.2
In terms of social legacy generally, the Whitlam and Fraser Governments were birds of a feather. Whitlam replaced a scholarship system with free universal university education and Fraser retained it when he became Prime Minister. Likewise, Whitlam implemented Legal Aid and Federal school funding, and Fraser retained those. In 1974, Whitlam established the Aboriginal Loan Fund to finance buy-back of private property and the Aboriginal Loans Commission to finance Aboriginal-owned businesses and home ownership. In a similar vein, Fraser passed the Land Rights Act to give indigenous Australians control of their traditional lands in the Northern Territory. Fraser established the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS), building on the forerunner radio stations established under Whitlam.
In some respects Fraser’s Government even outdid Whitlam’s in social progressiveness. In 1965, at Whitlam’s urging and over the objections of then Federal Labor leader, Arthur Calwell, Whitlam managed to delete reference to the White Australia Policy at the biennial Labor Party conference. 1977 Cabinet documents reveal Fraser went further, to adopt a formal policy for an “humanitarian commitment to admit refugees for resettlement”.3 During the last eight months of the Whitlam Government, only 1,026 South Vietnamese were allowed entry into Australia as refugees,4 whereas over 5,000 were accepted over the ensuing two years under Fraser.5 To cite another example, in 1972 Prime Minister Whitlam ordered the Australian UN delegation to vote in favour of sanctions on apartheid South Africa. However, Fraser was yet more active in foreign policy as Prime Minister, actively assisting the Commonwealth of Nations to abolish apartheid in South Africa and was the principal architect in ending white minority rule in Rhodesia.
It has become a mantra in recent years that Fraser hung a political left after leaving office. However, the foregoing analysis evidences that Fraser, like Whitlam, was always a champion of human rights.
