A huge mistake that changed history: Whitlam failed to tell the right people he’d been sacked

On this day 50 years ago, Gough Whitlam had served for two years, 11 months and six days as Australia’s prime minister.

For the Labor faithful, Whitlam’s election offered hope, opportunity and the promise of real and lasting change after 23 years of continuous opposition. The legitimacy of Whitlam’s election had never been accepted by the opposition and it drove frenzied efforts to reclaim government by any means.

Since Federation in 1901, the Senate in its first 71 years of existence had rejected only 68 government bills; in just the next three years, it rejected 93 Whitlam government bills.

Gough Whitlam on the steps of Parliament House after his dismissal as prime minister in 1975.Credit: Age Archives

Conservative state premiers abandoned the convention of filling casual Senate vacancies with a nominee of the same party. In 1975, Labor was down two Senate seats it had won in May 1974.

On October 15, 1975, the opposition announced it would withhold supply until the government agreed to go to an election. Delaying the passage of the budget was possible solely because Coalition state governments had broken the convention on filling Senate vacancies.

The Liberal and National parties at all levels had abandoned tradition in favour of a reckless path back into government. Even then, their strategy was failing but for the treachery of the governor-general, Sir John Kerr. He debauched his office by conspiring against, and deceiving, the elected prime minister.

As the stalemate between the houses over the refusal to pass supply rolled on, Kerr did not inform Whitlam that he was considering the dismissal of the government, not even a hint. Whitlam advised Kerr not to consult chief justice Sir Garfield Barwick. Kerr consulted Barwick.

Kerr did not inform Whitlam that he had sought advice from High Court justice Sir Anthony Mason. Thanks to Jenny Hocking’s research, we now know Mason provided advice secretly to Kerr on multiple occasions.

On November 11, 1975, Kerr ambushed Whitlam.

At 1pm, Whitlam arrived at Government House in Yarralumla to advise the governor-general that a half-Senate election be held. Kerr didn’t waste words or time, informing Whitlam that he had withdrawn his commission, and handing him a letter of dismissal. A few minutes later, Kerr completed the ambush. Liberal opposition leader Malcolm Fraser, hidden metres away in an anteroom at Yarralumla, was sworn in as prime minister.

The man elected prime minister of Australia headed back to The Lodge. Whitlam’s first phone call was to his wife, Margaret, in Sydney. She told him he should have just torn up the letter. A typical Whitlam response followed: “You can’t do that; it’s a legal document.” She then said: “You should’ve slapped his face and told him to pull himself together.” He had time to eat his lunch though – medium steak with German mustard and a horiatiki side salad.

Whitlam as prime minister, governor-general Sir John Kerr and senator Ken Wriedt in 1975, months before the Dismissal.Credit: Fairfax Archives

Paul Keating’s response was even stronger. Keating has recently shared what he would have told Kerr. I quote: “You’re seeking to illegally dismiss the government of Australia, which I regard as a criminal act, and I am ordering the police to arrest you.”

Those views were not a recent reflection. Just a couple of hours after the Dismissal, Keating described Kerr to his senior colleagues Frank Crean and Fred Daly as “a pseudo crim … and what you do with pseudo crims? You lock them up.”

As someone who served in the Senate, my thoughts about that day have always gone to what might have occurred in that chamber where the Whitlam government had been so frustrated – if Labor senators had been told about the government’s sacking.

John Faulkner and Whitlam at the launch of their SBS documentary, Gough Whitlam: In His Own Words. This was based on an in-depth conversation between the pair covering Whitlam’s public life including The Dismissal. Credit: Photo: Steven Siewert

On returning to The Lodge after the Dismissal, Whitlam planned tactics with senior staff and cabinet colleagues including deputy prime minister Frank Crean, the leader of the House, Fred Daly, attorney-general Kep Enderby and House speaker Gordon Scholes. Present too were key staffers John Mant and Graham Freudenberg, and for a short time the secretary of the Prime Minister’s Department, John Menadue. ALP national secretary David Combe was also there.

Unfortunately, Whitlam and his inner circle – every one of them – focused exclusively on how events would unfold that afternoon in the House of Representatives. Incredibly, with the Senate due to consider the appropriation bills shortly after resuming at 2pm, no one thought to tell any Labor senators, let alone its leadership, that the government had been sacked.

The appropriation bills were brought on for a Senate vote at 2.20pm. To the complete surprise of Labor senators, the Coalition instantly ticked them through on the voices. Labor senators had no idea their government had been dismissed.

With the supply bills passed, the last vital stage of the coup was completed in mere minutes. Labor had forfeited its best chance to frustrate Kerr’s decision.

We now know that during the vice-regal lunch following the Dismissal, Kerr’s wife suggested he should inform the queen. That was done. Yet at no stage did Kerr inform the Australian parliament, or the presiding officer or clerk in either chamber. This omission by Kerr is a most extraordinary and reprehensible failure – a massive dereliction of duty. Yet, in 50 years, it has received little attention.

Whitlam did not even know that Fraser had been sworn in as prime minister until Fraser himself, at 2.24pm, informed the House of Representatives.

The morning after: Prime minister Malcolm Fraser, Sir John Kerr, and Fraser’s deputy, Doug Anthony, after the swearing in of the caretaker government.Credit: Fairfax Media

The president of the Senate, Labor’s Justin O’Byrne, could have simply, and very properly, suspended the Senate sitting until it had been formally advised of the status and composition of the government. Surely that advice could not have been provided until the governor-general had dealt with the House of Representatives motion of no confidence in Fraser, which also called upon Kerr to recommission a Whitlam government?

Under the Senate’s standing orders, only a minister, or a senator acting on behalf of a minister, was entitled to move that motion to pass the budget, which Labor Senate leader Ken Wriedt did in 1975. Of course, Wriedt was unaware he’d been sacked. In fact, there were no ministers in the Senate at the time. Whitlam’s ministers had been sacked. The Fraser government ministers were not sworn in.

It would have been very easy for any Labor senator wanting to delay or upend Senate business to raise hell while events unfolded elsewhere in Parliament House and Government House. Not for minutes, but for many, many hours.

The opportunity was there for Labor to return the favour – with interest – in the chamber that had caused the Whitlam government such grief. It did not happen, as not one of those present at the meeting at The Lodge thought to tell the Senate team about the Dismissal. It was a huge mistake. It mattered because only after the passage of the supply bills was Kerr willing to dissolve the parliament so an election could be held.

As the then clerk of the Senate, Jim Odgers, wrote: “If the Senate had been informed of the dismissal of the Whitlam ministry, the course of events might have been different.”

After the Dismissal, Kerr – advised by Mason again – ignored the House of Representatives motion of no confidence in Fraser and its call that he recommission a Whitlam government. Kerr thumbed his nose at the parliament. Fraser remained prime minister.

Maintain the rage: Whitlam addresses reporters on the steps of Parliament House after his dismissal.Credit: Keystone

So contemptuous, improper and unethical was Kerr that he refused to receive the speaker at Yarralumla until he had dissolved the parliament.

After the dissolution of both houses was proclaimed on the steps of Old Parliament House, Whitlam took the microphone to make the greatest extemporaneous political speech in our nation’s history, exhorting supporters to maintain their “rage and enthusiasm”.

On this 50th anniversary, I hope we will see a renewed focus on the achievements of Gough Whitlam and his government.

Whitlam set aflame a languishing light on the hill for the Labor Party and its supporters in the 1960s and ’70s. Yes, he took risks and he certainly made mistakes – some on a grand scale – but remember what an inspiring and visionary leader he was: reforming the ALP; delivering two election victories; and creating a fairer, more modern, outward-looking and independent Australia.

For many Australians, Whitlam remains a heroic figure – his standing never dimmed by the Dismissal. Yes, Labor lost the short-term politics of the Dismissal – it suffered a resounding election defeat – but, half a century later, it is clear the constitutional argument has been won. The Senate has not since contemplated withholding supply and dividing the nation.

It is accepted that Kerr conspired against, and deceived, his prime minister. That he improperly misused the reserve powers. That he was partisan and dishonest. That he failed to observe longstanding conventions. That he abused his office. It must never happen again.

This is an edited extract from a speech by former Labor senator, minister and now chair of the Whitlam Institute John Faulkner, which he presents on Monday at the Whitlam Dismissal and the Crisis of November 1975 symposium in Canberra.

The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up here.