A Palace of Correspondence
The last time I felt this anxious about the opening of a letter was in late 1993 when desperate to receive the results that determined whether university entrance would be possible.
On 29 May 2020, the High Court of Australia reached a decision that a series of correspondence known as the “palace letters” could be made public.
Historian Professor Jenny Hocking had pursued the release of the letters, which detail conversations between then Governor-General, Sir John Kerr and Queen Elizabeth II and her private secretary, Sir Martin Charteris, during the months prior and following the constitutional crisis and dismissal of the Whitlam Government.
Some 211 pieces of correspondence, more than 1200 pages, had remained locked away under the Archives Act after an agreement entered with Sir John Kerr.
Kerr’s wish was that the “palace letters” could only be released with the permission of the Crown.
The Federal Court held the view that the letters were personal and private until it was overturned by the High Court during late May when they found that the letters were Commonwealth property.
On 14 July 2020 at 11am, the National Archives of Australia uploaded to their website the “palace letters”.
The dismissal of the Whitlam Government on Remembrance Day 1975 remains one of the most discussed, debated, and contentious moments in the democratic history of Australia.
Many considered the Governor General, Sir John Kerr’s move a coup: unconstitutional, undemocratic, and plainly wrong. Others, including the caretaker Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser, for political reasons, believed it essential to restore confidence in government.
I was born just eight weeks after the dismissal, however, for any “True Believer” the constitutional crisis has been documented in a manner that enables people to feel like they were there on the steps of Old Parliament House in Canberra during the famous “Kerr’s Cur” oration.
It is a moment in history where people can recall exactly what they were doing when Prime Minister Whitlam was dismissed.
Sir John Kerr wrote to the private secretary of Queen Elizabeth II marking the letters “Personal and Confidential” or “Personal in Confidence”. He received correspondence in return indicating that the Governor General must act for constitutional and not political reasons.
The Monarch also made it clear that she did not wish to be involved and that it must be sorted out in Australia.
It is contestable as to whether The Queen should have been told or whether The Queen would have followed the advice of the Prime Minister or whether the then Governor General could use Reserve Powers of the Constitution as discussed with the Palace during September of 1975. All these matters will be debated at length in coming days.
The fact that Sir John Kerr did not tell Gough Whitlam of the dismissal because he did not want to put the monarchy at risk, and the fact that “it was better for Her Majesty not to know” does not pass the pub test.
The incontestable fact is that right to information, freedom of information, and electoral disclosure laws are paramount for confidence in the public institutions that we hold dear.
And it should not require a High Court challenge to uncover the truth nearly forty-five years after the fact.