More featuring Lang Hancock» , Secession»

Lang Hancock, “Saving Australia from socialism,”
The West Australian, April 10, 1974, p. 6, as a letter to the editor.

LANG HANCOCK, Perth: Every loyal West Australian will wish Sir Charles Court well in his approaches to the Commonwealth Government.

Unfortunately for Sir Charles, matters are beyond his control. His suggested conciliatory approach, or a straight-out confrontation, will have little effect on the Canberra bureaucracy which wants, and takes, more and more of the control of government from WA to build up its own ever-growing departmental empires.

The message from Canberra is loud and clear. Sir Charles Court’s praiseworthy hopes of WA development will in all probability be stymied.

The bureaucracy has resolved that there is to be no relaxation of any count for any project by any government (Labor or Liberal) of the Reserve Bank’s requirement of 33 1/3 per cent non-interest bearing lodgement with respect to overseas borrowings. The bureaucracy is adamant on this point.

Mr Whitlam could not shift them to aid the Tonkin Government or his friend Rupert Murdoch in the Alwest case. Admittedly with its large foreign content it was a bad one to try on.

Though he lost the State election, the result was a personal triumph for Mr Tonkin in the metropolitan area which has not yet been visibly affected by Canberra.

Sir Charles’s victory was an overwhelming reaction against the ALP government in localities where people were brought more into contact with the devastating effects of Canberra and its policies; Sir Charles must now try to do better than Mr Tonkin. Reality indicates that this is well nigh impossible.

The Senate is of greater importance than the so-called unity of four non-socialist States in defeating Canberra socialism. WA’s only hope then is to try to strengthen the resolve of the three anti-Labor parties in the Senate to reject all of the Bills which contain socialist-nationalisation machinery.

People in WA are coming round to the view that the best way of saving Australia from back-door nationalisation is to get effective representation in the Senate by electing candidates on the secessionist issue, instead of the usual party hacks. If the Senate should fail in its duty to protect WA then West Australians could secede. That would preserve this State from the dead hand of Allende-style nationalisation of private industry and people’s livelihood which brought Chile to a standstill.

There is no thought in any secessionist’s mind of dividing the nation. It is more a campaign to preserve WA’s economic and defence positions and by doing so helping to safeguard all of Australia.

Secessionists want nothing to do with mischievous talk of incitement to arms. This is ridiculous: Australia’s army has been reduced to an ineffective size (it is only one quarter the size that tiny Portugal keeps in just one of its territories) and therefore could not, and certainly would not, do anything to invade WA.

West Australians deplore Australia’s total lack of defence and the Brisbane-line outlook of Canberra involving total abandonment of WA to potential enemies.

West Australians deplore abandonment of the only allies that could possibly afford Australia and WA an umbrella of safety. They deplore the lowering standards of parliamentary government in Canberra as evidenced by Senator Gair in his defection to Labor Party interests and the defection of Liberal Party leaders (Messrs Lynch, McMahon and Snedden) to socialist philosophy in their sell-out to the Labor Party in supporting the Government’s Financial Corporation Bill.

Fortunately in WA all major parties are blessed with leaders of quality.

Fair-minded people of all political parties can see that secession has a much wider aspect than just promoting the welfare of WA as a prosperous free-trade, fast-developing territory. Secessionists have the welfare and safety of the whole of Australia at heart, not just the western part of the continent.

*****
Lang Hancock, “DEVELOPMENT — A BENEFIT FOR ALL,”
The West Australian, April 18, 1974, p. 6, as a letter to the editor.

LANG HANCOCK, Perth: In reply to Mr Hooton and Mr Page (April 16), the words “most of the people will be working to enrich the lives of a favoured few” could only be true if the proposed nationalisation Bills are not thrown out by the Senate, as advocated by the WA secessionist movement — the favoured few being the power-hungry “fat cats” in Canberra.

In the secessionists’ vision of a “prosperous free-trade fast-developing WA” in which the standard of living of the average person — not only the favoured few — would probably double in five years, it would certainly not be a case of “workers swarming over every undeveloped square mile, digging, blasting etc.”

Every Australian should be aware that the digging and blasting by the mining industry, without which Australia’s living standards would fall drastically, occupies less than a quarter of 1 per cent of Australia’s total land surface. Surely a very small price to pay for the very high standard of living enjoyed by Australian generally — not just a favoured few.

We all want clean air and clean water. I believe that I have worked as hard as anybody to obtain this for Australia because I honestly believe that the answer to Australia’s energy and industrial pollution problems lies in developing clean, safe, nuclear power.

If we develop our country and by so doing raise our standard of living, it seems to be the only guarantee of safety that we have. As you know Australia is not defendable by only 14 million Australians — any one of our near neighbours could take us by telephone.

Therefore if we are to survive, the only course that seems open to us is to make ourselves indispensable to one or more of the major nuclear powers, by developing our natural resources.

My advocacy is that we reverse the ALP Government’s “resources diplomacy” and develop our resources as fast as possible to supply the needs of powers who would be forced to defend us in order to maintain their own standard of living.

I believe that we could make ourselves indispensable, not only to Japan, but to the United States who will, over the next quarter of a century, need: 7,000 million tons of iron ore, more than 1,000 million tons of bauxite, 1,000 million tons of phosphate rock, 100 million tons of copper, 20,000 million tons of coal and 100,000 million tons of stone, sand and gravel.

Quite a proportion of these huge quantities can be developed and exported without in any way seriously depleting WA’s reserves — such is WA’s untapped wealth.

While not quarrelling with the concept of “a magnificent place to escape to during a weekend,” I do not lose sight of the fact that it is only through mining the road-making sealing material that these sanctuaries (sometimes hundreds of miles away from the cities) can be reached, otherwise it would be a case of having to walk.

(in order of appearance on Economics.org.au)
  1. Ron Manners’ Heroic Misadventures
  2. Hancock's Australia
  3. Hancock on Government Help
  4. Wake Up Australia: Excerpts Part 1
  5. Wake Up Australia: Excerpts Part 2
  6. Lang Hancock's Five Point Plan to Cripple Australia
  7. Governments Consume Wealth — They Don't Create It
  8. Up the Workers! Bob Howard's 1979 Workers Party Reflection in Playboy
  9. Jump on the Joh bandwagon
  10. John Singleton and Bob Howard 1975 Monday Conference TV Interview on the Workers Party
  11. Governments — like a red rag to a Rogue Bull
  12. Lang Hancock's Pilbara-Queensland Railway Proposal
  13. Singo, Howard and Hancock Want to Secede
  14. Lang Hancock's Foreword to Rip Van Australia
  15. New party will not tolerate bludgers: Radical party against welfare state
  16. Small and Big Business Should Oppose Government, says Lang Hancock
  17. A Condensed Case for Secession
  18. Hancock gets tough over uranium mining
  19. Hancock's threat to secede and faith in Whitlam
  20. PM's sky-high promise to Lang
  21. Govt "villain" in eyes of new party
  22. The spread of Canberra-ism
  23. Govt should sell the ABC, says Lang Hancock
  24. 1971 Monday Conference transcript featuring Lang Hancock
  25. Aborigines, Bjelke and the freedom of the press
  26. The code of Lang Hancock
  27. Why not starve the taxation monster?
  28. Lang Hancock 1978 George Negus Interview
  29. Party Promises to Abolish Tax
  30. Right-wing plot
  31. "The best way to help the poor is not to become one of them." - Lang Hancock
  32. WA's NCP commits suicide
  33. "You can't live off a sacred site"
  34. Hancock: King of the Pilbara
  35. Bludgers need not apply
  36. New party formed "to slash controls"
  37. Workers Party Reunion Intro
  38. Workers Party is born as foe of government
  39. Government seen by new party as evil
  40. Ron Manners on Lang Hancock
  41. Does Canberra leave us any alternative to secession?
  42. Bury Hancock Week
  43. Ron Manners on the Workers Party
  44. Lang Hancock on Australia Today
  45. Hancock and Wright
  46. Lang Hancock on Environmentalists
  47. Friends of free enterprise treated to financial tete-a-tete: Lang does the talking but Gina pulls the strings
  48. Lang Hancock, Stump Jumper
  49. Lang Hancock: giant of the western iron age
  50. The Treasury needs a hatchet man
  51. We Mine to Live
  52. Get the "econuts" off our backs
  53. 1971 Lang Hancock-Jonathan Aitken interview for Land of Fortune (short)
  54. Gina Rinehart, Secessionist
  55. 1982 NYT Lang Hancock profile
  56. Enter Rio Tinto
  57. Hamersley and Tom Price
  58. News in the West
  59. Positive review of Hancock speech
  60. Lang Hancock International Press Institute General Assembly speech, Canberra, 1978
  61. Australia's slide to socialism
  62. The Great Claim Robbery
  63. Why WA must go it alone
  64. Lang Hancock in 1976 on Public Picnics and Human Blights
  65. MILLIONAIRE PUTS MONEY BEHIND SECESSIONISTS
  66. Resource Management in Australia: Is it possible?
  67. The gospel of WA secession according to Lang Hancock
  68. Crystal Balls Need Polishing
  69. Minerals - politicians' playthings?
  70. John Singleton-Ita Buttrose interview (1977)
  71. Boston Tea Party 1986 style, hosted by Lang Hancock and Bob Ansett
  72. Singo says Lang Hancock violated Australia's 11th commandment: Thou Shalt Not Succeed
  73. Singleton: the White Knight of Ockerdom
  74. Tactics change by Hancock
  75. Lang Hancock complains to Margaret Thatcher about Malcolm Fraser
  76. 'Phony crisis' seen as 'child of politics'
  77. Lang Hancock on nuclear energy
  78. Lang Hancock beats the left at their own game on civil liberties
  79. Lang Hancock's Favourite Books
  80. 1977 Lang Hancock Canberoo poem
  81. Hancock's playing very hard to get
  82. Hancock proposes a free-trade zone
  83. An Open Letter to Sir Charles Court
  84. John Singleton 1976 ocker Monday Conference Max Harris debate
  85. Lang Hancock in 1984 solves Australian politics
  86. Lang Hancock on the Workers Party, secession and States Rights
  87. Lang Hancock asks what happened to Australia's rugged individualism?
  88. Precis of Ludwig Plan for North-West
  89. Announcement that Lang Hancock will be guest of honour at the Workers Party launch
  90. Lang Hancock's March 1983 attempt to enlist "former presidents of nations and heads of giant companies" to save Australia
  91. Lang Hancock asks us to think how easily environmentalists are manipulated for political purposes
  92. Invest in free enterprise
  93. Democracy is dead in Australia and Lang Hancock's education
  94. Lang Hancock Incites Civil Disobedience
  95. Hancock sounds call to battle Canberra
  96. Mining policy a threat
  97. Over Whitlam's head
  98. Lang Hancock suggests that newspapers don't give space to politicians unconditionally
  99. Lang Hancock on saving Australia from socialism
  100. Secede or sink
  101. Australia can learn from Thatcher
  102. John Singleton. Horseracing. Why?
  103. How Lang Hancock would fix the economy
  104. Lang Hancock: victim of retrospective legislation
  105. Lang Hancock supports Joh for PM
  106. Hancock seeks miners' tax haven in the north
  107. The Ord River Dam
  108. Why Lang Hancock invested in Australia's film industry
  109. Lang Hancock's 1983 letters to The Australian: Lang's precedent for Steve Jobs, renaming the Lucky Country to the Constipated Country, and more
  110. Australia's biggest newspaper insider on manipulating the media
  111. 1980 Lang Hancock-Australian Penthouse Interview
  112. Canberra: bastion of bureaucracy
  113. Pilbara can be the Ruhr for South-East Asia
  114. 1982 Lang Hancock-John Harper Nelson Interview
  115. Australian elections are one of the greatest con games in history
  116. Our leaders are powerless
Powered by Hackadelic Sliding Notes 1.6.5