Following the chaos of the Whitlam years, Fraser had restored calm and order to the nation’s government. The budget was brought under control. It was being steadily returned to surplus until the recession of the early ‘80s hit, and this had happened through a time of subdued world economic growth.
To properly assess Malcolm Fraser’s economic stewardship is to understand that, first and foremost, he was a creature of the Menzies–McEwen period of economic management, when plenty of benign and protective government intervention appeared to work. There was strong growth and low unemployment to show for it. Why, therefore, should those policies not be continued? Fraser, and many around him, brought that attitude back to government in 1975.
For the seven-and-a-half years that we had worked together, the relationship between Malcolm Fraser and me had been politically close. I was an advocate for Fraser within the parliamentary party, as I always believed that he was the right person to lead the party through the time that we were in government. I also had a strong sense of loyalty towards him, reinforced by his generous promotion of me. Our relationship, although friendly, was very much a professional political one, which was never likely to continue once he left parliament in 1983.
My differences with Fraser, in government, were confined to certain economic issues. It was during my prime ministership that we really parted company, with Fraser attacking many of my stances on social and foreign policy as well: the handling of Pauline Hanson, asylum-seekers, a formal apology to Indigenous people and involvement in Iraq. His quite unfounded allegation that I played the race card ignored, for example, the fact that during the time I was PM my Government maintained a non-discriminatory immigration policy. I deny the claim in Fraser’s memoirs, co-authored with Margaret Simons, that in 1977 I said to him, in a corridor conversation, that we should not take too many Vietnamese refugees.
In 1993 Malcolm Fraser announced that he would seek the federal presidency of the Liberal Party, but pulled out when it was obvious that he would not be elected. His withdrawal speech vehemently attacked freemarket economics. He said that a small group had pushed our policies further to the right, and that the Liberal Party had become a right-wing conservative one. This was an ideological distortion, but one he would increasingly invoke to explain the growing gulf between him and the party he once led. In truth, the 1980s saw a major shift in the centre of gravity of the economic debate towards a more free-market approach. Attitudes within the Coalition parties as well as the ALP reflected this change.
For Malcolm Fraser, the harsh reality was that legions of Liberals felt that he had not used the massive mandates of 1975 and 1977 to effect sufficient change. Moreover, as time passed, many staunch Liberals who had gone to the barricades for him in 1975 deeply resented his regular attacks on my Government during our time in office.
Although I had commenced my ministerial career with anything but a strong commitment to economic rationalism, I had, by the time of the Fraser Government’s defeat in 1983, gone through something of an epiphany. The influences on me had been many and varied, most particularly the experience of administering the Treasury portfolio. In opposition I was to develop my views even further, especially in respect of industrial relations policy.
In retrospect it was clear during the 1980s that Australia needed broad economic reforms to taxation, the labour market, industry protection and the financial system. As well, governments had to be taken out of the ownership of business undertakings. The economic story of the ensuing 25 years was how both Coalition and Labor governments contributed to that reform task, and how in opposition the Coalition also gave crucial support to ALP reforms — a gesture never reciprocated when the ALP was in opposition. I was a major player in that saga, from both government and opposition, and many of the pages which follow contain a detailed account of that economic journey which did so much to ensure that when the global financial crisis of 2008 hit, our nation was better placed than most to withstand its ravages.
Plate 1
My parents married on 11 July 1925 at Marrickville in Sydney. They devoted their lives to the welfare and future of their four sons.
My father ‘somewhere on the Western Front’. A gas attack damaged his lungs, which contributed to his death at age 59.
Plate 2
It was a short walk from home to Earlwood Primary School. Here I am aged six, sixth from the left in the third row. World War II ended the year before.
Dad’s garage in 1954, just after going ‘one brand’. It was at the corner of Wardell Road and Ewart Street, Dulwich Hill, Sydney. I loved working there.
Plate 3
The Canterbury Boys High School debating team of 1956 (second from the left, front row). Debating gave the priceless discipline of marshalling arguments.
I played in the CBHS Second XI in 1956 (second from the right, front row). Captain Ian Sharpe, on my right, later a professor of economics, was a good leg spinner.
Plate 4
Before a family wedding early in 1955. Dad’s health was failing; he died nine months later. The Howard brothers (from left to right): Stan, John, Bob and Wal.
With Mum at my law graduation early in 1961. My hearing problem made university quite taxing. It also meant I could not go to the bar.
Plate 5
A safe federal seat: Janette and I show elation after the Liberals picked me for Bennelong in December 1973. It was a marathon day.
Plate 6
Our wedding day at St Peter’s, Watsons Bay, 4 April 1971.
A polling booth at Gladesville Public School on election day, October 1980. Fraser’s retreat on taxation would later disappoint me.
Plate 7
This family photo was taken after Richard’s birth in September 1980. Melanie, looking cute, is aged six. I am holding Tim, approaching three.
Plate 8