In 1995, many Australians were ready for their country to become a republic.
Paul Keating and his second-term Labor government knew this, but the prime minister proposed “minimal change”.
Confidential Cabinet documents from 1994 and 1995, released by the National Archives of Australia on Monday, provide a snapshot into the Keating government and the how it wanted to define itself.
The Keating proposal
Mr Keating circulated a document in his name which outlined the path to a republic.
“It is government policy to introduce an Australian republic by 2001,” a document from 22 March 1995 noted.
Prime Minister Paul Keating and US President Bill Clinton during an APEC meeting in Bogor, Indonesia, in 1994. Source: National Archives of Australia
One of the most vexing issues was who would lead the republic and how they would be chosen. Cabinet acknowledged it was going to be “controversial”.
Mr Keating wanted Parliament to appoint a president “following the nomination of a single individual by the Prime Minister”.
“This course would in time fundamentally change the character of Australian government, and could well move our parliamentary democracy towards an executive presidency,” he warned in his Cabinet submission.
“This matter needs to be handled sensitively so that public understanding increases as the debate continues.”
Kim Beazley, who was finance minister in the Keating Cabinet, told SBS News:
“There was a sense of confidence that we’d get a republican model that would firstly be workable, and secondly popular.”
Mr Beazley would go on to become a federal Labor leader and ambassador to the United States.
“In the end, we put forward a model which was probably very good but probably doomed to failure,” he said.
'Burden sharing' climate change
In the mid-1990s, the government was grappling with climate change.
“The difference in the discussion that took place on climate change in the 94-95 Cabinet papers and now, of course, is knowledge,” Mr Beazley said.
“We didn’t have full, scientific understandings of what impact land and oceans use would have on it.”
Kim Beazley, right, shakes Governor-General Bill Hayden's hand after being sworn in as Minister for Finance in December 1993. Source: National Archives of Australia
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change had been in place for two years, but Cabinet noted “international pressure is mounting” to strengthen its commitments.
The government also noted it was “likely to only meet 46 to 53 per cent of the implied 1990 target in the Framework Convention on Climate Change”.
It raised the idea of “burden sharing” and singled out countries like Germany and the UK which would have to share the same targets as nations like Canada and the US.
“Burden sharing arrangements would seek to ensure the cost of meeting targets does not fall unduly heavily on particular countries,” the documents noted.
“Australia will, therefore, need to devise ways of encouraging greater acceptance of the concept of burden sharing.”
Cabinet floated additional climate change measures in 1994, including a carbon tax, an environmental levy and an increased fuel excise.
The 'situation' in WA
The documents also reveal a government frustrated with Western Australia over its opposition to the new Native Title Act. The 1993 Act recognised Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people had traditional rights and interests in their land and allowed them to make a claim for it.
“Western Australia remains implacably opposed to the NTA,” a February 1994 Cabinet paper noted.
“We understand that Western Australia may also be attempting to persuade other states and territories to follow suit.”
Newly sworn-in members of the second Keating Cabinet outisde Government House, Canberra, in March 1994. Source: National Archives of Australia
Mr Beazley said: “You had the Western Australian government desperate to overthrow it so there’s a lot in the Cabinet papers about arguments with the West Australian government.”
“What happened in West Australia was critical to Native Title itself because WA was the only state where Native Title is largely not being suppressed by other forms of title. In many ways … Native Title is all about WA.”
In many ways … Native Title is all about WA - Former finance minister Kim Beazley
In one paper the federal government also took a swipe at WA’s treatment of Indigenous people.
“The general approach by that state to Aborigines is also demonstrated by an inequitable provision of essential services such as water, power and sewage to established Aboriginal communities,” a Cabinet paper said.
Cabinet was worried the goodwill from other states would evaporate.
MORE READING
Native title changes pass parliament
“Undecided states and territories may well fail to take positive measures towards co-operation with the Commonwealth regime and, at worst, may gradually gravitate to the Western Australian camp,” one document revealed.
In 1995, the High Court rejected WA’s challenge to the act which argued Native Title had been extinguished when Australia was established as a colony. A paper from that year shows the Cabinet, even in victory, had concerns WA would try “to effectively overload and delay” the Native Title Tribunal.
“We expect the WA Government to now formally comply with the NTA, but to attempt to characterise the NTA as cumbersome and unworkable.”
Indonesian ties and French nuclear ambitions
The Cabinet papers also reveal the Keating government’s two major diplomatic focuses for the period were creation of a security treaty with Indonesia and the resumption of French nuclear tests in the South Pacific.
In June 1995, France declared it would resume testing nuclear bombs in Moruroa, an atoll in French Polynesia. The decision was met with outrage by Cabinet as it considered its diplomatic options.
“Australia’s response to the French decision has been strong, unequivocal and concrete,” a Cabinet minute from June 1995 read.
“The government gave instructions to its embassies abroad to make our position known.”
The Cabinet was genuinely frustrated and concerned about smaller nations in the Pacific. As well as freezing defence contacts with France, Cabinet also decided to recall Australia’s ambassador.
“This amounts to an unequivocal response,” it noted.
Closer to home, Australia had formal defence ties with most of its neighbours, except one.
“The biggest initiative at the time was the Indonesian security treaty,’ Mr Beazley said.
“This was a product of a very close relationship between the leader of Indonesia [President Suharto] and Paul Keating.”
Cabinet wanted the treaty but recognised the need to balance its ambitions while distancing itself from Indonesia’s occupation of East Timor.
A December 1995 Cabinet minute said “there is no country more important to Australia than Indonesia”.
'There is no country more important to Australia than Indonesia' - 1995 Cabinet minute
But Cabinet wanted to be clear the upcoming treaty did not “commit Australia in any way it would wish in internal security matters” like East Timor.
It was also adamant it would not “commit Australia to get involved in any conflict in which Indonesia may be engaged”.
“This was a declaration that each of us had an interest in the others’ security,” Mr Beazley said.
“The sorts of fears that had dominated Australian political thinking, or public thinking, to that time were addressed by the treaty.”
