Labour History: A Journal of Labour and Social History

The Australian Labor Party and its Relations with Business: The Case of the Margarine Industry

Labour History: A Journal of Labour and Social History (2017), 112, (1), 81–98.

Abstract

Given its relationship with the union movement, its formal commitment to public enterprise and its status as a party of the Centre-Left, the Australian Labor Party (ALP) has often faced questions about the nature of its relationship with the business sector. This article explores the theme of party-business relations through a study of the long-term connection between the ALP and the margarine industry. In doing so, an evaluation is undertaken of the historical restrictions on margarine production in Australia, limits designed to assist the dairy industry, and the impact these had on the alliance built between the Labor Party and some margarine manufacturers. Despite periodic accusations that this was a corrupt relationship, the two partners cooperated primarily because of their shared interests, which in turn arose from the broader phenomenon of state intervention in Australian agriculture.

Access Token
£25.00
If you have private access to this content, please log in with your username and password here

Footnotes

*The author would like to thank Labour History’s two anonymous referees. Google Scholar

1.Geoff Gallop and Greg Patmore, “Social Democratic Parties and Business,” Labour History, no. 98 (May 2010): 1–5. Google Scholar

2.See for instance V. G. Childe, How Labor Governs: A Study of Workers’ Representation in Australia (London: Labour Publishing Co., 1923), chap. 5. Frank Bongiorno, The People’s Party: Victorian Labor and the Radical Tradition, 1875–1914 (Carlton, Vic.: Melbourne University Press, 1996). N. Brennan, John Wren, Gambler, His Life and Times (Melbourne: Hill of Content, 1971). Edward Buggy, The Real John Wren (Camberwell Vic.: Widescope, 1977). James Griffin, John Wren: A Life Reconsidered (Melbourne: Scribe Publications, 2004). Google Scholar

3.For accounts of government interventionism in Australia during the twentieth century, see: Brian W. Head, ed., State and Economy in Australia (Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1983); and Noel G. Butlin, Alan Barnard and Jonathan J. Pincus, Government and Capitalism: Public and Private Choice in Twentieth Century Australia (Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 1982). Google Scholar

4.Dairy Industry Committee of Enquiry, Report of the Dairy Industry Committee of Enquiry on the Australian Dairy Industry (Melbourne: Dairy Industry Committee of Enquiry, 1960). Google Scholar

5.For an account of microeconomic reform and the margarine industry, see: Malcolm Abbott, “Margarine and the Origins and Timing of Microeconomic Reform in Australia,” Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 60, no. 1 (2016): 22–38. Google Scholar

6.Alan, G. Lloyd, “Table Margarine in Australia,” Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics 19 (1951): 24–46. Google Scholar

7.Colin Kirkman, Margarine: Seed Oils Replace Nuts: The History of Nuttelex (Prahran, Vic.: Nuttelex Food Products Pty Ltd., 2000), 2. Google Scholar

8.Paul Clarke, “The Marketing of Margarine,” European Journal of Marketing 20, no. 5 (1986): 52–65. Google Scholar

9.Kirkman, Margarine, 2. Google Scholar

10.West Australian, 8 November 1989, 3. Google Scholar

11.Argus, 14 September 1893, 9. Google Scholar

12.Sydney Morning Herald, 27 August 1898, 6. Google Scholar

13.Prime Minister’s Department, Margarine: Regulations in Force in Australia, 1917, A2 1917/3284, National Archives of Australia (NAA). Google Scholar

14.Herbert V. Evatt, Australian Labour Leader: The Story of W. A. Holman and the Labour Movement (Sydney: Angus and Robertson, 1945). Google Scholar

15.Frank G. Menzies, Crown Solicitor, Opinion on the Health Act of 1919, 15 November 1927, Department of Agriculture File, Dairy Products: Margarine Part 1, Series VPRS 10163/P3, Item 107, 43, Public Records Office of Victoria (PROV). Google Scholar

16.This legislation was passed through the national parliament as well as those of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania. See Year Book of the Commonwealth of Australia, no. 32 (1939): 668. Google Scholar

17.The Council declared in the James (Dried Fruits) Case that the Commonwealth had no power under the Constitution to regulate trade between the States; Geoffrey Sawer, Australian Federal Politics and Law 1929–1949 (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press), 94–95. Google Scholar

18.Accounts of the importance of dairy farmers in the Country Party can be found in: Ulrich Ellis, A History of the Australian Country Party (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1963); Antony Lamb, “Of Measures and Men: The Victorian Country Party, 1917 to 1945” (PhD diss., Swinburne University of Technology, 2009); Don Aitkin, The Country Party in New South Wales: Membership and Electoral Support (Canberra: ANU Press, 1965); P. Davey, The Nationals: The Progressive, Country and National Party in New South Wales 1919 to 2006 (Sydney: Federation Press, 2006). B. D. Graham, The Formation of the Australian Country Parties (Canberra: ANU Press, 1966). Google Scholar

19.Lloyd, “Table Margarine.” Australian Agricultural Council and Standing Committee on Agriculture, Notes Prepared on Agenda, Item 1(b) Butter Substitutes, for a Meeting in Sydney on 10 and 15 April 1935 by the Department of Commerce, Canberra, 22 March 1935, Department of Agriculture File, Series VPRS 10163/P2, Item 36, Butter Substitutes, Part 2, PROV. Google Scholar

20.Argus, 6 March 1936, 10. Google Scholar

21.Argus, 5 April 1938, 11. Google Scholar

22.Alan G. Lloyd, “Competition between Table Margarine and Butter,” Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics 24 (1956): 8. Google Scholar

23.Andre P. Morony, “The Margarine Quotas” (Honours thesis, Flinders University of South Australia, 1970), 4. Google Scholar

24.Lloyd, “Table Margarine,” 7. Google Scholar

25.Australian Agricultural Council, Proceedings and Decisions of the Seventh Meeting Held in Canberra, Agenda Item 12, Butter Substitutes, 12 and 13 May 1938, Department of Agriculture File, Series 10163/P2, Item 100, Minutes, PROV. Bulcock was not prepared to discriminate against one set of primary producers (the oil seed producers) in favour of another (dairy farmers). Queensland, Parliament, House of Assembly, Parliamentary Debates: Hansard, vol. 178 (9 November 1939): 1468. Google Scholar

26.Australian Dairy Produce Board, Annual Report (1938): 38. Google Scholar

28.Sydney Morning Herald, 6 November 1940, 13. Google Scholar

30.Argus, 12 August 1939, 3. Google Scholar

32.Ibid. Google Scholar

33.Lloyd, “Table Margarine,” 24. Google Scholar

34.Lloyd, “Competition,” 6. Morony, “The Margarine Quotas,” 3. Google Scholar

35.Sydney Morning Herald, 21 October 1908, 13. Google Scholar

36.Daily Commercial News and Shipping Line, 5 January 1921, 5. Sydney Morning Herald, 21 February 1922, 11. Google Scholar

37.Sydney Morning Herald, 10 August 1951, 7. Google Scholar

38.Australasian Grocer 22 (May 1932-April 1933): 147. Google Scholar

39.The Land, 28 June 1940, 18. Google Scholar

40.Sydney Morning Herald, 23 September 1951, 7. Google Scholar

41.Australia, Parliament, Dairy Industry Committee of Inquiry, Report of the Dairy Industry Committee of Enquiry (Melbourne: Dairy Industry Committee of Enquiry, 1960), 99. Lloyd, “Competition,” 6. Google Scholar

42.Sydney Morning Herald, 19 September 1951, 3. Google Scholar

43.Sydney Morning Herald, 5 December 1951, 4. Google Scholar

44.Sun Herald, 22 November 1953, 5. Google Scholar

45.Sydney Morning Herald, 22 November 1953, 5. Google Scholar

46.Sun-Herald, 22 November 1953, 5. Google Scholar

47.Argus, 4 March 1955, 20. Google Scholar

48.The New South Wales quotas were Meadow Lea 2,166 tons, Vegetable Oils 2,166 tons, Marrickville 2,166 tons, Unilever 1,002 tons, Mensa 750 tons and Barnes 750 tons. Marrickville Holdings, Table Margarine Quotas in Australia 1940–1966 (Fyshwick: Union Offset Press, 1966). Google Scholar

49.Farmer and Settler, 7 October 1955, 1. Google Scholar

50.Argus, 9 July 1955, 5. In Victoria, production remained below the level of the quota up until 1954. From then on, the margarine companies pressed for increases in the quota in Victoria (unsuccessfully), and from 1955 began shipping margarine from Sydney into Victorian markets. Google Scholar

51.Argus, 9 July 1955, 6. Google Scholar

52.Argus, 16 July 1954, 6. Farmer and Settler, 17 June 1955, 41. Because production of margarine in Victoria was below the quota until 1954, the issue did not achieve the same level of intensity as in New South Wales until 1955. Google Scholar

53.Canberra Times, 6 July 1955, 6. Google Scholar

54.Sunday Mail, 24 August 1952, 3. Google Scholar

55.Courier Mail, 29 September 1951, 1. Google Scholar

56.Courier Mail, 18 November 1953, 1. Sydney Morning Herald, 16 June 1953, 2. Google Scholar

57.Australian Agricultural Council, Proceedings and Decisions of the Council, Thirty-Eighth Meeting, 15–16 June 1953, Canberra, 65–67. Google Scholar

58.Courier Mail, 30 July 1953, 9; 11 January 1954, 6. Google Scholar

59.Courier Mail, 2 November 1953, 6; 22 October, 9. Google Scholar

60.West Australian, 20 September 1952, 2. Google Scholar

61.Courier Mail, 20 July 1954, 9. Google Scholar

62.Canberra Times, 1 October 1966, 14. John Edwards, “Crebbin, Richard Charles (Dick) (1913–1989),” Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, accessed March 2017, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/crebbin-richard-charles-dick-12368. Google Scholar

63.Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics, 4306.0, Report on Food Production and the Consumption of Foodstuffs and Nutrients in Australia (Canberra: Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics, 1961–71). Google Scholar

64.Canberra Times, 23 September 1966, 3. Chaffey, a Country Party politician, was particularly zealous in going after the Marrickville Margarine Company. On this occasion, he was burnt in effigy by workers whose jobs were at risk. He was accused of undertaking a feud against the company by Richard Crebbin, chairman of Marrickville Holdings Ltd. Google Scholar

65.Canberra Times, 23 July 1966, 2. Google Scholar

66.Canberra Times, 23 November 1966, 3. Google Scholar

67.Daily Telegraph, 13 May 1966. Google Scholar

68.Australian Women’s Weekly, 19 October 1966, 25. Google Scholar

69.Ibid. Google Scholar

70.Queensland, Parliament, Legislative Assembly, Parliamentary Debates: Hansard (23 August 1966): 189. Google Scholar

71.Report of the Dairy Industry Committee of Enquiry, 124. Google Scholar

72.Canberra Times, 23 July 1966, 1. Google Scholar

73.Canberra Times, 26 April 1971, 3. Google Scholar

74.Canberra Times, 28 April 1971, 13. Google Scholar

75.Canberra Times, 27 September 1973, 10. Google Scholar

76.Australia, Parliament, House of Representatives, Hansard, no. 21 (23 May 1973): 2494. Ibid., no. 21 (25 May 1973): 3288. Google Scholar

77.Australia, Parliament, House of Representatives, Hansard, no. 46 (14 November 1973): 271. Google Scholar

78.Queensland, Parliament, Legislative Assembly, Parliamentary Debates: Hansard (22 August 1974): 271. Google Scholar

79.Edwards, “Crebbin, Richard Charles (Dick) (1913–1989).” Google Scholar

80.Canberra Times, 5 February 1974, 3. Google Scholar

81.Canberra Times, 25 July 1974, 6. Australia, Parliament, Senate, Hansard, no. 31 (30 July 1974): 530. Google Scholar

82.Canberra Times, 31 August 1974, 1. Google Scholar

83.Canberra Times, 23 August 1976, 6. Google Scholar

84.New South Wales, House of Assembly, Parliamentary Debates: Hansard (22 February 1977): 4256. By this stage, the National Country Party seems to have accepted that it was defeated on the issue, and that the quotas were pointless without agreement between the states. They may also have been influenced by rising public opposition to the quotas. Google Scholar

 Google Scholar

 Google Scholar

 Google Scholar

If you have private access to this content, please log in with your username and password here

Details

Author details

Abbott, Malcolm