Please wait. Contacting image service... loading
Hide article pages Show article pages
  1. Page 1
    Page 1 thumbnail
  2. Page 2
    Page 2 thumbnail

Article text

On this Page 1
Downer's day looks up
COMMENT
Peter Cole-Adams
It's hard to say which was
more remarkable - the out
come or the process by which it
was achieved.
Either way, Alexander Down
er, who was sorely in need^of a
victory, and the federal leader
ship of the Liberal Party had a
very good day at the party's
Federal Council in Albury.
They won on all three of the
constitutional amendments de
signed to give the party's feder
al executive some real clout for
the first time in the Liberals'
50-year history, and on a fourth
which will lead to the party's
federal council becoming a
much larger and more repre
sentative body.
But not before some of the
strangest shenanigans ever wit
nessed at one of these usually
sedate annual talkfests. Briefly,
a vote on the most controversial
of the amendments, which was
well and truly lost on the first
count, was won by the narrow
est possible majority on a re
count ordered, against strenu
ous objections, by party
president Tony Staley.
The effect of that recount, as
suming it is endorsed by four of
the seven state and territory
Liberal divisions (which is not a
foregone conclusion), was to
give the federal executive a po
tentially dangerous power.
Continued on Page 2

The day looks up for Opposition Leader Downer

Continued from Page 1

It is a power that, at least until
Friday, its most optimistic mem
bers had thought they were un
likely to be granted - the author
ity, admittedly only by a hefty 75
per cent majority, to discipline
and even remove endorsement
from federal parliamentarians or
candidates. Even yesterday morn
ing, Downer and his allies would
have been happy enough if they
had lost on that motion (which
had only been circulated a week
ago) but won on two others giv
ing the federal executive power,
in extreme circumstances and by
a three-quarters majority, to veto

federal candidates after preselec
tion and to intervene in the af
fairs of state parties in the event
of insolvency or financial mis
management. In the event, both
of those amendments, after modi
fication to ensure due process,
passed easily.

Which brings me back to that
amazing vote and recount on the
third motion. By some curious
accident or alchemy, no less than
eight votes that had not been reg
istered the first time, or that had
gone uncounted, suddenly materi
alised, splitting 7-1 and producing
the magic figure of 39 "ayes", the
bare three-fifths majority re

quired. On the first-show of
hands, the vote had been*32-24.
The second time around (and
they counted it twice, just to
make sure) it was 39-25. In be
tween, there had been a vote on
the move to allow a recount. We
never did get the figures for that
one, although it should be record
ed that Downer voted against it.

Staley over-ruled an objection
that a recount was unconstitu
tional because the result had al
ready been declared. He then fell
back on standing orders to refuse
an extension of time to allow de
bate on an amendment that
would have enabled the federal

executive to discipline not only
MPs and candidates, but party of
ficials, including himself.

The best - and most respect
able - explanation for the voting
turnaround seems to be that, on
the first count, some delegates
were outside having a smoke and
a few waverers raised their
hands only after the tellers had
passed them. Whatever the rea
sons, the final outcome is a sig
nal triumph for Downer and the
"feds" against the party's hard
line states' Righters - Liberal
leaders, going back to Menzies
had sought similar constitutional
changes and been rebuffed - al

though it should be noted that op
position also came from party
moderates concerned about the
implications for the traditional
freedom of Liberal MPs to speak
out and even 'cross the floor on
issues of conscience.

Whether it will stick is another
matter.

For the constitutional changes
accepted by the council yesterday
to become operative, they must
be ratified by the executives of at
least four of the seven divisions
(the six states and the ACT) with
in three months.

Western Australia and Tasma
nia voted solidly against the con

tentious Motion 3 yesterday.
Queensland split five-three
against, and a well-informqd
Queensland - delegate said there
was "no way" that the state exec
utive would endorse it, having
voted by an overwhelming major
ity a few weeks ago to reject fed
eral intervention even in prese

lections.

Given yesterday's overwhelm
ing votes on preselections and
federal intervention in state af
fairs on financial grounds, these
two amendments can be expected
to receive state endorsements.
Motion 3 is another matter.

$