Talk:Don Dunstan/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Expansion

I'll be significantly adding to this article in the next few weeks / months. If Dunstan is of particular interest to any editors, I'd greatly appreciate any input regarding my additions - he's got a very controversial place in the history books. michael talk 06:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll try and help out. It'd be great if we could have quality articles on both Dunstan and Playford IV, the two most dominant people in our history.--cj | talk 08:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Structure

Intro

  1. Early life
  2. Ascent to power
  3. The Dunstan Decade
    1. Election Wins
    2. Festival State
    3. Social Reform
    4. Cultural Change
    5. Electoral Reform
  4. Life after Politics
  5. Legacy

Current plan - feel free to make changes. michael talk 07:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Rebecca 09:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Making Dunstan into a FAC had been part of my long term plan (after finishing the rest of the South Australian Premiers). Good start and I will be helping where I can. This may be down the track a bit but some suitable images would be great and the image of him in pink hot pants on the steps of Parliament House ideal but we may have to dig for them. --Roisterer 12:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Specially tailored pink shorts if I can remember correctly! A character. michael talk 14:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Sources

  • Don Dunstan, Politics and Passion: Selected Essays from the Adelaide Review, John Spoehr, Bookends Books, Adelaide, 2000 - got it
  • Felicia: The Political Memoirs of Don Dunstan, Don Dunstan, Macmillan, Melbourne, 1981 - just purchased it
  • The Dunstan Decade, Andrew Parkin and Alan Patience (Editors), Longman Cheshire Pty. Ltd, Melbourne, 1981 - haven't got it
  • Playford to Dunstan, Neal Blewett and Dean Jaensch, Cheshire Publishing Ltd, Melbourne, 1971 - got it
  • Don Dunstan: The first 25 years in Parliament, Richard Yeeles, Hill of Content Publishing Company Pty. Ltd, Melbourne, 1978 - got it

Any others that you can suggest? michael talk 12:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Hm. These resources may be of some use if you can track them down. A bit of a search also came up with this book, which sounds potentially useful. Rebecca 13:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Cheers, I don't know how easy it'll be to grab the university records, but I'll definitely try to find that book. michael talk 14:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
They're not just university records, though - it lists the date and paper and page of all the newspaper articles/biographies, if you (or I) can be bothered looking them up by normal means. Anything else that's really crucial there is quite possibly in the National Library archives, too. Rebecca 01:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
I've got a feeling I'll have to schedule another trip to the State Library. Oh, well. michael talk 02:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
For a critical view of Dunstan, you may wish to check out It's Grossly Improper by Des Ryan and Mike McEwen (there's a copy at the SA State Library). Additionally, the book A Liberal awakening: the LM story [by] Steele Hall [and others] will probably include critical comments on Dunstan (it's been a while since I read it). Even if this is not the case, I recommend the book as an interesting document on 70s politics in South Australia. The State Library also has a copy. The article is looking great. --Roisterer 14:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I ended up buying a copy of Felicia (signed too!) and its well worth it, just for the read itself - it'll come especially handy when I get to the 'Dunstan Decade' section. Walter Crocker's book on Playford dedicates an entire section on Dunstan (almost completely negative) but I will see if I can find those two you have suggested. Thanks for the comments regarding the article. :) michael talk 14:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Subdivisions

Is there any reason for the particular subdivisions of the Dunstan Decade section? It seems a little strange to have seperate subdivisions for the relatively minor (in the scheme of things) changes with festivals and the role of the governor, and then to cram everything else in an "other section". It seems to me that it might be better to take this chronologically (or to go by the above five-section plan). Rebecca 14:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

They'll probably disappear. I just need to organise my information, and there's a lot of it. It'll probably end up chronological. michael talk 14:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Images

There is going to be a big problem in regard to obtaining images for this article. There are next to none online, and I have no others I can easily access. Any suggestions? michael talk 06:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Flinders University was endowed with the Dunstan Collection in 1988 by the man himself. There is an Online Photographic Database. However, beware of copyright and conditions of access. I think the copyright of most images is held by the Advertiser. The Don Dunstan Foundation might be able to help out if a request is put to them. Also, you could try the South Australiana Database of the State Library.--cj | talk 06:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Legacy

I don't think I should include this section. Its contents should be removed or integrated into the rest of the article if possible. There's too much a chance of original research - whether positive or negative. Any comments? michael talk 15:06, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

query arising from FAR

"liberal conservative Liberal and Country League (LCL)"—I wonder whether the epithet can be piped to just "conservative". I'm sure that it's the way the coalition would have described itself then, and would today too. That would avoid the cumbersome repetition of "liberal". Tony 04:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

EXCELLENT article

Wow. Just wow. This article is incredibly detailed and very well written. My congratulations go to beneaththelandslide aka michael. Very well done and top notch effort! Timeshift 12:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Is this going to go on FAC? I think it's been ready for a while now. Rebecca 00:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm just waiting for the peer review to end. Once that's done, I'll tidy up the fair-use rationales on the images and then it'll go on FAC. michael talk 00:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Dunstan's sexuality

My personal view that Dunstan is gay, or at least bisexual; I have no doubts whatsoever. However, he never officially came out and declared himself to be so. In fact, when 'It's Grossly Improper' was released, he denied all of it as the work of a cocaine addict (which Ceruto was). As far as I know, nowhere in the books has it outright said 'Dunstan is gay'. I can remember a reference to an 'ambiguous sexuality' in a newspaper article though.

And as for telling me to "read the article", I wrote the article. I researched the article. I read countless books on the man. I don't need an activist coming on here and tooting his horn needlessly and telling me how I need to read my own piece of work. michael talk 02:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Well there is a contradiction here. As our IP editor friend points out, the article reads "In 1986 he met his future partner, Stephen Cheng, with whom he opened a restaurant called "Don's Table" in 1994. He lived with Cheng in their Norwood home until his death from cancer on February 6, 1999.". If that's accurate those categories belong. If not that bit of article is problematic (or need to reflect any ambiguity in their living arrangement that may be present). WjBscribe 03:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
The point is that Dunstan never openly identified as homosexual or an GLBT activist; in fact, as Michael mentions, he actually rejected such labels in at least one instance. Hence, the categories are inappropriate. However, tagging this article as within the scope of WP:LGBT is somewhat appropriate given Dunstan was significant in homosexual law reform.--cj | talk 03:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, Cheng was his partner. His business partner and his companion. But as for a romantic, sexual or whatever relationship, it is simply unknown and ambiguous. We don't have fact or proof on the matter. What we know is that Cheng was a partner and this is mentioned. 'Ambiguous' certainly is the key word here, and if anything could be said, an 'ambiguous sexuality' would be it. I agree with CJ regards the LGBT project inclusion. michael talk 03:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Stephen Cheng was his partner in every sense of the word. Justice Kirby was quite clear on the matter at the NSW launch of the Dunstan Foundation on 28 July 1999. As to tagging, at least LGBT activist is quite appropriate. 150.203.2.85 03:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Kirby is not an authority on Dunstan's private life. And Dunstan was never an GLBT activist.--cj | talk 03:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Considering Kirby knew Dunstan for over 30 years, I'd dispute that. 150.203.2.85 01:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah the project tag is fine given his role in rights reform anyway. But as I see it, either:

  1. He had a documented relationship with a man that lasted an number of years, in which case the LGBT people tag is appropriate (I agree the activism one isn't), or
  2. He did not, in which case the section I quoted above needs to be adjusted, perhaps to "business partner".

As I see it, if there is controversy about his sexual orientation which was more than just gossip, NPOV requires the extent of that to be conveyed- though without reaching our own conclusions and citing reliable sources. WjBscribe 03:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Philip Adams wrote that he "urged Don Dunstan to publicly profess his homosexuality, so as to spike the guns of gossiping conservatives seeking to destroy his premiership".[1] The gossip was around while he was still Premier, and not just because of the pink shorts! At the opening of the 2002 Gay Games, Justice Kirby said people like Robert Helpmann and "future premier" Don Dunstan frequented well known gay dance clubs such as the Purple Onion in the early 1970s.[2] 150.203.2.85 03:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

This obit made it pretty clear what team he batted for. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 09:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

He was gay "Openly gay former Premier of South Australia Don Dunstan has died of cancer at the age of 72."[3] "The courts hosted trials for men accused of gay sex before South Australia became the first state to decriminalise homosexual sex, under gay premier Don Dunstan in 1975."[4] "there were two periods 1967-68 and 1970-79, where we had an openly gay Premier, Don Dunstan"[5] "Australia has had at least one gay state Premier, Don Dunstan in SA, but the truth of his sexuality wasn’t revealed til long after he left office."[6] "Ex-premier Dunstan's long-time lover in payout plea"[7] <--- Direct quote from Stephen Cheng.

He was an activist "He was also a leader in the fight for gay and lesbian rights."Senate Hansard, p1927

150.203.2.85 01:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't those refs are unbiased, but we don't need them. Maybe I'm being naive here, but how can a man with a male partner not fit the GLBT category? Rocksong 02:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Please don't remove information about the Special Branch "pink files". They were the very reason Dunstan sacked Salisbury, for misleading Parliament about their existence. 150.203.2.85 03:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Disappointment regarding deletion of factual material

I place on the record my disappointment in the deletion of factual material regarding Don Dunstan.

Away from politics, Dunstan had a wide range of interests, which are not incorporated in the article.

If another contributor has concerns about "haphazard" style, I would have thought the answer is to perform diligent rewriting to harmonise the material, rather than merely deleting it as a matter of personal taste!Fitzpatrickjm 09:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Such lines as "Whilst he was State Premier, he published a cookery book, inwhich [sic] he advocated the use of chicken." are not of encyclopedic value. michael talk 09:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I consider this comment somewhat dismissive, and ignorant of the importance of food and drink in his life- not only was Dunstan the author of an influential cookery book, he also was an advocate of food education, a restauranteur and a gardener.

Also, other factual material has been deleted.

I consider your actions in deleting factual material are indicative of an unwillingness to consider the role of an encyclopedia to present facts.Fitzpatrickjm 11:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the fact that he published a cookery book (and the other stuff) deserves to go back in, and I think "Other interests" is a good heading for it. But I don't understand the point of mentioning chicken. Suffice to say he published a cookery book. Peter Ballard 13:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
But all these things are already mentioned in the text. They're already there! michael talk 13:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
No, they're not! I request that this information be reinserted. Anyone who has read Don Dunstan's books "Don Dunstan's Australia" and "Don Dunstan's Cookbook" will have gained an idea of Mr Dunstan's broad range of interests outside politics. Sadly, neither of these books are cited as references in the article.Fitzpatrickjm 11:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC) 11:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
His cookbook is mentioned. Cooking as a hobby is mentioned. I am aware of 'Don Dunstan's Australia', but it is a book that seems to have little to no publicity. michael talk 11:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Date formats

Looking at the mishmash of date formats in this article, may I take the opportunity to remind editors of the guidelines found in WP:DATE. --Pete 09:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


Moomba Monarch: irrelevant?

On 04:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC) User:Beneaththelandslide deleted a sentence on Dunstan being 1992 Moomba Monarch which was referenced.

In the Edit summary, User:Beneaththelandslide stated (rv; tiny tidbit in his history; irrelevant).

I believe that this is the User's point of view and not a neutral statement.

Could User:Beneaththelandslide provide evidence to verify that Dunstan beleived his selection as Moomba Monarch was irrelevant?

At least 40 to 60,000 people lined the streets of Melbourne to cheer Dunstan and the procession. He was warmly received at a variety of official Moomba activities and gave numerous speeches to gathered media.

Pastor Sir Douglas Nicholls was a previous recipient as King of Moomba (1973) and his significance to Dunstan is detailed in this article (including a photo of Nicholls).

As indicated in this article, in the early 1980s Dunstan had been Director of Tourism for Victoria, and as such, promoted the Moomba Festival: he certainly believed it was significant. Dunstan left Victorian Tourism amidst some controversy and possible rancour between both sides. To be appointed and accept this 'tourism' based position some 6 years later indicates that forgiveness from both sides has occurred.

For these diverse reasons, the appointment as Moomba Monarch is not irrelevant.

I request discussion of this issue and pending a consensus decision against inclusion of this one sentence I have re-inserted it.

Shaidar cuebiyar 23:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Beneaththelandslide on 00:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC) rv Page with Edit summary: (rv; dont waste my time. there's countless other things in his life that have gone unmentioned because they had no impact on the rest of it.)

Impact on life was discussed above.

Shaidar cuebiyar 00:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't care. You're wasting my time and I shouldn't even have to type this. You're conversing with the fella who wrote the damn article, repeats the line that he wrote the damn article and defends it (even though he had read WP:OWN), and doesn't like it when people screw and degrade the article.
Put simply, there are countless numbers of events that happened in Don's life that I could throw in there, but the simple fact is that they are irrelevant to the rest of it, irrelevant to the people he knew, and irrelevant to his legacy. One little idiot festival counts for no points in the grand scheme of things and does not deserve the undue attention of its own paragraph.
Why can't you people do something productive with your time?! Michael talk 01:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
How very venomous and Adam Carr'esque your comments are lately BTL :P Timeshift 02:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Michael, these edits are in good faith, so please remember the guidelines in Wikipedia:Etiquette. Peter Ballard 12:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I do however agree that they don't really fit in the article. Perhaps a category "Kings of Moomba" could be created, that way it could be slipped quietly into the categories and would not disrupt the article. Peter Ballard 12:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Most of User:Beneaththelandslide comments on 01:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC) above are the User's point of view and don't raise significant objection to the inclusion of a single sentence on the recognition of Dunstan's appointment as Moomba Monarch.
To illustrate further the relevance of Moomba Monarch to Dunstan, to people he knew and to his legacy consider the following:
1. Sir Robert Helpmann (1909 - 28/9/1986) had a eulogy delivered by Dunstan (see Flinders University Library collection at: [8])
This includes "He was born into the stifling conformity of Adelaide society but insisted on going his own way - which was not theirs. And along the way he showed a fine contempt for the jeers of his detractors."
Quoted at: [9]
Helpmann worked with Dunstan to enhance the Adelaide Festival of Arts and develop the Adelaide Festival Centre, Helpmann was director of the Adelaide Festival in 1970 and became King of Moomba in 1974. Being crowned King of Moomba was in recognition of Helpmann's contributions to the arts.
2. As mentioned above Nicholls was a previous King of Moomba. He was also a member of the Moomba festival board and was involved in establishing the recognition of indigenous contribution to Australian life in the 1951 Aboriginal Theatre production see (Craig Bellamy, Gordon Chisholm, Hilary Eriksen (17 Feb 2006) Moomba: A festival for the people.: http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/rsrc/PDFs/Moomba/History%20of%20Moomba.pdf PDF p 6, 19, 22 + photo p 8) Also discussed by then Governor of Victorian, Ron Landy (15th May 2001), "A Tribute to Doug Nicholls - A Pioneer of Reconciliation" accessed at: [10] Being involved with the Moomba festival was important to Nicholls and he was certainly honoured by being King of Moomba. Nicholls' importance to Dunstan is clearly expressed in the existing article.
3. Dunstan as Tourism Victoria director and Chair of Victorian Tourism Commission (1982 to late 1986) saw the Kings of Moomba as: Frank Thring, Daryl Somers, Kevin Bartlett, Ian Meldrum and Peter Brock. As indicated earlier Dunstan promoted the festival as part of his work for Victorian Tourism.
His contributions to Victorian Tourism are still resounding: Miranda Devine discusses why Melbourne has a better restaurant scene than Sydney and why Robert De Niro was attracted to opening a new restaurant in Melbourne. See (Miranda Devin, (16th Aug 2007) "And the winner is ... Melbourne", Sydney Morning Herald, accessed on-line at: [11]
Devine quotes Christopher Fay who consulted with Dunstan to reform the Victorian Licensing Act (1984) "Don was particularly adamant about the need for restaurants to be able to serve liquor without food, which obviously leads to the type of establishments Melbourne has today."
The current article leaves Dunstan's relationship with the people of Melbourne / Victoria at a very low point (after the Porcamaddona scene) with his leaving Victorian Tourism.
As stated above, the general people of Melbourne held no ill will to Dunstan and cheered as he rode in their favourite procession. In accepting the title of Moomba Monarch, Dunstan was reconciled to the public and responded graciously at numerous media, arts and society functions that he attended.
In Summary: at least some of the previous Kings of Moomba were friends of Dunstan's, they had significant impact on his life and considered the festival important. Dunstan left a legacy to the people of Victoria which was recognised by asking him to be Moomba Monarch.
It would be an insult to Dunstan to describe the Moomba festival as "One little idiot festival" this smears his name and the legacy Dunstan left to the people of Melbourne.Shaidar cuebiyar 09:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Other than User:Beneaththelandslide, there has been no indication as to why the Moomba Monarch appointment should not be included in this article. Consequently I have re-added it. I have included information illustrating Dunstan's contribution to Victorian Tourism (the 1984 Licensing Act referred to above). It's placed into the paragraph dealing with Dunstan's Victorian tourism work and I believe it now presents a more balanced perspective of Victoria's appreciation of Dunstan.Shaidar cuebiyar 04:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
It is irrelevant. Heaps of politicians attend fairs and such. This was also after he retired and he is a politicianfirst. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:59, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
As indicated above, Dunstan did not merely 'attend' the Moomba festival he was proclaimed the Moomba Monarch, led a street procession of 40 to 60 000 people, opened festival related activities & by de facto Dunstan acted as an ambassador to Melbourne's cultural scene for nearly a fortnight. It certainly happened after he was SA Premier that's why it's included in the section 'Life after politics'. The article mentions numerous activities by Dunstan after his mainstream political career.

The information supplied is relevant to Dunstan's time in Victoria. From the existing article, could you please tell me: a) What was Dunstan's lasting achievement(s) while in Victoria for five years as Victorian Tourism director? (Other than the Porcamadonna scene.) b) What recognition did the people of Melbourne/Victoria give for Dunstan's contributions to their arts, culture and society? I believe the current article does not adequately describe these issues and so added the information which was subsequently deleted by User:Beneaththelandslide on 04:56, 12 October 2007 with the note (rvv; irrelevant and minor idiot festival. has absolutely nothing to do with the rest of dunstan's career. mentioned nowhere in any of the history books. insignificant) User:Beneaththelandslide has not discussed these issues in any detail: I've supplied my rationale for inclusion above.Shaidar cuebiyar 00:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

We could debate this nonsense—it is nothing less—for all eternity, but I'll put across my point again: not in his obituaries, and not in the history books. Not notable. I can't see any reasonable reason (ho ho) why you continue to persist with this and waste my (along with everybody else's) time. Michael talk 00:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
In your opinion, the information is deemed to be irrelevant. I have consistently disputed your opinion without using emotionally weighted phrases such as "little idiot festival", "people who screw and degrade the article", and "Why can't you people do something productive with your time?". These are hardly rational responses to my points.
I have shown how the appointment of Dunstan as Moomba Monarch related directly to Dunstan (his life after politics: VicTourism) - this point has not been contradicted; how it related to people he knew well (Helpmann & Nicholls both had long associations with Dunstan: both were also Moomba Monarchs) - you have not responded to this point; how it's inclusion would improve the article (better balanced view of his interaction with Victoria/Melbourne) - no response to this either; hence, due to lack of reasoned counter-points, I believe a statement about Dunstan being Moomba Monarch should be included in this article.
You further state that it is "not in the history books" - there are problems with your additional proviso:
1. Are all biographical articles in wikipedia required to include only information from "history books"? I read no such requirement. I understand that reliable sources adequately referenced are sufficient;
2. Is _all_ information in the Dunstan article to be found in "the history books"? I doubt this;
3. The reference I cited (and you first deleted over two months ago) was, in fact, subtitled a 'history of Moomba' (see Moomba: a festival for the people for more details) and this included Dunstan's appointment as Moomba Monarch. This document may also be downloaded from City of Melbourne - Moomba History website which describes the reference I cited as a "50 year celebration Moomba History Document, ‘Moomba - A Festival for the People’."
Dunstan's appointment as Moomba Monarch is a historical fact of some notability, it is relevant as it did impact his life and legacy, it did impact the lives of people he knew well and provides better balance to the section on Victorian Tourism; consequently it should be in this article.Shaidar cuebiyar 08:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Every day I look for larger trees to bang my head against, in the futile hope that eventually through this practice enough brain cells will be lost, and I will be able to converse with you at your level. Give up. Stop wasting your time. Please. There has to be so much more you can contribute to Wikipedia. You have to be a good writer, or a good organiser, or good at researching, or something—concentrate on that, not on this. Please.
Moomba. You obviously love it. Good on you. I applaud you. I give you hugs and kisses and chocolate coated strawberries. But it is irrelevant to Dunstan's life. BL came on here and concurred with me, and he's a lot more congenial than I am, and he stated it nice and simple. It is, in the course of his life, irrelevant. One day when I or you are semi-famous journalists or academics, we could possible sit down and write a lovely book on lovely Dunstan, and include everything about his Moomba involvement. But not now. Not in an article this small that has to stay central to his life. Michael talk 09:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Once again, there are no new rational arguments here. Returning to the actual discussion, I have addressed every reasonable objection that either User:beneaththelandslide or User:Blnguyen have aired - I have provided a counter-point to each. I ask for the opinion of other Editors so that a consensus might be reached.Shaidar cuebiyar 09:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
As there has been no response to this discussion for over a month I intend to make the changes to Don Dunstan that I have outlined and justified, in detail, above. I request that User:beneaththelandslide and User:Blnguyen leave the changes to the article so that other readers have an equal opportunity to determine for themselves its relevance or lack thereof. My initial change to the article occurred some three and a half months ago.Shaidar cuebiyar 10:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
There is no consensus to make the change, so I'd strongly suggest you don't do so. I don't care for the article either way, but I'd suggest that making an edit "per" having found no consensus is probably not going to be appreciated. Daniel 03:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Economics

Wonderful article.

It might help non-South Australian readers if the article mentioned the strong role the steel and car industries played in the SA economy. This is why SA's unemployment went from best to worst so quickly when high oil prices caused plummeting demand for the large cars made in Adelaide's factories. Those industries never recovered, but withered away being replaced by more competitive goods from Asia.

The claim that the ALP was blameless in this state of affairs is too strong. The ALP was a long-time supporter of the tariffs which sustained the car and steel industries, insulating the car makers from pricing signals that indicated a change in customer preferences and insulating the car and steel manufacturers from the huge falls in manufacturing costs which were attainable with new equipment. So I'm afraid the ALP will need to share the blame with the other parties which failed to move industry from protectionism into a competitive environment in the decades following WWII.

"MPs started wearing items such as shorts to proceedings" is a overstatement. Dunstan famously wore shorts, it was not a trend.

"In 1976, Don Dunstan's Cookbook was published" might be a good place to note Dunstan's love of gastronomy -- one of his wide-ranging enthusiasms, which were a sometimes a challenge for the predominantly straight-laced times. I've got it around somewhere -- let me know if you want the cover scanned.

I was at an event in the 1990s when Don said the sale of the "loss making railways" was mainly because the Commonwealth would pay the huge costs for their conversion from Broad to Standard Gauge. His retrospective claim that it wasn't the recurrent loss which inspired the sale, but the huge capital injection required to keep the interstate railways efficient sounds reasonable and matches the recollections of the Commissioner of Railways of the time in a speech I heard him give in 2006 at a book launch at the Port Adelaide National Railway Museum.

The SAPOL Special Branch behaviour was nothing unusual for the era (Victoria Police's Special Branch was notoriously worse). Don's objection was initially that their extra-policing behaviour was threatening civil liberties, but it became clear that the SAPOL's lack of willingness to accept direction was threatening the preeminence of Parliament. The "pink files" were the initial concern, but in the end it came down to a power struggle between Premier and Police. In retrospect Don's sacking of Salisbury was correct -- the Victoria Police was asked to disband its Special Branch but it was found to be still operating two decades later and to have kept dirt files on anyone of a left leaning. In NSW and Qld there was no conflict -- those police were a corrupt arm of the premier's offices. That SA was not the same as those two states was Commissioner Salisbury's significant achievement.

Ah, I only went by my sources, so if you can find ones that support what you have written, you are free to edit the article to correct any mistakes. Cheers, Michael talk 03:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Mark Oliphant

Perhaps it's a beat up (after all, this is the FA and not that one), but Oliphant's page notes that he was involved in the 1975 dismissal, and a cause of concern to Dunstan? Can someone elaborate on this? It definately has potential to be noteable IMHO, especially considering how the article refers to Dunstan detaching himself from the dismissal and continue on to win the 1975 state election. Timeshift (talk) 14:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

See my answer at Talk:Mark Oliphant Peter Ballard (talk) 02:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC).

"Dunstan's progressive reign saw aboriginal land rights recognised"

Shouldn't it be listed here? All I can see is mention of the Pitjantjatjara Lands Act 1956. And despite a mention of land rights in the lead, I cannot seem to find mention of them in the body of the Dunstan article. Comments? Timeshift (talk) 01:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The body of the article has nothing on aboriginal land rights during his premiership (it only mentions reforms as attorney-general under Frank Walsh). I don't doubt there were reforms, but we should get this article right first. Peter Ballard (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
That was Michael not I. That is why i'm asking. Timeshift (talk) 06:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Dunstan's leadership spill margin?

When he took over as Labor Party leader, the article says "Eventually, Dunstan won the leadership over Des Corcoran, winning fourteen votes to eleven on the strength of rural and marginal Laborites", and is referenced from a book. Today, Isobel Redmond said that Dunstan took over the leadership, having won by only one vote. Who is correct? Timeshift (talk) 04:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Bizarrely enough, there seems to be book sources for both of them. This book supports Redmond's story that it was one vote, but a bit of Google-fu with the cited source here turns up "On the second ballot, with Hutchens and Bywaters eliminated, their votes split five to one in favour of Dunstan, giving him victory by fourteen votes to ...". Unless they're talking about different ballots, I'd go with the one that's here now, since it has more detail about what happened. Rebecca (talk) 05:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Don Dunstan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Don Dunstan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:06, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Don Dunstan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:11, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Don_Dunstan/Archive_1&oldid=1136668451"