BY JOHN PASSANT
"We have a great objective — the light on the hill — which we aim to reach by working for the benefit of mankind." So spoke Labor Prime Minister Ben Chifley half a century ago. Now Kim Beazley, celebrating the 100th anniversary of the formation of the federal Labor parliamentary caucus, has quoted these words to disingenuously attempt to define his coming government.
For many the phrase uttered by Chifley defines the ALP. The "light on the hill" encapsulates the idea that Labor stands for a better world. Chifley's eloquent phrase reinforces the fairy tale that Labor in power is a "caring" government.
The myth-making continues today, whether it be about Gough Whitlam or Bob Hawke, or even Paul Keating. And now we can add Kim-in-waiting.
But it is the dead Chifley, the reality of his government unknown to most, who dominates the pantheon. Looking at what Chifley did in practice shows then, as now, that what the ALP is really about is managing capitalism, at the expense of workers if necessary.
So what was the "light on the hill" comment really about?
Chifley's speech was an apologia for ALP social democracy at a time when the Communist Party of Australia had some influence in the trade unions and among elements of the Australian working class. The CPA was a critic of Labor's idea that capitalism could be reformed for the ongoing benefit of working people.
Capitalism at the end of the second world war could not meet the high expectations of workers who had fought for a better world.
This contradiction reflected itself in the ALP talking about a better society while suppressing workers taking industrial action to try and improve their lives. Thus while Chifley was talking about the "light on the hill", he was also warning workers that Labor was not about putting "an extra sixpence" in their pockets.
Chifley could talk about a better world; he just couldn't deliver.
Just weeks after Chifley's light on the hill speech, 23,000 miners struck for better wages and conditions.
In 1947 Chifley had set up the Coal Industrial Tribunal. This body had arbitration power in the coal industry. The miners' unions lodged claims with the tribunal for a 35-hour week and a 30 shilling increase in wages. They also asked for long service leave as a normal work condition.
These demands were not outrageous. The ALP's platform had supported a 30-hour week for miners in recognition of the nature of their work. The wage claim was actually less than that lodged by the ACTU for all workers.
The tribunal stalled for two years. As a consequence the communist leadership in the unions agitated for direct action, rather than tribunal arbitration.
The communists found a ready audience among miners. They voted to strike. Negotiations with the employers fell through and the unionists walked out.
How did the party of the "light on the hill" respond to working class action for better wages and conditions?
It immediately passed legislation to make it illegal to support the strikers financially. It arrested union officials for not handing over union funds to the industrial registrar. Eight were later given jail terms of between six and 12 months. Police invaded union and CPA premises. The unions were fined.
The government and employers portrayed the strike as inspired by the communists. The CPA was certainly strong in the mining unions. Workers voted for communists in their unions and followed their lead — because they did a good job fighting for better wages and conditions and defending workers against employer attacks.
Chifley took on the miners, not because they were communist-led, but because they dared to step outside arbitration. If they won better wages and conditions by direct action, other workers might follow. Hawke attacked the Builders Labourers Federation and the pilots for the same reason.
Historically the ALP has been about utilising arbitration to limit wage increases. Chifley, like Hawke, used the state to try and defeat any union that dared step outside the boundaries.
Chifley also needed to prove again his pro-capitalist credentials to employers in a bidding war with Liberal Party leader Robert Menzies in the run-up to the 1949 elections. Bloodying the nose of the miners would serve both purposes.
The media went into a frenzy, screaming about a communist strike to destroy democracy. The ALP and right-wing unions joined in the orgy of lies. Yet despite the propaganda and the repression, two weeks into the strike the miners voted to keep it going.
The ACTU played a double game. It supported the miners' claims with words, but condemned them for "provoking" the Labor government. Other unions took the hint and began to scab, operating open-cut mines and transporting coal.
This is not a surprise. Right-wing union leaders (and some who proclaim themselves to be left-wing) have time and again shown solidarity with the employing class against other workers. Their class collaborationist politics drives them relentlessly down this path.
Four weeks into the strike Chifley's armed troops began to run the mines. Chifley could have relied on more scab union labour to do this. However, he wanted a grand gesture to prove his credentials to run capitalism and to demoralise union militants throughout the country.
It worked. The strike ended two weeks after the troops went in.
Arrests, fines, lies, armed troops. So much for the light on the hill.