Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I acknowledge the contribution from the member for McMillan and the heartfelt thoughts that he has offered in his contribution to this condolence debate. Losing a husband or losing a father is a traumatic experience for anyone, so I would like to dedicate the early parts of this speech to offering my heartfelt condolences to those who are left behind. I lost my father when I was eight years old and I understand wholeheartedly the pain that you go through and that you suffer for the many years when you lose someone who is such a significant part of your life.

I encourage the children of the Fraser family to look back on the wonderful contribution that your father made to this country and to stand proud, knowing not only that your father made a valuable, heartfelt contribution on an economic perspective and on a political perspective but also that he was a good, decent man. To Mrs Fraser, my heart goes out to you in the loss of a lifelong partner. There will be, into the future, moments of enormous grief and enormous loss in losing someone who you have committed your life. I wish you, on those lonely nights, all the best, knowing that you are in the thoughts of many members of both sides of this House and you are in their hearts.

The passing of the Rt Hon. Malcolm Fraser is deeply saddening news that has left all of us reflecting on his legacy and the important changes he enacted. Much of Malcolm Fraser's legacy lies outside the economic sphere; however, as a young man, I always admired the economic struggle he must have faced during his term as Prime Minister. During his time as our 22nd Prime Minister, between 1975 and 1983, Fraser set down a path of economic responsibility following the demise of the previous government after a time known as the Whitlam years. Fraser came to power and met a shocking economic occurrence: that of 'stagflation'. Until the early 1970s it was thought by most economists that high inflation and high unemployment could not occur at the same time. Keynesian economics at the time believed that if you revved the economy a bit faster, you would get more employment and output but stoke inflation; take the foot off the pedal and the opposite occurs. In 1975 inflation hit an alarming peak of 16 per cent. That is an enormous number given that the current fiscal settings of the Reserve Bank, which has carriage of monetary policy, have the inflation rate at between two and three per cent. When you consider 16 per cent was the peak during his reign, it would have been a task in itself to manage it.

In the decades that followed, Australia's unemployment grew fivefold, spiking in 1982 to as high as 10 per cent. But at the same time wages shot up, putting pressure on prices, which in turn put pressure on wages; and this so-called wage-price spiral was hard to break. The Fraser government, dealing with this phenomenon for the first time, took a pragmatic, if not principled, approach; that was the genesis of the then 'razor gang' which cut back on Commonwealth spending in a serious way. Spending was completely out of control under Whitlam; despite that, Fraser faced ardent pushback from members of his government who wanted to see more severe cuts and a more significant downsizing of government. Members at the time wanted a much more Thatcherite approach to the problems facing the Australian economy, yet Fraser resisted. He pushed for a more free-market direction. Government spending was cut, trade became more free and huge wage claims were curtailed, but he did not go all the way to Reaganism—the principle of which was that government was the problem—nor to Thatcher's radical individualism.

In many ways Malcolm Fraser approached the economy like a wise family doctor advising on dieting and weight loss: enjoy a little of everything in moderation. Without developed economic policy options available and with the new age of economic theory still on the desks of academics in overseas countries, Fraser did a truly remarkable job of steering a middle course. The gift of hindsight allows us to realise that there were areas in which Fraser could have improved; John Howard made the high-profile admission that he believed there could have been a 'bit more Lucas and a lot less Keynes'. But at that time Fraser was creating economic policy on the run and addressing emerging problems without the sophisticated number-crunching that policy makers adopt today.

Others will no doubt point to his variety of principled and moral stands. We have heard in this House from a range of speakers on both sides of the House about the Prime Minister's stand against apartheid. We have heard at length of his fight for Indigenous land rights and, in his post prime ministerial years, for a range of humanitarian causes. Malcolm Fraser was clearly a very decent human being. But it would be wrong to think that he was not also a good economic manager. In many ways he laid the groundwork for the Hawke-Keating years. He certainly was not a visionary like Keating, nor did major reforms take place on his watch. But he steadied the ship and the Australian economy is the beneficiary of a lot of his cost-cutting in that sector.

Australia can be justifiably proud of an approach to economics that sat us squarely between Europe and the United States. In the US, the champions of free enterprise toke a position of free enterprise at the cost of social values; however in Europe we see a much larger role for the state, even if that inhibits free enterprise. In Australia, under Fraser, we found the middle ground. When Malcolm Fraser became Prime Minister, that was all up for grabs. We could have become 'old Europe', or we could have become the United States and veered onto the path of radical individualism responsible for the debacle that came to both of those nations. Fraser helped us chart the middle course, and we should be very grateful for that.

In conclusion, I want to acknowledge Malcolm Fraser—and I believe this is the first time this has been raised in this House—for a contribution he made to Queensland. In my office, I have in my employ a lady by the name of Ruth Doyle. Ruth Doyle, before coming to work for me, had a small business in the small township of Birdsville. She is very complimentary about the Rt Hon. Malcolm Fraser. In 1978 he attended the Birdsville Races, where attendance was normally around 250 to 300 people. Malcolm Fraser, when he was the Prime Minister, went to the Birdsville Races, and he ran the country from a bush camp outside the township of Birdsville, still known today as 'the eight mile'. The Birdsville Races in Queensland are now a rite of passage for campers and those looking to have the regional experience of bush picnic races. Malcolm Fraser made a contribution and forever after, from that day when he was present at that race meeting, crowds have swollen to in excess of two and three thousand and, on occasion, five thousand.

Malcolm Fraser, for your contribution to our nation, I am truly humbled and grateful. To your family members who are left behind, the Buchholz family offers our deepest condolences. The people I represent in the electorate of Wright will, I know, join with me in offering our deepest condolences to a great Prime Minister. May he rest in peace.

See this speech in context