Howard government worries about drought, house prices and the Iraq War

This year’s release includes documents from the national security committee. NAA: A14482, 040124DI-001. AUSPIC Photographer: David Foote © Commonwealth of Australia, 2004, Author provided (no reuse)

The war in Iraq and national security

The national security committee considered most of government department submissions on the conflict in Iraq. The first phase of the war ended in May 2003 after a campaign of “shock and awe” that toppled Saddam Hussein’s regime.

These submissions include discussion of a transitional government known as the Coalition Provisional Authority. It was established under the leadership of US diplomat Paul Bremer.

It quickly dissolved the Iraqi army and other entities of the Ba'athist state. These decisions helped to fuel sectarian violence between Sunnis, Shias and Kurds. An insurgency, led by disaffected Sunnis and supported by Al-Qaeda, extended into 2004.

The legitimacy of the occupying force was further undermined in April 2004, when media reported Iraqis had been abused at the US-run prison at Abu-Ghraib^[2].

In 2003, Australia had committed to the war without the authority of the United Nations. This reinforced the Howard government’s determination to secure legal privileges and immunities for Australian personnel in Iraq through UN Security Council resolutions and Iraqi consent (rather than solely from the Coalition Provisional Authority).

After an Iraqi government was established in June 2004, the national security committee adjusted its strategy. It now sought to emphasise training Iraqis in Australia, rather than deployment of experts to Iraq.

A significant embarrassment

A significant embarrassment for the Howard government was the failure to find any weapons of mass destruction^[3] in Iraq.

The fear, based on what turned out to be flawed intelligence, was that the regime of Saddam Hussein possessed such weapons. This fear had provided a powerful argument for Australian participation in the war.

The papers released today show that in 2004, Cabinet accepted most of the recommendations of the ensuing inquiry into the failure of Australia’s intelligence agencies^[4].

Australia’s continued dominance of the international wheat trade with Iraq was a major Australian objective in 2004, the papers show.

This would be undermined in 2005 and 2006 by evidence the Australian Wheat Board Ltd^[5] had paid bribes to the Iraqi government in defiance of the United Nations Oil-for-Food programme.

A significant embarrassment for the Howard government was the failure to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. NAA: A14482, 040270DI-072. AUSPIC Photographer: Michael Jones © Commonwealth of Australia, 2004, Author provided (no reuse)

Closer to home

Cabinet also considered other areas of international policy, including maritime negotiations with New Zealand and East Timor.

The Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) had reportedly placed listening devices^[6] in the offices of the East Timorese government in October 2004.

Interestingly, nothing in the cabinet papers relates to this exercise. But it was reportedly done to obtain information favourable to Australia in the negotiations^[7] on the oil and gas fields in the Timor Gap.

Cabinet also considered defence cooperation with Papua New Guinea, participation in the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands, and the detonation of a bomb outside the Australian embassy in Jakarta.

Domestic policies and the 2004 election

Simon Crean stood down as leader of the Australian Labor Party in November 2003.

He was succeeded by Mark Latham, then the young member for Werriwa (Gough Whitlam’s old seat).

By March 2004, in an election year, Latham was enjoying a higher personal approval rating^[8] than any opposition leader since Bob Hawke in 1983.

In February 2004, Latham wrongfooted the government by announcing the ALP would close the generous system of superannuation entitlements^[9] for federal politicians. Latham’s attack proved too popular for the Cabinet to resist. Initially, the government tried to defend politicians’ super, but it soon moved to close down the scheme.

This decision accompanied approval for Australians to be able to choose their super fund.

Prime Minister John Howard and Opposition Leader Mark Latham face off in the only televised debate of the 2004 federal election campaign, Channel Nine, Sydney, September 2004. NAA: A14482, 040483DI-0373 © Commonwealth of Australia, 2004, Author provided (no reuse)

By the second half of 2004, commodity prices, building approvals and average earnings were rising. Despite Latham’s initial ratings, these indices augured well for the government in the election.

One that did not was rising house prices.

After the government referred housing to the Productivity Commission, Cabinet adopted all its recommendations for boosting supply.

It did not consider that changes to capital gains tax arrangements^[10] in 1999 had had a large impact on house prices.

Howard’s health minister, Tony Abbott, was appointed in 2003 because health was considered a weak point for the government. He staunchly defended the Medicare safety net throughout the year.

After the election, however, Howard admitted health funding was unsustainable and raised the safety net threshold, making medical care more costly for the poor. It was a volte-face that almost caused Abbott to resign from parliament^[11].

Drawing on opposition to the Iraq War in 2003, Latham pledged in 2004 to have Australian troops in Iraq home by Christmas^[12]. However, Latham’s decision was widely seen as perhaps too abrupt a withdrawal.

This and other matters, such as ALP plans to reduce Tasmanian logging, contributed to Howard winning the election in October.

The icing on the cake for Howard was winning control of the Senate^[13].

Climate change, energy and water

In 2004, the persistence of severe drought in eastern Australia influenced policy on water in the Murray-Darling Basin.

To address the problem of over-allocation of water to irrigators, Cabinet oversaw development of the National Water Initiative^[14]. Agreed upon by all the states and territories, it provided a framework for managing water sustainably.

In 2003, Howard had vetoed a submission from his ministers to set up an emissions trading scheme. But in 2001, the government had adopted a Mandatory Renewable Energy Target. It aimed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by encouraging additional renewable electricity generation.

In 2004, Cabinet rejected recommendations to strengthen the target and released an energy White Paper.

The paper shifted policy away from any consideration of emissions trading and toward technology. About A$1.5 billion of spending was mainly directed at the fossil fuel sector, primarily carbon capture and storage for coal or gas-fired generation^[15].

Read more https://theconversation.com/cabinet-papers-2004-howard-government-worries-about-drought-house-prices-and-the-iraq-war-243469

• Prev
• Next