Brisbane Line"—A Study in Wartim E Politics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
APPENDIX 4 THE "BRISBANE LINE"—A STUDY IN WARTIM E POLITICS N the course of an electioneering campaign in Victoria in October 1942 , I the Minister for Labour and National Service, Mr Ward, was reporte d to have stated that when the Curtin Government took office there was in existence a plan, formulated by its predecessors, for the abandonmen t of an important section of northern Australia without firing a single shot . ' Messrs Menzies, Fadden, Hughes, McEwen and McBride, all member s of the two previous Governments, made public statements denying th e allegation. On 12th November they also expressed their serious concer n in the Advisory War Council . Menzies referred to the special difficult y presented by the fact that the statement had been made by a responsibl e Minister and that it could be answered only by a complete expositio n of secret military plans—a disclosure that no one was in a position to make . At this meeting the Prime Minister, Mr Curtin, told the Council that h e had sent a telegram to Ward, that he would see him on the subject, an d that Ward should not have made the statement.2 It can only be assumed that Curtin was unable to discipline his Minister, for Ward kept on repeating the statement with minor variations and by May 1943 his allegation had taken the form of a statement tha t a line—the "Brisbane Line"—had been drawn north of Brisbane and that the Menzies and Fadden Governments had the "defeatist plan" o f withdrawing behind this line in the event of an invasion . During the public controversy which followed, the members of th e Opposition found a further cause for complaint in the fact that the Prim e Minister, who as a member of the Advisory War Council under th e previous administration would have been in a position to know what wa s or was not planned, still did not publicly disavow Ward's charges but , by his silence, seemed to give them credence . After repeated protests to him by the Leader of the Opposition (Fadden), Curtin did write to Fadden on 27th May saying : "On Japan coming into the war the Commander- in-Chief of the Home Forces submitted to the Minister for the Arm y proposals relating to the defence of Australia, the essence of which wa s concentration on the defence of the vital parts of Australia. This involve d holding what is known as the Brisbane Line ." Elsewhere in his letter , which was widely published in the metropolitan press of 28th May, Curtin mentioned that the Commander-in-Chief of the Home Forces had bee n appointed by the Menzies Government, and that his submission had bee n rejected by the Curtin Government which "took steps to defend the whole of the continent" . Argus, 27 Oct 1942 . 'Advisory War Council Minute 1102, 12 Nov 1942 . 712 THE " BRISBANE LINE " This absence of an outright disavowal of Ward's charge and the linkin g of the Menzies Government with the name of the general who had put up the plan was regarded by the Leader of the Opposition as "a cunnin g piece of evasion" . 3 During early June 1943 there was warm discussion of the subject in th e Advisory War Council and at one time it seemed as though the non - Government members might leave the Council in protest if the publi c discrediting of them by a Minister was not corrected . In response to a request made by Fadden in a letter of 28th May, and by Spender, a former Minister for the Army, at a meeting of the Council on 13th May 4 the Prime Minister produced War Cabinet and Advisory War Council records to a meeting of the Advisory War Council in Sydney on 3rd June . In the meantime, in the course of a broadcast from a commercial radio station on 1st June, Ward had said : "I do not withdraw one word of what I have said about the Brisbane Line", and "I lay two charges against the Menzies and Fadden Governments—first, I charge them with creatin g a position in this country which necessitated the contemplation of suc h a defeatist plan, and secondly, I charge them with becoming so pani c stricken as the threat of invasion increased, that they turned to a treacherous plan under which large portions of Australia were to be given away t o the enemy. In the course of the Council meeting on 3rd June, according to th e official minute, Curtin said that the only plan relating to the Brisban e Line of which he had knowledge was that submitted by the Commander- in-Chief of the Home Forces, Lieut-General Sir Ivcn Mackay, in Februar y 1942 ; that Ward had no access to the relevant documents ; and there had been no leakage of information from Ministers on the War Cabinet an d the Advisory War Council . Non-Government members stated that th e documents disproved Ward's allegations by showing that the plan whic h had been attributed by Ward to the Menzies and Fadden Government s was made in February 1942, four months after Curtin took office . The Prime Minister should make it clear that no such plan had existed durin g the term of office of the Menzies and Fadden Governments . During discussion in the Council reference was also made to the plans for the evacuation of the civil population and essential industr y from vulnerable areas, which had been discussed by the Advisory Wa r Council and the Premiers of the States in February 1942, and to evacuatio n plans which were consequently formulated in Queensland, New South Wales and Western Australia. These plans had also been mentioned in the public controversy arising from Ward's charges, but Council member s observed, first, that the plans related to civil evacuation of potential battl e areas (not to the military abandonment of a territory) and nothing ha d emanated from them which bore any relation to the strategic conceptio n a Argus, 28 May 1943 . 4 Advisory War Council Minute 1198, 13 May 1943 . The full text of the broadcast is in the Century, 4 Jun 1943, p . 7 . THE " BRISBANE LINE " 713 of the "Brisbane Line" to which Ward referred; second, these plans, too, belonged to the period of February 1942, and not to the term of office of the Menzies and Fadden Governments . Non-Government members referred to the difficulty they had in refutin g the charges of Ward in regard to the state of the forces during the ter m of office of the Fadden Government without revealing information o f value to the enemy. When the question was raised of tabling the papers relating to the "Brisbane Line" the Prime Minister objected that it wa s important in wartime to keep faith with the military leaders, that the secrecy of the information in the papers would preclude the tabling o f the documents and that it would be unfair to the Chiefs of Staff, as the Government's military advisers, to publish the advice they had tendered .° During a no-confidence debate in the House of Representatives on 22n d June, Fadden again called on the Prime Minister to repudiate th e "slanderous campaign" conducted by Ward, but Curtin replied with a general description of the situation that had confronted his own Govern- ment when Japan attacked . Menzies pressed the point harder : "I put this to the Prime Minister : Every record of the Department of the Army and every relative record of the Advisory War Council have been searched, and there is no such plan before February 1942 . That is a fact." Curtin answered by interjection: "I said that. I stated that the plan was put to my Government ."' Later in the debate, Ward, while "not contradicting or denying tha t the available records disclose that the first plan was dated 4th Februar y 1942", added that he was "most reliably informed that one importan t report is now missing from the official files" .8 After receiving a certificate from the departmental officers concerne d and an assurance from the Minister for the Army (Forde), the Prime Minister stated in the House on 24th June that all the records of th e War Cabinet, the Advisory War Council, Army Department and Defenc e Department were complete and no unauthorised person had ever ha d access to them . He added : "The information given to the Minister fo r Labour and National Service is therefore incorrect . The Minister for the Army and I have discussed the matter with [Mr Ward], who withdraws the statement, which he made in the belief that it was made on reliabl e information." The "withdrawal" by Ward, however, was equivocal . He said: "Last night I conferred with the Prime Minister and the Minister for the Army . In the course of the talk I received an assurance from [Mr Curtin] tha t no document is missing from the files . I unreservedly accept that assuranc e and I am satisfied that the document to which I was referring on Tuesday night is still in existence . My references to the document have been seized upon by members of the Opposition as a device for disguising the rea l e Advisory War Council Minute 1202, 3 Jun 1943 . ',Commonwealth Debates, Vol 175, p . 38 . s Commonwealth Debates, Vol 175, pp. 574 . 714 THE " BRISBANE LINE " issue. The real issue is whether my charges against the former Prime Ministers are or are not true .