Federal policy speech.  Eighteen months ago in an election triggered by a diplomatic appointment by Mr.Whitlam, which filled even his own supporters with shame, the Democratic Labor Party lost its Parliamentary representation, Mr. Whitlam declared then that the DLP had been an obstacle to good government. Has there been better government since the DLP lost its Senators? Rather has the Australian government been revealed as more incompetent ruthless and corrupt! It is commonly said that we have the best country in the world! All that is wrong is the people running it. The sheer incompetence of the Whitlam government is revealed by the fact that it cannot fight the election on its record - it has none. Instead it invests its leader with the halo of martyrdom! Surely the role of slaughtered innocent sits oddly on one whose Prime Ministership has been marked by his political assassination of Messrs. Creang, Cairns, Cope, Connor, Cameron and others of his own followers; whose proudest boast is that he destroyed four Liberal leaders – Holt, Gorton, McMahon and Snedden; whose ambition is to add to their number Fraser and even a governor-general. He has proved that he can destroy - we need another Prime Minister, who will build!  Therefore, the DLP calls on the Australian people to  1. Remove from office the corrupt, incompetent, and economically disastrous Whitlam government.  2. Restore Democratic Labor representation as an inspiration towards policies for economic good sense, wise control of inflation, free enterprise, better family life, realistic defence and foreign policies, preservation of rural industry and adequate education for all.  The unedifying Canberra events of the past two months have made many Australians determined to vote for the acceptable alternative the D.L.P. In a desperate attempt to sidetrack the real issue - the failure of his government, Mr Whitlam on 18th October, stated the issue of the Parliamentary crisis - this is the first Senate in Australian history to reject a money bill.  The President of the Australian Labor Party, Bob Hawke, supported Mr. Whitlam - he said it has not happened once in 75 years. These statements are blatantly untrue. I know because I voted in the divisions where money bills were rejected. Voting with me were Labor Ministers, Senator Lionel Murphy. D. McClelland, J.Cavanagh, and the full A.L.P. Senate team. I recall the Senate majority (Labor and DLP) defeating,, among others  1. The Income Tax Bill, 1965 - a money bill.  2. The Bill to increase Post and Telegraph Rates, 1967.  3. The State Receipts Duty Bill, 1970 - a money bill.  On May 12, 1967 (see Hansard) on the 1967 Bill, Senator Murphy was very explicit. He said: "The Labor Opposition opposes this Bill. There is no tradition, as has been suggested, that the Senate will not use its Constitutional powers, whenever it considers it necessary, or desirable to do so in the public interest. There are no limitations on the Senate in the use of its constitutional powers except the limits imposed by discretion and reason. There is no tradition in the Australian Labor Party that it will not oppose in the Senate any tax or money bill, or what might be described as a financial measure. Mr. Whitlam must have known his statement was untrue, that no Senate had ever rejected a money bill. In his own Party Caucus discussions in 1965 and 1970, he took a prominent part. The Labor Party rejected his view and supported Senator Murphy, who triumphantly incorporated in Hansard a list of almost 300 occasions when Labor Party Senators voted against money bills, supply bills and appropriation bills. The Whitlam constitutional issue is exposed as a "phoney". Australians must look at the real issues. Since 1972 we have seen two grave threats to our Parliamentary democracy - threats which Parliamentary leaders in Britain have warned are a grave danger to the Parliamentary system. They are:  One - An increasing trend for the executive power, the Cabinet, to by-pass Parliament, culminating in Mr. Whitlam's action against which even some of his own Party protest, to replace the traditional Prime Ministership by an American Presidential style of pre-watergate vintage. The Whitlam Cabinet attempted to evade Parliamentary control through the notorious Khemlani loans.  Two- Assertion by trade unions @@@ influenced), of their right to reject the rule of law in industry, reject economic policies declared by the elected government to be vital to the people's welfare, deprive citizens of their property rights and determine without regard to the elected government, government's policies on foreign affairs, defence, social issues and a host of other purely political issues.  On the first issue, we have seen  1. A first Whitlam Cabinet of two – selected by one who claims to stand for political convention.  2. The gag and guillotine regularly used to prevent all but perfunctory discussion of bills making vital changes in the Australian way of life. Twenty one bills are lined up waiting to be passed if Whitlam wins. They will change the whole face of Australia.  3. A wholesale expansion of ministers’ personal staffs a Cabinet bureaucracy.  4. A "dirty tricks" department, formed to manage the press, by offering inducements where they are acceptable and by hints and threats where they are not.  5. Blatant treachery to by-pass Parliament and the Loan Council and obtain vast sums from dubious criminally exorbitant interest rates.  The Whitlam Party poses as the champion of democracy, yet in this election a Whitlam win could end Parliamentary democracy as we know it. The second issue - trade union power - has almost brought the United Kingdom to its knees and threatens Australia with a similar fate. Australian examples are - the ban on wheat to Chile, the ban on the export of live cattle without a permit from the meat union, the ban on supplies to Australian troops in Vietnam in Australian ships, the ban on certain overseas ships unless bribes are paid to certain unions, the ban on the transport of uranium, the ban on mining on Fraser island, the ban on the erection of the Newport Power House, the ban on demolition of the Regent Theatre. All these bans imposed arbitrarily by persons not subject to popular election, are a threat to democracy. Government, both Liberals and Labor, has preferred, appeasement to assertion of the @.  It is time to assert that Australia will be governed by the people's elected representatives, not un-elected union bosses! It is no answer to ignore the facts, and as so many commentators do, bleat about "kicking the communist can. None of the four communist groups here expects to win power by political action. Where communist candidates stand, they do so only to issue propaganda and win recruits. Their power is in the trade union, and it is stronger than at any time in our history. Even though divided at the trade union level, except for occasional personalities, e.g. Mundey versus Gallagher, the communists work as a team. They have power inside the ACTU, they are close to control of the Trades Hall Councils. Their aims are to produce a revolutionary situation by  1. Amalgamation of trade unions into 4 huge economic units, each under a communist secretary, i.e. Transport, Light, Fuel and Power, Iron and Steel, and Building. With these four, they can control the economic life and eventually the political life of Australia.  2. They have the shop-steward movement whose object is to give the communists control at the job level, and by-pass any non-sympathetic non-union leaders. It should be remembered that both Bob Hawke and Clyde Cameron have warned of possible authoritarian coups unless economic disorder can be eliminated. Sharkey, the Communist theorists called the shop stewards the leaders in producing a revolutionary situation.  It is pathetic to see the Whitlam government pleading with men who are dedicated to destroy capitalism and build communism on the ruins, to instead co-operate to make free enterprise work. There is danger also in the election claims of ALP leaders that the unions will not permit a Fraser government to govern. This would mean that governments are not to be elected by the people but subject to the approval or veto of Messrs, Carmichael, Bull, Halfpenny and Gallagher. The DLP believes the solution to communism in the unions lies with the rank and file unionist. He must be activated to defeat Red influence not by bans but democratically at the union ballot box - as the Industrial Groups did. Opponents will brand a statement of policies by the DLP as unrealistic. They believe we will not be a government. Yet ideas in world history have outweighed numbers. In the Senate we voted for issues on their merits - not on the rigid party lines of the Government and official opposition. Our presence was for years a factor in resolving Senate deadlocks, when neither major party would budge. We were a powerful factor in influencing desirable advances on pensions, social issues, housing the family, especially education and child endowment, defence and foreign policy, industrial and economic policy. We will do that again.  THE ECONOMY  The Whitlam Government, whose leader is so scapegoat-minded has sought a scapegoat for its misgovernment in overseas conditions. That is an unacceptable plea. In countries like Britain or Japan, their problem has been the need to spend vast sums on imports of food, raw materials and especially oil. We are the lucky country. We have all the food we need, vie have most raw materials, we produce 70% of our own oil (and that the most costly type). Overseas conditions have some effect, but overall our troubles are due to ineffective and disastrous government policies, which were humiliatingly reversed by the Socialist-minded Whitlam government-in recent months. No political party has an infallible nostrum for our economic ills and the DLP does not claim to be an exception. The first essential is a restoration of confidence. Investment and employment are bound up with this, just as during the depression of the early thirties. Government policies must seek to restore the private sector, to rehabilitate the struggling farmer and aid the small business man. If this is done, Australia has the resources for complete recovery.  The DLP recommends in addition  a) Substantial cuts in unessential government expenditure, which has been a major contributor to the inflation rate.  b) reform of the tax structure - tax indexation both for @.  c) Wage indexation.  d) A return to the Rule of Law in industry. Outlawing of political strikes.  e) immediate reduction of excessive charges for postal and communication services, which are gravely inflationary and affect all industry, especially rural industry.  f) Encouragement for mineral industry development and oil exploration. If our present oil supplies run out, we will face vast increases in our overseas costs.  g) A more stable economy would eventually make possible a desirable lowering of interest rates.  The DLP will call in the Senate for a complete survey of the whole field of rural industry and its problems over the next decade at least. We sought this in the last Parliament, without avail. It was contended that each rural industry wished to be a law to itself. That policy has been a failure. An overall rural plan is vital. Rural industry and the mining industry are the mainstays of our export trade and deserve encouragement, not the economic attacks under which they have suffered in the past 3 years. Finally, there is a need for every Australian to work to make his country a better place. Wage increases ultimately must depend on increases in productivity and not the something for nothing attitude encouraged by the Whitlam government.  SENATE RIGHTS.  All the hysteria and emotion about Senate powers is unnecessary and bogus. There is a method available to obtain democratically the people's decision on Senate powers - a referendum. The DLP has no objection to such a referendum.  FOREIGN POLICY AND DEFENCE.  As a result of Liberal ineptitude, the 1972 and 1974 elections were fought with foreign policy and defence non-issues. As these two issues have been for years Labor's Achilles heel, it is no wonder Whitlam won!  FOREIGN POLICY (Cont).  Australian foreign policy and the defence policies associated with it are the creation of Mr. Whitlam. He has said that he believed himself to be the greatest Foreign Minister in Australian history. When pressure was put on him by his party to relinquish the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and concentrate en the Prime Ministership where frequent absences abroad would not leave Australia leaderless, he used a subterfuge to retain Foreign Affairs. He removed the Ministry from the House of Representatives so that he could remain spokesman for it there. The Titular Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Willesee, was to Whitlam a figurehead. Our foreign policy is Mr. Whitlam’s. The keynote of the Whitlam policy was set some years ago, when returning from South East Asia, he said we must accept division of the world of the future into spheres of influence dominated by super-powers -Europe to the Soviet; North America to the United States; South East Asia and probably us, to Red China. Whitlam's policies in Asia are dominated by the need to appease China, but appeasement does not bring peace - it brings war. The danger to us is greater when our defences are emasculated. Remember, most of the world's people today live under communism - Russia is the most powerful military nation in the world. Yet the Whitlam cry is that a world full of violence has offered us immunity for 10 or 15 years!  The DLP offers these realistic policies:  1. We should make ourselves as self reliant as possible in defence, even if this involves considerable spending on the army, navy and airforce. Even if danger were not in sight for 10 years, it would take all that to rebuild our defences.  2. We should prove by self reliant defences to our allies in Anzus that we are equipped to make a contribution to mutual security instead of adopting the Whitlam policy of free- loading. Our army of 30,000 means only 5,000 fighting men. Our navy, airforce and defence supply department are equally in need.  3. Our subservience to Peking should be replaced by a cool realization that China regards 12 million people as of minimal importance and their interest in us only extends as far as we can be made us of.  4. Alliances and associations with Britain, U.S.A. and friendly South East Asian countries, especially Indonesia, should be strengthened.  5. Double diplomacy, e.g. encouraging guerrillas in countries like Vietnam, Laos, South Africa, Cambodia, Rhodesia, while condemning them in countries under Communist rules should cease.  6. Aid to "have not" countries should be doubled at least. Our aid is still small and largely confined to New Guinea.  7. Oil exploration should be stepped up on terms attracting overseas capital but ensuring adequate Australian content.  8. Friendlier relations should be cultivated with the Pacific Island areas and mutual security agreements encouraged.  EDUCATION.  The DLP stands for the best possible education for Australian youth. It therefore supports the dual system of State and registered schools. It should be remembered that the DLP pioneered the call for aid, a better term for which is "justice" - for the registered schools. The DLP also supported and voted in the Senate for every proposal to advance State education. The DLP believes that there should be a survey of the whole field of education. Australians have readily provided money in astronomical quantities for education, but are we getting value? Should we spend more on primary education and less on the more glamorous forms. Where are the advances best made? A wide ranging survey should be made to provide the answers, so that we get full value in both State and registered schools. Mr. Whitlam profited in 1972 by posing as the friend of the registered schools. He promised additional aid and that no aid then being given would be withdrawn. Yet he proceeded to withdraw all aid from A class schools and only reversed the decision under DLP pressure. Parents of children, in A class schools should remember that Mr. Whitlam declared their aid would be continued only for 2 Years. That term is @.  EDUCATION (Cont).  Perhaps Mr. Whitlam’s true attitude was shown when he eliminated in his Budget, tax concessions to parents of children in private schools. The increased sums allocated to private schools have largely been robbed of their value by Whitlam-caused inflation. The DLP regards the latest Schools Commission Report as most unsatisfactory. The DLP attitude is for each child to be treated equally no matter what type of school he or she attends. Finally, the DLP believes there should be an examination of the voucher system favoured by many teachers as a remedy for excessive centralism.  RURAL.  Long ago, Mr. Whitlam decided that elections were determined by the city vote, the pensioner vote and the civil service vote. That explains his indifference to rural problems. Even Senator Wireidt, who is closer to him that most of his Ministers, could get little from Whitlam for the farmer, and it is no secret that he was glad to be transferred from the Primary Production portfolio. Mr. Whitlam's creed is that the farmer has never had it so good and therefore Labor's mission should be to improve the quality of life in the cities. Yet rural production is our biggest industry and today languishes from governmental indifference and neglect! Farmers, whose debts are mounting and whose prospects are deteriorating for the first time in history, demand the equivalent of unemployment pay. Their problems have no hope of solution under a Labor government. The DLP advocates an overall survey of rural industry to spotlight problems and determine solutions. The DLP calls for long term finance at low interest rates, reform or elimination of estate duties, immediate drastic reduction of postal, telephone and other communication charges and measures for effective decentralisation and preservation of the family farm. Without measures such as these, the Country will die, and Australia will be the worse for it!  HEALTH and HOUSING.  The DLP originally opposed Medibank. We believed the voluntary Health Benefits system effectively covered 90% of the people and the Government should provide for pensioners and those unable to cope. Whitlam Labor pressed on and as a result we have a huge bureaucracy set up to handle Medibank and promising unlimited problems with doctors, pharmacists and others - also unlimited costs! When Australians, receive their tax assessments they will realize that Medib-W1k is not free! The DLP will urge the new government to seek a better system, with less regimentation, less bureaucracy and less cost. On housing, Whitlam, Labor has been a total loss. The building industry is at an all-time low, and homes are priced out of the home seekers reach. The DLP will seek to divert finance to home builders at lower interest rates. The DLP, in order to assist genuine home seekers, calls for a reduction in interest rates and the re-introduction of an up-dated Home Grants system which in the past has helped young people to reach the deposit required by lending institutions. We call again for the setting up of a special fund at the Reserve Bank which will provide loans for the erection of homes on the purchaser's own land, the purchase of land itself, the purchase of a home already built, or the purchase of a home unit.  SOCIAL JUSTICE.  In the area of social policy there are two groups of persons which require immediate and sympathetic attention the pensioner and the family man.  Pensioners - Pensioners have not and will not receive justice under the existing system, where pension rates are determined in the auction room atmosphere of politics, particularly at Budget time or Election time. All pension rates should be determined on a regular basis by an independent tribunal of exports. The tribunal, which should include a pensioner representative, should review all the relevant criteria, cost of living, prices, wage increases, etc. On many occasions the DLP moved in the Senate for the establishment of such a tribunal and on every occasion the ALP joined with the Liberal-Country Party to defeat it. The tribunal, would now be a reality if the ALP had, for once, voted for a proposal on its merits and not solely on @.  SOCIAL JUSTICE (Cont).  The best way to assist the family is through child endowment. Under the present and past Governments, child endowment payments have been allowed to decline in real value. The DLP believes that child endowment payments should be increased, particularly for the third, fourth and later children, and that, the increase should be on a graduated basis. There is no point or logic in spending millions dollars on immigration if the natural increase in population is ignored and not encouraged. To assist those families who are experiencing accommodation problems, the DW also advocates the introduction in Australia of the very successful New Zealand scheme of the capitalisation of child endowment payments in a lump sum for housing additions and improvements. The DLP directs attention to and supports the child endowment policies set out by Professor Henderson in his report on poverty, especially regarding large families.  WOMEN.  The DLP affirms that women have certain undeniable natural rights. Foremost is the right to contribute to the welfare of home and family as a full-time homemaker. While women have a rightful role as part of the workforce, it cannot be accepted that this role be promoted as superior to a woman's traditional role in society as a full time homemaker, particularly if she has dependent children. To assist these women to maintain their rightful natural role in Australian society, the DLP calls for:  1. An inquiry into the contribution made to the community by the mother who stays at home, and an assessment of its value.  2. Immediate and significant increases in child endowment.  3. Promotion of family life education, especially at the secondary school level.  Working women.  The DLP advocates that married women be guaranteed absolute freedom of choice as to whether they wish to work in industry or to care for their families full-time. There is no real freedom of choice unless the economic rewards of both occupations are substantially the same. In order to ensure absolute freedom of choice for married women, the Arbitration Commission be urged to structure a new wage system on the following principles  a) There should be a Standard Wage, expressly fashioned to provide for the 'needs' of the unmarried wage-earner, including savings for marriage.  b) There should be equal pay for equal work among male and female workers.  c) There should be a-system of Family Allowances, including an allowance for the wife who chooses to stay at home and for each child, fixed at a level to meet the actual cost of maintaining both wife and children.  REFUGEES.  The DLP regrets and condemns the callous indifference of the Whitlam government to the plight of refugees, particularly from Vietnam. The DLP will urge the new government to undertake a realistic, contribution to world refugee problems.  ABOLITION OF DEATH DUTIES.  Let me now turn to another issue - the abolition of probate or death duties - in which the DLP has played a leading role. We believe that death duties must be abolished on the following grounds. While a man is working, his income is taxed. It is outrage that when he dies, his life savings are also taxed! The tax schedules for probate have remained unaltered for more than two decades. Inflation over that period leads to ever higher valuations on farms, houses and other property. As a result, ordinary Australians are being taxed as if they were cattle kings or squatter barons.  DEATH DUTIES (cont).  In the case of the primary producers, over the past 10 years they have paid on average 35% of all Federal death duties collected by Canberra. But primary producers make up only 7% of all taxpayers. This is blatant discrimination against the rural community, practised - I remind  You- by both Liberal-Country Party and Labor Governments. In the cities, too often a widow is forced to sell up the family home to pay death duties because inflation has caused her home to be valued at ridiculous levels. The DLP had a Bill before the Senate to solve the problem by the complete abolition of Commonwealth probate. The Liberal-Country Party coalition always refused to abolish probate when it held office. Perhaps in order to win office, it will repent and support our proposal!  INDUSTRIAL.  The DLP believes that a return to the Rule of Law in industry is vital to our economic and social future. Therefore the DLP calls for Australian governments to defend the Arbitration system against the efforts of so-called militant and communist union leaders to destroy it. The DLP points to the warning given by Mr. J.B.Chifley in 1947 - "There are circumstances that must be guarded against, those that arise as a result of employers and employees engaged in industries that are almost monopolistic, coming together and reaching an agreement with a certainty that they will be permitted to pass on to the consuming public the excessive costs arising from such agreements”. Governments must insist that the public interest be not excluded from such negotiations and where, powerful unions threaten, employers with demands for. such "sweetheart agreements" governments must firmly protect those threatened. The DLP further believes that  1. The use of trade union strength by strike action to achieve political purposes should be made contrary to law.  2. That the trade union movement be called upon to develop effective procedures for dealing with demarcation disputes, so preventing ruinous strikes.  3. That elections for full time union officials be according to a system of compulsory voting in ballots conducted by Commonwealth Electoral officers.  INDUSTRIAL (Cont).  4. That employers be encouraged by tax and other concessions to introduce as far as possible worker participation and profit-sharing.  5. That the principle of secret ballots on strikes is democratic and desirable.  6. That wage and tax indexation should be implemented.  OIL.  The failure of the Whitlam government to promote oil exploration has gravely endangered our economic future. Our reserves have been allowed to fall from 2,300 million barrels in 1970 to 1,700 million in 1974. No new reserves have been discovered and consumption is rising. Oil imports have been estimated to cost  $650 million 1975  $1300 million 1977  $2000 million after 1980.  The Whitlam government removed exploration incentives and, exploration dropped catastrophically. Investment allowances should be re-introduced, together with tax concessions for exploration. Australia must provide significant sums for exploration and development of newly discovered fields. Oil exploration is a gamble but the rewards can be more than worth while. Additionally, Australia should seek to produce oil from its proven coal deposits. Oil price rises can make this an economic pro-position. We should plan to produce oil from coal deposits in the Eastern States. We will need home-produced oil for industry and defence, and as a barrier against inflation.  Environment.  The DLP strongly supports policies for the protection and improvement of the environment. The DLP however, condemns approaches by certain pro-environment organisations to trade unions, seeking to make them and their officials the arbiters on environmental disagreements. The DLP supports the establishment of judicial tribunals to determine such disagreements, the decisions of such tribunals, which shall have power to co-opt expert advice, to be final and enforced by law.  BALTIC NATIONS.  The DLP is irrevocably opposed to the Australian Government’s recognition of Soviet control over the captive Baltic nations. The DLP directs attention to the broken promise of Mr. Whitlam prior to the last election that his government would not recognise Soviet control over the Baltic nations.  DEFENCE FORCES.  The DLP will strive to  a) Widen the powers and charter of the National Disaster Organisation to incorporate Federal, State and Local Government representation and incorporate the armed services to the extent of purporting a purposeful, vital and essential need for the services in both peace and war.  b) Fully involve the expertise and technological training of the Services in national scientific and research programmes thereby allowing members to -apply the benefits of their education to their satisfaction and the nation's benefit.  c) Take all necessary practical actions to develop a living awareness within the Services and the nation at large of the achievements and traditions of our Services.  d) Relate individual service units to the local community and give commanders the facilities to allow effective cultivation of this concept.  DEFENCE FORCES (Cont).  e) Modernise service dress so that servicemen and women again wear their uniforms in public with pride and dignity.  f) Establish a Defence Forces Work and Resettlement Commission to continually investigate and advise or implement conditions of service, pay variations and repatriation in accord with the relevant conditions applying in outside industry.  g) Provide such national works as will anticipate wartime defence needs.  We record the fact that the DLP was the initiator of the inception of a National Disaster Organisation.  MIGRANTS.  The DLP supports migration and regrets the recent restrictions. It points to the words of the late Albert Monk that you cannot turn migration on and off like a tap. The great advances made in Australia since 1946 were to a big extent due to the migrant contribution.  The DLP calls for -  1. Increased assistance for family migration.  2. Supervised migration of single women in collaboration with national, Church and philanthropic bodies.  3. More humane attitudes to Asian migration.  The DLP condemns anti-migrant attitudes and attacks on human rights of migrants, of which the raids and attacks on citizens of Croatian origin were the worst attacks on human rights in Australian history.  ELECTORAL.  A sinister feature of the Whitlam Governments' plans is its legislative programme to alter the electoral system to perpetuate itself in power.  Features of this programme are -  1. Electorates are to he made equal in population, not in numbers of voters. With Labor electorates containing more children, this gives the adult vote in a Labor electorate far more value than a Liberal or Country Party vote.  2. The present ballot system is to be altered to first past the post or optional preferential. Either change gives substantial advantages to the Labor Party.  3. As part of the Labor plan to discourage or destroy small parties, large scale increases in candidates' deposits, and percentages necessary for the return of deposits are to be introduced. Yet, it is only a few years since they were previously increased. The DLP firmly supports the only just system preferential voting and proportional representation.  THE MEDIA.  The media can make or mar the election. It could be a British style election with not only major but also minority opinions represented, or an American Presidential style election - Whitlam v. Fraser. That was the style in 1972 and 1974, which were both media disasters. The DLP in 1972 and 1974 were censored from the election debate. We had five Senators and were the decisive force in the Senate, yet with most of the media we did not exist! If only we could get the coverage given to the Communist Party - the Mundey's, Gallagher’s, Halfpenny's and Carmichael’s. The DLP hopes the call for a fair go in the election will not be confined to Mr. Whitlam; minority views deserve a fair go too!  THE NEXT ELECTION.  This election will not be the decisive one for Australia; the decisive election will be the one after it. If Fraser wins, as we believe he will, everything will depend on his ability to do a good job. Already union elements are declaring that there will be no co-operation with a Fraser government and that the unions will bring him down. Their  belief is that Australia will then turn back to and give it the power in both Houses to implement Socialism. That is why whatever the result on December 13, the DLP will continue. Already we have created a record. No other small party in Australian history has lasted 21 years. The pressures favouring the major parties are too great. To those who sneer at the DLP’s performance. We point out that if someone opened a shop between Coles and Woolworth's and in competition with them, the fact that he failed to put both out of business would not mean that he was a poor businessman or sold a poor type of article. The DLP does not resent those who examine our arguments; we do resent those who ignore our arguments and attack us. We will still be there when the real crisis comes in the next five years!