pdf download - Westerly Magazine

ingly in the determination of its policy andtactics. In doing this it presented a publicface of superior and inflexible wisdom, and ittried to justify its stand by frequent referencesto the advice of its town planners. But thedefenders on the other hand, particularly theRoyal W.A. Historical Society and the BarracksDefence Council worked on people'ssocial nostalgia; they ranked the Barracks highin a scale of sentimental importance. Theaward to the building of the "Classification'A' "—"to be preserved at all cost"—^meantmuch more than the government recognised.But the Brand Government, since takingoffice in 1959, has won widespread electoralsupport through the momentum of the economicdevelopment it has engendered in theState. In the light of its success in this respectit is understandable that it took the stand thatit did on the Barracks Archway. It forgot,temporarily, that there are other criteria ofsocial progress. And, as 1966 progressed, thegovernment, unwittingly, and gradually, gaveground to the defenders. Its bargaining positionwas weakened by the Police Commissioner'sarbitrary refusal of "The Barrackade"; theswitch from the earlier promise to let the archwaystand to the dollar for dollar proposalfor re-siting it; the apparent confusion whenpressed to reveal the real meaning of the politiciansstock-in-trade "public opinion", and therefusal to give credence to the non-official attemptsto measure it; the drafting of the motionin the House to read conclusively "that. . . the Barracks Archway should be removed. . ."; the failure to realise that late 19th centuryideas about parliamentary symbolism arenot necessarily valid in the mid-20th century;and, in general, the failure to appreciate thatman does not live by bread alone. With aFederal election looming, the governmentfound relief in calling for the "free vote".But this is not to say that the defenders wonby the government's default. Many of theerrors listed above were made in the face ofthe political pressures that the Barracks DefenceCouncil initiated. From a position ofweakness in the period 1963-65, when it wasitself divided over tactics, the Council foundunity and strength in 1966 and initiated someimaginative ideas. But for all that, its effortswould have come to nothing had it not beenfor the publicity given its cause by the mediaof mass communication. Radio and T.V. newsand panel discussions, particularly TVW7's atthe time of the McNair survey, were importantstimuli to public thinking on the issue. And,unquestionably. The West Australian's defenceof the right to dissent, its impatience with thegovernment's apparent ineptitude, the publicitygiven to readers' views and its own search for"public opinion", all primed an emotional fervourin the community. The conflict illustratedthat the power of organised restraint is not themonopoly of professional associations, financialinterests or real-estate speculators; that thecommon man also has a stake in town planning;that his seeming apathy is a measure ofhis trust rather than his lethargy; and thatorganised groups in the community can arousehim to defend interests other than those affectinghis pocket.The outcome of the dispute is that the"western termination to the main street of themetropolis" has been settled—for the present.It may or may not be a "fine" or "fitting"termination; and it may or may not be seenas the remnant of a building with historicalsignificance. But, unquestionably, it has becomean arch of triumph—the "triumph" being thatof the ordinary citizen against the authoritarianurges of planners, officials, and of the politicianswho for the time being may have fallenunder their spell.60 WESTERLY, No. 1 of 1967