In view of certain statements made in the press, and particularly the Sydney press, including an interview with Mr Hughes⁽¹⁾,the Prime Minister has asked me to make a statement about the constitutional position of the present Government in the great crisis in which it finds itself. The fates are that the Empire is engaged in a great war at a time when this country is in the midst of a general election.

Secretary, Attorney-General's Department

There is nothing new in this position. It has happened frequently before in our history. Take, for example, the year 1812, with the burning of Moscow and the battles of Badajos and Salamanca. Parliament was dissolved and Great Britain was without a Parliament for over two months. There are several other similar cases. In the event of war taking place at such a time the duty of the Government is clear. Whatever may be the political or Parliamentary position it is its watch on deck. Ministers cannot leave the wheel for a moment. The most serious executive responsibilities at once crowd upon it from all quarters. The only direct effect such an event has upon the pending elections is that Ministers themselves are completely incapacitated from taking part in the fight on which their political existence depends. The indirect effect of rendering the actual issue of the elections of less importance than the momentous issues raised by the war is one of those contingencies which, though they may be regretted, cannot be avoided. Let me deal with the suggested alternatives. One of these suggestions is that the dead Parliament might be galvanised into a temporary existence by the withdrawal of contentious nominations. Such a course, instead of keeping the issues of the election open for subsequent and calmer consideration, would have had the immediate effect of destroying at once the main issue of the elections, namely, the reform of the Parliament by a dissolution. Our political opponents have been effusive in their proffers of assistance to the Government in its great difficulty. Is such a suggestion as this an earnest of their desire not to embarrass the Government?

Then, again, were that Parliament revived, nothing is more likely to cripple the efforts of Ministers to do their duty in the present crisis. Mr Hughes says it might sit as a committee of public safety. I should call it a committee of public insecurity. Ministers would not be able to meet it. They are engaged every day, during the whole of the day, and often very late at night, in dealing with a continuous stream of the most responsible matters which have to be dealt with at once. Even if they were capable of meeting Parliament, apart from the question of supply, which I will deal with in a moment, the first course would be to adjourn Parliament until it was necessary to obtain supply again. It might succeed in adjourning the House of Representatives, but the Senate would constitute itself probably a permanent committee of public safety, and would demand daily, and as a right, information upon a host of matters which it is the duty of Ministers not to make public. In this and other matters Mr Hughes gives no indication as to the manner in which he would carry out his suggestions under the Constitution. The Government has no hesitation in saying that, apart from the question of obtaining the additional supply which might be necessary before Parliament meets again in the ordinary course, the sittings of the two Houses would do nothing to minimise the difficulties with which we are faced. To approach the Imperial Parliament at the present moment to pass an Act altering, even temporarily, the provisions of the Constitution of Australia would be a course almost impossible to take, even if absolutely necessary for carrying on our Government. But it cannot be justifiably asserted that the Government cannot be carried on in existing circumstances. There has not been a murmur of opposition against any action taken by the Government. The Government has every reason to suppose that it possesses the confidence of the entire community in the steps which it has thought necessary in the present crisis. The idea of approaching the Imperial Parliament at the present time, in its moment of supreme stress and tension, to pass an Act having no other purpose than to enable the Australian elections to be held at a period when the minds of the Australian electors might be a little more calm than they are at present is an absurd and almost unthinkable proposition, and one which I for one would not for one moment consent to.

The Government is fully seized of the desirability of obtaining the concurrence of the leading members of the Opposition and of obtaining the concurrence of all the State Governments, so far as it is possible, in dealing with the matters with which it has to deal in a crisis of such extreme gravity as now exists. The Prime Minister has stated more than once that he is prepared to consult Mr Fisher⁽²⁾ in connection with matters as to which the sanction of Parliament may be required for any acts which the crisis may render necessary. It is not necessary or even desirable that I should enter into details as to what these may be. Every national crisis involves an extension of executive authority to a point which may call for Parliamentary ratification. So far no steps of the kind referred to have been found necessary. But Mr Fisher has been informed of the course from time to time taken by the Government.

I have referred to the necessity that may arise with regard to supply. The Ministry has every reason to believe that it will receive every assistance that may be necessary from the Leader of the Opposition which his position will enable him to render in connection with this matter should the necessity arise. I need hardly add that it would be the greatest relief to Ministers were they enabled by any means to share the responsibility that at present falls on their shoulders with members representative of the other side of the House. But that, we feel, is impossible. This aspect of the question has formed the subject of very anxious consideration by all of us. All the suggestions which have appeared in the press and others which have not appeared in the press, have been fully considered by the Cabinet, and it has come to the conclusion that the only possible course is to go straight on in the path in which it finds itself placed.⁽³⁾

(1)Willim morris Hughes, Attorney-General on two previous Governments. He became Attorney General again after elections in september 1914.

The interview was reported by the Sydney Morning Herald, on 5 August 1914. In answer to the question as to how Parliament, having been dissolved, could be called togather without waiting for the elections, Mr. Hughes replied:

'well, it might be done in one or two ways-one at first unconstitutional, altogather that difficulty could be cured later; and the other quite constitutional. The first is that the Executive might by proclamation dissolving Parliament.That would, of course, be quite constitutional and illegal, but, as sit Alexander Peacock [Premier of Victoria] has pointed out, that difficulty could be cured by an Act of the British Parliament, which could be passed almost immediately; or that Act itself would be sufficient without action by the Government.Parliament could be called togather is an arrangement between the leaders of the parties to withdraw the nominations now lodged against those persons who were members of the Parliament, This would create, as from next Saturday, a new Parliament, in which the parties would be exactly on the same footing as they were in the last. it might happen, of course, that in one or two cases independents would run,but that would not materially affect the position, and the issue would not materially affect the position , and the issue would not be at all in doubt, not need Parliament await the elections in these few (if any) cases.

Of course, the suggestion, if it were put forward, would not in any way affect the ultimate settlement of the party issues lately set before the people. It would be not a settlement of party differences, but a truce. The Parliament, whether the old on recreated or a new one, would last only during the currency of the war, and thereafter as long as was decided by mutual agreement, and would deal only with the war and consequences arising out of it. The parliament would take whatever steps were necessary to deal with the financial stringency, the commercial crises, industrial paralysis, unemployment, the shrinking of cradit, and that general paralysis of trade and industry that follow on the steps of modern war'.

(2)Anderew Fisher, Leader of the oposition.

(3)This openion is unsigned in the Openion Book, but was published in the Argus, Melbourne, 8 August 1914,p.16 and is referrred to in R.R. garran, prosper the commonwealth, Angus & Robertson,Sydney,1958,p.219.