Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Three hours after midnight on the Sabbath morning of Sunday, 3 December 1854, a winter and spring of discontent erupted in a short and dirty skirmish atop the gold-led diggings known as Eureka on the western outskirts of the Victorian town of Ballarat. The colonial authorities had sent troops from two British regiments, supported by the Victoria police—296 men, all told, against a tottering stockade defended by some 150 miners of the Ballarat Reform League. The miners protected a hand-sewn flag bearing a design of the Southern Cross, beneath which they had each sworn an oath 'to stand truly by each other, to fight to defend our rights and liberties'. The bloody scrum described as the battle for Eureka lasted for fewer than 15 minutes. Six men of the colonial forces and 22 miners were killed. One hundred and fourteen of their Reform League comrades were imprisoned in the Ballarat lock-up and the flag was torn down. In the following months, 13 miners charged by the state with high treason were unanimously acquitted by citizen juries. All bar one of the political demands of the Ballarat Reform League were granted within 12 months. The first bill for the universal enfranchisement of men in the Australian colonies was passed by the Victorian Legislative Council in 1857.

Today I have pleasure in welcoming to the House John Moloney and Richard O'Brien from the ACT branch of Eureka's Children. Eureka's Children fosters the memory of Eureka and the principle of Australian democracy. I thank Mr Maloney for his recent reminder that the battle for Eureka is now an indelible part of the Australian narrative. It ignited the struggle for Australian female suffrage and continues to inspire the Australian Republican movement. The accusing memories of Pemulwuy and Yagan bear witness that this was not the first time in Australia colonial history that a rebellion had been led in defence of a people. The smug orchestrators of the Rum Rebellion proceeded and succeeded in their coup d'etat, while the dead convicts at Castle Hill can attest to the first revolt of white men against the wickedness of colonial authorities.

The Eureka protesters were mostly not Australian citizens as we understand the concept. Only two of them can be said to have been Australian-born. Black and white Americans, Jamaicans, Italians, Swedes, Scots, Jews, Dutch, French and Germans participated in the Eureka protest, with Asian Australians being the only conspicuous absence. But, like the convicts at Castle Hill, the overwhelming majority of miners at Eureka were Irish. They were led by Irishman Peter Lalor and were easily motivated by Irish distrust of English overlords. Yet, out of the gun smoke and mist, the story that emerges does make the battle for Eureka unique in Australian history, a story that cannot be found in any paragraph before or since, a story that was and is an outstanding flare in our democratic consciousness. Until that summer dawn in 1854, no Australian political movement had claimed or defended the democratic freedoms that we today, in this House, understand as the self-evident bedrock of our society.

A month before the battle, 10,000 miners had assembled on Bakery Hill and voted into existence the Ballarat Reform League. The league immediately passed a resolution and with it vaulted across an Australian political Rubicon. The resolution declared, 'It is the inalienable right of every citizen to have a voice in making the laws he is called upon to obey, that taxation without representation is tyranny'—the first explicit demand of Australia's unfranchised for the rights of political recognition and the responsibilities of political representation. The founding resolution was swiftly developed into a charter calling for full and fair political representation based on universal male suffrage, an end to the property qualification for members of the Victorian Legislative Council, so vigorously defended by the conservative forces, salaried members of parliament, voting by secret ballot, and a shorter parliamentary term. In Australia's short history that charter is unique, the original affirmation of the democratic expectations of an Australian citizen. I acknowledge the work of Taimus Werner-Gibbings, who has assisted me with this speech, the advocacy of Peter FitzSimons in his excellent book on Eureka, and my co-authors David Madden, Macgregor Duncan and Peter Tynan, with whom I co-authored a book called Imagining Australia, which featured the Eureka flag on the cover.

Deputy Speaker, I hope this debate will be bipartisan. Robert Menzies said that Eureka was 'an earnest attempt at democratic government'. He repeatedly wove Eureka into his speeches and we should all be proud of the Eureka story. (Time expired)

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is important, indeed imperative, that Australian history be an integral part of Australian secondary schooling. Thankfully, the coalition when in government under John Howard recognised this as a fundamental part of the curriculum. The former prime minister had attacked the teaching of Australian history in schools, saying that 'too often history has succumbed to a post-modern culture of relativism where any objective record of achievement is questioned or repudiated'. He was right, of course. We went through a period of political correctness under the Hawke and Keating Labor governments and unfortunately we are experiencing a new wave of this under the present administration such that no-one, certainly in this place, is quite sure if they can or cannot say anything about anyone.

This motion is about the 1854 Battle of Eureka, which as the member for Fraser correctly notes, was a key moment in Australian democracy. I concur with his encouragement to all Australians to visit the Museum of Australian Democracy at Ballarat to learn about the history of the 3 December battle. In fact, on this very day, Principal Danny Malone is taking the year 6 pupils of Mater Dei Catholic primary school of Wagga Wagga for the school's annual excursion to Ballarat to do just that.

The battle of the Eureka stockade was an organised rebellion of gold miners at Ballarat pitted against the British colonial authority. The most significant conflict in the colonial history of Victoria, it resulted in the deaths of 22 miners and six soldiers. Irish born Peter Lalor played a leading role in the Eureka rebellion. He led the miners' opposition towards often brutal administration of the goldfields. His left arm was seriously wounded in the battle, requiring amputation. Lalor was later elected to the Victorian Legislative Assembly, the first outlaw to make it to parliament. His name lives on in the Victorian federal seat currently held by the Prime Minister. The Eureka flag, designed by a Canadian miner, Captain Henry Ross, includes the Southern Cross on a blue field. It is now a symbol of unionism. A similar flag was flown prominently above the Barcaldine camp of the 1891 Australian shearers' strike, and therefore has had a strong association with the Australian labour movement from this time. Construction unions, such as the Builders Labourers Federation in particular, adopted the Eureka flag and it is one of the flags flying permanently above the Melbourne Trades Hall. No doubt, if Tony Abbott forms a government after next year's election, the Eureka flag will be flown often at the protests which will undoubtedly follow as unionists rally workers against the coalition's policies. The Eureka flag was put up on that day of infamy on 19 August 1996 when a union protest, one of the leaders of which was none other than the current Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, degenerated into the violent and bloody Canberra Riot. Protesters broke away from a rally organised by the Australian Council of Trade Unions and broke down the doors of parliament, trashing the gift shop and injuring police. The Canberra Times reported the following day:

Impertinent but agile protesters climbed up and across the holy marble parapet of the Great Verandah in front of the building and hung their flags and banners there. Eureka and Aboriginal flags even hung across the astonished kangaroo and emu of the nation's sacred, stainless steel coat of arms.

That is the use of the Eureka flag; used by the unions, flown proudly by the unions.

The other side today acknowledges and celebrates ordinary people rising up against the establishment. That is correct. It exalts these people. The most downtrodden group in Australia at the moment are farmers, in particular, irrigators. You can scoff all you like but we have a modern day Peter Lalor of sorts in Griffith farmer John Bonetti, who is dead against the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. Now he is quoted in the Area News newspaper at Griffith saying that he is one of many who said that the community would continue to take

Geoff Lyons (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a motion about Eureka, is it?

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, it is. I am talking about the Eureka flag. I am talking about modern day protests. I am talking about how that side exalts in people who rise up against the establishment, rise up against things that they feel reflect poor policy being enacted by this government. Let me tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker, the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is just that, and Mr Bonetti declared he would lead a whole set of protests if his fellow farmers agreed to support him.

We will not accept the plan if it is not right for us … I'm basically a law-abiding person but this ridiculous. We will take a militant stand against this if we need to.

I sure that the good farmers of Griffith will not be as bad as the unions were in 1996. I will just finish with the words of Mark Twain who said, in talking about the Eureka Stockade:

…I think it may be called the finest thing in Australasian history. It was a revolution—small in size; but great politically; it was a strike for liberty, a struggle for principle, a stand against injustice and oppression…

I am sure that the other members of the house would agree will Mark Twain's sentiments on that score.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is hard to follow the member for Riverina. I was getting a bit lost there, but the point he makes is essentially right. The struggle at Eureka meant that people up in the Riverland could burn the plan and politically protest and express their views on the laws that we write in this place. That is exactly the principles that we are defending and that were defended at Eureka. There is no doubt it was as celebration of democracy and there is no doubt it was a celebration of Australian values—justice, liberty, democracy and mateship. These are the same values that have echoed down the generations and the same values that we have defended on battlefields around the world. It is an interesting point the Peter Lalor, his grandson—also Peter Lalor—died at Gallipoli defending those values. There is no doubt that the events and symbols of Eureka have had a long association with the labour movement. Ben Chifley said that

Eureka was more than an incident or passing phase. It was greater in significance than the short-loved revolt against tyrannical authority would suggest. The permanency of Eureka in its impact on our development was that it was the first real affirmation of our determination to be masters of our own political destiny.

Even John Howard said that the events of Eureka, 150 years ago, played a part in the development of Australia. He must have said that through gritted teeth, I think, but as the member for Fraser, who has brought this motion to the House, pointed out, Prime Minister Menzies was far more generous to Eureka and to the diggers there, and far kinder to that struggle and its role in the development of Australia than other conservative leaders. Indeed, it would be my hope that Eureka becomes a far more bipartisan thing and that the symbols of Eureka become far more bipartisan. In my own electorate, when the Central Districts footy club play footy, you can see the Union Jack, the flag of Australia and the Eureka flag, all flown at the same time while a flare is set off. These are not necessarily partisan symbols, and they are not necessarily exclusive signals. They sit alongside all of the other symbols that Australia has.

If we look back—talking about justice, liberty, democracy and mateship and all of those values that were present there on Bakery Hill—we also have to look at the other side and what their motivations were. Commissioner Robert Rede, in his letter of Saturday afternoon 2 December 1854, said:

… I am convinced that … the future … of the Colony … depends on the crushing of this movement in such a manner that it may act as a warning. I should be sorry to see them return to their work. …we may be able to crush the democratic agitation at one blow which can only be done if we find them with arms in their hands and acting in direct opposition to the laws …

You can see there that the motivations of the Establishment at that time were to smash the democratic ideals of those miners, to smash the democratic ideals of those people who made all those important pledges. I think, as I said before, that we do need to have a more bipartisan attitude to Eureka; it should be something that is celebrated because it was the rejection of the maladministration of justice, licence hunts and the jailing of journalists for seditious libel. It was the rejection of 13 stockaders—including John Joseph, an African-American who was first put on trial—and their freedom by juries. We should look at taking that oath that was sworn by the diggers:

We swear by the Southern Cross to stand truly by each other and fight to defend our rights and liberties.

We should be looking at having that oath in our citizenship ceremonies and in our other oaths because it is a historic echo of this nation's character, this nation's struggle for democracy and this nation's preservation of democracy. That is not something that any one party owns. That is something that every Australian owns, and it has been defended up hill and down dale, and we should not be shy about defending it in this place either.

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I commend the member for Fraser for his introduction of this most important motion, the contribution made by the member for Riverina, which was interesting, and the one by the member for Wakefield, which I thoroughly enjoyed. Having said that and having heard the contributions and the outline of the motion that is before us, I applaud the sentiment that is in that motion, because, as the member for Wakefield says, he talked about character, what formed the Australian character, why we are like we are—and we are accordingly a little different, especially when it comes to authority—but let us not go there too far today, especially in this week for me.

I would put to you, Deputy Speaker, that for me this is about one man, one flag, one arrest and one spirit. The one man was Peter Lalor; he stood in that meeting and said, 'I will lead'. He did not say, 'Pick me, pick me', he said, 'I will lead.' He was the only voice that stood in the meeting and said, 'I will lead.' This Irishman stood up and said to this group of Australians who were being oppressed by the authorities, 'I will lead.' One man. One unique flag under the Southern Cross. One unique flag where they looked to the sky for their future, and it was the Southern Cross displayed on that flag that they were to come behind. One arrest. Who did they arrest? This is the best part of the whole story: they arrested the journalist; they arrested the local editor. Nobody else was jailed or arrested over this whole episode. Lalor, though damaged with his arm smashed to pieces and later taken off, was not arrested and eventually became a member of the Legislative Council. Isn't that just greatest story? Who did the authorities have a go at? They booked the journalists for—what was it?—seditious libel. Most of our journalists would be in jail and we would not have newspapers today if that were the case, especially with regard to the Prime Minister at the moment. But let's not go there! But can we be candid about the moment and also interested in the past? Yes, we can, because what happens today in Australia emanates from what happened then. If we had some of their principles and pride and we took the same pride and care in any allegation that is made towards people in leadership, perhaps there would be a lot less said in this place and in newspapers about our national leadership than is said today.

But then I add a caveat at the end, and the caveat at the end is one spirit. What has not been mentioned here today—although the member for Wakefield went very close to it—is the spirit of this nation that was born out of not just this one incident but also many incidents like it. But this was a turning point that said, 'We are Australians and we will not be oppressed.' What did Lalor say when he stood up and took that lead? What was the one word he used when he stood up? What was the first word he said? Yes, there was a small speech, but he said one word. That amazing one word was 'liberty'. He did not stand up and say, 'I will do the job. Excuse me; I will do it' He stood up and he said, 'Liberty.'

In the national consciousness, that word acquitted with his name made the difference at that time. Whether they were victorious was a typical Australian story. No, they failed. But they did not fail in spirit, because of the spirit they had created amongst the 500. The disastrous consequences for those around them and the revenge that was taken by the authorities was outrageous. So they lost on all accounts. They lost life and they lost and lost and lost. But, out of that loss, was born the spirit that we live with today that makes us the unique country that we are.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This debate itself has exemplified the grand passions that the Eureka Stockade engenders. I so delighted that this debate has been brought before this chamber and that we are continuing to have these very, very passionate discussions about what is, in my view, at the heart of our democratic tradition.

We live in one of the world's greatest democracies. We live in a state with transparent and fair elections and our voices are heard through our parliaments and our community leaders, and now, more than ever, Australians are speaking out through the use of technology such as social media. As a nation, we well and truly do our bit. We pay our taxes, we work hard and we have a say in the future of our children and our children's children. That has not always been the case. Many of the world's finest democracies have in the past not allowed even the most basic of rights—from slavery and segregation to the right of all people to vote. Each has had their own move to democracy, and it is important that we celebrate and recognise our own: the battle of the Eureka Stockade.

On 3 December 1854, our nation experienced one of the most defining moments in our journey towards our democratic tradition. It was with great significance that the Ballarat Reform League Charter was placed onto the Australian Memory of the World Register back in 2004. Three weeks prior to the battle at the Eureka Stockade, 10,000 miners gathered at Bakery Hill and supported this charter. It is one of the most significant documents in our nation's history. The miners represented by the Ballarat Reform League wanted a say in how they were to be governed, how their taxes should be spent and how they as people deserved to be treated. Its stated premise was:

It is the inalienable right of every citizen to have a voice in making the laws he is called on to obey—that taxation without representation is tyranny.

The story of Eureka represents our nation's ability to overcome the struggles which we have faced over the last two centuries. The battle that occurred back in 1854 was the most significant turning point in our journey towards democracy. The federal government is committed to ensuring that the role of the events of the Eureka Stockade, the movement leading up to it and the events that followed it are very much central to our understanding of our democratic history. Under the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure program, we have committed some $5 million to establishing the Museum of Australian Democracy at Eureka. The project is to be opened next year and I really want to urge every Australian to visit this very important centre in Ballarat. It should be seen as a prerequisite to developing a full understanding of the significance of the Eureka Stockade in the formulation of our democratic society.

The Eureka Flag will be moved on loan—for two years initially, with a review—to the new centre when the facility is complete. Those of us who have been involved in this debate for a long period of time know the incredible significance of that. It follows an agreement between the board of the Ballarat Fine Art Gallery and the Museum of Australian Democracy at Eureka to move the flag from the art gallery on loan. It is a very significant thing for them to have done, and I want to acknowledge the leadership of the board of the Ballarat Fine Art Gallery in this regard. The Eureka Flag was gifted to the city of Ballarat by the Trooper King family—no relation to mine—and it has been with the Ballarat Fine Art Gallery for a long period of time and they have done an extraordinary job in curating and looking after what is, I think, one of Australia's finest and most important national icons. I know that the board of the art gallery did not take the decision lightly and that it was a very difficult one for them to make. I want to give them my full support and say thank you as a grateful nation for making that decision. I think that was the right decision to have been made.

This month, we have also seen the release of another addition to the history of Eureka with Peter FitzSimon's book, and I am very much looking forward to reading it. I understand, from all accounts, it is a very good account of the history of the Battle of Eureka. This book joins the many others—and I notice that we have John here as well—on this very, very important issue, that have documented the historic events in the Ballarat goldfields back in the mid-1800s.

I commend the member for Fraser for presenting this motion to the House. It is a very fitting recognition of this bloody battle at the Eureka Stockade that it will be remembered always as a pivotal point in our nation's history and also very much part of this nation's understanding of itself. For those of us who live in Ballarat, we are very proud to have been the site where this occurred, but also the site where we have held the tradition and continue to make sure that tradition is brought to the Australian public. Again, I urge all members and senators of this parliament to come to Ballarat—you will be most welcome—and have the opportunity to visit the Eureka Flag in the new Museum of Australian Democracy at Eureka and respect those who fought for our right for democracy.

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Deputy Chairman , Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I say at the outset that I am grateful that the member for Fraser has introduced this motion on the Eureka rebellion. It was a great moment. My gratitude also stems from the opportunity it provides to scratch a political itch I have endured for many years. It gives me a chance to set the record straight about what the Eureka Stockade was, and what it was not. It was a tax revolt—an uprising by private sector entrepreneurs against an oppressive mining levy.

The miners who defended the ramparts of the Eureka Stockade on 3 December 1854 were quintessential entrepreneurs. No-one exemplifies the values of the Eureka rebels better than their leader, Peter Lalor. As my good friend next to me, the member for McMillan, pointed out, he lost an arm at the stockade but that did nothing to dampen his thirst for liberty. In one of Australia's most remarkable political metamorphoses, Lalor went from mutineer to MP within the space of 11 months. In November 1855, he entered the legislative council, and then he won election to the assembly the following year. Peter Lalor was an advocate for the principles of limited government in the Victorian parliament.

Now to a few words about what the Eureka Stockade was not. It certainly was not some socialist uprising, like some try to claim in a warped version of history. It is interesting to look to Peter Lalor's words afterwards. When challenged on his ideals, he wrote:

I would ask these gentlemen what they mean by the term 'democracy'. Do they mean Chartism or Communism or Republicanism? If so, I never was, I am not now nor do I ever intend to be a democrat. But if a democrat means opposition to a tyrannical press, or a tyrannical government, then I have been, I am still, and will ever remain a democrat.

Yet the member for Fraser apparently thinks otherwise, because his motion asserts that the Eureka Stockade was the inspiration for the Australian Republican Movement. Wrong! Utterly and unequivocally, as the words from Lalor demonstrate. For the record—as my friend the member for McMillan knows—in 1999 I voted 'Yes' to the republican referendum. But my personal preference for an Australian head of state does not make me willing to countenance the deliberate distortion of Australian history. The member for Fraser, I feel, has fallen victim to one of the great frauds in the historiography of our nation. His ignorance stems from the arrogation of the Eureka Stockade story by the Left generally, which has warped it beyond all truth or recognition.

The Eureka uprising was a rebellion of capitalists; not collectivists. The rebels were not fighting for a progressive mining tax as the member for Fraser's motion implies. They were fighting against an arbitrary increase in licence fees, as the member for McMillan outlined. And isn't this all so reminiscent of another incompetent government flogging an ill-advised mining tax? I will not go there for reasons only of time.

These days we fight our battles with ballot papers rather than with muskets. Yet over the decades we have watched the Eureka symbol be usurped by those who represent the antithesis of the Eureka spirit. We see trade union yobs wave the Eureka flag as they employ standover tactics of intimidation during workplace disputes. As we speak, the CFMEU bully boys are flaunting the law through their illegal blockade at the Little Creatures brewery site in Geelong. Not too long ago we saw union yobs attacking Victoria police at a construction site in downtown Melbourne.

In 1854 the Eureka banner signified classical liberal principles of limited government, individual freedom and personal responsibility. But as this motion demonstrates, the Australian Labor Party excels at turning history into mystery—a mystery of myths, stolen symbols and tall tales designed to serve its partisan interests. Let me predict that if Peter Lalor were alive today—he obviously would be very old—he would be climbing every construction crane in sight to take back the Eureka banner that has been so misappropriated and abused by the trade union movement.

Geoff Lyons (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.