The Money Men by Chris Bowen (superbooks4u .txt) 📕

An Evaluation

Sir George Turner was a substantial if unexciting figure who made a worthwhile contribution to the development of the Australian nation. He deserves to be better remembered than he is, and to be well remembered at that. Before he became the federal treasurer, he made decisive and positive contributions to the federation debates—his pragmatic demeanour allowed seemingly intractable disputes about the balance of power between the small and large jurisdictions to be resolved. If a less skilful or committed man had been premier of Victoria at the time, it is likely that Federation would not have occurred when it did. It is also possible to conclude that Australian history could have been altered by the choice of a different man as the country’s first prime minister if it hadn’t been for Turner’s resolute refusal to serve under Sir William Lyne, and his deft handling of this difficult situation.

Some treasurers are remembered for their policy flair and imagination, but Turner is certainly not one of them. He did, however, take a prudent approach to managing the accounts of the new nation. He exemplified how important it is for a treasurer to understand the elements of the Budget in detail, although the complexity of the task has obviously increased exponentially from Turner’s day to now.

The Australian Constitution was largely a blank canvas, which Barton and his ministers filled in during the early years of Federation. The role of treasurer could have developed in any number of ways. Under Turner, the Treasury became the government’s central accounting body, and the relationship between the federal and state treasurers was regarded as being of the utmost importance. This approach would remain influential throughout the first half of the twentieth century, before the Treasury became an economic policy body. It was largely due to Turner’s caution and attention to detail that treasurers came to be judged by the same standard.

2

WILLIAM ALEXANDER WATT

A Treasurer in Conflict

Born: november 1871, Barfold, Victoria

Died: September 1946, Melbourne

Treasurer: 27 March 1918 – 27 July 1920

NO RELATIONSHIP IS more important to a government than that between the prime minister and the treasurer. They need not be friends. They may have previously been rivals, and may potentially be rivals again. But when in their respective offices, they must work in concert. They must have professional respect for each other’s role and authority. When a prime minister and treasurer do not share this level of respect, it will pose a mortal threat to the government, and the situation will normally end with the departure of one or both of them.

The treasurership of William Watt is a case study in the implications of a dysfunctional relationship between a government’s two most senior figures. Almost right from the start, prime minister William Morris Hughes and his treasurer William Watt had a tense coexistence. Each was headstrong, talented and determined to put his stamp on the government. Their relationship was predominantly a long-distance one, with Hughes spending seventeen months overseas while leaving Watt in charge of the day-to-day running of the government during his absence. It was when they were in different countries that their relationship reached its lowest point, with each feeling they should have more autonomy to make their own decisions.

It was perhaps inevitable that Hughes and Watt would clash. Hughes was stubborn and difficult to work for. He was not a natural team player and would join six different political parties during his fifty-one years in the federal parliament. Watt would be one of six treasurers during Hughes’ seven years as prime minister. Indeed, Watt had not been entirely enthusiastic about joining Hughes’ Cabinet, having had a premonition that he would be very difficult to work with. He’d told colleagues, ‘You can do nothing with the little devil, he won’t listen to anybody.’1

Watt himself was not universally popular with his colleagues either. He was regarded as the finest orator in the federal parliament at the time, and his occasional bent for cutting sarcasm did not always endear him to his contemporaries. His organisational ability and discipline were very strong, meaning that he was always highly likely to bristle against Hughes’ much more freewheeling ways. He was also not the type to lightly accept Hughes’ brusque management style. Despite a relatively modest upbringing, he had worked hard to educate himself and had fought doggedly to enter parliament—when he entered the Victorian Colonial Cabinet in 1899 at the age of twenty-eight, he was reported to be the youngest Cabinet minister in the British Empire. He worked his way up to being premier of Victoria and was then prevailed upon to transfer to the federal parliament, with pundits fully expecting him to become prime minister. He showed an independent streak throughout his career, refusing to toe the line of governments that he nominally supported when they did not live up to his high expectations.

Watt carried considerable burdens during his time as federal treasurer. Government finances were pummelled by World War I, and after the war the economy had to adjust to the return of hundreds of thousands of service personnel. His burdens were increased by the extended absence of his prime minister. His caretaker role was made almost intolerable by Hughes insisting that Cabinet decisions be sent to him for approval in London before being finalised—this in the days when communications between Melbourne and London took days. Even worse, Hughes took positions in the peace treaty negotiations in London and Versailles that Watt and the Cabinet fundamentally disagreed with. When the tables were turned, with Hughes back in Melbourne and Watt representing the Australian Government in London, Hughes insisted on calling the shots even as Watt demanded more autonomy in the negotiations.

Watt eventually quit his post in protest at what he saw as Hughes’ unwarranted interference in his prerogatives, tendering arguably the most spectacular of any treasurer’s resignation in the history of Federation. He had