House of Representatives
7 September 1949

18th Parliament · 2nd Session



Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. J. J. Clark) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 3

DISTINGUISHED VISITOR

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– I desire to inform the House that the Right Honorable Lord Fairfax, a member of the House of Lords, is within the precints of the House.With the concurrence of honorable members, I shall invite him to take a seat on the floor of the House beside the Speaker’s chair.

Lord Fairfax thereupon entered the chamber, and was seated accordingly.

page 3

QUESTION

WOOL

Mr McLEOD:
WANNON, VICTORIA

– Can the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture say what profits are held by the Australian Wool Realization Commission as Australia’s share of the operations of the joint organization set up to dispose of the wartime wool surplus? Is the Government taking any steps to provide for an interim distribution of profits, and if so, when may wool-growers expect the distribution to take place? When will the final distribution be made?

Mr POLLARD:
Minister for Commerce and Agriculture · BALLAARAT, VICTORIA · ALP

– Australia’s share of the profits held by the Australian Wool Realization Commission is expected to amount to between £55,000,000 and £60,000,000, which was about the value of a normal prewar Australian clip. The Government, under the terms of the Wool Realization Act, has taken into consideration the financial position, and the Treasurer has agreed to an interim disbursal not exceeding £25,000,000. The act requires that the Australian Wool Realization Commission shall be consulted, and a letter of consultation has been despatched to the commission to-day. It is expected that a distribution of £25,000,000 can be made within the next two months. A final distribution of the remaining profits cannot be made until the scheme is wound up. A conference is to take place in London in January of next year to discuss the matter, and after that we shall be in a better position to fix upon a date for winding up. When a decision has been reached, we shall be able to indicate the additional amount which is to be distributed, and the approximate date of distribution.

page 3

QUESTION

IMMIGRATION

Mr HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Prime

Minister inform the House of the total cost, entailed by the kiss bestowed by the Minister for Immigration upon the brow of the fifty-thousandth displaced person to arrive in Australia ? Will the right honorable gentleman itemize that cost and state from what source it will be met? Will he confirm or deny the reported statement by the master of the migrant vessel which brought the “ kissee “ that his ship was diverted to Fremantle on an order received while at sea and that this diversion was a factor in making the ministerial kiss a costly ceremony? On whose authority was the vessel diverted? Was the kiss inspired by Government policy or did the Minister act on his own initiative in the matter?

Mr CHIFLEY:
Prime Minister · MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– My information with respect to the incident to which the honorable member has referred is that the total cost involved in the kiss bestowed by the Minister for Immigration upon a child refugee was the physical effort expended by the Minister in giving it. The vessel was not specially diverted for the purpose of meeting the Minister at Fremantle. That aspect of the matter has already been explained. In reply to the last part of the honorable gentleman’s question, I can only say that one’s action in kissing a person is simply a matter of personal favour and preference.

Mr SHEEHAN:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the Minister for Immigration prepared to make a statement about the recent deaths of immigrant children in this country?

Mr CALWELL:
Minister for Immigration · MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP

– I have a statement ready. I told some pressmen the other day that I would seek an opportunity to make a statement as soon as the House met. I propose to ask for leave to make the statement at about three minutes to 4 o’clock to-day.

Mr WHITE:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA

– I wish to ask the Minister for Immigration a question on unassisted British migration. To explain my question, I point out that some thousands of British people who are waiting to come to Australia cannot obtain nominators and others who would pay all their own expenses cannot obtain houses. The Minister may remember a proposal 1 made to him in writing and in the House about the need to cater for these people on a plan arranged between the Government of the United Kingdom and the Australian Government that would include housing. He will, of course, have had other proposals, too. Can he say whether any plan is being worked out so that these persons who wish to migrate to Australia will not be lost to us? Can he say whether accommodation, even of a temporary nature, could be provided as it is provided for displaced persons?

Mr CALWELL:

– It is perfectly true that the honorable member for Balaclava, and also other honorable members, have expressed concern from time to time at the inability of a number of people in Great Britain, who wish to come to Australia, to find nominators who can guarantee them accommodation in their own homes or such other accommodation as the State immigration authorities can accept. I, too, have been greatly concerned about this position, and I took advantage of the recent conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers to raise the matter, through the Prime Minister. The Premiers have agreed, in most cases, that there should be a joint Commonwealth-State scheme for building hostels to house the type of British migrant to whom the honorable gentleman has referred. We are awaiting replies from all the States. We shall go ahead as quickly as we can with the provision of hostels on much the same lines as those in which we are housing the new Australians, but, as I pointed out to the honorable member for Calare when he raised thi3 matter some little time ago, our difficulty with the British migrants is that we cannot tie them down for two years in the same way as we are able to tie down the new Australians and require them to work in a particular industry and live in a particular locality. We could do it of course - the authority to direct man-power is operating in England to-day - but we choose not to do it. The difficulty arises from the fact that some of the British migrants undoubtedly would take the accommodation that is offered to them and would leave within a few days or a week, and our plans would be considerably dislocated. The refusal of such people to stay where we want them to stay would complicate the housing problems of Australians, and, to that extent, could cause friction. We are trying to overcome all the difficulties because we do want to bring to Australia as many more British people, who cannot at present come here, as we possibly can get.

Later:

Mr CALWELL:
Minister for Information and Minister for Immigration · Melbourne · ALP

by leave - The deaths at Albury of twelve European child migrants, some of them from malnutrition, is a tragic reminder of the conditions of privation under which children are still forced to live in war-devastated Europe. If we need any further incentive to redouble our efforts to bring to Australia as many as possible of these innocent victims of the war’s cruel aftermath, these deaths would provide it. By bringing these children to Australia, we at least give them a chance first to live and then to grow hale and strong.Were we to leave them in Europe, we would condemn them to a. death rate very much higher than the incidence of deaths among those who have so far arrived in Australia.

The moment a European child migrant reaches Australia, he or she receives the best care which medical and nutritional science can provide. Once the children have entered a Commonwealth reception centre, malnutrition becomes merely a memory of a sad past except for the few whose condition has been too far advanced on arrival for the sufferer to respond to treatment. I am deeply concerned at the fate of these pitiable few and, in recent months, I have made the strongest possible representations to the International Refugee Organization.

Let it be clearly understood that the migrant from Europe becomes the responsibility of the Australian Government only from the time of arrival in Australia. The International Refugee Organization is responsible for the care and welfare of all European migrants from the time of their admission to a displaced persons’ camp in Europe until their arrival at an Australian port. In fact, the Commonwealth has no direct control over conditions on any migrant ships. Standards for accommodation and commissariat are laid down in the merchant shipping laws and regulations of the countries in which the ships are registered. On these are superimposed any special conditions required by the charterer, which in the case of the ships which brought these children to Australia is the International Refugee Organization. Policing of conditions is, therefore, the responsibility of the navigation authorities and the charterers. All that Australia can do is to request that certain standards be set and adhered to and this has been done in the strongest possible terms, not only in relation to the ships themselves, but also in respect of the camps in which migrants for Australia live prior to embarkation.

Earlier this year, I was disturbed by reports of conditions at International Refugee Organization embarkation centres in Naples and following representations dating back to January of this year, I caused the following telegram to be sent on the 30th March to Major-General Galleghan, head of the Australian Military Mission to Berlin : -

Your cable notifying the deaths of children at Naples coupled with reports being received by heads of families in Australia from dependants there indicate that conditions are far from satisfactory. Most damaging reports have emanated from Camp Capua. These depict conditions as deplorable.Will you please cable detailed report on conditions of all camps in which displaced personsen route to Australia are waiting also any action taken or to be taken by international Refugee Organization to improve conditions.

To this cable, Major-General Galleghan replied that the International Refugee Organization had sent an Australian member of its staff to investigate conditions at Camp Capua. This officer had reported that the deaths of the children had not been directly due to local conditions, although a lack of amenities and the fact that they were placed in an unheated camp had contributed to the trouble. Furthermore, the food in Naples was said to be strange to most of the displaced persons, particularly those from Poland and the Baltic States, and that sickness could be expected until they had adjusted themselves to the food. MajorGeneral Galleghan added that conditions in all the Naples staging camps were rapidly being improved by the International Refugee Organization. More recently, on the 11th July last, I addressed further strong representations to the International Refugee Organization through Major-General Galleghan for the special care and treatment both at embarkation centres and on shipboard of young children, particularly those showing preliminary signs of malnutrition.

As a result of my representations, improvements have been effected by the International Refugee Organization and have been reported to me by MajorGeneral Galleghan in a letter dated the 9th August, as follows: -

I took this matter up on a high level at Geneva and as a result Geneva had a conference of all the people concerned. I spoke to the Assistant Director-General responsible (Mr. Jacobsen) and impressed upon him the seriousness of the complaint and he has now advised me that as a result of the complaint a food supervisor has been appointed to the Naples area who will be responsible for diet, sanitation and hygiene in the various kitchens and dining halls of the two camps at Capua and Aversa. He also advised me that international nurses are being appointed to the various vessels, and in the case of vessels of large capacity there will be two international nurses. These will replace to a large extent the Italian nurses who have been employed, and the employment of whom has been the cause of complaint by me to the International Refugee Organization. It is further advised from Geneva that the Health Division there will Compile a full set of sanitary and hygiene instructions for use by the escort staff starting from the originating points for displaced persons in Germany and Austria covering the eating of tainted fruit and drinking of polluted water while en- route to Naples. This instruction will also cover the conduct of mothers Whilst in the staging areas and on board ships and will have special reference to those boats which flock around the ships at such ports as Port Said, Aden, and Colombo selling fruit which it would be much wiser not to allow children to eat. The International Refugee Organization has also guaranteed me that they Will ensure that the water in the tanks of the various vessels is tested at Naples before departure, and that water tanks are cleaned and re-cemented after every voyage. This was in reply to a suggestion by me as a result of troopships experience that water tanks are often the source of intestinal troubles.

I am quite satisfied that Geneva is seized with the seriousness of this complaint and are taking all possible remedial action . . .

Also as a result of these representations, Matron Constance Fall, principal matron for New South “Wales during the latter stages of the last war, and matron of the King George V. Hospital, Sydney, has left Europe for Australia on the International Refugee Organization ship Nelly, which is due to reach Australia in mid-September. Matron Fall will report fully on all aspects of the shipboard diet and medical care facilities for children on the voyage to Australia. In preliminary reports submitted by Matron Fall on conditions prior to embarkation, she indicated that catering at camps in Europe was satisfactory with the exception of one camp. The director of that camp was, as a result of Matron Fall’s report, replaced1 during August. In addition, recommendations submitted by her to the International Refugee Organization regarding care of mothers and children during train travel to staging camps, and in these camps, have also been put into operation by the International Refugee Organization. A further factor which contributed to the illness of children on arrival Ls referred to by Matron Fall in a preliminary report. A baby passenger in the ship Nelly, on which Matron Fall is travelling, died after two days at sea, and it is believed that the mother of the child concealed the fact that it was ill prior to embarkation in the fear that the family might miss the ship. This is a sufficiently pitiable commentary on the eagerness of these unfortunate people to get to Australia. Arrangements have now been made for all families to be lectured, in order that they may be assured that illness of children, whilst deferring embarkation on a particular vessel, will not bar them from subsequent embarkation.

In the light of this positive action on my part to improve conditions which are in no way Australia’s’ responsibility, it will be seen that there is no justification for the statement by the Sydney Daily Telegraph in its leading article on Monday that Australia might have contributed to the tragedy of the young children by its neglect to ensure that shipboard conditions were up to a reasonable standard. Once the migrant children are admitted to a Commonwealth reception centre, those of them who show signs of malnutrition become the special care of doctors, nurses and nutritionists who prescribe the best possible foods in medically desirable quantities. A diet chart for children in the different age groups has been compiled after exhaustive investigation by Dr. E. H. Hipsley, a distinguished nutritionist who is Acting Director of the Institute of Anatomy, Canberra. This diet chart, which admits of absolutely no limitation in its prescription of the best protective and body-building foods, ensures that the children receive milk, butter, cereals, eggs, fruit, meat, vegetables, fish liver oil, orange juice, tomato juice, broths of all descriptions, and so on.

All hospitals in Australia are short of staff, but the 200-bed hospital operated by the Commonwealth Department of Health which serves the immigrants at the Bonegilla Reception Centre is as well staffed as any Australian hospital, in the capital cities or elsewhere. The Bonegilla hospital has a professional staff of two Australian doctors and eight Australian nurses assisted by a nursing and domestic staff of over100 migrants, including six who were practising doctors in Europe and others with nursing experience. The conditions in our immigration centres have set a standard for the world. Members on both sides of the House and of both Houses of the Parliament who have visited these centres have been eulogistic in praise of them. Other leading public figures both from Australia and abroad have been most enthusiastic about the way in which the new arrivals are looked after in these former service camps and have been most complimentary in their comments on the methods adopted for the care and well-being of the migrants. Even the newspaper reporters who flocked to the Bonegilla Reception Centre at the week-end are unanimous that the migrants get the best possible food and plenty of it. Had the newspapers even the flimsiest reason for reporting otherwise, they would have done so because they normally show no disinclination to embarrass me or the Government.

Let me emphasize that the number of deaths of migrant children under two years of age is by no means high in the circumstances. The total number of deaths from all causes of European child migrants after arrival in Australia is nineteen out of a total of 2,029 children under the age of two years of age who have arrived. This represents a death rate of only 9.4 a thousand. It will be obvious, therefore, that despite the unfortunate start these children have in life, despite the lack of proper food and prenatal care for their mothers, despite the difficulties of providing appropriate diet and facilities for medical care in dis placed persons’ camps in Europe, despite the severe climatic conditions they face in their early life, often without proper clothing, and despite the undernourished condition in which some of them arrived in this country, we have been able to reduce the mortality rate amongst them to a remarkably low level. Thinking people, when they know the full facts surrounding the bringing of these children to Australia, will realize that, much as we regret that the best medical skill and attention available were unable to save their lives, we should remember rather those other children who, had it not been for the proper nourishment and care provided in Australia, would have perished in displaced persons’ camps in Europe instead of being as they now are, fine healthy children sharing with their Australian playmates the sunshine and plenty of this country. I should like to make it quite clear that it has never been and never will be the practice of out immigration selection teams in Europe to reject a family merely because a child showed signs of malnutrition. It may even happen that in the future other children who arrive here too late may die, but it will certainly happen that many children who would otherwise have died in Europe will find health and happiness in Australia. I lay on the table the following papers: -

  1. Deaths of European Child Migrants - Ministerial Statement;
  2. Report on the Deaths by the Medical Superintendent of Bonegilla Hospital ;
  3. Letter, dated 5th September, 1949, to the Minister for Immigration from Major-General C. E. M. Lloyd, Chief of Australian and New Zealand Mission of the United Nations’ International Refugee Organization, and
  4. Cablegrams from the International Refugee Organization to the Minister for Immigration and to Major-General Lloyd.

Major-General Lloyd, in his letter, disclaims any responsibility on the part of the Australian Government for the deaths from malnutrition of these unfortunate children with whose cases I have dealt. The international telegrams completely refute statements that either the International Refugee Organization or its officers or spokesmen have ascribed any blame to the Australian Government for the fact that these children have died. They also state that the International

Refugee Organization has decided, subject to our consent, that the summer crossings of the Red Sea, which intensify the arduous conditions of shipboard life and make illness more likely to occur among children, will be postponed for 60 days until cooler weather will enable .the children to be brought here with a greater prospect of their safe arrival in Australia. 1 move -

That the Ministerial statement be [printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 8

QUESTION

PHARMACEUTICAL BENEFITS

Mr DALY:
MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services in a position to advise the House of the reasons for the delay on the part of the High Court in delivering its judgment in the important case dealing with the Pharmaceutical Benefits Act?

Mr HOLLOWAY:
Minister for Labour and National Service · MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP

– The case to which the honorable member has referred arose out of the attack made by the British Medical Association and the Victorian State Government upon the validity of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Act. The case was heard early last month, and the hearing, which was commenced on the 12th August, was concluded quickly, for it lasted only two and one-half days. The Government naturally expected that the court might give its judgment by the end of that month. As the court has now gone to Western Australia, and may be dealing with other matters, I am not able to give the honorable member any idea when it is likely to announce its decision in the pharmaceutical benefits case. I understand that six justices heard that case and that each of them must give a separate decision. Consequently, we cannot expect the judgment until the slowest member of the court arrives at his decision. I shall ask the Attorney-General, if he thinks it proper, to do so, to approach the Chief Justice with a. view to obtaining an early decision.

page 8

QUESTION

WHEAT

Mr HAMILTON:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Has the attention of the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture been drawn to a statement by Mr. H. Smith, General MacArthur’s food officer, that informal discussions had taken place regarding Japan becoming a party to the International Wheat Agreement? If so, has the Minister any information to give to the House regarding the matter? Has Australia been asked to indicate its attitude on the proposed participation of Japan in the agreement?

Mr POLLARD:
ALP

– I have read in a press report the statement to which the honorable member has referred, but I have no official knowledge concerning it. Any application by Japan to become a party to the International Wheat Agreement, if it has been made, will be dealt with by the Wheat Council which has been set up under the terms of the agreement. I have no doubt that at the appropriate time the council will announce whether any such application has been made. It will also, no doubt, tell the world how it recommends that the application should be dealt with.

page 8

QUESTION

DAIRYING

Commonwealth Assistance - -Butter

Mr FULLER:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture whether the Government’s grant of £250,000 to promote greater efficiency in the dairying industry will be used to pay more experts and to enable the writing of more reports? Is it a fact that Government interference with the dairying industry and Government experts is preventing increased production of dairy products? Is the Minister aware that the Bank Officers’ Committee has implied in advertisements published in the newspapers that this is the case?

Mr POLLARD:
ALP

– By accident my attention was drawn to the newspaper report to which the honorable member has referred. I was rather astonished to think that any body of men such as the Bank Officers’ Committee would dare to suggest that the State governments, or for that matter the dairy-farmers of Australia, would resent the Australian Government making available an amount of £250,000 annually for five years for the purpose of promoting efficiency in the dairying industry of this country. The expenditure of that money will not involve the employment of experts by the Australian Government. The money has been allotted to the States on the basis of their respective cow population. This year Victoria and New South Wales .will each receive £67,000, Queensland £68,000, Western Australia £17,000 and Tasmania £9,000. The money will be expended by the State Departments of Agriculture, which will employ experts who are already on their staffs. Probably they will recruit a few additional outside experts. I am sure that the dairy-farming community in the States I have mentioned will welcome the provision of this money and the additional work which its expenditure will make possible. The money will be expended oi. herd recording, sire surveys, increasing the efficiency of dairy-farmers, the provision of mobile units for extension work find the like. I am astonished to think that anybody should be so ill-informed a.t,o resent the making available of money for these purposes by the Australian Government. The ultimate result of this expenditure will be that the efficiency of the dairying industry will be improved and more butter and fats will become available to Great Britain. Eventually dairy-farmers will be able to lead much more enjoyable lives and dairy products will be produced at a more reasonable cost.

Mr ANTHONY:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I direct a question to the Prime Minister. I have here an interesting little booklet entitled Digest of Decisions and Announcements and Important Speeches by the Prime Minister, No. 131. I refer to an announcement that was made by the Prime Minister on the 13th October, 1947, and reported on page 5 of the booklet. The right honorable gentleman stated that there would be a review of the prices of dairy products each year from April to June and that the price of butter would be adjusted according to the findings of the reviewing committee as from the 1st July of each year for a guaranteed period of five years. The committee recommended an increase of the price of butter by 3d. per lb., which should have been paid to the suppliers as from the 1st July last. When is it proposed to make that distribution to the dairy-farmers ? Can they expect that, like the wool cheque, it will be in two or three months’ time?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– Quite a number of conferences have been held on the price of butter. The Minister for Commerce and Agriculture has just handed me a list of the conferences. On the 6th July there was one at Brisbane with the prices officers. Another was held at Brisbane on the 8th July with the prices ministers representing the .States. A special conference of departmental officers and the prices officers was held at Canberra on the 27th and 28th July. There was a further conference between the Premiers and myself on the 17th July. On the 25th August the departmental officers and the prices officers again conferred. So there has been no lack of conferences on the matter. The intimation that I have received from the Premiers is that the price of butter will receive further consideration from the prices ministers at an early date. I forget the precise date. The Premiers have given me an undertaking that the matter will bc cleared u>p at a reasonably early date. It is not the fault of the Australian Government that the increased price of butter recommended by the committee has not been paid. Discussions are still taking place.

page 9

QUESTION

DOLLAR DEFICITS

Washington Conference: Australian Representation - Inducements to Investors

Mr ABBOTT:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Prime Minister state whether the Canadian Ministers for Finance and External Affairs are representing the Canadian Government at the dollar talks which are to open at Washington to-day? Will the right honorable gentleman explain why the Australian Government is not to be represented at these talks at a ministerial level, and why the Australian Minister for External _ Affairs is not present with his Canadian colleague to support Australia’s case? If it is not considered necessary for an Australian Minister to be present, is it because the Government has given Sir Stafford Cripps an open authority to agree to whatever that gentleman likes, irrespective of whether or not it is in the interests of Australia?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– The talks are to take place between representatives of the dollar countries, and of the United Kingdom as representing the sterling area.

Mr Rankin:

– Is the United Kingdom a dollar country?

Mr CHIFLEY:

– The talks are to take place between representatives of dollar countries, and of the United Kingdom as the leader of the sterling area.

Mr Abbott:

– Why is one dominion to be represented and not another?

Mr CHIFLEY:

– One of the reasons why Canada is to be represented is because that dominion is a dollar country. Sir Stafford Cripps has neither asked for nor has he been given a blank cheque in this matter. We understand and appreciate the difficulties which will confront him -and Mr. Bevan at these talks. It has been customary for the Canadian Government to direct the Canadian Minister for External Affairs, Mr. Pearson, to attend conferences on behalf of that dominion. It eather peculiar to find that when the Minister for External Affairs is absent from Australia honorable members opposite want to know why he is away; but when he is here they want to know why he is not elsewhere. The representatives of the United Kingdom, which controls the dollar resources of the sterling area, will take part in these talks on behalf of the sterling group. The discussions will take place with representatives of Canada, and the United States of America, the two countries directly associated with dollar currency.

Mr WILLIAMS:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the desirability of taking a long-term view of the necessity for making dollars available to Australia in connexion with the development of this country, will the Prime Minister inform the House whether the Government holds out any inducement to people who desire to bring capital to Australia, or to establish manufacturing industries here? Is the Prime Minister prepared to examine personally any applications for import licences for machinery and plant which have already been refused by the Department of Trade and Customs on the ground that the dollar expenditure that would thereby be incurred is not warranted ?

Mr CHIFLEY:

– I assume that the honorable member for Robertson has referred to American companies which de sire either to enlarge their interests here or to transfer interests from America to this country. When such a position has arisen, I have generally been a party to discussions upon the application, because the proposal has very often involved the formation of companies or the provision of additional capital in an existing company. From that aspect alone, the matter would come to my notice, as a rule, through the Advisory Committee on Capital Issues. There are a number of difficulties in connexion with the importation of plant and machinery. Sometimes, the American interests consider that the plant should be paid for in dollars. At other times, American interests have been prepared to take shares, representing the capital equivalent of the plant, in the particular company with which they proposed to become associated. Indeed, some strong demands have been made in favour of allowing them to take shares for the capital equivalent of plant that i.s installed in an Australian company and to pay fairly substantial sums for what is known as the technical “ know-how “. I have not always looked upon such requests with great enthusiasm. The utmost assistance is given to every kind of industry that will produce essential and even non-essential goods, so long as it does not make a heavy drain on our dollar resources. -I am prepared to look at each particular case, and I think that it; is safe to say that 90 per cent, of the cases of any magnitude have been examined by me personally.

page 10

QUESTION

DEPORTATIONS

Mr HAYLEN:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister for External Affairs whether it is a fact, as has been reported in a section of the press, that a petition has been forwarded to him for presentation to the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations. The petition is reported to concern the removal of certain Chinese aliens from Australia under recently enacted legislation. Has the matter any relationship to the Declaration of Human Rights, and is the Chinese Embassy associated in any way with the alleged petition?

Mr Abbott:

– Is not the matter sub

Dr EVATT:
Attorney-General · BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– As the honorable member for New England has interjected, certain aspects of this question are before the High Court and I shall not deal with them. However, I think that I can answer the honorable member’s question by saying that no petition has been received by me and that I cannot imagine that the Chinese Embassy would be associated with it because it would be a. very irregular course to present a petition to the United Nations secretariat in the way that has been suggested in the press. Apart altogether from the legal constitutional questions that are before the court and about which I shall say nothing, there is no relationship between the Declaration of Human Eights, or any clause of it, that I am aware of and the exercise by a country of its national right, which has always been recognized in every country, to determine the composition of its own people.

page 11

QUESTION

SHIPPING

ClearanceofCargoes - Ban on Dutch Vessels.

Mr FALKINDER:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

– Will the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs ask his colleague to have an investigation made into the excessive delays occasioned by the Department of Trade and Customs in the slow clearance of cargoes from oversea s and interstate ships in Australian ports to the firms to which the goods are consigned?

Mr POLLARD:
ALP

– I shall be glad to refer the question to the Minister for Trade and Customs and will endeavour to obtain a prompt answer.

Mr BERNARD CORSER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

– Has the Prime Minister’s attention been drawnto recent newspaper reports that the federal council of the Waterside Workers Federation may decide next month to lift their ban on Dutch shipping? In. view of the fact that the ban has already resulted in a loss to Australia of £40,000,000 worth of trade with the Netherlands East Indies in the past four years, and is tantamount to the Government’s surrender of Australia’s foreign policy, will the right honorable gentleman inform the House why he has permitted continuing loss of government prestige?

Has the Australian Government yet been advised by the Communists when they may lift this shipping ban against a friendly nation ?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– I presume that the honorable member is not referring to all Dutch shipping coming to Australia. At one time the Waterside Workers Federation imposed a ban on the unloading of ships of the Holland-Australia Line. That matter was dealt with and there is not now a ban applying to vessels of that line coming to Australia. Suggestions have been made by certain interested parties, about a ban on oil tankers plying from). Indonesia, particularly Sumatra, to Australia. In point of fact there has never been any interference with oil tankers coming from the Netherlands East Indies to Australia. They pass to and fro quite freely. Although there have been difficulties with relation to other shipping; coming to Australia from the Netherlands East Indies, the Government does not officially recognize that any ban has been placed on Dutch shipping in Australia. That matter may be overcome very quickly. As a result of the activities of the Good Offices Committee of the United Nations organization, on which Australia has a representative, I understand that the relationship between the Indonesians and the Dutch is now much better than it has been. The Good Offices Committee has succeeded in smoothing out many difficulties and there are hopes that others will be overcome very shortly.

page 11

QUESTION

EMPLOYMENT

Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND

– I ask the Minister for Labour and National Service how the labour market has adjusted itself since the great army of unemployed developed as a result of the recent coal strike? Will the employment of new Australian workers from overseas adversely affect the re-employment of Australians who may be still unemployed? What is the degree of unemployment in Queensland to-day?

Mr HOLLOWAY:
ALP

– The labour market has not quite re-adjusted itself since the recent coal strike, but the figures show that it is rapidly getting back to normal. In the week preceding the strike, 920 people in Australia were drawing unemployment benefit, and, at the peak of the strike, there were 118,000 people drawing unemployment benefit. Last Saturday 3,670 people were drawing unemployment benefit. So, the position is rapidly getting back to what it was before the strike. The honorable member has asked whether the employment of Australian workers may be affected by the employment of new arrivals. The answer is that it will not be affected. There is a perfect understanding between the Department of Labour and National Service, the Department of Immigration and the employers’ and employees’ organizations that Australian workers will not be adversely affected by the employment of new arrivals. While Australian labour is available new labour from overseas cannot bp engaged. That undertaking was agreed to at the inauguration of our immigration policy. It has been faithfully carried out, and it will continue to be carried out. The honorable member may rest assured that we are employing new arrivals as quickly as possible in essential industries where they are most needed. We will continue to do that, but that will not adversely affect Australian workers. Queensland has more people temporarily unemployed than have the other States because there is much more seasonal work there. When the strike broke out 500 people in Queensland were drawing unemployment benefit. Their number jumped to 14,000 during the strike. The figure is now down to 650.

page 12

PRICES CONTROL

Mr.FRASER. - Will the Minister for

Commerce and Agriculture inform the House whether it is true that prior to the referendum on rents and prices the Government warned producers that six separate State governments could not satisfactorily administer prices control? Following the defeat of the referendum, was power to control the price of butter transferred to the State governments in terms of the undertaking given to the industry? If the State governments do not grant to the butter industry a price based on the cost of production, will the Commonwealth consider withholding from payments due to the States, from the 1st July, an amount sufficient to recoup to the butter producers the loss incurred by them on account of the failure of the State governments to do them justice?

Mr POLLARD:
ALP

– It is true that prior to the recent referendum on rents and prices control the Australian people were informed that in the absence of an overall prices control authority the Australian Government would find it difficult, if not impossible, to continue to pay subsidies in relation to certain commodities. It is also true that following the defeat of that referendum complete control over prices was transferred to the State governments. The honorable gentleman has asked what the Australian Government will do in certain eventualities. I am hopeful that common sense will prevail. I am sure that every angle will be studied carefully before a decision is made, and I think that the decision that will bemade will be satisfactory to all concerned.

page 12

QUESTION

COTTON

Mr FRANCIS:
MORETON, QUEENSLAND

– My question relates to the decrease of the production of cotton in Queensland. In May, 1948, the Queensland Cotton Marketing Board presented a case to the Tariff Board for a guaranteed price of 32d. per lb. for raw cotton for a period of five years. The Tariff Board completed its report in May of this year. The delay in ensuring that cotton producers shall receive an adequate return for their products has, unfortunately, resulted in a serious decrease of cotton production. I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs whether the report of the Tariff Board can be considered by the Government without further delay and a decision regarding a guaranteed price for cotton expedited. The cotton planting season is about to begin, and if a favorable decision is not made soon only a very little cotton may be produced in Queensland in the new year.

Mr POLLARD:
ALP

– I shall refer the matter to the Minister for Trade and Customs and ascertain the present position.

page 12

QUESTION

BUDGET 1949-50

Mr LANG:
REID, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Treasurer whether the printed budget papers were received at the Treasury offices in the State capitals of Australia on last Monday morning, prior to their consideration either by Cabinet or the Parliamentary Labour party?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– The budget was dealt with by Cabinet some time ago. It has not been considered by Cabinet during this week. Some weeks ago Cabinet made decisions regarding recommendations to be made to the Parliamentary Labour party concerning the budget. Those recommendations were considered yesterday and endorsed by the party. It has always been the practice, after Cabinet has dealt with the matter, to forward to the State capitals copies of the budget papers and an outline of the budget speech, or, if possible, a copy of the speech itself, so that they can be made available in those cities for the benefit of the press. If the Parliamentary Labour party at its meeting yesterday had rejected the proposals that were put forward by Cabinet, the budget speech could not have been delivered this afternoon. I informed the leaders of both the Opposition parties that the budget speech might be made this afternoon. That was conditional upon the endorsement by the Parliamentary Labour party of the Cabinet’s proposals. It is true that the budget papers were sent to the capital cities of the States after the budget proposals had been considered by Cabinet. That is the usual practice. It was done for the convenience of the press.

page 13

SEWERAGE INSTALLATION AT ALICE SPRINGS

Report of Public Works Committee

Mr RANKIN:

– I present the report of the PublicWorks Committee on the following subject : -

Sewerage installation at Alice Springs.

Ordered to be printed.

page 13

QUESTION

HEARING AIDS

Mrs BLACKBURN:
BOURKE, VICTORIA

– I ask the Min ister representing the Minister for Social Services whether the rehabilitation of physically incapacitated persons under the social services legislation includes the provision of hearing aids, at least topersons on low incomes ? Does that legislation also cover the teaching of lip reading to those who require that service, and, if so, is the Government arranging for the training of the necessary teachers?

Mr HOLLOWAY:
ALP

– The matter of supplying hearing aids to people on lower incomes was investigated by the Minister for Social Services when he was making inquiries overseas regarding the cheapest equipment available for that purpose. I am not sure whether a scheme for supplying those aids has actually been put into operation, but I shall discuss the matter with the Minister and give the honorable member a reply as soon as possible.

page 13

QUESTION

POLIOMYELITIS

Mr RYAN:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA

– Can the Minister representing the Minister for Health state whether, in view of the widespread public concern over the spread of poliomyelitis, or infantile paralysis, in Australia and abroad, the Government will assist the Governments of the States in measures to combat the disease? What facilities, if any, has the Government to conduct research on a national scale into this disease? Is it a fact that four years ago the New South Wales Government desired to establish a modern research unit costing £60,000 but abandoned the plan when it was discovered that that amount was insufficient, and that an additional sum of £190,000 would be required to establish an up-to-date institution of the kind desired? Will the Government consider giving assistance to the State authorities to establish research units to deal with this disease?

Mr HOLLOWAY:
ALP

– I could answer portion of the honorable member’s question but I consider that it would be more to his advantage if he were to put it on the notice-paper. I shall meanwhile discuss the matter with the Minister for Health and obtain a full answer to the whole question.

page 13

QUESTION

PIG MEATS

Mr ADERMANN:
MARANOA, QUEENSLAND

– As I understand that the present contract price for pig meats supplied to the United Kingdom has practically expired, can the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture inform the House whether any decisions have been finalized between the Australian Government and the British Ministry of

Food regarding the new contract. If so, what price has been agreed upon?

Mr POLLARD:
ALP

– The Australian Meat Board recently forwarded to the Australian Government its recommendations regarding the prices that it considered fit and proper for Australian meat producers to receive from the United Kingdom under the terms of contracts to be reviewed as from the 1st October. The Government has considered those recommendations and has conveyed to the United Kingdom Government its requests regarding the review of the price. A public statement will be made as soon as a decision on price levels is reached by the United Kingdom Government and the Australian Government.

page 14

QUESTION

LAPSTONE HOTEL

Mr HOWSE:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– During the parliamentary recess I asked the Minister for Repatriation whether he would consider the use of the Lapstone Hotel, which the Government has acquired, for the treatment of war neurosis cases. Is the Minister yet in a position to say whether a final decision has been reached on that matter ?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– I shall answer the question which relates to the use of the Lapstone Hotel which, as the honorable member has mentioned, has been acquired by the Australian Government. The present arrangements are that the Lapstone Hotel building will be used as the head-quarters of the Royal Australian Air Force, Eastern Command, which will be transferred from Bradfield Park, Sydney. This will release accommodation at Bradfield Park, which will be made available partly to the New SouthWales Ministry of Housing, and partly to immigration authorities to provide additional accommodation for immigrants arriving in New SouthWales. It will not be possible, therefore, for the Lapstone Hotel to be used for the purpose that the honorable member has mentioned. The Minister for Repatriation may have some other proposals regarding that matter, and in any event I shall mention to him the matter that the honorable member has raised.

page 14

GOVERNMENT HOSTEL, DARWIN

Report of Public Works Committee

Mr RANKIN:

– I present the report of the Public Works Committee on the following subject: -

The erection of a hostel for officers at Darwin, Northern Territory.

Ordered to be printed.

page 14

TARIFF BOARD

Reports on Items.

Mr POLLARD:
ALP

– I lay on the table reports of the Tariff Board on the following subjects : -

Fuel Injection Equipment

Surgical Instruments

Motor Vehicle Bodies and Pressed Metal Panels

Cooking Stoves and Cooking Ranges

Home Cinematographs

Cinematographs

Foundation Garments

Ordered to be printed.

page 14

QUESTION

BROADCASTING

Mr BEALE:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to ask a question of the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral. I have received a letter from the Returned Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen’s Imperial League of Australia enclosing a copy of two broadcast scripts which were banned by the broadcasting authorities. They were offered by the Queensland Branch of the Returned Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen’s Imperial League of Australia in furtherance of its anti-Communist campaign for August and September, and they were refused for broadcasting under section 89 (3) of the Australian Broadcasting Act, which prohibits the dramatization of political matter. By way of further explanation–

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– I think the honorable member has explained enough. He should now ask his question.

Mr BEALE:

– Has the Minister seen the script of the two broadcasts? Is he aware that they are in simple and straightforward terms, that they are not in dramatized form, that they are set out in the form of a dialogue between two persons named “.Ted “ and “ Bill “ who discuss the merits and demerits of communism ?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– The honorable member should ask his question.

Mr BEALE:

– Has the Minister seen the scripts, and can he justify the grounds on which permission to broadcast them was refused?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– The latter, part of the honorable member’s question is out of order. The Minister is not called upon, in answer to a question, to justify anything.

Mr BEALE:

– Is the Minister aware that the two scripts referred to have been banned under section 89 (3) of the Australian Broadcasting Act? Does he agree with the banning of the scripts, and is he aware of the grounds on which they were banned ?

Mr CALWELL:
ALP

– This matter affects the administration of my colleague the Postmaster-General. I have seen some reference in the press to the scripts mentioned, and I have myself received a letter on the subject. I sha.ll ask the Postmaster-General to prepare a report on the matter, which I hope to be able to supply to the honorable member at an early date. I take it from what the honorable member has said that, in his view, there was no dramatization of the scripts because there were to be only two voices, those of “ Ted “ and “ Bill “.

Mr Beale:

– That is also the opinion of Mr. Fanning, the chairman of the Australian Broadcasting Control Board.

Mr CALWELL:

– I can see no reason why the scripts should be rejected because they provided for the use of the voices of two men called “ Ted “ and “ Bill There might be a difficulty if they were “Howard” and “Percy”.

page 15

QUESTION

COMMUNISM

Mr HOLT:
FAWKNER, VICTORIA

– I direct a question without notice to the Attorney-General about the raid which was made a few weeks ago by Commonwealth officers on Marx House, Sydney. Will the Minister inform the House of the purpose of the raid? Can he tell honorable members anything of the results obtained, and what action, if any, the Government proposes to take as a result of the investigations?

Dr EVATT:
ALP

– The primary purpose of the raid was to ascertain whether the Communist party was committing a breach of the National Emergency (Coal Strike) Act, which this Parliament passed during the last sessional period. The information which was obtained by the security officers was used in the Arbitration Court, and was instrumental in obtaining important orders against the Communist party of Australia regarding the payment of certain moneys into court, which orders were immediately obeyed by the Communist party. In the course of the raid, certain other information was, not unnaturally, obtained. Responsibility for the internal security of Australia rests in the first instance upon the DirectorGeneral of Security, Mr. Justice Reed. His officers have examined the documents obtained during the raid, but it would be obviously contrary to the public interest to indicate what information has been obtained. Indeed, it is so obvious thar all honorable members will agree that such a rule, upon which the Director.General absolutely insists, must be strictly observed.

Mr HARRISON:

– Has the attent N of the Prime Minister been directed to a, San Francisco newspaper report, dated 1Sth August last, of a statement by the Australian Ambassador to the United States, Mr. Makin, that there was no heavy Communist influence in most Australian unions, and that industrial disturbances had been negligible in recent years? Was the statement made on the authority, or with the concurrence, of the Australian Government? If so, was Mr. Makin advised that Australia had just passed through a general coal strike of seven week’s duration, which the Prime Minister and the Premier of New South Wales had publicly described as a Communist conspiracy? If the Australian Ambassador to the United States was not so advised, will the Prime Minister state why he was not apprised of the latest Australian developments?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– I have not seen in any San Francisco newspaper a report of any statement made by the Australian Ambassador in Washington. Probably, His Excellency the Ambassador was speaking in general terms about the industrial position in Australia. He was certainly not given any indication by me of the statements he should make. He is quite capable of attending to such matters himself. I regard the honorable member’s inquiry as a purely propaganda question, and therefore I do not propose to discuss it any further.

Mr WHITE:

– In view of the recent denunciation of the Communists by Commonwealth Ministers and their knowledge that the ban on Dutch shipping was the work of the Australian and Indonesian Communists and has cost Australia millions of pounds worth of trade, can the Minister for External Affairs, now that he is not going overseas, report progress with respect to any action the Government has taken or intends to take to end this sabotage?

Dr EVATT:

– I do not know whether the honorable member was in the chamber at the time, but a similar question was asked earlier by the honorable member for Wide Bay and was answered by the Prime Minister.

page 16

QUESTION

PAPUA AND NEW GUINEA

Mr TURNBULL:
WIMMERA, VICTORIA

– Can the Minister for External Territories say whether the Legislative Council for Papua and New Guinea has yet been officially set up? Are the members of this council, with the exception of three missionaries, required to take the oath of allegiance, which is not to be confused with the oath of office ?

Mr WARD:
Minister for External Territories · EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– The council has not yet been officially established, but it will be established at an early date. The answer to the latter part of the honorable member’s queston is, “ Yes “.

page 16

QUESTION

LEGAL SERVICE BUREAU

Mr SHEEHAN:

– Has the AttorneyGeneral received a communication from the Returned Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen’s Imperial League of Australia stating that they have heard that legal aid to ex-servicemen, hitherto provided by the Attorney-General’s Department, is to be discontinued? Is it intended to discontinue this service?

Dr EVATT:
ALP

– There is no substance whatever in the report. Indeed, the contrary is the fact. During the seven or eight years of the existence of the Legal. Service Bureau which gives legal advice to ex-servicemen and their dependants, thu number of advisings in the six States has been almost 1,000,000. Far from contracting its activities, we are coming to the conclusion that we shall have to extend them in some respects.

We are considering whether it would be advisable to provide for the giving of advice to members of the public who believe that they are entitled to Commonwealth social service benefits.

page 16

QUESTION

LAND SETTLEMENT OF EX-SERVICEMEN

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
Postmaster-General · BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– Can the Minister for Post-war Reconstruction prepare a statement disclosing whether it is a fact that, under Commonwealth law, a lessee of a soldier settler’s block is not allowed to bequeath that- lease to either his widow or children? Will the Minister lay upon the table a copy of the leases being issued to ex-service personnel in each of the States and the Territories?

Mr DEDMAN:
Minister for Defence · CORIO, VICTORIA · ALP

– I shall give consideration to the honorable member’s request.

page 16

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH CONTRACTS

High Court Action against Mr. R. E. Fitzpatrick.

Mr RANKIN:

– In view of the fact, as reported in the press, that the Minister for External Affairs does not intend to attend the next conference of that “ white elephant “ called the United Nations organization, will he now have time to inquire into the matter relating to the aerodrome at Bankstown and which affects one Fitzpatrick? The Minister promised me during the last sessional period that he would supply me with a report on the subject. Can I expect to receive a report on that matter during this sessional period ?

Dr EVATT:
ALP

– The honorable member’s sarcasm is not strong, and his wit is no sweeter. If he had understood the information which I furnished to him during the last sessional period he would have learned from the facts supplied therein by my officers exactly where the litigation to which he refers stood. The matter which was decided in one part against Fitzpatrick and in another part in his favour, is in the hands of the High Court and it must be dealt with by the court.

page 16

QUESTION

POSTAL CHARGES

Mr FALKINDER:

– Increased postal charges have been made by the PostmasterGeneral’s Department. Will the

Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral ask his colleague to overprint all forms, such as telegram forms and the like, to show the new charges and thus end the confusion which now exists regarding the new rates ?

Mr CALWELL:
ALP

– I shall ask the Postmaster-General to give consideration to the honorable member’s request and to furnish me with a reply which I shall deliver to the honorable member at an early date.

page 17

BILLS RETURNED FROM THE SENATE

The following bills were returned from the Senate: -

Without requests -

Supplementary Appropriation Bill 1947- 48.

Without amendment -

Supplementary Appropriation (Works and Buildings) Bill 1947-48.

page 17

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following bills reported : -

Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Power Bill 1949.

Pharmaceutical Benefits Bill (No. 2) 1949.

Genocide Convention Bill 1949.

Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Bill 1949.

Liquid Fuel (Defence Stocks) Bill 1949.

Cockatoo and Schnapper Islands Bill 1949.

Immigration Bill 1949.

War-time Refugees Removal Bill 1949.

Whaling Industry Bill 1949.

Census and Statistics Bill 1949.

Post and Telegraph Bill 1949.

Lighthouses Bill 1949.

Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Bill 1949.

Australian Soldiers’ Repatriation Bill 1949.

Stevedoring Industry Bill 1949.

Supplementary Appropriation Bill 1947-48.

Supplementary Appropriation (Works and Buildings) Bill 1947-48.

page 17

ESTIMATES 1949-50

Messages from the Governor-General reported transmitting Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure and Estimates of Expenditure for Additions, New Works, and Other Services involving Capital Expenditure, for the year ending the 30th June, 1950, and recommending appropriations accordingly.

Ordered to be printed, and referred to the Committee of Supply forthwith.

page 17

BUDGET 1949-50

In Committee of Supply:

Mr CHIFLEY:
Prime Minister and Treasurer · Macquarie · ALP

– I have the privilege of presenting estimates of revenue and expenditure for 1949-50, and details of actual revenue and expenditure in 1948-49.

In 1948-49, for the second time since the war ended, it was possible to balance the Commonwealth budget. All expenditure, excluding advances to the States for housing, was met from revenue, and, in addition, substantial sums were set aside in the National Welfare Fund and the War Gratuity Reserve.

This result marks a great improvement in the national finances under post-war conditions - an improvement which can be measured by comparison with 1944-45, the last full financial year of the war period. In that year revenue fell short of expenditure by £266,000,000, which had to be borrowed. In the four years since then -

Tax reductions have been made which, on present income levels, would be valued at £280,000,000 per annum ;

Large outstanding war accounts, including the lend-lease settlement, have been met; £108,000,000 has been provided for repatriation and re-establishment of ex-service men and women ; £184,000,000 has been found for interest and sinking fund on debt arising from the war;

Gifts totalling £35,000,000 have been made to the United Kingdom;

Contributions worth £30,000,000 have been made for the relief of war-distressed peoples ;

Social service expenditure has been increased from £39,000,000 a year to £81,000,000 a year and the National Welfare Fund has been built up to nearly £100,000,000. Social service expenditure this year is estimated at £100,000,000;

Annual payments to the States have been increased from £48,000,000 a year to £79,000,000 a year. With proposals to be made in this budget, payments to the States in 1949-50 would be £101,000,000; £132,000,000 has been paid in subsidies to keep down the cost of living and to assist primary producers ;

A post-war defence programme to cost £295,000,000 has been pushed forward and great national works have been undertaken in the fields of the post office, civ il aviation and power development.

Whilst the budget has encompassed all these measures, the huge war-time gap between revenue and expenditure has been closed and in the past two financial years no borrowing for current purposes has been necessary.

Australia has been aided in these years by good seasons, and export prices have been high because of the strong post-war demand for our products abroad. The national income has increased and that increase has been widely shared. Imports have flowed in strongly during the past three years, adding to local supplies of goods. But the main key to this post-war financial achievement - as to many others - has been, I believe, that throughout the whole period full employment of labour has been maintained.

Consistently, every available worker has had a job, every new worker has found a job, and the total number of wage and salary earners in work has risen rapidly. In June this year it was 75,000 above June last year and 720,000 above June, 1939. These basic facts, far more than anything else, explain why we have been able to throw off the burdens of war, reduce taxes, increase production, improve social services and find the way to our present strong financial position.

Revenue and Expenditure, 1948-49

During 1948-49 national income is estimated to have increased by £200,000,000, and wage and salary payments by £150,000,000. Exports rose by £140,000,000 and imports by £76,000,000.

Detailed estimates of national income and expenditure in 1948-49 are contained in a separate paper which is being circulated with the budget papers.

As in the previous year, budget estimates of revenue in 1948-49 allowed for some rise in employment, incomes and trade, but not for as much as occurred.

Total revenue for the year, excluding self-balancing items, was £535,000,000, which was £42,000,000 above the estimates. The main increases were -

Income tax and social services contribution - £26,000,000. This was due to the rise in wages, salaries and other incomes being greater than expected and to further overtaking of arrears in income tax assessments.

Customs and excise- £11,000,000. The rise in imports was greater than estimated and there was also a substantial increase in sales of beer and spirits.

Pay-roll tax- £1,800,000. This reflected the exceptional increase in wage and salary payments.

On the expenditure side defence and post-war charges in 1948-49 were £196,000,000, which was £3,000,000 below estimates.

Expenditure on defence and allied services showed a small increase over the budget estimates. Pay and allowances of the forces were substantially greater than estimated mainly as a result of the increase in service rates of pay granted in November last year and the settlement of pay accounts of personnel discharged. Navy expenditure was also greater than estimated mainly because of payments to the United Kingdom in respect of the aircraft carriers and associated equipment. As against these increases, however, expenditure on army supplies was less than expected and defence research and development expenditure, although increasing at a rapid rate during the year, was below the estimate.

Post-war charges of £117,000,000 in 1948-49 were £6,000,000 below budget estimates. Expenditure on war service land settlement and on reconstruction training was below the estimates by £2,700,000 and £2,800,000 respectively. On the other hand, subsidies on imported goods discontinued last year were greater than estimated, largely because of an extension of the time during which goods on ship were eligible for subsidy.

Total credits offset against defence and post-war charges were £3,400,000 above estimates.

Expenditure other than ‘defence and pest-war -charges exceeded the budget estimate by £2 ,

Tor reasons already -discussed -the amount transferred to the National Welfare Fund on account of social service contribution and pay-roll tax was £ !8,000,:0TO -greater than tire ‘estimate.

Post ‘Office expenditure of £f9,9O0,’0’0!0 on ordinary services was £5,200,000 greater tiran the estimates, increased wages, salaries, and cost of materials being mainly responsible.

Expenditure on post office works was £2,000,08® above estimates. On other capital works and servies it was £3,000,000 lower than was estimated.

Total expenditure in 1948-49 was £535,000,000. This was £2o,0<!>0,00G greater ‘than the budget estimate ; but it may be noted that -this included payments *o the National Welfare Fund which were £30,000,000 greater than expenditure from that fund, and that an additional £5,800.,0G© was transferred to the war gratuity reserve.

Details of revenue and expenditure in 1948-49 compared with the budget estimates, are contained in Statement No. 1. In addition, the main items of aggregate war expenditure to the 30th June. 1949, are set out in Statement No. 5.

Loan Transactions. 1948-49

During the year, loans raised in. Australia for State works programmes, Commonwealth advances to the States for housing, and redemption of unconverted securities resulted in cash subscriptions amounting to £127,598,780. In addition, conversion operations were undertaken to deal with maturing securities amounting in all to £161,825,775, which became due in September and October, 1948, and April, 1949. The total amount converted was £111,018,805. The holders of securities not converted were paid off from cash subscriptions to the loans. Three and one-eighth per cent, securities for eleven to fourteen years were offered for both loans, and 2 per cent, securities for threeyears were, in addition, offered in the April operation.

Conversion operations were also undertaken in London to deal with maturing loans and loans over which options of redemption were available. The total amount o’f these Joans which represented debts of the ‘Commonwealth and States was £58,7’4’9’908. Securities amounting to £15,’76”3,7.21were paid off and the balance of ‘£#2;9-86,i’87 was converted into 3 per cent, securities. Of the amount paid off £1,318,556 was redeemed from the National Debt Sinking Fund1 and £14,445,165 was transferred to Australia with the assistance of the Commonwealth Batik.

Details of loan transactions are given in Statement No. 6.

Incomes, Prices and Employment, 1949-50

Expansion of employment and production, rising export prices and the upward thrust of internal prices, wages and general costs which followed, upon the relaxation of war-time controls, have combined during the past three years to cause a great increase in total community incomes.

The market for wool appears to be still very strong but wheat prices have fallen back from the peak reached sixteen months ago. Prices of metals have also receded and exports of manufactures are meeting keener competition abroad than formerly. Prices of most other major exports are determined under long-term contracts. In all, it seems likely that export income will be lower this year than in 1948-49 but it will still be relatively high.

Wages and internal prices have risen rapidly during the past two years and will probably go further in 1949-50. Some rise in these factors was inevitable under post-war conditions when demand’ for goods has increased so much faster than supplies could possibly have done. The Government, however, has always recognized the difficulties to which excessive and cumulative price and cost increases could give rise and’ it has done its utmost to avoid such increases, partly by direct controls so long as these were available and partly by general monetary and financial measures.

Shortages of coal and steel and of certain classes of labour have retarded production in a. number of industries and these difficulties have been accentuated sharply - although, I believe, temporarily - by the recent coal strike. Nevertheless the underlying drive for industrial expansion continues and its fruits are seen in a greater volume and variety of goods available to the public. Imports, of course, have also brought increased supplies.

Experience in many countries during recent years should warn us that the course of economic affairs can change suddenly and unpredictably. I shall review again presently the special problem of international payments, which has great significance for Australia. Transcending even this, however, is the question whether levels of employment and incomes can be maintained in major countries abroad, because it is these factors which, fundamentally, determine world production, prices and trade. This year some falling away in business activity has occurred in the United States and its effects have already been felt in other countries. We must profoundly hope that this movement will soon be reversed because conditions in the United States, the greatest of industrial countries, have enormous importance for the world1.

Again, it would be wrong to ignore the difficulties to which developments within our own economy could lead. Some industries, encouraged by the buoyant conditions of recent years, may tend to develop capacity too great for prospective demand.

Nevertheless, our external position has been strengthened by reducing the burden of overseas debts, accumulating London funds, and securing long-term contracts for a number of our exports. Within Australia, industry has been greatly diversified, business and farm debts have been reduced, interest fates kept down and the national finances brought to a sound position. These are valuable safeguards against adversity, from whatever source it may arise.

MIGRATION and Development.

Security, higher living standards and the attainment of an ampler national life all depend upon whether we can bring our indisputable wealth of resources into greater productive use. There are two main conditions to fulfil. One is that development should proceed along systematic lines, with governments and in- dustry co-operating. Another is that we should have a population large enough to make the best use of our resources.

To an increasing degree, now that the tasks of war have been put behind us, the Government is directing its- energies to undertakings which will provide th basis for future expansion of our economy. These undertakings lie in the fields of power development, water supply, aviation, land transport, and the search for minerals, which are pre-requisites for progress under the new techniques of our age. They extend also to the opening up of pastoral and agricultural areas.

The Snowy Mountains power scheme, for which legislation has been passed this year, will be the greatest single project so far undertaken in Australia. It aims to provide large blocks of electric power for defence purposes and to conserve water for irrigation purposes in the valleys of the Murray and Murrumbidgee Rivers.

In Western Australia, the Commonwealth is sharing with the State Government the cost of a plan to reticulate water to certain areas in the north-eastern portion of the main mixed wheat and sheep belt.

The Commonwealth has plans for encouraging the development of the cattle industry in Northern Australia, and so increasing the availability of meat for export to the United Kingdom. The Government is collaborating with the Governments of Queensland and Western Australia in the provision of improved transport facilities and water supplies for this purpose. On present estimates these plans will cost the Commonwealth about £4,500,000.

Discussions have been held with the Queensland Government on three other major projects. One envisages the use of the waters of the Burdekin River for irrigation and the generation of electricity. Under a second scheme the Barron and Walsh rivers would be used for irrigation purposes. A third project would provide railway facilities for the Callide open-cut coal mine, and make additional, supplies of coal available for all States, particularly the southern States.

These are examples of individual projects to bring the latent wealth of this country into fruitful economic use. At the same time, great programmes of work are going forward in the fields of the Post Office and civil aviation, where modern facilities can do so much to improve the general efficiency of our industrial life.

Meanwhile, the Government is tackling the population problem on a scale never attempted before. Under its migration programme it is expected that some 220,000 financially assisted new settlers will have landed in Australia by the 30th J une next year, and of these some 130,000 will be available for employment. Thereafter, the numbers will increase year by year. Indeed, now that shipping difficulties are being overcome, the only limits to the programme are those set by availability of suitable people from overseas and the capacity of our economy to absorb them. The programme will not be accomplished without difficulties and financial costs. The Government, however, is prepared to meet those difficulties and costs because, in its view, they will be far outweighed by the gains to be made from a steady increase in our population.

Already the benefits of immigration have appeared in a higher output of industries formerly under-staffed and a faster rate of progress in building and other constructional projects. Key services such as hospitals have also gained relief from pressing shortages. Steadily the stream of new citizens and workers will broaden out to reach all branches of’ the economy.

Progress in developmental works and immigration will open the way for the growth of private industry. Progress in these fields together will secure increasing markets for the products of industry, so that the whole economy can go forward. That in itself will afford the best assurance of steady full employment and rising living standards. It will also enlarge the foundations of our defensive strength which, in the troubled world conditions of to-day, must rank amongst our foremost national objectives.

International Trade and Payments

In most countries of Western Europe during the past year production, trade and industrial capacity have increased, although some countries have done better than others. The United Kingdom achievement has been notable indeed. Its industrial output rose during the year by 7 per cent, and the volume of exports by 9 per cent. In the last half of 1948 its external earnings and payments actually balanced whereas in the year before there had been a gap of £630,000,000 sterling.

Notwithstanding these gains, however, an acute crisis exists to-day in the sphere of international trade and payments. A number of countries are taking further measures to curtail spending of dollars and other scarce currencies. The gold and dollar reserves of the United Kingdom have fallen sharply in recent months and are now considerably below the level regarded as a safe minimum.

In essentials, the exchange problem has not altered. Although producing more than in earlier post-war years, many countries are still unable to earn sufficient dollars to pay for the goods they need from the United States, Canada and other dollar sources. They have borrowed where possible, sold investments and spent reserves; but beyond these resources and the special aid they are receiving from the United States, they are forced to do without dollar goods, even of essential kinds. Similar problems exist on a smaller scale with regard to Belgian and Swiss francs and certain other currencies.

The Marshal] plan envisages an attack on this problem extending over four years. Through dollar grants and loans, the participating countries are enabled to obtain goods for industry and reconstruction over and above those they can buy from dollar resources of their own. It is a condition of receiving this aid that they shall do their utmost to help themselves and one another.

Under the plan valuable progress has been made by the countries concerned and this can be expected to continue. But special difficulties have arisen. Although they have more goods to export, participating countries have not been able to sell as much as they had hoped, either’ direct to the dollar area or to countries which can pay in dollars. The position has beeen worsened by the business recession in the United States, which has made selling there more difficult, and in particular by smaller earnings from Bales of raw materials, such as wool, cocoa, rubber and tin from which dollars, are normally obtained.

The United Kingdom, which has led the way in post-war recovery and has itself given substantial aid to countries iri. Europe and elsewhere, has felt the full impact of these developments so that, despite great progress in its overall trade position, its dollar position in the past few months has seriously deteriorated. Both the value and the volume of its sales to dollar countries have fallen and so, too, have sales of certain raw materials from the colonies which are an important source of earnings for the dollar pool.

When these adverse changes had become apparent, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr. Attlee, invited Ministers from the sterling area countries of the British Commonwealth and from Canada, to attend a conference in London in July at which the position would be reviewed. Following this invitation but before the conference, there were discussions in which United Kingdom and Canadian Ministers and the Secretary to the United States Treasury. Mr. Snyder, had a part.

At the London conference, where Australia was represented by the Minister for Defence and Minister for Post-war Reconstruction (Mr. Dedman), longterm aspects of the problem were considered and agreement was reached as to major objectives which should be pursued. In particular it was thought that the central aim of all countries should be the achievement of a pattern of world trade in which the dollar and non-dollar countries should be able to operate within a single multilateral system, and that the strength and stability of sterling as an international currency should be a major goal.

The conference also considered the immediate problem of stopping the drain on the gold and dollar reserves of the United Kingdom which are the central reserves for the whole sterling area. The United Kingdom Government had previously announced its intention to cut expenditure on dollar imports in 1949-50 by 25 per cent, as compared with the 1948 level. Representatives of the other sterling area countries agreed to recommend to their respective governments action designed to achieve comparable results.

At the time of the conference, it had been arranged that further discussionsbetween representatives of the United. Kingdom, Canadian and United States Governments would take place in Washington during September. Those discussions have begun and are expected to cover the main problems of financial relationships between the three countries taking part.

It will be clear that, apart from longerterm considerations, the issues being discussed in Washington have a critical present importance. Further restriction of imports, whilst necessary to check the fall in gold and dollar reserves, obviously cannot be carried beyond certain limits without causing grave dislocation to industries and standards of living in the countries concerned. In any case, it can of itself contribute nothing to the solution of the dollar problem which requires a positive effort to lift levels of trade rather than to reduce them.

The Government has decided to adopt the recommendations of the London conference and, as already announced, has reduced allocations of licences in theSeptember quarter for imports of goods from the dollar area. The aim is to reduce dollar expenditure on imports to- 75 per cent, of the 194S level as quickly as possible. This means that there will have to be a substantial reduction in dollar expenditure by government departments as well as cuts in practically all the major categories of commercial dollarimports. Dollar imports were already severely restricted in 1948. The reductions in the ‘September quarter were thelargest which could be applied immediately without causing severe disruption, in Australian industries.

But the full 25 per cent, saving in dollar import expenditure will not be possible of achievement in 1949-50’ because of the commitment represented by outstanding licences. Australia must play its full part in avoiding a furtherdrain, on. the limited gold and dollar reserves of the United Kingdom and the Government is examining the possibilities of borrowing as a means to provide additional dollars. The Government recognizes that this course may present difficulties. Generally, it has been averse to increasing the long-term dollar commitments of Australia. There are various possible sources of dollar borrowing, and the matter will be decided in the light of all the circumstances.

Proprosed Grant to the United Kingdom.

It has been remarked earlier that whilst most countries in Western Europe had increased production and trade last year, some had done better than others. This unevenness in the rate of recovery as between European countries creates problems having much in common with the general dollar problem, though on a smaller scale. Some countries cannot earn enough by trade with other countries to buy from them the goods they require, even when those goods are available. As a result, productive effort will be wasted and aid received from abroad will fall short of its purpose unless means can be found to remove these difficulties of payment between such countries.

As a counter-part to Marshall aid, a system of intra-European payments was -established last year with the object of providing funds by which European countries could within limits buy from their neighbours more goods than their own earnings would cover.

It is proposed that, with modifications, this scheme will be continued in the current year, in which case the United Kingdom will again make large contributions in sterling. This is because sterling, which is the means of buying goods not only in Great Britain but throughout the whole sterling area, is for many countries a very scarce currency. The United Kingdom, as honorable members know, has during the post-war years given very large financial aid to countries in Europe and1 this has helped them considerably to restore their industries and trade.

Australia has a large trade with Western Europe and, since trade improves with general economic activity, it follows that Australia has benefited from the aid given by the United Kingdom to Western Europe and that we stand’ to gain from any further improvement there.

In view therefore of the further contributions which the United Kingdom will this year make to European revival and as a measure of assistance to the United

Kingdom in its own great efforts, the Government has decided to make a further grant of £10,000,000 to the United Kingdom Government. The payment will be made from balances held by the Commonwealth Bank in London and repayment will be made to the bank in Australia from Consolidated Revenue. Legislation will be brought down for this purpose at a later stage in this session.

Financial Prospects, 1949-50

Because incomes and trade have increased so steeply in the past three years and because substantial arrears of income tax assessments have been overtaken, revenue has continued to rise notwithstanding the heavy reductions made in rates of taxation.

These conditions, however, must in large part be regarded as temporary. Total incomes will probably rise further in the current year, but not as fast as recently. Tax arrears will again contribute to revenue this year but not so much as last year and before long they will be reduced to normal. At the same time the full effect of reductions in taxation rates will be reflected in revenue.

On the other hand, the current rise in prices and costs is likely to continue for some time yet and will cause further increases in expenditure, particularly in the Post Office, railways and works, but also in most other branches of administration. The necessity of importing materials in short supply here will also in many cases add to costs.

Since, therefore, proposals affecting revenue and expenditure extend beyond the present into future years, often with progressively increasing effects, the considerations just cited must be kept prominently in view at a time like the present. Because at all stages since the war the economic outlook has been liable to rapid change, the Government has consistently refused’ to embark upon financial measures that were not clearly practicable and for which the resources were not in sight. Whilst adhering to this policy, the Government has still been able to achieve a great deal in the financial field, as the earlier review has shown. It would be wrong if passing circumstances were allowed at this stage to induce a departure from that policy.

Defence and Wak SERVICES, 1949-50.

In the Estimates this year items relating to services and commitments arising out of the recent war are grouped under the heading “War and Repatriation (1939-45) Services and will henceforth be treated on the same basis as War and Repatriation (1914-18). The heading Poet-war Charges will not in future be used. Expenditure on the post-war defence plan is shown under the heading Defence Services.

On the basis of existing commitments, net expenditure on Defence and War (1939-45) Services is estimated at £154,000,000 as compared with £195,600,000 in 1948-49. The latter figure included an amount of £17,000,000 transferred from trust fund balances.

Provision is made for gross expenditure of £640,000,000 on Defence Services as compared with £61,000,000 in 1948-49 and for War and Repatriation (1939-45) Services of £101,000,000, as compared with £149,000,000 in 1948-49. Credits in 1949-50 are estimated at £11,000,000 as against £14,400,000 in 1948-49. Full details of Defence and War (1939-45) Services are contained in Statement No.” 4.

Defence Services

Expenditure on Defence Services this year is estimated at £60,000,000, of which £9,000,000 is expected to be spent overseas.

The five-year defence programme, which extends over the financial years 1947-48 to 1951-52, is progressing satisfactorily. The total cost of the programme was originally estimated at £250,000,000. This figure has now been increased to £295,000,000 as a result of rising costs and certain changes which have been found necessary since the plans were first formulated.

Naval aviation is now firmly established in the Royal Australian Navy. The first aircraft-carrier, H.M.A.S. Sydney, has joined the fleet as a fully operational’ unit. A naval air station as a hase from which the carrier will operate has been established in New South Wales.

It is expected that the first destroyer under the post-war programme will be completed by the end of 1949 and the second during 1950.

Army estimates for 1949-50 are based on an average strength of 15,000 full-time military duty personnel and a Citizen Military Force of an average strength of 23,000. The strength of the Australian Military Forces in the British Commonwealth Occupation Force in Japan has been reduced to proportions commensurate with the smaller commitment required under stabilized conditions. From army personnel returned to Australia during the past twelve months, a Regular Army Brigade Group has been formed.

Developments in the Royal Australian Air Force in 1948-49 included the establishment of a school of land/air warfare and also a staff college for the training of career officers for the Royal Australian Air Force. All Royal Australian Air Force units have their full complement of aircraft and will carry out operational and training flying to the maximum extent possible. Satisfactory progress is being made with the local manufacture of aircraft and engines already provided for in the defence programme. In “addition, work is proceeding on the production of prototypes of certain new types of aircraft. Proposals for the manufacture in Australia of new types of jet-propelled fighter and bomber aircraft are now under consideration.

At the Naval and Air bases at Manns, construction work is well advanced and personnel have been posted by both Services.

An amount of £6,000,000 has been included in the Estimates for expenditure on defence research and development. Of this the greater part relates to the longrange weapons project. Satisfactory results have been achieved in assembling appropriate equipment at Salisbury and in recruiting scientific staff. Accommodation has been a limiting factor but current plans for housing of personnel engaged in the project should overcome this difficulty. Considerable progress has been made in developing the range and technical areas at Woomera and concurrently with this work, buildings, services and amenities in the village area have gone forward. A shortage of materials and certain types of supervisory and skilled labour as well as surveyors has resulted in some slowing up of the planned building and constructional works. However, trials as planned are proceeding on the interim missile range, concurrently with construction on the main range.

Pay of the Forces.

The pay code for the defence forces, which was introduced in July, 1947, provided basic rates of pay for members of the permanent forces having regard to civilian rates then ruling. In light of changes in civilian rates, the basic rates were varied in November last year to provide for an increase of 2s. a day in the overall remuneration of the forces.

A further review of the pay code is now being made and, whilst full details of the increases have not yet been worked out, they will be completed in time for the new scales to operate from the commencement of the first full pay period in October, 1949. An amount of £1,000,000 has been included in the Estimates on this account.

War and Repatriation (1939-45) Services

On the basis of existing commitments, expenditure on War (1939-45) Services is estimated at £101,000,000. Expenditure last year, which included the United Kingdom grant of £10,000,000, was £149,000,000.

An estimated increase of £970,000 in war pensions this year reflects the operation for a full year of the increase in pension rates made last September.

Expenditure on reconstruction training is expected to decrease by £2,600,000 in 1949-50 as compared with 1948-49 because the number of trainees is falling off.

On the other hand, estimated expenditure on war service land settlement is £800,000 above the amount spent in 1948-49. Greater contributions towards the writing down of capital value of holdings are expected and, with more settlers in occupation, provision is made for increased expenditure on living allowances.

Price stabilization subsidies in 1949-50 are expected to cost £6,700,000, which includes £5,500,000 for subsidy on tea and £1,200,000 for outstanding claims in respect of subsidies discontinued last year.

The estimate of primary production subsidies this year is £9,700,000, which includes provision of £5,600,000 for sub sidies on dairy products, £3,600,000 for superphosphate subsidy and £500,000 for subsidy on nitrogenous fertilizer. Details of price stabilization and primary production subsidies are contained inStatements Nos. 8 and 9.

Provision of £1,300,000 is made for international relief and rehabilitation, which includes £450,000 for post-Unrra expenditure and £850,000 for the third Australian contribution to the International Refugee Organization.

Other Expenditure

On the basis of existing legislation and commitments, total expenditure other than Defence and War (1939-45) Services is estimated at £387,000,000 in 1949-50 as compared with £339,000,000 in 1948-49.

The major increases are £11,000,000 in payments to the National Welfare Fund, £13,600,000 in payments to the States and £15,700,000 in capital works and services.

Social Services

Statutory payments to the National Welfare Fund in 1949-50 are estimated at £121,000,000, of which £99,000,000 is from social services contribution and £22,000,000 from pay-roll tax, as compared with £110,000,000 in 1948-49.

Expenditure from the fund, on the other hand, is estimated at £100,400,000, as against £80,800,000 last year. The main increases are -

The increase in pensions and child endowment payments is due in part to normal growth in numbers of beneficiaries and in part to the operation for a full year of the increased rates which came into effect last year. The estimate of unemployment and sickness benefits is larger because of the coal strike.

Details of the National Welfare Fund are contained in Statement No. 7 and of Commonwealth social and health services in Statement No. 11.

Special Grants to States

The report of the Commonwealth

Grants Commission for 1949-50 has not yet .been received, but an amount of £11,000,000 has been included in the Estimates for special grants to South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania.

Capital Works and Services

Expenditure on capital works and services, excluding defence works, is estimated to increase from £37,500,000 in 1948-49 to £53,200,000 in 1949-50. Major increases are -

Additional labour and increasing deliveries of plant and equipment have been making possible a higher rate of progress in works programmes which, howover, will now be retarded by the coal strike. Construction costs are rising because of higher wages and costs of materials.

Administrative Expenditure

The Government is maintaining its efforts to ensure the utmost economy and efficiency in administration. Staffing and organization of departments is under continuous review by the Public Service Board and special instructions have been issued to all branches of the Public Service that expenditure of all kinds must be kept to a minimum. With wages, salaries and costs of materials rising and with expansion of vital activities such as the Post Office, civil aviation and works, some increase in the numbers of staff and in the genera] costs of government is inevitable.

Total Expenditure, 1949-50

On the basis of existing legislation and commitments total expenditure in 1949-50 is estimated at £541,300,000 as compared with actual expenditure of £535,000,000 in 1948-49.

Estimated Revenue, 1949-50

It is estimated that revenue in 1949-50 will be £532,600,000 after taking into account the reduction in rates of income tax and social services contribution which came into operation on the 1st July of this year.

Allowing, however, for a substantial increase in incomes and profits subject to taxation, revenue from these two taxes is estimated at £2-76,000,000 compared1 with revenue of £272,000,000 in 1948-49.

At existing rates, revenue from salestax is estimated at £40,000,000. This is £1,000,000 higher than last year.

Revenue from pay-roll tax in 1949-501 is estimated at £22,000,000, an increase of £2,000,000 above 1948-49.

Revenue from customs is estimated to be slightly lower on existing rates than in 1948-49. There may be some increase in total imports, though mainly in free or low duty classes of goods. On the other hand, dollar imports, some of which carry high rates of duty, will be lower.

Estimated excise revenue for 1949-501 is set down at £64,000,000 as comparedwith £62,700,000 in 1948-49.

Post Office revenue will reflect therecent increases in postal, telegraph and’ telephone rates and is estimated to be- £5.000,000 higher than last year.

Accordingly, on the basis of estimates’ which do not allow for proposals affecting both revenue and expenditure, which will be detailed presently, revenue for 1949-50 will fall short of expenditure- by £9,000,000.

Taxation

In March last, substantial reductions were made in the rates at which incometax and social services contribution arepayable by individuals for this financial year. The rates were reduced prior tothe 1st July, 1949, so that the benefit of the reductions would be reflected in theinstalments deducted from salaries and’ wages as from that date.

The total cost to revenue of the reductions is estimated at £36,500,000 perannum, which amounts to approximately 23 per cent, of the total direct taxation payable by individuals. This will beoffset to some extent, however, by thecollection of arrears. During the financial year 1948-49, arrears in the assessment and collection of income tax and social’ services contribution were largely overtaken and it is expected that, by thu end of this financial year, the arrears will’ be reduced to a normal level.

There have now been five major reductions in rates of direct taxation since the- war ended, besides a large number of particular concessions and their effect has been to lighten the weight of taxation upon individuals very greatly. The majority of taxpayers now pay considerably less than half the taxes which would have been payable at war-time rates on comparable incomes and a very large number of people pay no income : tax at all.

As an assistance in the re-equipment of industry and in the establishment of new industrial enterprises, the income tax depreciation allowances are being extended. At present, a special initial depreciation deduction of 20 per cent. of the cost of plant and machinery acquired or installed up to the 30th J une, 1950, is allowed in the year of acquisition or installation. This special deduction is additional to the normal annual allowance for depreciation. It is proposed to extend the period of the special allowance for a further two years to the 30th June, 1952. At the same time, companies and other taxpayers are being given a right to elect to deduct initial depreciation of 40 per cent. in lieu of the present 20 per cent. on plant and machinery acquired or installed after the 30th June, 1949.

It is proposed also to extend the income tax concessional rebate in respect of life assurance premiums and superannuation contributions by individuals. At present, £100 is the maximum amount on which the rebate is allowed. As from the 1st July, 1949, this maximum is being increased to £150.

In the field of indirect taxation the Government proposes to make certain concessions which will now be outlined.

Sales Tax

It is proposed to reduce the general rate of sales tax from 10 per cent. to 81/3 per cent. This reduction will apply to a very wide range of goods in general use and “will thus operate to the benefit of the whole community. Certain new exemptions will also be granted, and the tax on some goods will be reduced from the maximum rate of 25 per cent. to the new general rate of 81/3 per cent. This new rate will be relatively simple to calculate as it will represent1d. for each 1s. of taxable value. Detailsof the amendments will be found in the bills to be introduced later this evening. The cost to revenue of these concessions is estimated at £6,700,000 for a full year and £5,000,000 for the current financial year.

Entertainments Tax

It is proposed to reduce the rates of entertainments tax by approximately 20 per cent. in regard to all classes of entertainments. Details of the reductions will be announced when the relevant bill is introduced later this evening. The resultant loss of revenue is estimated at £1,100,000 for a full year and approximately £800,000 for the current financial year.

Customs, Excise and Primage

The following remissions are pro posed : -

Primage. - Removal from some 400 items and sub-items, mainly raw materials, semi-manufactured goods and industrial equipment. Cost to revenue is estimated at £1,000,000 in a full year and at £820,000 in 1949-50.

Outside Packages. - Abolition of customs duty and primage. Cost to revenue is estimated at £450,000 in a full year and at £385,000 in 1949-50.

Passengers Baggage. - Remission of duty on articles for personal use or gifts to a total value of £30 with a limitation on spirituous liquors and tobacco. Articles above a total value of £30 will be charged a flat rate of 25 per cent. ad valorem. Cost to revenue is estimated at £30,000 in a full year and at £25,000 in 1949-50.

Ships’ Stores. - Abolition of customs duty and sales tax on stores other than spirituous liquors and tobacco. Cost to revenue is estimated at £120,000 in a fullyear and at £100,000 in 1949-50.

Aircraft Stores. - Exemption from customs duty of stores used on aircraft trading overseas. The concession will extend to nonAustralian aircraft where Australian aircraft receive reciprocal treatment. Estimated cost to revenue is £100,000 in a full year and £83,000 in 1949-50.

Radio Valves. - Reduction of excise by1s. a valve. Cost to revenue is estimated at £100,000 in a full year and £87,000 in 1949-50.

Full details of these concessions will be announced later this evening by the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs.

Total Tax Reductions

In all, therefore, the proposed additional tax concessions will cost revenue £9,600,000 in a full year and £7,300,000 in 1949-50. Taking into account the reductions in rates of direct taxation estimated to cost £36,500,000 a year the full cost to revenue of tax concessions coming into operation in 1949-50 would thus be approximately £46,000,000 per annum.

Payments to the States.

Proposals will be made for payment to the States this year of a coal strike emergency grant of £8,000,000 and an increase in the Commonwealth Aid Roads and Works Grant of £1,000,000 a year. In addition, provision is made in the Estimates for an increase in the States Tax Reimbursement Grant of £8,750,000, an increase of £3,500,000 in special grants, and a further payment this year to reimburse the States for costs of administering controls over prices, rents and land sales. Taking account of these items, the main details of which will be given presently, aggregate payments to or for the States in 1949-50 will be approximately £101,000,000 - an increase of £22,500,000 above payments last year and £34,000,000 above 1947-48.

Tax Reimbursement Grants

It is expected that under the formula embodied in existing legislation the tax reimbursement grants payable to the States in 1949-50 under the uniform tax scheme will amount to £62,500,000, an increase of about £8,750,000 over 1948-49. This will mean a total increase of no less than £17,500,000 in the tax reimbursement grants since 1947-48.

Coal Strike Emergency Grant

In recent months, a very heavy burden has been placed on State budgets by reason of the coal strike, coal shortages and associated effects. The adverse effect of the coal situation on State budgets has been particularly noticeable in the finances of the State railways and certain other State business undertakings.

At the recent conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers the Commonwealth was furnished with estimates of the effects of the coal situation on State budgets, and after considering all circumstances, the Government has decided that a special coal strike emergency grant of £8,000,000 should be made to the States in 1949-50. This grant will be distributed among the States in the same proportions as the tax reimbursement grant payable this year. Legislation to give effect to this proposal will be introduced shortly.

Commonwealth Aid Roads Grant

It is also proposed to increase by £1,000,000 the amount made available to the States under the Commonwealth Aid Roads and Works Act 1947-48 for expenditure on roads in sparsely settled areas. This will increase the amount to be provided for that purpose in 1949-50 to £3,000,000 and the estimated total roads grant to £9,000,000. Legislation will be introduced to make the necessary amendment to the act.

Controls over Prices, Rents and Land Sales

Last year, legislation was passed pro viding for the States to be reimbursed by the Commonwealth for additional expenditure incurred by the States in 1948- 49 by reason of their assumption of control over prices, rents and land sales. The Government has decided that this arrangement should be continued in 1949- 50. New legislation will be necessary. Last year, grants to the States in reimbursement of the cost of these controls amounted to £597,000 whilst £800,000 has been provided for this purpose in the budget this year.

Further details of payments to the States are given in Statement No. 10.

War Gratuity Reserve

During last financial year, as honor able members know, the War Gratuity Reserve was established as a provision against the payment of war gratuity due in the financial year 1950-51.

At the 30th June this year the balance in the reserve was approximately £30,100,000. As the total liability for war gratuity is estimated at £80,000,000 which will mainly fall due for payment in 1950-51, the Government considers that further provision should as far as possible be made in this financial year.

Accordingly, it is proposed that part of the balances in certain trust accounts built up through provision against certain war-time contingencies, such as the Diverted Cargoes Account and the “War Damage Fund, and which are no longer required for their original purpose, should be appropriated to the “War Gratuity Reserve. The total amount involved is £6,700,000, which would bring the balance in the reserve to £36,800,000.

Budget Summary

Taking into account the revenue and expenditure proposals just outlined the budget for 1949-50 may be summarized as follows: -

Details of the revenue estimates for 1949-50 compared with actual revenue in 1948-49 and allowing for the proposed reductions in taxation are contained in Statement No. 2. Also, details of the expenditure estimates for 1949-50, compared with actual expenditure for 1948-49, and including new expenditure proposals, are contained in Statement No. 3.

Loan Council. Programmes 1949-50

At its meeting in August this year, the Loan Council endorsed a works programme for the Commonwealth and the States of £116,887,000.

The borrowing programmes approved by the Loan Council for 1949-50 total £79,300,000 to cover loan expenditure by governments, mainly on public works and housing. The Commonwealth’s share of this amount is £13,100,000, which will be used wholly for advances to the States under the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement. The Loan Council also approved a total borrowing programme’ of £45,000,000 for semi-governmental and local authorities. All the borrowingsapproved are subject to review in January, 1950.

Conclusion

The past ten years have proved the resilient strength of our country. When faced with danger, we put forth a military and industrial effort far greater than formerly thought possible and since thewar we have been able, despite many difficulties arising from that conflict, to recover lost ground and advance along the road of progress again. Indeed, Australia is in many ways much fartherahead than ten years ago. In manufacturing, our capacity has increased at least 50 per cent. Throughout the economy asa whole there are 40 per cent, more peopleat work than there were then. From a social standpoint we have greatly extended the range and value of services availableand experience has shown not merely that we can afford these services but that they have a positive worth in keeping updemand for goods and hence employment and investment.

These examples of constructive achievement in a time disordered by war and theeffects of war point to what can be done under normal conditions. Knowing our resources, we should not be afraid to set our goals high. I believe for examplethat our population can be doubled within a few decades. I believe also that our present problems of fuel and power can be solved, so opening up immense industrial possibilities. Housing, again, difficult though it has been in recent years,, will be steadily overcome if we keep upour efforts.

But it is a condition of all this that we should accept as a common aim the future greatness and security of Australia and as a common responsibility that it rests with us in our own generation to. do our utmost to achieve these things.

page 33

STATEMENT No. 4.- DEFENCE SERVICES AND WAR AND REPATRIATION (1939-45)

page 33

SERVICES

(Including Capital Works and Services.) Estimated Expenditure 1949-50 compared with Actual Expenditure 1948-49. {: .page-start } page 34 {:#debate-33} ### STATEMENT No.5.- MAIN HEADS OF WAR AND POST-WAR EXPENDITURE 1939-40 The following are the main heads of war expenditure for the ten years from July, 1939, to June 1949, in respect of the 1939-45 War.- Notes. - *(a)* In addition supplies and services to the total value of £293,000,000 (excluding reciprocal lend-lease) were provided for Other Governments. All of this amount has already been recovered except for £16,438,000 which is allowed for in the item " Credits - After deducting items of miscellaneous expenditure.". Sinking Fund. During 1948-^49 'the receipts of the National Debt Sinking 'Fund for -redemption purposes were £29,536,000. In addition, a .balance of £4,181,000 was carried forward from the previous year, making a total of £33,717,000 available for debt redemption .in 1948-49. Of this amount an unused balance of £18,422,000 if< being carried forward to the financial year 1949-50 and it is 'estimated that, with receipts of £30,355,000 in 1949-50, the total amount available .for debt redemption .purposes in the current financial year will be £48*777,000. {: .page-start } page 36 {:#debate-34} ### STATEMENT No. 8.- DETAILS OF PRICE STABILIZATION SUBSIDIES Estimated Subsidies 1949-50, compared with the Actual Subsidies 1948-49. {:#subdebate-34-0} #### Termination of Subsidies Following the decision to terminate Com monwealth price controls, subsidies were progressively withdrawn, and with the exception of that being paid on tea were all terminated by the 31st October, 1948. {:#subdebate-34-1} #### Tea The amount of £5,500,000 shown in the 1949-50 Estimates is required to meet the cost of continuing the subsidy at the approximate rate of 2s. 4d. per lb. As previously announced, the rate of subsidy will not be increased to meet any rise in the landed cost of tea or in distributors' costs and margins. Imports (other than Tea). These subsidies were originally scheduled for termination on the 31st July, 1948, but later the period was extended to include goods on board ships which arrived in Australia on or before the 12th September, 1948. The provisions of £1,190,000 for 1949-50 is required to meet outstanding claims which could not *be* finalized before the 30th June, 1949. {: .page-start } page 36 {:#debate-35} ### STATEMENT No. 9.- ASSISTANCE TO PRIMARY PRODUCTION Estimated Subsidies 1949-50 Compared with Actual Subsidies 1948-49. The dairying industry has been given a guarantee by the Government that for five years as from the 1st April, 1047, farmers' returns will be based on the cost of production which will be the subject of investigation and report each year by the Joint Dairying Industry Advisory Committee. In June, 1948, the committee completed its first annual review under this arrangement, and, as a consequence, the return to the farmer at the factory door was increased, as from the 1st July, 1948, by 2d. per lb. commercial butter to 2s. 2d. per lb. A further review of cost movements in the industry was recently completed by the committee. As a result the committee recommended that the return to the producer should be increased as from the 1st July, 1949, by 21/2d. per lb. to cover additional costs. This brings the returns to the farmer to 2s. 41/2d. per lb. commercial butter basis for 1949-50. The committee's recommendation was accepted by the Government. Advice of the increased cost of production was advised to the Premiers of the various States on the 22nd June, 1949, for the attention of the pricing authorities. The Government is continuing its subsidy payments at the rate applying last year. On this basis, the subsidy is estimated to cost £5,575.000 for 1949-50. The Government is continuing the payment of subsidy on superphosphate during 1949-50 at the rates which applied last financial year, viz., Western Australia £2 15s. a ton, Eyre Peninsula £2 10s. a ton, other areas £2 5s. a ton. Provision has been made accordingly. The Government has announced that, pro vided the nitrogen pool is maintained, it will continue the subsidy on nitrogenous fertilizer during 1949-50. This subsidy is designed to meet the difference between the average of the differing costs of nitrogenous fertilizer from various sources and the fixed selling price. During 1949-50, the amount of subsidy required to make up this difference on a turnover of 76.400 tons by the pool is estimated to be £500,000. STATEMENT No. 10.- COMMONWEALTH PAYMENTS TO OR FOR THE STATES. Following the decision of the Commonwealth Government to continue uniform taxation of incomes and entertainments indefinitely, pro visionwas made in the States Grants (Tax Reimbursement) Act 1946 for payment of tax reimbursement grants to States which did not levy income taxation. This legislation set out the basis on which the aggregate tax reimbursement grant was to be determined for payment in 1946-47 and in subsequent years and also the basis on which the aggregate grant was to be distributed among the States each year. Legislation was passed in 1947 and 1948 amending the basis for determining the aggregate grant but the basis of distribution of the aggregate grant between the States was left unchanged. Under the States Grants (Tax Reimbursement) Act 1946-1948, the aggregate grant was fixed at £40,000,000 in 1946-47 and £45,000,000 in 1947-48, whilst in respect of subsequent years the act provides for the aggregate grant of £45,000,000 to be varied in accordance with a formula which takes account of - The aggregate grant paid to the States in 1948-49 in accordance with this formula amounted to £53,744,000 whilst it is estimated that the amount payable in 1949-50 will be £62,500,000. The aggregate grant was distributed among the States in 1946-47 and 1947-48 in accordance with the First Schedule to the 1946 act. In respect of years subsequent to 1947-48 the act provides that the aggregate grant is to be distributed in accordance with a distribution formula which taxes account to an increasing extent each year of the respective populations of the States after adjustments have been made to those populations for relative sparsity of population and the number of school children aged five to fifteen years inclusive in each State. The effect of this distribution formula in respect of the grant for 1949-50 is to provide that eight-tenths of the aggregate grant be distributed among the States in the proportions laid down in the schedule to the 1946 act and the remaining two-tenths in proportion to the adjusted populations of the States. By 1957-58 the aggregate grant will be distributed solely in proportion to the adjusted populations of the States. The estimated grants payable in 1949-50 are compared below with the grants in the four previousyears. The tax reimbursement grants paid annually to each State are reduced by the amount of any arrears of State income taxation which may be received in that year by the State. In 1948-49 these arrears amounted to £256,679 and are estimated at £143,000 in 1949-50. Coal Strike Emergency Grant. It is proposed to make a special nonrecurring coal strike emergency grant of £8,000,000 to the States in 1949-50 to alleviate the burden placed on State budgets by reason of the coal strike, coal shortages and the associated effects. The grant will be distributed among the States in the same proportions as the tax reimbursement grant payable in 1949-50. The precise amount which each State will receive cannot be specified until the Commonwealth Statistician has completed his determination of the amounts payable to each State in 1949-50 under the tax reimbursement distribution formula. It is estimated, however, that the distribution among the States of the coal strike emergency grant of £8,000,000 will be approximately as follows: - Special Grants. Special grants under section 98 of the Constitution have been paid annually by the Commonwealth to Western Australia since 1910, to Tasmania since 1912, and to South Australia since 1929. With the establishment of the Commonwealth Grants Commission in 1933 the special grants paid each year to these States have been in accordance with the recommendations of the commission. The general principle adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission over the years is that of financial needs and has been expressed by the commission in the following terms : - " Special grants are justified when a State ' through financial stress from any cause is unable efficiently to discharge its functions as a member 'of the federation and should be determined by the amount of help found necessary to make it possible for that State by reasonable effort to function at a standard not appreciably below that of the other States." The report of the Commonwealth Grants Commission on the applications by South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania *lor* special grants from the Commonwealth in 1949-50 is not yet available. Fending receipt of the commission's report, an amount of £11,054,000 has been included tentatively in the 1949-50 budget for special grants to these three States. In 1948-49, special grants paid to these States on the recommendation of the Commonwealth Grants Commission amounted to £7,450,000 made up aa follows: - Commonwealth Aid Roads and WORKS Agreements made under the Federal Aid Roads and Works Act 1937 terminated on 30th June, 1947, and the act was superseded by the Commonwealth Aid Roads and Works Act 1947 which came into operation on 1st July, 1947, for a period of three years. This act provides for the following payments to be made from Consolidated Revenue during this period : - In 1948 amending legislation was passed increasing during each of the two final years of the scheme the allocation for roads in sparsely settled areas from £1,000,000 to £2,000,000. It is proposed this year to make a further increase of £1,000,000 in the' allocation for roads in sparsely settled areas, thus bringing the total allocation foi this purpose in 1949-50 to £3.000,000. The full amount of £100,000 provided under the act for the promotion of road safety was expended during 1947-48. Since that time, moneys for road safety purposes have been provided by the Commonwealth under the administrative vote of the Department of Transport. Expenditure from Consolidated Revenue under the act in 1948-49 is compared below with the estimated expenditure in 1949-50: - Payments from Consolidated Revenue for the foregoing purposes are made in the first place to a trust account (known as the Commonwealth Aid Roads and Works Trust Account) from which the moneys are subsequently disbursed. In 1948-49 the payments from this trust account amounted to £7,470,000. {:#subdebate-35-0} #### Administration of Prices, Rents and Land Sales Control The States took over the administration of prices, rents and land sales controls towards the end of 1948 and the Commonwealth agreed to reimburse the States for the additional costs in which the States would be involved in 1948-49 by reason of their administration of these controls. Provision was made accordingly in the States Grants (Administration of Controls Reimbursement) Act 1948. Grants to the States in 1948-49 in reimbursement of these controls amounted to £597,409 (this amount covers approximately the last nine months of the year), while £800,000 has been provided for this purpose in the budget for 1949-50. New legislation will be introduced to authorize the payment of these grants in 1949-50. Payments under Financial Agreement. Under the Financial Agreement, which was entered into between the Commonwealth and the States in 1927, the Commonwealth agreed to contribute certain amounts towards meeting the interest and sinking fund payments in respect of the States' debts. The agreementprovides that the Commonwealth will in each year during the period of 58 years commencing on the 1st July, 1927, contribute a fixed amount of £7,584,912 towards the interest payable on the States' debts. The sinking fund contributions made by the Commonwealth in respect of the States' debts vary according to the nature of the borrowings and may be described briefly as follows: - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. In respect of States debts existing on the 30th June, 1927, the Commonwealth contributes 2s. 6d. per cent. per annum and the States 5s. per cent. per annum for 58 years. {: type="1" start="6"} 0. In respect of borrowings to meet State deficits incurred between the 1st July, 1927, and the 30th June, 1935, the Commonwealth contributes 5s. per cent. per annum and the States concerned 15s. per cent. per annum, such contributions to continue for 39 years from the 1st July, 1944. This provision was made in an amendment to the Financial Agreement in 1944. No sinking fund contribution is made by the Commonwealth in respect of any other borrowings to meet State deficits. 1. In respect of new borrowings by the States after the 1st July, 1927 (other than for deficit purposes), the Commonwealth and the States concerned each contribute 5s. per cent. per annum for 53 years. The Commonwealth contributions in respect of sinking fund on States' debts are paid direct to the National Debt Sinking Fund. In 1948-49 the Commonwealth contributions amounted to £1,851,883, whilst the contributions in 1949-50 are estimated at £1,980,088. {:#subdebate-35-1} #### Western Australian Waterworks Grant Under the Western Australian Grant (Water Supply) Act 1948, the Commonwealth agreed to provide financial assistance to the Western Australian Government for a scheme designed to provide water for certain parts of the State's main mixed wheat and sheep belt and indirectly to relieve demand on the water supply to the eastern gold-fields. The Commonwealth financial assistance is limited to one-half of the capital cost of the project, with an upper limit of £2,150,000. The grant was considered to be justified because of the developmental possibilities of the project and the limited financial resources of the States. No payments have so far been made by the Commonwealth, but an amount of £400,000 has been provided in the budget for 1949-50. This represents 50 per cent. of the amount which the Western Australian Government estimates will be expended on the project during 1949-50. {:#subdebate-35-2} #### Summary The foregoing payments to or for the States in 1948-49 are compared below with the estimated payments in 1949-50: - I move - >That the first item in the Estimates under Division No. 1- Senate - namely, " Salary and Allowances, £12,400", be agreed to. Progress reported. {: .page-start } page 42 {:#debate-36} ### BUDGET PAPERS The following papers were presented : - >The Budget, 1949-50 - Papers presented by the Right Honorable J. B. Chifley, M.P., for the information of honorable members on the occasion of the Budget of 1949-50. {:#subdebate-36-0} #### National Income and Expenditure 1948-49 Ordered to be printed. {: .page-start } page 42 {:#debate-37} ### STATES GRANTS (COAL STRIKE EMERGENCY) BILL 1949 Message recommending appropriation reported. *In committee* (Consideration of Governor-General's message) : Motion (by **Mr. Dedman)** agreed to - >That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an art to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum for the purpose of financial assistance to the States by reason of the losses and costs incurred by the States as a result of the coal strike. Resolution reported. Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted. *Ordered -* >That **Mr. Dedman** and **Mr. Riordan** do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution. Bill presented by **Mr. Dedman,** and read a first time. {:#subdebate-37-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-37-0-s0 .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr DEDMAN:
Minister for Defence and Minister for Post-war Reconstruction · Corio · ALP -- I move - >That the. bill be now read a second time. The purpose of this bill is to authorize the payment to the States in 1949-50 of a special non-recurring grant of £8,000,000 to alleviate the burden placed on State budgets by reason of the coal strike, coal shortages and the associated effects. The latest trends in the finances of the States were the subject of discussion at the Conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers which was held last month. It was clear at that discussion that, despite the increase of approximately £8,750,000 which may be expected *in* the tax reimbursement grant in 1949-50, in accordance with the formula embodied in existing legislation, the States will experience serious financial difficulties this year because of the effects on their budgets of the coal strike and coal shortages. It is, of course, impossible to make a precise estimate of the lossesor additional costs incurred by the State Governments by reason of the coal strike and its associated effects. At the conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers, however, the Commonwealth was furnished with estimates of the effects of the coal position on the State budgets particularly in relation to the finances of the State railways, and, to a less extent, of other State business undertakings. After considering all circumstances, the Government has decided that to meet this situation a special non-recurring grant in 1949-50 of £8,000,000 would be justified. It is considered that it would be appropriate to distribute the grant in the same proportions as the tax reimbursement grant payable this year. Provision is made in the bill accordingly. The precise amount which each State will receive under this method of distribution cannot be specified until the Commonwealth Statistician has completed his determination of the tax reimbursement grant payable to each State this year. On the basis of preliminary estimates furnished by the Statistician of the tax reimbursement grants payable this year, however, the share of each State in this coal strike emergency grant of £8,000,000 would be approximately as follows : - Debate (on motion by **Mr. Menzies)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 42 {:#debate-38} ### STATES GRANTS (ADMINISTRATION OF CONTROLS REIMBURSEMENT) BILL 1949 Message recommending appropriation reported. *In committee* (Consideration of Governor-General's message) : Motion (by **Mr. Dedman)** agreed to - >That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue foe made for the purposes of a bill for an act to make provision for the grant of financial assistance to the States in connexion with the administration of prices, rente and land sales controls, and for other purposes. Resolution reported. Standing Orders suspended ; resolution adopted. *Ordered -* >That **Mr. Dedman** and **Mr. Riordan** do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution. Bill presented by **Mr. Dedman,** and read a first time. {:#subdebate-38-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-38-0-s0 .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr DEDMAN:
Minister for Defence and Minister for Post-war Reconstruction · Corio · ALP -- I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. The purpose of this bill is to enable reimbursement to the States of the costs incurred by them in the administration of prices, rents and land sales controls to be continued during the financial year 1949-50 on the same basis as that applying in 1948-49. The States Grants (Administration of Controls Reimbursement) Act 1948 provided for the reimbursement until the 30th June, 1949, of the States' administrative costs in connexion with these controls. The present measure provides for further grants to be made up to the 30th June, 1950. The Government takes the view that, whilst inflationary tendencies are still evident, the States should not be hampered by financial considerations in deciding the extent and duration of these controls, and that further financial assistance is desirable this year, to enable the States effectively to maintain the controls they consider necessary in the interests of general economic stability. Based on figures initially supplied by the States, asum of £800,000 has been provided in the 1949-50 estimates for these purposes. The cost of reimbursing the States during that part of 1948-49 for which they were responsible for these controls was £597,000. On a yearly basis this was equivalent to approximately £770,000. Revised estimates received from the States within the last few days indicate that expenditure on the respective controls will be £633,000 for prices, £103,000 for rents and £61,000 for land sales, making a total of £797,000 for the three controls. The figure of £61,000 for the cost of land sales control takes into account the fact that control in New SouthWales terminated on the 1st September, 1949. As the future of this control is under review in certain other States, expenditure may be less than the estimate of £61,000. As was the case last year, it is proposed to limit the grants to the reimbursement of administrative costs and any capital expenditure which the States may incur will be to their own account. In order to relieve the States of the necessity to finance expenditure pending reimbursement from the Commonwealth, provision is again made for the payment of the grant by way of advances. At the end of the financial year an adjustment will be effected with each State on the basis of a certified statement by the State Auditor-General. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Harrison)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 43 {:#debate-39} ### UNITED KINGDOM GRANT BILL 1949 Message recommending appropriation reported. *In committee* (Consideration of Governor-General's message) : Motion (by **Mr. Dedman)** agreed to - >That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to grant and apply out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund the sum of £10,000,000 as a grant to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom. Resolution reported. Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted. *Ordered -* >That **Mr. Dedman** and **Mr. Riordan** do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution. Bill presented by **Mr. Dedman,** and read a first time. {:#subdebate-39-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-39-0-s0 .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr DEDMAN:
Minister for Defence and Minister for Post-war Reconstruction · Corio · ALP -- I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. The bill now before the House seeks to appropriate £10,000,000 for a grant to the United Kingdom. As honorable members will recall, a gift of a similar amount was made to the United Kingdom last year. It was made as a practical expression of the desire of the Australian people to assist the United Kingdom and also in recognition of the outstanding contribution which the British Government and people have made, despite their own pressing problems, to the economic recovery of Europe since the war ended. The decision to make the gift was welcomed and approved by honorable members on both sides of the House. During the .past year the United Kingdom has made further striking progress in reconstructing its trade and industry. By a great effort, an overall balance in payments with all countries was achieved in the second half of 1948. Priority must still be given, however, to manufacture for export, particularly to dollar markets, where payments difficulties continue to be acute. This has meant that comparatively little of the increased production from British factories has been available for consumption at home. Imports of foodstuffs and other consumer goods are also still limited and the improvement in the external financial position of the United Kingdom has been achieved only because the British people have been willing to continue to make sacrifices in their own living standards. The United Kingdom is also still required to meet calls on its resources to help in the recovery of other European countries. The countries of Western Europe are receiving aid from the United States to held them to solve their dollar shortages. Through the European recovery programme, dollar aid totalling 4,875,000,000 dollars was allocated to the participating countries in 1948-49. For 1949-50 a sum pf about 3,600,000,000 dollars is expected to be made available. With these dollars, European countries have been able to continue buying from the Western Hemisphere essential goods needed for their economic reconstruction. In addition to the dollar problem, some of the European countries are faced with a shortage of other currencies, including a shortage of sterling. .Some European countries have done better than others in increasing production and trade. Because of the uneven rate of recovery, some countries cannot earn enough by trade to buy the goods they need, whilst others are producing goods they cannot sell because of these payments difficulties. Last year, the difficulties were met by introducing an intraEuropean payments arrangement whereby countries which were in credit in their payments provided funds for use by those in debit. The creditor countries were able to provide these funds because they received in return something like the equivalent in Marshall aid dollars. The United Kingdom played a large part in this scheme. Altogether the United Kingdom made grants totalling £61,500,000 sterling to other European countries in the nine months ended the 30th June, 1949. The United Kingdom itself has been short of Belgian currency, and it received in Belgian francs the equivalent of £7,500,000 sterling from Belgium in the same period. These sums have been outright grants, leaving behind them no problems of repayment. In this manner, a break-down in trade between European countries was averted. Europe was given a breathing-space in which the reconstruction pf industries could continue without grave dislocation. In the absence of these payments arrangements, Europe's recovery would have been hampered and the dollar assistance being given by the United States would have been much less effective. Similar arrangements are being negotiated for 1949-50. The contributions to be made by the creditor countries have not yet been finally determined but the United Kingdom will certainly again be called upon to make substantial sterling grants. Australia's interest in the restoration of economic prosperity in Europe remains as strong as it was a year ago. These European countries are important customers of ours. In 1948-49 we exported goods valued at £A.120,000,000 to countries other than the United Kingdom taking part in the European recovery programme. This represented 22 per cent, of our total exports valued at £A.547,000,000. Trance and French possessions took goods to the value of £A.48,000.000 and apart from the United Kingdom were the largest buyers of Australian commodities. Italy's share was £A.29,000,000 and Belgium's purchases amounted to £A.20,000,000. Wool was, of course, the main commodity entering into this trade. A total of £A.95,000,000 worth of wool was shipped to these European countries in 1948-49, representing 41 per cent, of all wool exports in that year. Our trade surplus with these countries last year was £A.85,000,000, which represented a large part of the surplus of £A.133,000,000 earned from our trade with all countries. We gain directly from the United Kingdom's contributions towards the reconstruction of Europe, when the countries receiving sterling grants spend a part of them on our products. We also gain from the increased production in Europe which these grants help to promote. Over the last year the European countries generally have supplied a growing proportion of our essential import needs. The recent deterioration in the sterling area dollar position has made it more important than ever to develop alternative sources of supply for the equipment and raw materials needed for our own industries. Our best hope of reducing our current dollar deficit lies in the growing capacity of the United Kingdom and the easy currency European countries to supply us with increased quantities of the essential imports on which we at present have to spend dollars. From all points of view it is clearly in our own interests to make what contribution we can to help the United Kingdom in its own recovery and in the efforts that country is making to promote increased production and trade in Europe. I am confident that honorable members will approve the bill. It expresses our goodwill towards the British people and our confidence in their ability to surmount their present difficulties. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Habbison)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 45 {:#debate-40} ### ENTERTAINMENTS TAX BILL 1949 *In Committee of Ways and Means:* **Mr. DEDMAN** (Corio - Minister for Defence and Minister for Post-war Reconstruction [5.47]. - I move. - >That, on and after the first day of October, 1040, in Heu of the rates imposed by the Entertainments Tax Act 1942-1949, the rates of entertainments tax be - > >in the case of an entertainment to which paragraph (a) or (6) of section five of that Act applies - as set out in the second column of the Schedule hereto; and (6 j in the case of any other entertainment - as set out in the third column of that Schedule. This resolution is brought in for the purpose of allowing relief from entertainments tax by reducing the rates of tax by approximately 20 per cent. The reductions will apply to all classes of entertainments, whether they are subject to tax at the general rate or the special rates applicable to the legitimate theatre and certain sports conducted by non-profit organizations. This concession will appreciably reduce the costs of entertainment to those who seek recreation at picture theatres and other popular sources of amusement. A comparison of the present rates and the proposed rates is set out in a statement which is being circulated for the information of honorable members. In view of the time which is necessary to procure new stocks of departmental tax tickets and' to distribute them to postmasters throughout Australia, it is proposed that the reduced rates shall not come into operation until the 1st October, 1949. In the meantime, proprietors of entertainments who operate under security and use their own roll tickets will be in a position to prepare for the change-over. lt is likely that many of them will have on hand stocks of tickets which specify the present rates of tax. The Commissioner of Taxation will, subject to certain conditions being observed, permit the use of these old stocks after the new rates have come into force. Proprietors who desire to use up old stocks of tickets should' communicate with the Taxation Branch with a view to making the necessary arrangements. The proposed reductions involve an annual loss of revenue amounting to £1,100,000, and the loss for the current financial year is estimated at £825,000. Progress reported. {: .page-start } page 46 {:#debate-41} ### SALES TAX BILL 1949 *In Committee of Ways and Means:* {: #debate-41-s0 .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr DEDMAN:
Minister for Defence and Minister for Post-war Reconstruction · Corio · ALP -- I move - (1.) That, in respect of goods not covered by the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and on the sale value of which it *ie* not provided by that Act that sales tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the rate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 1) 1030-1046, sales tax at the rate of Eight and one-third per centum be imposed upon the sale value of goods manufactured in Australia by a taxpayer and on or after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, sold hy him or treated by him as stock for sale by retail or applied to his own use, (2.) That, in respect of goods not covered by the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and on the sale value of which it is not provided by that Act that soles tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the rate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 2) 1930-1940, sales tax at the rate of Bight and one-third per centum be imposed upon the sale value of goods manufactured in Australia and sold on or after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, by a taxpayer who purchased them from the manufacturer. (3.) That, in respect of goods not covered by the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and on the sale value of which it is not provided by that Act that sales tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the rate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 3) 1930-1940, sales tax at, the rate of Bight and one-third per centum bc imposed upon the sale value of goods manufactured in Australia and sold on or after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, by a taxpayer not being either the manufacturer of those goods or a purchaser of those goods from the manufacturer. (4.) That, in respect of goods noi covered by the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and on the sale value of which it is not provided by that Act that sales tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the rate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 4) 1930-1940, sales tax at the rate of Eight and one-third per centum be imposed upon the sale value of goods manufactured in Australia and sold to a taxpayer who has, on or after the eighth day of September; One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, applied those goods to his own use. (5.) That, in respect of goods not covered by the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and, on the sale value of which it is not provided by that Act that Bales tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the rate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 5) 1930-1946, sales tax at the rate of Eight and one-third per centum be imposed upon the sale value of goods imported into Australia by a taxpayer on or after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine. (6.) That, in respect of goods npt covered by the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and on the sale value of which it is not provided by that Act that sales tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the fate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 6) 1930-1046, Bales tax at the rate of Eight and one-third per centum be imposed upon the sale value of goods imported into Australia by a taxpayer and, on or after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, sold by him or applied by him to his own use. ( 7. ) That, in respect of goods not covered by the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and on the sale value of which it is not provided by that Act that sales tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the rate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 7) 1930-1946, sales tax at the rate of Eight and one-third per centum bc imposed upon the sale value of goods imported into Australia and sold on or after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty -nine, by a taxpayer not being the importer of the goods. (8.) That, in respect of goods not covered bv the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and on the sale value of which it is not provided by that Act that sales tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the rate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 8) 1930-194(1.. sales tax at the rate of Eight and one-third per centum be imposed upon the sale value of goods imported into Australia and sold to a taxpayer who has, on or after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, applied those goods to his own use. (9.) That, in respect of goods not covered by the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act and on the sale value of which it is not provided by that Act that sales tax shall not be payable, in lieu of the rate of tax imposed by the Sales Tax Act (No. 9) 1930-1946, sales tax at the rate of Eight and one-third per centum bc imposed upon the sale value of goods in Australia, including goods which have gone into use or consumption in Australia, leased by a taxpayer to a lessee on or after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and fortynine. (10.) That, for the purposes of the foregoing resolutions, "the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act" means the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act 1935- 1948 as proposed to be amended by the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Bill *1849.* The purpose of these motions is to authorize a reduction of the general rate of sales tax from 10 per cent, to 8-J per cent. The new rate represents a charge of one penny per shilling of the wholesale selling value of goods. The reduction from 10 per cent, to 8^ per cent, will apply to a wide range of goods in general use, and will thus operate to the benefit of the whole community. The reduced rate will apply to sales on and from to-morrow, the 8th September, 1949. The reduction involves an annual loss of revenue amounting to £6,066,000, and the loss for the current financial year is estimated at £4,549,000. Progress reported. {: .page-start } page 48 {:#debate-42} ### SALES TAX (EXEMPTIONS AND CLASSIFICATIONS) BILL 1949 Motion (by **Mr. Dedman)** - *by leave -* agreed to - >That leave be given to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act 1935-1948. Bill presented, and read a first time. {:#subdebate-42-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-42-0-s0 .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr DEDMAN:
Minister for Defence and Minister for Post-war Reconstruction · Corio · ALP -- *by leave* - I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. The purpose of this bill is to provide for certain additional exemptions from sales tax and to remove other specified goods from the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act, thus reducing the rate of tax thereon from 25 per cent. to the new general rate of 81/3 per cent. Particulars of the goods affected are set out in a statement which is being circulated for the information of honorable members. As the result of the omissions now to be made from the Third Schedule, the maximum rate of 25 per cent. will apply only to a very limited field, which will include jewellery, imitation jewellery and precious stones, toilet and beauty preparations and materials, and fur garments. The reduction of the field to which the maximum rate applies will simplify the classification of goods for sales tax purposes and will, therefore, be very welcome to the merchants concerned. The concessions will operate on and from to-morrow, the 8th September, 1949, with two minor exceptions in respect of which earlier commencement is authorized in the bill. In view of the benefits conferred by the bill, it will no doubt be favorably received by all honorable members. The loss of revenue for a full year as a result of the amendments is estimated as £660,000; the loss for the current financial year will be approximately £495,000. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Harbison)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 48 {:#debate-43} ### TARIFF PROPOSALS 1949 {:#subdebate-43-0} #### Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) ; Excise Tariff Amendment (No. 2) ; {:#subdebate-43-1} #### Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) Amendment (No. 1) {:#subdebate-43-2} #### In Committee of Ways and Means: {: #subdebate-43-2-s0 .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD:
Minister for Commerce and Agriculture · Ballarat · ALP -- I move - [Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2).] {: type="1" start="1"} 0. That the Schedule to the Customs Tariff 1933-1948 be amended as hereinafter set out, and that, on and after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, Duties of Customs be collected in pursuance of the Customs Tariff 1933-1948 as so amended. 1. That, without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1.) of these Proposals, the GovernorGeneral may, from time to time by Proclamation declare that, from a time and date specified in the Proclamation, the Intermediate Tariff shall apply to such goods specified in the Proclamation as are the produce or manufacture of any British or foreign country specified in the Proclamation. 2. That on and after the time and date specified in a Proclamation issued in accordance with the last preceding paragraph, the Intermediate Tariff shall apply to such goods specified in the Proclamation as are the produce or manufacture of a British or foreign country specified in that Proclamation. 3. That any Proclamation issued in accordance with paragraph (2.) of these Proposals may, from time to time, be revoked or varied by a further Proclamation, and upon the revocation or variation of the Proclamation, the Intermediate Tariff shall cease to apply to the goods specified in the Proclamation so revoked, or. as the case may bo, the application of the Intermediate Tariff to the goods specified in the Proclamation so varied, shall be varied accordingly. 4. That in these Proposals, unless the contrary intention appears - "Proclamation" means a Proclamation by the Governor-General, or the person for the time being administering the government of the Commonwealth, acting with the advice of the Federal Executive Council, and published in the *Commonwealth of Australia Gazette ;* "the Intermediate Tariff" means the rates of duty set out in the Schedule to those Proposals, in the column headed " Intermediate Tariff", in respect of goods in relation to which the expression is used. [Excise Tariff Amendment (No. 2).] That the Schedule to the Excise Tariff 1921-1948 be amended as hereinafter set out, and that, on andafter the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, Duties of Excise be collected in pursuance of the Excise Tariff 1921-1948 as so amended. {: .page-start } page 51 {:#debate-44} ### EXCISE DUTIES [Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) Amendment (No. 1).] That the Schedule to the Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) 1933-1948 be amended as hereinafter set out and that, on and after the eighth day of September, One thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, Duties of Customs be collected in accordance with the Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) 1933-1948 as so amended. The amendments contained in the tariff proposals that I have just introduced fall into three categories, namely, budget, protective and administrative. In regard to the items of budget significance, the Treasurer **(Mr. Chifley)** in his budget speech has given information to honorable members in respect of the concessions involving customs, excise and primage duties that the Government proposes. The concessions in respect of primage duty and ships' and aircraft stores referred to by the Treasurer will be implemented under the provisions of the Customs Tariff (Primage Duties) Act and the Customs Act respectively. Consequently these concessions do not appear in the tariff proposals before the committee. It is proposed to reduce the duty on wireless valves, under both the customs and the excise tariffs, by ls. a valve. This reduction should have some bearing on the prices charged for these essential components of wireless sets and for the wireless sets themselves. The Government has decided that duties on outside packages should be removed. The operation of this duty, which imposes additional costs on industry, has been reported upon adversely by the Tariff Board. The removal of the duty will facilitate the work of both the Department of Trade and Customs and the importers. The proposal to grant some concessional treatment to passengers bringing into Australia dutiable goods of a limited value for their own personal use or as gifts will relieve passengers of the payment of protective rates of duty on such of the goods as are not imported for purposes of trade. The proposal will also facilitate the work of the Department of Trade and Customs and will ease the congestion at the wharfs when a vessel arrives carrying a large complement of passengers. The proposal is that goods, ordinarily dutiable, up to £30 in value, not being for sale, brought in by a passenger will be admitted free of duty. Dutiable goods in excess of £30 and up to a value of £110 will be entitled to entry at a flat rate of 25 per cent, ad valorem. The operation of the concession has been made subject to departmental by-law, which will provide for flexibility in administration, and adequate safeguards will be taken to ensure that the concession will not be abused. It will be realized that this proposal could provide an incentive for greater tourist traffic. The protective items involved include corsets, fuel injection equipment, cooking stoves, cinematographs and surgical and dental instruments. Although the tariff proposals in respect of these goods do not in each case constitute increased protection to local industry, the incidence of protection has been inquired into by the Tariff Board and the proposed amendments to the items conform to the board's recommendations. In regard to corsets, the rates of duty are unchanged but the item has been widened to include combined garments of which corsets form a part. A new item is proposed to cover fuel injection equipment at protective rates of duty. Equipment of this kind was previously admitted under various items of the tariff at different rates of duty. The duties now proposed are in accordance with the Tariff Board's recommendation. The duties on cooking stoves designed to function on the heat storage principle have bo.en varied in accordance with the recommendation of the Tariff Board. Generally speaking the proposal is that commercial stoves and ranges will be subject to protective rates of duty and domestic types which are not manufactured in Australia at non-protective rates. The Tariff Board in its report on cinematographs has recommended that protective rates of duty should apply where the film width capacity exceeds 9.5 millimetres. Previously, protective rates of duty applied only to cinematographs greater than 17.5 millimetres in width. The proposed rates therefore will assist local industry in the production of the popular 16 millimetre projector. To conform with treaty obligations a consequential amendment is necessary under the Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference). Local manufacturers are now producing certain surgical and dental instruments which were previously admitted under departmental by-law at concessional rates of duty. The Tariff Board in its report said that it felt that local manufacturers should be assisted in respect of the types of instruments made by them by the imposition of the' rates of duty shown in the proposal. The Tariff Board reports covering the various protective items in the proposals now before the committee were tabled in the Parliament by me earlier to-day and are available for perusal by honorable members. The proposals under the heading " Administrative Items " are as follows. Tariff Item 118 (d) (2) has been amended by the addition of the words, " Carpeting, Carpet Mats, Carpet Rugs and Carpet Door Slips ". The item is a non-protective one and it covers types of carpets not produced in Australia. The amendment is proposed merely to overcome classification difficulties. Ornamental figures of the type ordinarily used in the household have been admitted as Statuary under Tariff Item 427 (c) for many years. However, doubt has arisen regarding this classification in view of the reference in item 809 (b) to "Ivory and other ornamental figures ". In order to clarify the position it is proposed to exclude the words, " Ivory and other ornamental figures " from item 309 (b) and to include in item 427 (c) the words, " Figures of the types ordinarily used in the household ". It is proposed to insert an item in the tariff to cover films of a scenic, tourist or travel nature produced or issued by or on behalf of government 'authorities and railway, airway or steamship authorities. The proposal to insert this item in the tariff follows negotiations with Canada for some reciprocal arrangement in regard to these films which are not ordinarily imported for commercial purposes. Canada has already extended this benefit to films produced by the Australian National Film Board, and the proposed action by Australia is therefore a measure of reciprocity. The item is subject to departmental by-law which will provide for flexibility in administration. The tariff provides for free entry under tariff item 373 (a) of goods imported by representatives of overseas countries. It is now proposed that any eligible person who wishes to obtain admission of goods free of duty under this item will be required to agree, before free admission under the item is granted, that in the event of the goods being sold or otherwise disposed of in Australia within a period of two years after the date of entry of the goods, the person will pay the duty which would otherwise have been paid upon importation. The amend ment is so designed that if special circumstances exist the Minister may determine that duty shall not be payable. A number of cases have come under notice in which representatives of overseas countries have imported goods free of duty and have desired subsequently to dispose of them in Australia. However, as the persons obtained free admission of the goods, they have felt that the sale or disposal without the payment of duty would be a breach of the privilege afforded under the item. The amendments under tariff items 410 (b) (2) and 427 (a) covering oil and water-colour paintings and works of art are merely administrative and have been made on legal advice to define more clearly the intention of the items. A summary of alterations showing in detail the amendments to be effected by these tariff proposals and the relative by-laws prescribed has been circulated for the information of honorable members. Progress reported. *Sitting suspended from 63 to 8 p.m.* {: .page-start } page 53 {:#debate-45} ### QUESTION {:#subdebate-45-0} #### NEW GUINEA TIMBER RIGHTS ROYAL COMMISSION Report Debate resumed from the 7th July *(vide* page 2236), on motion by **Mr. Chifley** - >That the following paper be printed: - New Guinea Timber Rights Royal Commission - Report {: #subdebate-45-0-s0 .speaker-JOI} ##### Mr BEALE:
Parramatta .- On the 7th July last, this House debated the report of the New Guinea Timber Rights Royal Commission. On that occasion, the Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward)** began his speech shortly after 8 p.m. He spoke for approximately 75 minutes, with the concurrence of members of the Opposition, without interruption, and he was granted several extensions of time. He was followed by the honorable member for Fawkner **(Mr. Holt).** The VicePresident of the Executive Council **(Mr. Scully)** then secured the adjournment of the debate. Subsequently, the Prime. Minister **(Mr. Chifley)** stated that he accepted full responsibility for the decision to adjourn the debate. If, therefore, after the lapse of two months, this matter is revived and things are said which might very well have been said and disposed of on the 7th July, the Government is entirely responsible. This debate arises out of a gross scandal concerning the attempted acquisition of timber rights in the Bulolo Valley in New Guinea, which territory was under the administration of the Minister for External Territories. Therefore, it is fair to say that this is a gross scandal arising in connexion with the Minister's own administration, whether one regards him as directly or indirectly responsible. I shall briefly describe the sequence of events. In December, 1947, certain disclosures were made to the police authorities, and forgery proceedings were instituted against **Mr. J.** S. Garden. First, there was a preliminary hearing before a magistrate, and Garden was committed for trial. Then there was a hearing of a forgery charge before a judge and a jury, and Garden was found guilty. He had to be found guilty. On his own admission, he was guilty of forgery, and it did not, matter what view the jury might have taken about the evidence of the witnesses for the Crown, and, in particular, the evidence of the Minister for External Territories, who was the chief witness for the Crown. Notwithstanding what view any jury might have taken, **Mr. Garden** had to be found guilty. That hearing was followed by the trial of **Mr. J.** S. Garden, his son, Harcourt Garden, Ray Parer and one other on a charge of conspiracy. It is fair to say that if the Gardens and Parer had been found guilty, their conviction would have vindicated the Minister. The Minister himself admitted that in his evidence. For his edification, I shall read the passage which appears on page 1149 of the transcript of the conspiracy trial. The Minister was asked the following question: - >And you know that "Jock" Garden's conviction in these proceedings would be an exoneration of you? The Minister replied as follows: - >Yes, I would think that to bo so. If the conviction of Garden would have been an exoneration of the Minister, it is equally true to say that the acquittal of Garden and his fellows would have been a reflection upon the Minister. He was not prepared to admit that, but I put it to this House and to the country that it is irresistible, as a matter of inference, that if a jury found these people not guilty of conspiracy, there was an obvious reflection upon the chief witness for the prosecution, the Minister himself. Hence, the royal commission was appointed. It is said that the Minister asked for the investigation. It may be so. He had to ask for it because, at that stage, a very grave cloud hung over his name, and a royal commission was necessary before it could be cleared. The royal commissioner was **Mr. .Justice** Ligertwood. I know him to be an able and honorable man. The terms upon which he was asked to investigate this matter are interesting, and they may be paraphrased as follow: - What was the actual transaction which took place between Hancock and Gore Limited and these other people ? Was the Minister for External Territories a party to any such transaction? I underline the word " party " because it is a limiting word. Did the Minister sign any grant of a concession to any persons? Did he get financial benefits directly or indirectly out of the transaction? Finally, arising out of the accusations which had been made against a man named Urquhart, His Honour was asked to consider whether the Minister had any financial interest in the firm of Sydney Pincombe Proprietary Limited? I should explain that Urquhart, the managing director of that firm, had been appointed to that position on the recommendation of the Minister, having been for years a close political friend of the Minister. The royal commission's report is a vindication of the Minister, and that is not surprising, having regard to the terms of the commission. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- The honorable member should be fair. {: .speaker-JOI} ##### Mr BEALE: -- I am endeavouring to be very fair. If the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture **(Mr. Pollard)** can point out to me any time, particularly in this speech, when I am not being scrupulously fair, he is welcome to do so. It is not surprising that the Minister for External Territories was vindicated because conviction of Him would depend upon the witness, **Mr. J.** S. Garden. Garden was a convicted criminal. He had been found guilty of forgery. He was admitted to have been a thief of other people's money. It is not surprising that in respect of those charges of corruption against the Minister, the judge preferred to believe the Minister rather than Garden, who was the chief witness. I want to say here and now that every honorable member on this side of the House is relieved and glad that that finding was brought in. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- Not many people will believe that. {: .speaker-JOI} ##### Mr BEALE: -- I am not so mealymouthed as to say that I am necessarily relieved because I have an affection for the Minister. No honorable member on this side of the chamber will take that view at all. I know that ever since I have been a member of this Parliament, and for many years prior to that, the Minister, above all others, has lived by slander and calumny of members inside this House and of public persons outside it. There is, indeed, a sort of cosmic justice in the fact that, having for so many years blackguarded and slandered so many people, he should have had to suffer the breath of scandal across his own name. Notwithstanding that, we are glad that the royal commissioner has brought in this finding, because all of us in this House, I believe - ^certainly all honorable members on this side of the chamber, and certainly nearly everybody on the other side - has a deep feeling for the institution of the Parliament. We should be grieved to think that a finding was brought in that supported a charge of corruption against any member of this House, because we respect this institution. We know that freedom in this country cannot survive if the Parliament, as an institution, is besmirched and destroyed. So we are glad that the royal commissioner has made this finding. There had to be a royal commission, because the evidence that was given in this scandalous matter from time to time over a period of eighteen months revealed h most fantastic state of affairs. For instance, it revealed that an ex-politician, " Jock " Garden, who, by the way, had been a leading Communist and who, according to the evidence, still had a current card as a member of the Communist party at the time of his arrest, was a sort of liaison officer, whatever that may be, in the Department of Labour and National Service. He had held that position for some years, and had been paid a large salary out of the public revenues of this country. His duties were nebulous and obscure. Indeed, they were highly mysterious. But there he had been for years. He was a crony of the Minister, and was a prominent officer of the electoral council of East Sydney. He was a close friend, and, indeed, an intimate of the Minister. The evidence shows that he was in and out of the Minister's room. When I make that statement I refer, not to the Minister for Labour and National Service, but to the Minister for External Territories who has been under this charge. **Mr. Garden** had access to the Minister and to his letterheads. The Minister said that Garden had stolen the letterheads. It may well be that Garden stole the letterheads; but he had access to them and he went freely in and out of the Minister's room. It is clear from the evidence that this man, Garden, was negotiating, in some capacity or other, apparently on behalf of Parer, so that Parer might obtain the grant of a concession for a timber lease at Bulolo in New Guinea. We know that Parer waa attempting to sell, or had sold it to Hancock and Gore Limited for a large sum of money. It is clear that this utterly disreputable man, Garden, was freely negotiating and pressing the claims of Parer with the Minister from time to time. It is clear from the evidence, as I shall prove in a moment, that he was actually drafting letters for the Minister to sign, that were to be used in connexion, with this very matter. Irrespective of what complexion is put upon the matter it is clear that by one device or another he had been carrying on a most gigantic fraud successfully and undetected for no less than three and a half years. On these facts there had to be a royal commission, but it is obvious that the terms of reference of the royal commission were utterly too narrow. Questions of administration, of how it was possible to conceal this fraud for so long, of how far the Minister knew or ought to have known what was going on, and of what the real relationship with Garden and other people in this matter was, and other questions, were all matters that were not covered in the terms of reference. Taking a scrupulously narrow view of those terms, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood did not inquire .into them or make any rinding upon them. That brings me to a matter in respect of which the Minister, in his speech on the 7 th July, made reference to myself. I remind the House that the honorable gentleman spoke for 75 minutes. He was granted several extensions of time, and the greater part of his speech consisted of his personal views of members of this House and of certain members of the public outside of the House. According to *Hansard* of the 7th July, at page 2220, the Minister said - >Another lawyer member of the Opposition, the honorable member for Parramatta **(Mr. Beale),** went a little further than some of his colleagues. He said . . . {: .speaker-JTF} ##### Mr Burke: -- I rise to order. Is the honorable member for Parramatta **(Mr. Beale)** in order quoting from *Hansard* for the current session? {: #subdebate-45-0-s1 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- The honorable member is not entitled to do so. {: .speaker-JOI} ##### Mr BEALE: -- If the honorable member for Perth **(Mr. Burke)** cares to take that point of order it is all right by me, because I can remember what the Minister said. If the honorable gentleman thinks that he will do his ministerial colleague any good in this House and with the listening public, he can have it that way. On the 7th July, the Minister charged me with lying to the House when, on the 3rd June, 1948, I made a reply to the Prime Minister. The House will remember that the Prime Minister had called **Mr. Isaacs** a " larrikin lawyer "- Government Members. - Hear, hear! {: .speaker-JOI} ##### Mr BEALE: -- Obviously honorable members on the Government side of the House cannot " take it ". I rose to defend the reputation and honour of my colleague at the bar, who is not able to defend himself here. Once again members of the Australian Labour party, in their coward's castle, were slandering a person-, who could not defend himself. I thought it proper to defend him. At that timethe royal commission had not commenced its investigations. The criminal proceedings were still going on, yet the Minister was still holding his job. I asserted that I, like other honorable members,, hoped that it would ultimately be found that the Minister was not guilty of impropriety. But I also pointed out that grave charges had been made against him,, and that although some of them rested' on conjecture, others had a basis of fact and yet he still remained in office. One of the allegations I made was that Garden was exercising authority and negotiating in this Bulolo matter. The Minister, during his speech on the 7th July this year, said that I was a liar. It used to be said that that kind of language was unparliamentary. However, we have heard it used so frequently by honorable members on the Government side of the House that it is becoming respectable by sheer iteration. I propose to-night to accept the challenge that he made. He invited me to find any evidence at all which would support the view that, as a matter of fact or inference, Garden had been exercising authority or negotiating in the Bulolo matter. Here are some facts. Since 1944 Garden had been trying, on behalf of Parer, to get a timber cutting concession in the Bulolo Valley. He had countless talks with the Minister and was the Minister's crony and intimate. The Minister's appointments book for the relevant period contains no less than 57 entries relating to his interviews with Garden. It is significant that time and time again those interviews were followed by departmental action within a day or two. On at least two occasions Garden drafted letters that were signed by or sent out by the Minister, or which were intended to be used, and were used in connexion with the negotiations which were then proceeding. Evidence of all of these things was before the jury in the conspiracy trial and the jury found Garden and1 his associates not guilty of conspiracy, even though Garden himself was already a convicted criminal in relation to the forgery matter. I shall refer to two letters. One dated the 2nd June. 1947. addressed to Garden, reads - >Dear Jock, > >I regret to advise you that I am not in a position to let you know anything more at this juncture regarding the desire of **Mr. R.** Rarer to secure a timber lease in New Guinea. The whole question of Government policy regarding the timber resources in New Guinea is at present being reviewed. As you are aware I will be absent from Australia for the next few months, but expect to be in a position to furnish you with further advice shortly after my return. > >Yours faithfully, (Sgd.) E. J. Ward. The evidence is that that letter was written by the Minister, at Garden's request, to show to Parer, because Parer had been pestering Garden. The evidence also is that Parer was interested only in Bulolo. In case it should be suggested that this is not the evidence, I shall read the relevant passages from page 297 of the transcript of evidence which gives the Minister's replies in cross-examination when he was pressed by **Mr. Isaacs.** When he was first asked about this letter the Minister denied that it was for the purpose of showing to Parer. He was then shown admissions that he had made in the police court proceedings, when he admitted that - > **Mr. Garden** said he had been pestered by Parer and he wanted to show him that the matter was being considered. When asked - >And he wanted a letter to show that it was being considered? the Minister admitted - > >That is correct. That was a letter which was false. He would only say that it was inaccurate. It was quite untrue for him to say that the whole question of Government policy regarding the timber reserves in New Guinea was being reviewed because it had already been pointed out by the Minister that Bulolo was " out ". The whole Question of timber policy with relation to New Guinea was not being reviewed. In case honorable members might think that there may be some misunderstanding about this aspect of the matter, the following appears at page 298 of the transcript of evidence : - {: type="A" start="Q"} 0. And of course at that date, 2nd June, 1947, in your view, Bulolo was definitely out? 1. Yes. On page 299 the following passage appears : - {: type="A" start="Q"} 0. The inclusion of the word " whole " makes the paragraph wholly untrue, does it not? 1. I would say that it was inaccurate. That was as far as the Minister would go. A little later on this passage occurs - {: type="A" start="Q"} 0. You knew as a fact that the whole question of Government policy was not being reviewed. 1. That is correct. The Minister has thus been convicted out of his own mouth of writing a letter at the instance of Garden so that Garden might show it to Parer in order to mislead Parer or to shut Parer up because he was pestering him. The letter was a false letter, yet he dictated it at Garden's request and permitted it to go out from his office and to be shown to Parer. Is it any wonder that the jury acquitted Parer and the Gardens of the conspiracy charge ? Now for the second letter. On the 6th December, 1947, the clouds were gathering and this matter was coming to its wretched close, because shortly afterwards the whole thing burst and the police were called in. On the 6th December there was an interview between the Minister, Garden and Forshaw, who was the logging manager for Hancock and Gore Limited. That company was still pressing to obtain this concession. Forshaw wanted finality. He was told that he could not have Bulolo. He asked then whether he could have the Wariata Valley, and he pressed for a reply. A day or two later Garden wrote a draft letter on the back of one of the letterheads of the East Sydney federal electoral council letterheads. He wanted the Minister to sign it so that he could send it to Forshaw to shut Forshaw up and keep him quiet. For the Minister's edification I mention that that letter was exhibit "OO " in the conspiracy trial. {: .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr Drakeford: -- Oh, oh ! {: .speaker-JOI} ##### Mr BEALE: -- There will be a few more cries of " Oh, oh ! " when I read the contents of the letter that was sent. The Minister did not like the draft letter very much, and he deliberately wrote one of his own. That letter was exhibit "HH" in the conspiracy trial. It is dated the 10th December, 1947, and reads as follows : - Dear Mr. Forshaw, Regarding the interview that you had with me on Saturday last concerning the desire of your firm to commence timber-getting operations in the External Territories, I desire to advise you that the matter has been receiving my attention. I have now decided to leave it in abeyance until I visit the territories next year. I want to know why that letter was written by the Minister at Garden's instance. It was obviously an attempt to stall this matter off. Why was the letter written at Garden's request? What was the necessity for it? Bulolo was " out ". The Minister was disclaiming any knowledge of this matter, yet, at Garden's request, he was apparently prepared to write this letter to Forshaw, the logging manager of Hancock and Gore Limited, and of which the Minister said he knew nothing. Having regard to the evidence of the intimate relationship that existed between the Minister and Garden, and bearing in mind the two letters to which I have referred, which prove that the Minister wrote the letters that Garden asked him to write, although he knew one of them at least to be false, the letters being written with the express purpose either of misleading a third party or of stalling another party off, is there any escape whatever from the very moderate proposition that I put forward in this House in July, 1948, which was that Garden was exercising some sort of authority in the Bulolo matter? I am aware that some of the matters that we have been discussing bore a different complexion when they were considered by the royal commission. By that time there had been four hearings and the Minister had had a chance to sort this matter out, so to speak, and to present his case in a more favorable light than he may have been able to do at first. Perhaps the element of surprise was no longer present, or it may be that more facts had been discovered. It does not matter. Matters were presented to the royal commission in a somewhat different light, but I remind the House that there were two significant differences between the proceedings of the royal commission and the proceedings of the conspiracy trial. The first difference is that Garden was not legally represented at the royal commission. The money had run out and the Gardens conducted their own defence. Being discredited persons, they did not get much of a chance in the matter, and, doubtless, they conducted their defence badly. The second difference is that the counsel who were briefed by the Crown in the proceedings before the royal commissioner were those who had conducted the prosecution on behalf of the Crown in two previous trials and had as their chief witness the Minister himself. The counsel who appeared to assist the royal commissioner, that is to say, to protect the interests of the public, were counsel who had for months before, of necessity, been supporting the Minister in criminal trials as their chief witness and a witness of truth. I say that the Prime Minister had no right to engage those counsel. Those are two very significant differences between the two sets of proceedings. That is how things are managed when the Government determines to have a royal commission on its own limited terms. The terms were not only limited in the sense of terms of reference but they were alsolimited in every other respect. I have referred to the evidence that had been given at the conspiracy trial. On that evidence the jury acquitted the defendants of criminal conspiracy. Is it any wonder that the Australian public are completely dissatisfied with a royal commission that left the whole matter of the administration of the Minister's department entirely out of account? We are glad that the charge of corruption has entirely gone, but we say that it is quite unsatisfactory that the public should not know how the Minister could possibly have remained deceived for so long,, and how and why he should have had this disreputable man Garden lurking in his office for so long. In this House last year the Prime Minister **(Mr. Chifley)** made a shabby charge against **Mr. Isaacs,** a member of my profession. On the 7th July, the Minister made a speech upon this matter. We welcomed the chance that was given to the Minister to defend himself to the utmost or to make a full explanation, yet in the long speech that the Minister delivered then, a great deal of time was taken up by blackguarding **Mr. Isaacs,** who was not, and could not, be here to defend himself. Has the Minister any cause for complaint? I remind the House that very early in these proceedings it was the Minister who went from Canberra to the witness box in Sydney, thinking that he could behave himself in .a court in the same way as he behaves himself in this House, that is by slandering everybody. From, the witness box he called **Mr. Isaacs** a liar and made a sneering reference to the fact that **Mr. Isaacs** was a Jew. In those circumstances, is it to be wondered at if **Mr. Isaacs** imported some asperity and strength into his criticisms of, and attacks upon, the Minister? The Minister brought it upon his own head. Nevertheless, **Mr. Isaacs** carried on with dignity. I am not without experience of these matters. My view is the view of the members of my profession generally. It is that **Mr. Isaacs** conducted himself in those trials fairly, in the face of great provocation. The trials were presided over by judges who would have pulled him up if he had misbehaved himself. Advocates are governed by a strict code of behaviour. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. **Mr. Isaacs** was not pulled up. I say, therefore, that is it overwhelmingly obvious that he conducted himself fairly and honorably as counsel. It is obvious that he also presented his clients' cases very ably. The damage that was done to the Minister by his cross-examination and the verdict of the jury in the conspiracy trial prove that that is so. I remind the House also that **Mr. Isaacs** was appearing for men whose liberty was in danger. He had the right and the duty to use his utmost endeavours, within the rules of advocacy that have been in existence for centuries, to secure the acquittal of his clients. In the second trial he did secure the acquittal of his clients. I shall conclude on this note. This wretched, squalid matter contains two lessons for all of us. The first is, that he who lives by the sword, shall verily die by the sword. The Minister has lived by slander and calumny all his political life. Now his turn has come, and he has suffered grievously because of it. Unfortunately, as he showed on the 7th July in this House, he has not learned his lesson, because, in his turn, directly he got the opportunity, he again embarked upon vituperation and bitter attacks on people who could not defend themselves. {: #subdebate-45-0-s2 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -Order! The honorable member's time has expired. {: #subdebate-45-0-s3 .speaker-L1A} ##### Mr WILLIAMS:
Robertson .- The honorable member for Parramatta **(Mr. Beale)** has made a most regrettable contribution to the debate. He began his speech by telling the House that he is pleased with the decision of the royal commission. He said that he regards the royal commissioner, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood, as an upright and honorable judge, and that he is glad of the judge's decision. Then he proceeded to make a speech from which the only inference that can be drawn is that he is attempting to throw doubt upon His Honour's findings. Let us remember that the Minister was completely exonerated by the royal commission. That fact cannot be overemphasized. The case was a long matter, which dragged on in the courts of law for many months, and there is little to be gained now by raking over the ashes of dead fires. But I consider that, in justice to the Minister, the Parliament and the country ought to be reminded again of His Honour's findings. The royal commissioner said in his report - >The Minister was not in any way party to the transaction or to the fraud. > >The Minister did not sign, or authorize John Smith Garden to sign, any notification that the grant to Raymond Parer of any timber licence in the Bulolo Valley had been, or would be, approved by the Minister. > >The Minister was not promised any financial benefit in relation to the transaction and did not receive, either directly or indirectly, any financial benefit therefrom or in relation thereto. > >The Minister is not and was not financially interested, either directly or indirectly, in Sydney Pincombe Proprietary Limited, and has not received, either directly or indirectly, any financial benefit from that company. A copy of the report of the royal commission was supplied to every honorable member, but it was left to the honorable member for Parramatta to try to re-open this matter for use as propaganda, not only against the Minister, but also against the Government. He has produced all this humbug here, starting off, I repeat, by informing honorable members, in one breath that he is glad of the commission's decision, and going on in the next breath to cast aspersions on the Minister as well as to argue against the finding of the royal commissioner, and to draw a red herring across the trail by introducing the name of **Mr. Isaacs,** whose religion, by the way, was not the object of any reflection by the Minister at any time during the proceedings. Whatever we say at this late stage about this matter, we cannot escape the written report of the judge, who sat on the Bench for many months sifting the evidence and hearing the crossexamination. His Honour said, on page 36 of his report - >In marked contrast to the evidence of Garden was that of the Minister. He was in the witness box for four days and he gave his evidence openly, frankly and with an air of sincerity and truth. I see no reason to doubt any portion of his evidence. Even in matters which told against him he was frank. For instance, knowing that I was disposed to be critical, as I still am, of Garden being kept in the position of liaison officer in the circumstances I have mentioned, he said that he had added his personal request to the written communications received by **Mr. Holloway** from the members of Parliament. He admitted that he was over-patient with Garden's importunity on behalf of Parer and stated frankly that his reason was that he did not want to offend a man who was his Campaign Secretary and had influence with the Unions. It was, however, this relationship between the Minister and Garden, which, both before me and in the criminal proceedings, gave rise to so much of the cross-examination on the basis that his partiality towards Garden called for an explanation. The only motive .that Garden suggested was that the Minister was party to the Hancock and Gore transaction. That motive must, of course, be rejected and with its rejection there is no difficulty in accepting the Minister's explanation. No other motive has been suggested. If there had been any other motive going to the Minister's credit, I feel sure that Garden and his advisers would have been quick to suggest it. I should also add that the personal relationship between the Minister and Garden coupled with his office of' liaison officer was a factor which enabled Farrell in negotiating the Hancock and Gore transaction to build up Garden as a " very important personage who wields an enormous amount of power in Australia ". On page 6 of the report the judge said - >I should say a word as to the evidence relating to the Minister's financial integrity. Every witness, who had personal knowledge of him, spoke most highly of his standing in this respect. While one's experience in the > >Law Courts makes one chary of accepting: testimonials at their face value - indeed in this very inquiry three testimonials were produced to me which in retrospect read very ironically - nevertheless, one can fairly quote' what J. S. Garden says of the Minister's reputation, he being the person who brings thecharge of corruption. J. S. Garden, in his evidence before mc, said that the Minister's reputation throughout the community was one of complete personal integrity; that he was aman who never sought graft; and that apart from his allegations in ' the present transaction, he could not point to any matter wherethe Minister either sought or received or offered to accept any illicit pecuniary gain for himself out of anything he did or failed to do as a Member or Minister. That, said' Garden, was the Minister's reputation throughout the country. > >Garden expressed the same opinion in hisanswers to three of the questions, which wereput to him bv Wilks on the 22nd December, 1047, only a week after the discovery of thefraud. I quote the questions and answers - > >Did you at any time tell Farrell or Parer that moneys would have to be paid to obtain this concession, to certain officials? > >No. > >Did you ever entertain the thought that you would have to pay **Mr. Ward** moneys for this concession if granted? > >No. > >Are you satisfied of your own knowledge, after years of association with **Mr. Ward,** that such a thing as paying him moneys for the issue of a concession is not possible? > >Not possible under any circumstances. Nobody could offer him anything under any circumstances, not even a postage stamp. He is the most conscientious, honest and sincere man I have dealt with in my years. Garden said that of the Minister when he was interviewed by Detective-Inspector Wilks shortly after the disclosure of this matter, and the judge, having sifted the evidence most carefully after months of hearing, made his determination which is contained in his written report that was tabled in this House, a copy of which was supplied to every honorable member and accepted by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr;. Menzies) and every other honorable member, apparently with the exception of the honorable member for Parramatta. It is regrettable that at this stage the slightest doubt should be thrown upon thefindings. It is not fair to His Honour;, and it is most reprehensible for an honorable member to attempt now to raise arguments against the propriety of the findings. I had no intention of engaging in this debate, but I considered that it wag most unjust for the honorable member to rise in his place and produce the ridiculous arguments and display of humbug that he has exhibited to this House to-night. {: #subdebate-45-0-s4 .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY:
Richmond .- This debate is on the report of the royal commission on the New Guinea timber lease transactions. In many respects, it would have been better if the matter bad been forgotten after it was discussed during the last sessional period. However, the Government has put it on the business paper for to-day as the first item for consideration, and members of the Opposition would be failing in their duty if they declined to say anything about a matter which cost one business firm in Australia £50,000 by fraud, and which has, no doubt, cost the taxpayers of Australia another £50,000 for legal expenses. In the circumstances, therefore, the Opposition is fully justified in discussing the relevant facts. Let me say, in the first place, that I accept **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood's findings regarding the probity of the Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward).** At no stage did I doubt that the Minister would be cleared. I have sufficient faith in his good sense to believe that he would not have fallen for the crude kind of fraud which was revealed in the evidence before the commission, and I expressed the opinion outside this Parliament that the Minister was not concerned in the fraud. However, there are many matters which call for criticism, and which justify the condemnation of the Minister and of the Government apart from any allegations of corruption. I have been interested in New Guinea affairs for quite a long time, and from time *to time* I have pressed in this House for an investigation into circumstances associated with the administration of the territory. On the 28th November of last year, only a month before the New Guinea scandal broke, I moved a formal motion for the adjournment of the House to enable me to discuss what I termed the maladministration of New Guinea. In closing my speech on that occasion, I said - >If statements made about conditions in New Guinea can be refuted, let them be refuted not by an *em parte* statement by the Minister, but by a select committee of the Parliament - or better still, a royal commission. Thus, just about a month before the Bulolo scandal broke, I had pressed for the appointment of a royal commission to investigate the administration of the territory. Alternatively, I asked for the appointment of a parliamentary select committee, representative of all parties, to investigate the needs of the territory. My proposal was abruptly brushed aside by the Prime Minister **(Mr. Chifley).** I do not believe that one member of the Parliament, apart from the Minister for External Territories and the member forParramatta **(Mr. Beale),** has been to New Guinea. I applied for a permit to go there, and the permit was granted. However, because of the conditions of travel for a private individual, I found that it would not be convenient for me to make the trip. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- The honorable member should now refer *to the* subject before the Chair. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- The subject before the Chair relates to New Guinea and the report of the royal commission. I suggest that if my proposal had been accepted the timber lease scandal would have been exposed long before it was brought to light because undoubtedly, during an inquiry of the kind for which I asked, some one would have said something about the timber concession. On the 14th October, 1947 - that is, more than twelve months before the scandal broke - I directed a question about **Mr. "** Jock " Garden to the Minister for Labour and National Service **(Mr. Holloway).** I had a suspicion that **Mr. Garden** was not discharging the duties for which he was being paid. The question I asked the *Minister* was as follows : - >Can the Minister inform me whether **Mr. Jock** Garden is attached to the Department of Labour or the Department of Transport? If the former, what is the nature of his duties? Is it a fact that **Mr. Garden** is now, and has for some time past, occupied an office on the eighth floor of the Commonwealth Bank, Sydney? The Minister replied in these terms - > **Mr. J.** S. Garden is a member of the staff of my department. He occupied that position long before I began to administer the department. His duties involve maintaining contact with employers and trade unionists and assisting to settle industrial disputes. He is a very useful and helpful officer. He occupies a very small room in the Commonwealth Bank Building, Sydney, because he can there keep in close contact with everybody whom I want him to contact. There might have been another meaning to those words. Certainly, **Mr. Garden** was in a position that enabled him to maintain close contact with those with whom he wanted to keep in touch. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood stated on page 7 of his report - >If Garden had been simply a liaison officer with the unions, he would no doubt, have been given accommodation at the A.P.A. Building, to which the Department of Labour and National Service had been removed, but apparently his duties were such that he was useful to the Federal members as well. He was allowed to remain on the eighth floor of the Commonwealth Bank Building, and was assigned a room across the passage from the Minister's suite. This proximity of his office to **Mr. Ward's** suite had several effects which proved most unfortunate in relation to the Hancock and Gore transaction. In the first place Garden having previously been a member of the Minister's personal staff, was able to continue his friendship with the Minister's secretaries and stenographers. Further on, His Honour stated - >I set out these facts by way of narrative only. They are necessary to a full understanding of how Farrell and Garden were able to; work the fraud. I am not in a position to criticize them, and I refrain from doing so. To do justice in any such criticism would require a separate inquiry as to Garden's work as a liaison officer and as to how far the exigencies of the military and industrial position required the retention of his services. One can be pardoned, however, for doubting the efficacy of Garden's work as a liaison officer during the three and a half years in which he was engaged in this fraud. It was during that time that I asked the Minister for Labour and National Service what Garden's duties were, and he gave me the answer which I have read. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood, however, said that he doubted whether Garden was worth anything at all. He also pointed out that **Mr. Garden** was a member of the Communist party in the early days of its existence in Australia. As a matter of fact, I had gone into this matter when the Banking case was being heard and that was before the Garden case broke, I then discovered that "Jock" Garden was the founder of the Communist party in Australia. He was the party's original secretary, or president. He is the only Australian who sat with Lenin, Trotsky and Zinovieff on the Third International. He held the highest Communist honour that any Australian could ever aspire to, a seat on the supreme council with Lenin himself. We were told that Garden had dropped the Communist party ; but let us examine the facts of his career. I want to emphasize the link which this man formed between the Communist party and the Australian Labour party. We were told that Garden had been removed from the Labour party because no person who is a Communist can belong to the Labour party. At the same time, we shall see how he gained a position which enabled him to perpetrate a fraud upon a company and embarrass the Minister for External Territories and the Government in this matter. In June, 1921, **Mr. Garden** attended a conference in Melbourne at which the Minister for Labour and National Service, who was not then a Minister, presided'. I refer to the Congress of the Australasian Council of Trades Unions. At that conference **Mr. Garden** sponsored a resolution which substituted for the No. 1 objective of the Australian Labour party - " The cultivation of an Australian sentiment " - the objective of " The socialization of industry, production, distribution and exchange". **Mr. Garden** was the author of that resolution. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order ! I do not wish to spoil the honorable member's enjoyment, but he must confine his remarks to the question before the Chair. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- I am not out for enjoyment. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- The honorable member must connect his remarks with the question before the Chair. No reference is made in the report of **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood to the matters with which the honorable member is now dealing. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- -The whole of the report before the House is based upon Garden's fraud. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood devotes several pages of his report to the history of Garden. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -Order! The honorable member must connect his remarks with the paper before the House. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- I am endeavouring to do so, because the whole foundation of this case is based on the fact that Garden occupied a certain position and because of that fact was able to perpetrate this fraud. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood makes that point over and over again. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order ! I cannot allow the debate to extend to matters which are not relevant to the paper before the Chair. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- Perhaps I shall be in order if I read the report insofar as it deals with Garden. For instance, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood states on page 6 of n1s report - >John Smith Garden was born at Lossiemouth, Scotland. He is 66 years old. He was ordained in Scotland as a clergyman . . . *In* 191!) he formed the Communist party in Australia and in 1922, having been elected a member of the World Executive of the Community party, he attended a Communist Conference at Moscow. Those facts are set out in the report. I am linking up Garden's affiliations, as **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood did, and showing how he was able to get a foothold on the Minister's doorstep and thus gain the opportunity to perpetrate this fraud. However, **Mr. Deputy Speaker,** if you will not allow me to proceed along those lines, all I can do is to point out, as the report states, that although **Mr. Garden** says he left the Communist party in 1934, and in spite of the fact that we are told that the constitution of the Australian Labour Party debars any Communist from membership, Detective Inspector Wilks said in evidence that when he searched Garden's office just after this case broke towards the end of 1948, he found there an up-to-date Communist membership ticket in Garden's name. One can only conclude that all this talk we hear about Communists resigning from the Labour party and being debarred from membership of that party is simply designed to mislead the public. The whole of the facts of this case are a reflection first upon the Minister in engaging Garden in the position he held and in giving him the opportunity to perpetrate this fraud which, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood says, he could not otherwise have perpetrated. I have little to say on behalf of the firm of Hancock and Gore Limited. Obviously, it deserved the criti cism which the judge levelled against it. However, when a firm writes a letter to a Minister and directs it to the Minister's official address and that letter finds its way into the hands of Garden, it is very difficult for any one to have official transactions with such a Minister. As the evidence in this case showed, Hancock and Gore Limited in the closing stages of this deal wrote to the Minister's proper address, hut Garden got their letter and tampered with it. I do not say that the Minister was " in it ", but Garden had that opportunity presented to him. because of the set-up of the Minister's office and administration. Garden had an office opposite the Minister's office and he held that office as a member of the staff of the Minister for Labour and National Service. But he was not really a liaison officer for that Minister. He drew the salary in respect of that position, but his real job was that of secretary of the Labour Electoral Council in the electorate of East Sydney. That was what he was paid for, and, as the evidence showed, the payment of his salary was a misuse of Government funds. The evidence also showed that the Minister for Labour and National Service exercised very little control or supervision over Garden. As a matter of fact, he was left completely to his own devices. When the Minister for Labour and National Service gave his reply in this House two years ago to my question on what Garden was doing he must have known that it was an incorrect statement of the facts. That is revealed in the report now before the House. When a man who founded the Communist party in Australia can get into a position on the doorstep of a Minister, and when evidence is given before a royal commission that the same person is still a Communist, a need is revealed for a very searching investigation into the Communist party in Australia in relation to its infiltration in high governmental spheres. I have no doubt that other cases similar to this would be revealed as the result of such an investigation. In view of your ruling, **Mr. Deputy Speaker,** I cannot deal with several aspects of this case which I had intended to discuss. Therefore, I shall content myself by saying that this case merits the criticism of the Opposition in relation to the facts that I have mentioned. Certainly, the Minister for External Territories brought this trouble upon his own shoulders as the result of the way in which he administered his department. The royal commission has found the Minister to be innocent of any fraud; and I believe that that finding is quite correct. But some of the associates of the Minister have not come out of this inquiry so well. I do not think that anybody will believe, as the judge was apparently prepared to believe, that **Mr. Urquhart** went to thirteen race meetings and had thirteen winning days in a row. Yet that is what happened, according to **Mr.** Urquhart's evidence. Ask any punter in Australia whether he has had the good fortune to back winners on thirteen race days in a row. All of us would take up punting if it were as easy as that to pick the winners.. Some of the claims made by the associates of the Minister must be studied with a little common sense and we must draw our own conclusions. Undoubtedly there were matters which, under the terms of reference, the judge was not permitted to probe. One of them was **Mr.** Urquhart's activities. However, I do not think that the Minister was personally involved in them. Finally, there should be, and I trust that there will be, a tightening up of the administration of the Department of Transport and the Department of External Territories which will prevent the Minister's stationery from being used to defraud any person of a sum of money, whether it be small or substantial. The letter on the basis of which the £50,000 was paid by Hancock and Gore Limited is headed " Commonwealth of Australia. Minister for Transport and External Territories ". It was addressed to **Mr. Ray** Parer and informed him that he had been granted a licence. Only the fact that the Minister's letterhead was used and that letters addressed to the Minister in reply were intercepted by Garden, who had full access to the Minister's office, permitted this matter to go as far as it did. I join with the honorable member for Parramatta **(Mr. Beale)** in stating that I am glad that the ultimate report of the royal commission has exonerated a Minister of this House, because the discrediting of a Minister of the Crown would bring discredit on the whole institution of the Parliament. I congratulate the Minister on his clearance and I hope that as the result of this inquiry there will be a very strict tightening up of the administration of the Government in this country. {: #subdebate-45-0-s5 .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
Barker · ALP -- This debate arises out of a report of a royal commission which was tabled in the Parliament a couple of months ago but it owes its true origin to the relations which existed between the Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward)** and a former member of this House, **Mr. J.** S. Garden. **Mr. Garden** was appointed to the staff of the Minister in 1941 or early in 1942 when he held the portfolio of Labour and National Service. On several occasions thereafter honorable members on this side of the House saw fit to challenge the wisdom of that appointment. When they inquired about the duties that were being performed by **Mr. Garden** on behalf of the Minister they were informed in somewhat flowery language that **Mr. Garden** was performing a really great national service for the Government .and for the Minister. Subsequently, when the Minister declined to disclose to a royal commission any of the evidence which he alleged he possessed on " the Brisbane line " affair, he was suspended from duty by the Prime Minister of the day and he was not re-appointed to the portfolio of Labour and National Service. It appears, however, that **Mr. Garden's** salary was paid by the Department of Labour and National Service, or should I say by the taxpayers of Australia through that department although **Mr. Garden** remained in very close proximity to the Minister for External Territories. Despite Opposition protests, and despite inquiries made by Opposition members about the duties performed by **Mr. Garden,** and the usefulness of those duties, this position was ' maintained until the storm broke. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood's report contains illuminating history of **Mr. Garden's** activities in more than one walk of life. After setting out the means by which Farrell Bud Garden were able to work the fraud, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood said ; I am not in a position to criticize them, and I refrain from doing so. To do justice in any such criticism would require a separate inquiry as to Garden's work as a liaison officer and as to how far the exigencies of the military and industrial position required the retention of 3iis services. One can be pardoned, however, for doubting the efficacy of Garden's work as a liaison officer during the three and a half years in which he was engaged in tins fraud. *No* attempt has been made by the Chifley Government to institute an inquiry along the lines suggested by **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood. I direct attention to the very serious discrepancy between the terms of reference handed to **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood aud those handed by the Prime Minister of Great Britain to **Mr. Justice** Lynskey, about the same time, when he was directed to inquire into the activities of a junior member of the British Cabinet, **Mr. J.** W. Belcher. As the result of **Mr. Justice** Lynskey's investigation, Belcher lost not only his ministerial portfolio but also his seat in the Parliament. The terms of reference handed to **Mr. Justice** Lynskey contained no limitations relating to the extent of the inquiry. In the case of Garden, however, there were distinct limitations to the scope of the inquiry. Another matter to which **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood referred was the fact that Garden was half owner of a newspaper known as *Denver Publications.* I had not previously heard of that newspaper, though I had heard from time to time that the former honorable member for Cook was part owner in a newspaper which dealt with astrology. If he and the Minister for External Territories had consulted the stars perhaps they would not have got into all this bother. A couple of months ago the Minister came into this chamber and made one of his characteristic speeches in his own defence. Since the report of the royal commission was presented I have seen one or . two exhibitions in this chamber which I never thought I should see. I actually saw the Minister shaking hands with the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Menzies)** and the Leader of the Australian Country party **(Mr. Fadden).** He seemed only too happy on that occasion to bask in their congratulatory smiles. Why, he even smiled at them! If that were well known in the electorate of East Sydney, it might have a very adverse affect on the Minister's future political career. In the long defence which he made in this House a couple of months ago, it seemed that he appeared to think that members of the Opposition had some very great hatred of him. That is not at all the attitude of honorable members on this side of the House towards him. We have a very deep compassion for him. We have pity for him. We think that it is a great shame that such talents as he possesses should have been misdirected as they have been during the fifteen years in which I have been a member of this House. Time and again, whenever even half an opportunity has been presented to him the Minister has become the self-appointed accusergeneral on behalf of the Australian Labour, party or, earlier in his career, on behalf of the Lang Labour party, with which he was associated on a couple of occasions. I cannot do better on this occasion than compare his situation with that of Gretchen in *Faust.* No doubt the honorable gentleman knows that play, which has been running in Australian theatres recently. I saw one performance, but it was in a language that I did not understand and I had to look up a copy of the play because I had forgotten some of it. The facts are that this young lady, Gretchen, consorted' with a gentleman who had sold himself to the powers below, with the inevitable result. That lady finally said - >How scornfully I once reviled When some poor maiden was beguiled. More speech than any tongue suffices I craved to censure others' vires! Black ns it seemed I blackened still And blacker yet was still my will. And blessed myself and boasted high And now a living sin am I. Yet all that drove my heart thereto God - was so good, so dear, so true! I think that that was the Minister's attitude towards the former honorable member for Cook until that December afternoon when he was obliged to call in Inspector Wilks, or somebody like that, or to make a sudden trip to his dear and esteemed friend, the Attorney-General, and ask for assistance and advice to get him out, of a little trouble. It is a strange thins that the Minister seems to get into trouble whenever he touches timber. We bad an occasion in this House not long ago when a division took place on Bretton Woods, and the honorable gentleman- {: #subdebate-45-0-s6 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER:
Mr. Burke -- Order ! That has nothing to do with New Guinea timber. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- I am referring to timber. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- The honorable gentleman had better confine his comments to New Guinea timber. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- Now wa are dealing with the New Guinea timber case, and here we have the accusergeneral, like Gretchen, lamenting the position in which he finds himself. But there is this distinction between Gretchen and the Minister : in Gretchen's time, contraceptives had not been discovered. She was more unfortunate than he. After the Minister's giving away of his former friend, colleague and campaign manager I went to sleep. It is a fact that I never sleep without dreaming. It is many years since I have dipped into Dante's *Inferno. It is* an excellent book, but it makes difficult reading. The scenes portrayed in it are somewhat harrowing. In my dreams, I saw the burning lake and I saw those countless heads above the liquid fire, the peelers, squealers and informers and kind's evidence men, and, in one shout of exultant triumph, I heard the cry, " Thank God we have reached cabinet rank at last ". We could compare the Minister with Marat, " the friend of the people " in the French revolution- {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- The fellow who did not wash. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- Well, he was killed in a bath tub. That gentleman had one comment for everything that happened in France - " We are betrayed " - -Just as the Minister has one comment for everything that arises in this chamber. Almost every time he speaks he declares "with great vehemence and vigor that he scents, something extremely suspicious. It is a long time since T read Carlyle's *History of the French Revolution,* but according to my recollection Marat met his end in a bath tub, by a butcher's knife at the bands of a young lady called Charlotte Corday. The question arises whether the New Guinea case should have gone first to a court or to a royal commission. The Opposition pressed for the appointment of a royal commission. It was not happy about certain things connected with New Guinea. The honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** has referred this evening to his own request for a royal commission. I have heard the honorable member for Balaclava **(Mr. White),** the honorable member for Moreton **(Mr. Francis)** and the honorable member for Wentworth **(Mr. Harrison)** on the subject, and I am sure that the honorable member for Parramatta **(Mr. Beale)** made such a request after one of his visits to the territory. It is a strange fact that the Prime Minister should have seen fit to do nothing about such thing until action was forced upon him. Heaven knows what the court cases and the royal commission have cost ! No doubt we shall find out in due course. Minister after Minister - J have forgotten how many - was called to give evidence before either the courts or the royal commission. One of the strange facts about this business is that the scandal was revealed to the Minister for Trade and Customs months before it broke into the harsh light of publicity. The Minister for Trade and Customs discharged his duty by revealing to his chief, the Prime Minister, the information that had been tendered to him. But the Prime Minister, in his happy, homely, lackadaisical way, just brushed the matter off and said, " There is nothing to worry about in these things. You can hear all sorts of things about yourself when you are in office". I should have thought that, having received that information, the first duty of the Prime Minister would be to send for the Minister for Transport and say to him, " Well, Ned ", or " Comrade ", " fellow-worker ", or whatever name he happens to call him by, " this is what we have been told. What have you to say about it? What do you know about it?" I have no doubt that, if that action had been taken, the Minister would have sent immediately for his liaison officer and the matter would have been brought to a bead very much earlier. Personally, I have no sympathy with Hancock and Gore Limited. I never have had any sympathy with it because I think that, if a company wants to deal with a governmnent department over matters of tikis kind, the proper course for it to adopt is to go to the man iia charge of tie department. I do not believe in back-door methods of conducting government business. Government business ought to bc conducted by the responsible persons. The royal commission's inquiry revealed the strange fact that officers of the Department of External Territories believed about the Minister in charge of their department the very things that were later charged in the lower courts. That was proved, by their correspondence as well as by their evidence. In other words, they had seen certain things and had been told certain things that led them to believe that the Minister had entered into some contract for the disposal of timber in New Guinea behind the back of the department, without consulting them and without acting through the normal departmental channels. I should say that the Minister would be fully entitled to make a rule in his department for the short time that he will be allowed to remain in charge of it - about four months, I think - that in future when officers of the department have any information of that sort their first duty is to go and see their chief about it, or at any rate to initiate a chain of events so as to ensure that what they have heard shall be referred to the head of the department and given proper consideration. In my opinion, the royal commission has left many questions unanswered, primarily because it was never empowered to inquire into many questions. The first question, as I have remarked, is, " What were the terms and conditions under which **Mr. Garden** was appointed to his position?" The second is, " What duties did he usefully perform in that position while he was there ? ", and the third is, " What sort of control has the Minister over his department when a thing like this could go on in his inner office under his very nose for three and a half years without his discovering a trace of it?". No man in this chamber will charge the Minister with being slow on the uptake. The general accusation, I think, if one were made, would be that he was a little too quick. So he is not able to seek refuge in (the plea that he is a aron who is below normal in mental 'equipment and perception. He is well above it. Yet, out of his own mouth, before the royal Commission and in those lower courts^ he condemned himself as a *mas&* who should not 'be left in charge of any department, iia the interests of the taxpayers of Australia* There is no other finding than that, when one comes to look at what the royal ( commissioner has to say about his department and his method of administering it. I think it is worth reading to the Howse. I quote **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood - It was the failure to fully understand thi* system- That is the Minister's system- which led to Bach lengthy ©ross examination of the Minister on the departmental files, Looking at any individual lite, one would be apt to *think* that, almost from 'day to day, the Minister was taking a keen personal interest in ite SM bbjectmatter. But when that file was compared with other liles, the Minister was chown to be taking no more interest in that particular case than in dozens of other cases, which had originated in a personal letter to him. This became of the utmost importance, when it was alleged, that the Minister took an extraordinary interest in the communications from Parer, and that his motive for doing so, waa that he was party to the Hancock and Gore transaction. In the light of his system, his interest in those communications is readily capable of the innocent explanation that, on each occasion, the matter was initiated by a personal letter, and that he was pursuing his system of seeing that it was brought to fruition, if the policy of the department so permitted. That paragraph permits of only one interpretation, that is, that the Minister's internal office administration was aimed at creating the illusion of strict personal attention to everything that came into his ministerial office, whereas, on the judge's finding, he was devoting no more time to one man's business than to another man's. He wanted to create the impression in the minds of those who dealt with the department, that their business was practically the one thing on which be was completely engrossed and to which he was devoting the very greatest possible attention. It is quite apparent that the honorable gentleman did not control his department. If he had, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood would not have been able to report as he has done in other parts of his report that **Mr. Garden** was able to use the Minister's office for the purpose of stealing the Minister's paper and envelopes and using them for certain nefarious designs. Then we arrive at the questions relating to **Mr. Urquhart.** There is something about him that we should look at. He was a member of the Department of Labour and National Service when it was administered by the honorable member for East Sydney **(Mr. Ward)** and later when it was administered by the honorable member for Melbourne Ports **(Mr. Holloway),** who still administers it. This man too, was apparently put under the harrow. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood talks of **Mr.** Urquhart's having said that- " Because he was the National Service Officer in charge at Newtown and he felt that if people heard of his good fortune, they might stop at any suggestion that he had won it at the races unless he were able to produce evidence. For this purpose he commenced to keep the race-books. When he started in January, 194C, to supervise the affairs of Sydney Pincombe Limited he was no longer in the position of a public servant who might be called upon to explain increases in his bank balance so he ceased to keep the racebooks." This speaks for itself and indicates Urquhart knew that he was playing with fire, when, as a responsible public servant, he was betting so heavily on the races and he can hardly complain if people hearing of his good fortune should have thought the things which he thought they: would think. I entirely agree with that. Further, the judge says, also in regard to this important gentleman - >At the same time I was not greatly impressed by his over-protestations of his good qualities. In other words, the judge looked upon him as one of the ladies who protest too much. The facts in regard to Garden are that he was the Minister's campaign secretary. Tt appears that he held that position all the time during which he was connected with the department - until the time of his arrest, at any rate. It is completely and utterly wrong that any person on the payroll of a Federal or State public service should in any way occupy a responsible position in the conduct of any political campaign for any candidate whatsoever. I do not care who that candidate is. It is utterly immoral and should npt be permitted. What his duties as liaison officer were the Lord only knows. That has never been explained, although on one of these occasions the Minister may choose to let us into that secret; yet he may not. It appears that at one time the department was disposed to transfer him elsewhere, but pressure was brought on the Minister for Labour and National Service in the following telegram : - >Hon. 15. J. Holloway, M.H.R., Minister for Labor r and National Service, Canberra. > >We, the undersigned members and senators, desire you to reconsider decision re transfer of **Mr. J.** S. Garden from his present position, for, during the time he has occupied such position, he has been responsible for straightening out many anomalies and adverting industrial trouble. Apart from this, he has been of considerable assistance to members of Parliament between the several departments coming under your control and under control of Allied Works Council. We therefore respectfully ask you that he still be retained in his present position as Liaison Officer between members and Department of Labour and National Service: - Watkins. James, Falstein, Clark, Sheehan, Amour, Mulcahy, Williams, and Daly One of the interesting passages quoted by the judge came from **Mr. Martens,** a former member for Herbert, in which he said that he hoped that Garden would be kept on and added - >Unless it is too late, I might ask that you reconsider this matter in your own interest, unless of course there is something you know that I do not. I will not enlarge upon that. That is quite significant. If the Minister has anything further to .say on this, as I have no doubt he will have, there is one other thing, on which he should enlighten us. It was the subject of a question asked last September by the honorable member for Bendigo **(Mr. Rankin)** and it concerned certain luggage which contained seventeen watch chains consisting of letters of the alphabet spelling out names. The first names were "E. J. Ward " and " W. Urquhart ". {: #subdebate-45-0-s7 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER:
Mr. Sheehy -- Order ! I should like to know what connexion that has with this matter. {: #subdebate-45-0-s8 .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
ALP -- Whether the watch chains have any connexion with' it or not I do not know, but it may be one of those 10,000,000 to one against coincidences in life about which it may be said truthfully that truth is stranger than fiction. I shall not say very much about the money in the registered letter except that, under the system of banking control that we have at present, which places every private bank under the thumb of the Commonwealth Bank and the Commonwealth Bank under the thumb of the Treasurer, it is most unlikely that 700 brand new £10 notes could be paid to any one without the bank having a record of the person that got them. If the Government wanted to find out who drew the money it could do so. It only needs to circularize the banks in the City of Sydney to find out who drew the money. I draw the conclusion that the Government does not wish this matter to be fully probed. This matter raises not only the whole issue of ministerial control, but also another issue, one that inevitably grew out of the enlargement of the Public Service during the war, when, no doubt, some bad appointments were made. I do not blame the members cf any administration. Under the stress of war, departments had to be expanded and men had to be brought in from outside and allotted duties that they were not accustomed to performing. It stands to reason in those circumstances that appointments may have been made of persons who turned out to be misfits. However, I think the Minister for External Territories should have found out something about this gentleman's activities much earlier than he did. I do not know the nature of the Minister's relations with him at the present time. They are somewhat distant, I should say. But I recall to the Minister's memory the fact that certain of his political collaborators were sojourning in Long Bay Gaol with this man. They were released after they had protested their sorrow for the sin that they had committed - their contempt of court - and had given their written promise not to offend again. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order! The honorable member is trying to touch on everything around the world. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- I am not going out of Sydney. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order! The honorable member will not be allowed to proceed on those lines. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- I am trying to keep out of Long Bay Gaol, and that is more than some people have been able to do. If the law that applies to the gentlemen who were recently released- {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order! The honorable member is clearly trying to defy the Chair. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- I am not. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order! The honorable member is nol in order in referring to the other case that was heard by the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- I am not referring to that case. All I am saying is that if- the law can apply to one person, it can apply also to " Jock " Garden, who is still in Long Bay Gaol. In that event, Garden may be able to conduct the Minister's election campaign in East Sydney. The Minister will want him fairly soon, and, if I am any judge, the Minister will need his services. I do not want to deal further with this matter. From my point of view, the Minister always seems to get mixed up in timber. He looked to me like a ringbarked redwood. I can hear a rusty halo jangling on the dying pine branch somewhere in the Bulolo Valley, and if ever an Australian poet were to have been given the task of preparing verses to justify the innocence of the Minister in this important matter, I consider that such a task could have been entrusted1 to only one man. He is now dead. His name was Ern Malley. {: #subdebate-45-0-s9 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Warringah .- This is a very sorry affair. Speaking on behalf of the Opposition, I say that I accept the findings of the royal commissioner. After all, if a royal commission is appointed to inquire into a matter, it is well that the findings should be accepted; but that acceptance does not discharge the duty of this House completely, because there is inherent in the findings of the royal commissioner various matters that call for further investigation at the hands of this Parliament. I thought that the Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward)** would have displayed more sense when the royal commissioner's findings were published, and have allowed the matter to rest there. However, he chose another course which was characteristic of him. He spoke at great length, as he was entitled to do, and, in the course of that speech, he again engaged in his usual vilification of other 'people. It is to be hoped that he will learn sense sooner or later, because if he does not learn sense as the result of this tragic experience to himself, he will find that, having engaged in character assassination all his life, he will be destroyed by exactly the same implement. I do not direct my attention to the findings of the royal commissioner on the specific questions that were put to him. But I do direct my attention to what is obviously an instance of the gross maladministration of a public department. We are concerned these days with the proper control of public departments, and with the kind of people who are brought into the public offices by Ministers of the Crown. This particular . inquiry has revealed that there is no real control over the kind of men who are appointed by this Government, and over the expenditure of public money. I now desire to make a few remarks about **Mr. Garden.** From my reading of the transcript of the proceedings and the findings of the royal commissioner, it is obvious that **Mr. Garden** who, as I shall prove, was at all material times an avowed Communist, and who was being paid from public funds, was engaged solely in two activities. First, he was engaging in fraud, and, secondly, he was carrying out the political affairs of a Minister of the Crown. In other words, apart from bis fraudulent activities, he was working for the Labour party in the interests of one Minister. One of the outstanding features of this inquiry has been mentioned more than once, but I believe that it should be re-stressed. **Mr. Garden,** on the evidence of Detective-Sergeant Wilks, was a Communist in 1946. He held a Communist party ticket for that year, but it seems obvious that if he had been a Communist at the time he formed that party, he continued to be a Com.munist thereafter until at least 1946 and probably thereafter. One of the most disturbing things about the inquiry :s a portion of the evidence of Detective-Sergeant Wilks, a man whose evidence was accepted by the royal commissioner, to the effect that Garden was a Communist during the time he had the ear of and access to Ministers and was occupying a position of domination over them. That point requires further investigation. More than once I have been struck by the kind of speech that the Minister has made on international affairs. I have noticed the strange resemblance that it bears to the Communist line of propaganda. Therefore, it is open to inquiry and suggestion that this man Garden, a Communist during the period he was with the Minister and was exercising a position of power and influence with Labour party administrators and other Ministers, was in a position to control and affect the destinies of this country. That the man was corrupt is beyond doubt. That he is a man who has no morals is beyond doubt. That he was a Communist seems beyond doubt. We have Detective-Sergeant Wilks's evidence on that point. Garden was paid from public funds, but <he was doing no real work for the public. Detective-Sergeant Wilks stated in evidence that he had seen in Garden's drawer a Communist party ticket for 194.6. On the assumption that the detective's evidence is correct - and it seems to be quite correct - one matter which cries out for investigation is : Why is this Government not able to control its intelligence service more efficiently so that this fact would have been revealed earlier? What kind of intelligence service have we when such a man, a Communist, can, under cover of being a liaison officer, exercise the influence that he possessed? I ask: Did the Minister know of it? Was the Minister aware of it ? If he was not aware of it, what was the Minister doing in his department? He has been drawing his salary for administering an important department, yet he appoints Garden to a position which enables him to have free access to the Minister's office and to any documents there. At the same time, the Minister pretends that he is administering his department. It could not be more clearly evidenced than it has been in this inquiry that this fraud involving £50,000, carried out over a period of three and a half years, could never have been carried out had there been a Minister who was vigilant in controlling his department. Had there been a Minister who was less concerned with politics and more concerned with the discharge of his responsibilities as the ministerial head of his department, this fraud could never have taken place. The thing that cries out for inquiry is how, in a public department, this fraud could have been perpetrated. There are some strange circumstances about it. I shall refer to one to which no reference has so far been made. It will be remembered that Hancock went on one occasion to Lae and was joined there by Forshaw. When they got there they were conducted to Bulolo by Cavanaugh, a Commonwealth officer who was McAdam's forestry officer. According to the royal commissioner's report - >Ostensibly they went to inspect the surveyed timber on the east side of the river with a view to tendering. Cavanaugh, however, overheard some of their conversation, from which he gathered the impression that their real interest was in the timber on the west side. He taxed Forshaw with it, whereupon Forshaw produced a copy of the letter of concession together with the plan. 1 stress that the copy of the letter and plan were produced to an official of the Government. The report continues - > >The letter was minus the signature. Cavanaugh was horrified. " Some one in Sydney must have gone mad ", he said. Forshaw and Hancock were apologetic about it, and said they would sooner deal with the department than with Parer, but they had to have the timber. Cavanaugh asked if they minded him communicating with McAdam. They could not very well say no, and Cavanaugh sent a wireless message to McAdam to meet them at the aerodrome at Port Moresby and followed it with an indignant letter letting McAdam know of his conversation with Hancock and Forshaw. In several other letters Cavanaugh made similar references to the concession and asked for an explanation. This is long before the fraud "broke". The report continues - >In several other letters Cavanaugh made similar references to the concession and asked for an explanation. There was a break-down in the wireless telegraphy at Lae and Cavanaugh's message was not despatched. McAdam was about to leave Port Moresby and he said he did not receive either the message or Cavanaugh's letters until he reached Canberra towards the end of the month. That was the month of May, 1946. The report continues - >He said he then searched the files, found no record of the approval of Parer's application, and came to the conclusion that the alleged concession was a bluff on the part of Forshaw. He said he dismissed it from his mind. > >At first I was inclined to give full credence to McAdam's evidence; but he left me in a state of suspicion, when it transpired that he had all of Cavanaugh's letters in his possession, and had withheld them both from me and from the other tribunals which had investigated the matter. The important point on this inquiry is that he did not disclose either to Halligan or to the Minister his knowledge of the alleged concession. Why he did not do so, 1 do not understand. 1 want to know in the course of this debate what action has been taken by the Government to inquire into the reasons that actuated **Mr. McAdam** in not revealing these two important letters to the various tribunals that dealt with this matter. We in Opposition would like to know precisely the reason, because there are suggestions which can advance themselves immediately why he did not do so. It is a very serious thing when a public official receives a letter from another public official which suggests that there has been something "funny" going on, and, if the facts contained in the paragraph of the royal commissioner's report that I have read are true, does nothing whatever about the matter. That shows that there ought to be an investigation into the administration of the Department of External Territories. What manner of men in that department deal with these matters? The honorable member for Barker **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** referred to a matter of prime significance. In June, 1947, six months before the fraud was revealed, Parer's brother came to Canberra and interviewed the Minister for Trade and Customs **(Senator Courtice),** whom he told that there had been some " funny " business going on with regard to timber in New Guinea. His charge was that the Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward)** had received money in connexion with the transaction. It is quite clear from the evidence given before the royal commission, that that took place. **Senator Courtice** indicated that it did. As I should have expected, the Minister for Trade and Customs conveyed that information to the Prime Minister **(Mr. Chifley).** Despite . the nature of the charge, however, the Prime Minister did nothing whatever about it. As the right honorable gentleman is charged with the administration of this country it was his bounden obligation to order an immediate investigation of so serious a charge against a Minister of the Crown. Had he done so, doubtless this fraud would have been unearthed long before it was. Inquiry in the department then would have produced immediately the letters written by Cavanaugh to McAdam, because they were then existent, and the fraud would have been revealed. I charge the Prime Minister with serious dereliction of duty in that when the Minister for Trade and Customs, a senior member of the Cabinet, told him of this charge against the Minister for External Territories, he waved it aside and did nothing whatever about it. A third matter that calls for investigation is the method by which **Mr. Garden** and other people were appointed. "Why was **Mr. Garden** appointed? Was it political patronage, simply the finding of a position for a Labour supporter, or was it because he was a man properly fitted to discharge the office that he was called upon to fill? There can be no doubt that it was political patronage, and for no other reason. The report of the royal commissioner revealed that the Minister for External Territories was the man who found him this position. {: .speaker-009MC} ##### Mr Holt: -- The Minister created the position. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- He found it for him. Be it said in favour of the Minister for Labour and National Service **(Mr. Holloway),** that when he took over the administration of his department, he wanted nothing further to do with Garden. As the Minister had had some association with him in 1921 he knew a bit about him and apparently realized that he was a dangerous man. I cannot understand why the Minister for Labour and National Service did not raise the matter of principle in Cabinet. But apparently loyalty to the party comes before the interests of the country. Garden was appointed to a position in which he had direct access to the Minister. How could this fraud have been perpetrated had it not been for the privileged position into which the Minister for External Territories put Garden? The Minister gave Garden a position that he created himself. When a change of Ministers occurred, Garden stayed in the same place. What was he doing there? Was there no Minister in the Government who was concerned about the expenditure of public money? Garden remained where he was, and still had access at all times to the Minister and to the Minister's files. One of the most extraordinary features of this report is the reference that has been made by the royal commissioner to the letter of the 10th December, 1947. It will be remembered that there was a great deal of dispute concerning the degree to which the Minister was cognizant of what was taking place inside his own department. For three and a half years a fraud was being enacted inside the department. I am prepared to accept that the Minister was entirely unaware of it, but it seems to me that a Minister who was so negligent that he was unaware of what was occurring inside his own department is deserving of the utmost condemnation. I say without hesitation that a man who is capable of such maladministration and misconduct in the discharge of his duties ought not any longer to hold the rank of Minister in a government. On the 10th December, 1947, the Minister wrote a letter. He had, on all occasions, made himself pliant to Garden's suggestions. This Minister, who pretends at all times to be strong and powerful, knew nothing whatever of important actions that were taking place in his own department and allowed himself to te used as a tool by Garden, who was a crook, a Communist, and a man of no morals. Let us examine what the royal commissioner has said about the letter of the 10th December. The report contains the following passage : - >On the 10th December, the Minister, at Garden's request, and, I suppose, to pacify him, wrote a further letter to Forshaw - Dear **Mr. Forshaw,** > >Regarding the interview which you had with me on Saturday last concerning the desire of your firm to commence timbergetting operations in the External Terri; tories, I desire to advise you that the matter has been receiving my attention. I have now decided to leave it in abeyance until I visit the Territories early next year, when I shall be able to make enquiries on the spot. The '" firm " referred to in the letter is Hancock and Gore. I do not intend to canvass the matter, but the Minister has said that he did not know that there was any firm involved in the transaction and that he did not know of Hancock and Gore. It was obviously Garden who was applying the pressure and, as the royal commissioner has said, the Minister, in order to pacify Garden, wrote the letter. How was it that the Minister was so entirely unaware of what was occurring in his department that he became pliant to an arch-criminal whom he had appointed to this position and allowed him to perpetrate a fraud on members of the public ? That is only one of many actions that show the manner in which this department has been administered. It gives point to what honorable members on this side of the House have said on more than one occasion, namely, that there are some Ministers, of whom the Minister for External Territories is one, who are not concerned so much with the administration of their departments, despite the propaganda that their press liaison officers release to the press from time to time, as with politics, and politics of a particularly unhealthy and unpleasant kind. A thorough inquiry is needed into the administration of this department in order to ascertain how it was that this fraud could have been committed, because if it has been committed in one department it can be committed in others. We owe it to the public to cause investigations to be made so that principles may be evolved and machinery devised that will prevent anything like this from occurring in other government departments. I shall deal now with a man named Service, to whom reference has been made in the report. His part in this conspiracy although apparently an innocent one, was an important one. As the officer in charge of the New South Wales branch of Army Inventions Directorate, he was able to permit Farrell and Garden, the two great minds behind - this fraud, to carry on their activities under the cloak of the respectability of a government department and with the apparent authority of a government department. **Mr. Service's** duties seem to have been rather strange. Nobody was able to ascertain precisely what his job was. He had been appointed as the officer in charge of the New South Wales branch of the Army Inventions Directorate. That directorate had a board of directors in Melbourne and1 a branch in each of the capital cities. The royal commissioner reported as follows : - >The officer in charge of the Sydney branch was Royden Murray Service. He claimed to be a qualified engineer. He had been appointed to the Inventions Directorate from the Optical Section of the Munitions Department. As head man in the Directorate in New South Wales, he seemed to have been left very much alone, and there appeared to be little supervision over his daily activities. Is it common in government departments that men appointed to important positions are allowed to spend their time as they think fit and, as in this instance, to enable a government department to be used as a vehicle for fraud? It is clear that Farrell introduced himself to Service in 1944. Thereafter Service witnessed the signatures of some of the fraudulent documents, in one case subscribing a statutory declaration as a justice of the peace. The report contains this statement - >Quite a number of the documents used by Farrell in carrying out the fraud were typed in the office of the Army Inventions Directorate. Service's function, however, was to arrange air travel for Farrell between Sydney and Brisbane. This was an instance of a man lending himself innocently to a fraud, being paid from public funds, but apparently doing nothing on behalf of the Government and having no supervision exercised over him at all. Is it any wonder that public expenditure is reaching astronomical figures? We on this side of the House have said time and time again that there is insufficient control over the expenditure of the revenues to provide which the people are taxed so heavily. There ought to be an inquiry into this kind of appointment. How did this man come to be appointed ? I shall make one final observation upon what the royal commissioner said about him - >On the 9th August, 1946, Farrell lent Service £200 free of interest repayable on demand. It was said to have been repaid shortly afterwards. The evidence of the repayment was suspicious. It is a nice kettle of fish that public departments were in the hands of men like Garden and Service and that those men were able to carry out their misconduct without any control or supervision by the Ministers of the Crown whose duty it is to see .that proper supervision exists. What kind of government is this? What kind of Ministers are those who pretend that they are exercising control over their departments, when within those departments blatant fraud can take place, without detection, over a period of three years? So I say that the royal commissioner's finding does more than exculpate the Minister. It arraigns the Government for maladministration. If that maladministration could occur in this case, then in how many more cases does it occur ? Now I come to another matter, that which concerns the Misses Pincombe. I have always been singularly impressed by the Minister's hatred of capitalism, of the " moneybags " and " big business ", but I find that in this instance "big business" came to the Minister and asked him whether he would consider becoming the managing director of Sydney Pincombe Limited. That is rather strange. The Minister rejected the offer. But what I find passing strange is that this Minister, who has, for so many years of his life, condemned private enterprise, recommended his friend **Mr. Urquhart,** another of his political organizers, for this very important position. **Mr. Urquhart** is a singularly fortunate person. Since the royal commissioner's observations on him were not within his terms of reference, I feel entitled to make a further observation. The royal commissioner was not asked to make any reference to whether **Mr. Urquhart** was a good man or a bad man, but he did make a most interesting observation regarding him which I think should be repeated here. The commissioner said - >Urquhart is a man now aged 38. He has known the Minister for twenty odd years. That was a very fortunate association, because as soon as so-called " filthy private enterprise " wanted some one to run a business it came to the Minister, who had a safe deposit box in the Bank of New South Wales, which is also surprising, and asked him whether he would become the managing director. The Minister said, " No, but I can suggest some one who can do the job and will fit nicely", and so **Mr. Urquhart,** who had "known the Minister for twenty-odd years", was recommended for the position by the Minister. The royal commissioner's report continued - >He joined the New South Wales Railway Service in his 'teens and he said that he sought .to qualify himself as much as he could. Among his other attainments, he said, he became a skilled stenographer. In this capacity, he was selected by the Minister for work on a Government inquiry in the Northern Territory. Can it be said that there is not a great deal of political patronage associated with this Government? The paragraph continued - >When he returned, he became the Minister's Assistant Private Secretary. From that .position he was appointed National Service Officer, first at Glebe and afterwards at Newtown. While holding these offices, he gave up three evenings a week to assist the Minister in dealing with the affairs of his constituents. No doubt sometimes government cars were used for this purpose, but what does the expenditure of a few pounds, or for that matter, a few million pounds, matter to the Government? The paragraph continues - >In 1945, in the circumstances I have already outlined, he became Managing Director of Sydney Pincombe Pty. Limited. I refer to the next paragraph, and ask honorable members to draw their own inferences from it. I repeat, **Mr. Urquhart** is a very lucky man. The paragraph reads - >He said that he found his duties as National Service Officer at Newtown very arduous, and he sought relaxation on the racecourse, " to get away", he said, "from people pestering me ". He had a current bank account, which he said he used as his betting account. During 1.944, he said, he commenced betting in a fairly big way. Each Friday . . . - I remind honorable members that this occurred while he was employed as national service officer at Glebe - he would draw £500 from his account and on the Monday he would redeposit the amount together with his winnings, if any. On the 19th December, 1944, he said, he had a big win on " Precise " which brought him a profit of over £900. Then he had a lucky run. For thirteen consecutive meetings, he said, he found himself a substantial winner at the end of the day, with the result that over a period he accumulated £3,000. {: .speaker-KQK} ##### Mr McDonald: -- On the Flat. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- All I have to say about that is that I wish he would tell me his system. The paragraph continues - >He explained that he bet mostly on twoyearolds " because anybody who follows racing knows that two-year-olds have not learned the tricks of the old horses". Now we know how to win on thirteen consecutive Saturdays. The paragraph continues - >He said he wagered up to £100 or more with bookmakers on the Flat and in the Leger enclosure. I find it very hard to have that amount of money in my pocket at any time. Now I come to the paragraph that intrigues me most. It reads - >Following his succession of wins, he said, his luck showed signs of receding, and after he had suffered a substantial loss or two a good friend suggested that he was being foolish. He said he placed his winnings in various savings banks accounts in the names of himself, his wife and his children. He limited the amount of each account to £500 so that he might get the maximum interest rate. Two paragraphs later the royal commissioner says that in support of his denial that this money had anything to do with his activities as a national service officer at Glebe, Urquhart produced racebooks. I have seen race-books produced many times in court for the same reason, but not always gaining the same acceptance as was gained in this instance. A man may be perfectly innocent and keep his race-books so that he will have a means of explaining should questions be asked how he came by certain money. But I am not satisfied as easily as apparently the judge was satisfied that the evidence of the race-books Concludes the matter. I say that all the things in relation to this matter - **Mr. Garden,** the friend of the Minister ; **Mr. Urquhart,** the friend of the Minister; political patronage in public office; and **Mr. Service** in public office - cry out for investigation, and I do not think that the public will be satisfied until such an investigation takes place. {: #subdebate-45-0-s10 .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr CHAMBERS:
Minister for the Army · Adelaide · ALP -- It was. not my intention to address the House on **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood's report on the New Guinea timber fraud. But such remarkable statements have been made by honorable members opposite during the evening that I consider it is time thai some one took up the cudgels on behalf of the Minister who has been attacked in such a cowardly fashion to-night. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- What rubbish ! {: .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr CHAMBERS: -- Of course, honorable members opposite may deny that they have made a cowardly attack on the Minister, but what is the position 1 The Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward)** was charged with being a party to. a fraud. It would be well for honorable members to bear in mind that charges of the kind brought against the Ministermight at any time be made against anyother Minister, or, indeed, any member of' this Parliament. One member of the Opposition complained that the inquiry before the royal commission had cost thetaxpayers £50,000. Well, who demanded the appointment of a royal commission *i* {: .speaker-KIX} ##### Mr Hutchinson: -- The Minister for External Territories. {: .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr CHAMBERS: -- It was demanded' by members of the Opposition, as well as by the Minister. Honorable members opposite, who are now complaining of the cost, demanded that the commission be appointed. Some honorable members opposite have presumed to criticize the report of the commissioner, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood. In his report, the commissioner paid a glowing tribute to the Minister for External Territories, and complimented' him upon the way in which he gave his evidence yet, to-day, practically every member of the Opposition who has spoken implied that **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood did not make a genuine report- {: .speaker-JLL} ##### Mr Abbott: -- Rubbish ! {: .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr CHAMBERS: -- That was the general trend of the speeches of the Opposition. Honorable members opposite have expressed doubts that Urquhart could have won so much money at the races. They say that it was impossible to lay a £100 bet on the Flat. I remind them that bookmakers, who were called before the commission, gave evidence on oath that Flat bookmakers would accept £100 bets. It was reported some time ago that the honorable member for Fawkner **(Mr. Holt)** had won a considerable amount of money at the races. Was anything alleged against him on that account? We did not ask for the appointment of a royal commission to inquire into the matter. It is significant that **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood's report has been pushed into the background during this debate, and members of the Opposition Lave used this opportunity to condemn the Minister and the Government for the administration of the external territories, and particularly of Papua and New Guinea. I know something of the conditions with which the Minister was faced' when he took over the portfolio of External Territories. Not one member of the Opposition has been honest enough or fair enough to point out that New Guinea and Papua were devastated territories when the Minister took over during the war, and that he was faced with a very difficulttask in rehabilitating them. I visited New Guinea before the war. I went there again during the war, and I again visited the area a few months ago. I wish to pay a tribute to the Minister for the success he has achieved' in rehabilitating the war-devastated territories of Papua and New Guinea. I felt that it was the duty of a Minister to rise in his place to defend the Minister for External Territories, and to reply to the unfair criticism of honorable members opposite. The appointment of **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood as commissioner to inquire into the New Guinea timber leases was not a political one. Honorable members from South Australia know that he is not a political supporter of this Government. Therefore, I had assumed that all honorable members of this Parliament would have been prepared to accept his findings. I remind honorable members that they should be careful to protect the good name of members of this House and of the Senate. Public men are always open to criticism. This case has shown that public men, unless they receive the protection of their colleagues, may at any time be charged with all sorts of crimes. It has been said that at some time in his career **Mr. "** Jock " Garden was a member of the Communist party. When I look around this House I see men who have changed their political allegiance, but no one condemns them for that. There are in Australia many people who were at one time Communists. A man who did a great deal during the recent coal strike to assist the Government and to end the strike was at one time a Communist. To-day, he is the greatest enemy of the Communists. It has been said that a current Communist party ticket belonging to "Jock" Garden was found. I do not think that the honorable member who made that charge really believed' it to be true. The ticket was not current, and it did not bear the name of " J Jock " Garden. Honorable members opposite have attempted, during this debate, to blacken the good name of the Minister for External Territories, and to condemn the Government for its administration of our external territories, but the royal commissioner, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood', complimented the Minister for External Territories upon his behaviour. He declared that the Minister was not guilty of the charges made against him, and had done everything in his power to bring the fraud to light. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood made no criticism of the Minister's administration of the territories. {: #subdebate-45-0-s11 .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON:
Wentworth -- I propose to be very brief in dealing with this matter, but I believe that I should say something with respect to certain aspects of it. I am particularly concerned about the fact that, although members of the Opposition have launched a sustained attack not upon the integrity of the Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward),** but upon the administration of his department, not one senior Minister has come to his aid in this debate. It is perfectly true that we have heard from a back-bencher who, I might say with respect, would have done a great service to the Minister had he kept quiet and not made the contribution that he made to this discussion. Then, a junior Minister said that we are criticizing the Minister for External Territories and the Government in respect of only one observation contained in the report of the royal commission. However, the honorable member for Robertson **(Mr. Williams)** went to great pains to quote that passage of the report to the House. What I am concerned about is that although the Minister has come through a royal commission and his administration has been adversely commented upon by the royal commissioner- {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- Where? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- I shall read the passage to the Minister for Information **(Mr. Calwell)** in a moment. However, notwithstanding the fact that the administration of the Minister for External Territories has been adversely commented upon by the royal commissioner, not one of the Minister's colleagues, with the exception of a junior Minister, has come to his defence in this debate which is now in its closing stages. The general public should be made perfectly aware of that fact because it is a most damning indictment of the Minister's administration. And his colleagues, by (heir silence, seem to support the charges made by members of the Opposition in that respect. I shall now have a look at what was said by the junior Minister, the Minister for the Army **(Mr. Chambers)** who, of course, had a loyalty to the Minister for External Territories because he administered the latter's department while the Minister was going through his travail. Consequently, be was to some, degree forced to participate in. this debate. Indeed, he said that it was time that some one took up the cudgels on behalf .of the Minister for External Territories. I have been thinking for some time that some one on the Government side should do so. However, the Minister's colleagues have " ratted " on him. They have left him to carry his own cross and bear the attack made by the Opposition, because, apparently, they have not been game to defend him. Such a thing has' never before been heard of in this House; but those are the facts. Then, a junior Minister complained that members of the Opposition were continuing the debate on the paper now before the Chair. Who opened the debate on this paper? It was the Minister himself; and he was given a number of extensions of time which he used to vilify and blackguard people inside and outside the Parliament. The Minister for External Territories himself initiated this debate which, on the motion of the Vice-President of the Executive Council **(Mr. Scully),** was adjourned at the close of the last sessional period. However, when the resumption of the debate was called on this evening, the Vice-President of the Executive Council walked away and thus allowed an Opposition member to resume it. The Prime Minister **(Mr. Chifley)** made the resumption of the debate the first item on the notice-paper. If the junior Minister to whom I have referred complains about the debate being continued, he should refer his complaint to the Prime Minister and the Minister for External Territories. That junior Minister then asked, "Who wanted this royal commission ? ". When we pointed out that the Minister for External Territories asked that the commission be appointed, that junior Minister replied, "No, it was the Opposition ". Let us look at the facts. It is perfectly true that the Opposition asked the Prime Minister to appoint a royal commission to inquire into this matter, but it is equally true that the Prime Minister refused that request. The right honorable gentleman said that he would not accept the evidence of a " larrikin lawyer ". However, when the jury which heard the conspiracy trial acquitted the accused, the Minister for External Territories asked the Prime Minister to appoint a royal commission, and it was only then, when the jury, the honest men and true, the backbone of the legal system in this country, turned him down that the Minister sought a royal commission; and it was only then that the Prime Minister, who had refused the Opposition's earlier request for a royal commission, agreed to institute such an inquiry. Those are the facts concerning the appointment of the royal commission. I shall now examine the remarks made by the junior Minister who has spoken with respect to the report. I shall quote from that report a passage similar to that quoted by the honorable member for Robertson, the only other ministerial supporter who has sought to defend the Minister for External Territories. As I said earlier, it would have been far better for the Minister had the honorable member left his remarks unsaid. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood, on page 7 of his report, deals with the rather extraordinary influence which **Mr. Garden** exercised over the Minister for External Territories and the extraordinary access that Garden had to the Minister's correspondence and office. His Honour said - >In the first place, Garden having previously been a member of the Minister's personal staff, wa-s- able to continue hi'* friendship- with the Minfetter's secretaries and" stenographers-. He had frei! access te the *Stait* rooms and was accustomed to1 tafe morning and afternoon te with the employees'. {: .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr Chambers: -- What is wrong with that ? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- I suggest that the Minister for the Army **(Mr. Chambers)** should address that question to **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood. If the Minister contends that the report gives a; complete clearance to the Minister for External Territories, he must accept it as a whole : he cannot quibble about the matter. Dealing with Garden the report continues - >If he wanted- letters typed, he was allowed to use the services of the Minister's typists. The opportunity was thus afforded to him o< doin'g what he in fact did, namely of stealing the Minister's departmental paper, for the purpose of giving to fraudulent letters the appearance of being official. And a junior Minister asks, " What is wrong with that ". The- report proceeds-^ Further, his own mail was delivered* with Ure Minister's mail to one of the inner offices*, and in the early morning he frequently sorted *ani* his own letters. I emphasize that Garden was net a member of the Minister's staff, Yet> he had the1 complete run of the' Minister's ©See and mail and complete association with the Minister's, staff. **Mr..** Justice Ligertwood continued - >I set out these facts by wa)y of narrative only.- They ave necessary te a- full understanding of how Farrell and Garden were able' to wot* th'e fraud. I am' not iri a position to' criticize then*, a'nd' I refrain from doing so. To do justice in* *any* suns]* Criticism would require a- separate inquiry as to Garden's work as a liaison officer and as to how far the exigencies of the military and industrial position required the retention of hiS' services-. One can be pardoned, however, for doubting the efficacy of Garden's work as a liaison officer during the three and a half years in which he was engaged in this fraud. The royal commissioner cast doubts upon the administration of the Minister's- department and the' methods adopted in it as the result of which unauthorized persons had access to infformation upon- whian they were able to base frauds. He' said that a special inquiry would be- necessary before he' would be in a position, to criticize the department. That is the stand which honorable members on this side of the House- take om the matter. {: .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr Chambers: -- There- is nothing wrong, with that {: #subdebate-45-0-s12 .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944 -- T he- junior Minister says, " There- is nothing wrong with that". Why then-,, has nott the Governm<iM appointed another commission to inquire into it?- The junior Minister cannot- walk away from that- one. Let us again consider the subject- of Garden's appointment. 1 cannot absolve the p-resent Minister for Labour and National Service' **(Mr. Holloway)** from some responsibility in this- matter, for Garden was setting. as> liaison, officer for him Garden *is* a notorious man. Much has been said about him! during this debate which I do not wish to- reiterate. He was clearly em-ployed by the Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward).** As the result of certain circumstances the Minister when administering the portfolio of Labour and National Service was suspended from' duty and Garden was forced upon his successor. In the evidence given before the royal commission it is interesting to find! that tie Minister for External Territories had lent a hand in forcing the Minister for labour and National Service to appoint Garden as his liaison officer. Dealing with the evidence of the Minister for External Territories, at page 36 of his report, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood said - >He said tha>t he had added his personal request to the written communications received by **Mr.** Holloway from the members of Parliament The Minister for External Territories, who- employed G'ard'en as his liaison officer, exerted pressure on the Minister for Labour and National Service to continue' Garden in his appointment as liaison officer *iti* the Department of Labour and National Service. When asked a question in this House about the work that Garden was' doing as- liaison officer, the Minister for Labour and1 National Service replied that he was- contacting employers and employees with regard' to industrial matters. It is' interesting to consider what **Mr. Justice1** Ligertwood had to say in that respect. Dealing- with the evidence of the Minister for External Territories", at pa-ge' 36' of the report, **Mr. JusticeLigertwood** said-- >He admitted that he was over-patient with Garden's importunity oft Behalf of Parer and stated frankly that MS reason wa's that Ure- did not want to offend a man who was his campaign secretary and had influence with the unions. ... I should also add that the personal relationship between the Minister and Garden, coupled with his office of liaison officer, was a factor which enabled Farrell in negotiating the Hancock and Gore transaction to build up Garden as a " very important personage who wields an enormous amount of power in Australia". **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood also said of the evidence of the Minister - >Even in matters which told against him he was frank. For instance, knowing that I was disposed to be critical, as I still am, of Garden being kept in a position of liaison officer in the circumstances I have mentioned he said that he had added his personal request to the written communications received by **Mr. Holloway** from the members of Parliament. He was referring to the fact that he had grave doubts whether Garden had been carrying out the duties of a liaison officer in the Department of Labour and National Service. I believe that the Minister for Labour and National Service was aware that Garden was not carrying out any useful duties for him, and that Garden had been appointed solely because he was campaign secretary for the Minister for External Territories, who had appointed him and paid him out of the taxpayers' money solely in order to keep him on side as his campaign secretary. {: .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr Chambers: -- What justification has the honorable gentleman for saying that? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- If the junior Min.ister will read the report of the royal commission he will find that it contains ample evidence to support my statement. There is no doubt in my mind on this matter. The royal commissioner made it clear that he did not agree that Garden had been doing any useful work as a liaison officer in the Department of Labour and National Service. The Minister for Labour and National Service was aware that no useful purpose was being served by Garden's employment. He well knew that Garden was appointed to his position solely because he was campaign secretary for the Minister for External Territories. Garden was found a job, as many other defeated members of the Parliament have been found jobs, under a direction issued by a member of the Government. If that be so surely it constitutes a damning indictment of the Minister for Labour and National Service. Let me carry this matter a step farther. It is interesting to note the circumstances associated with the first charge of forgery in this matter of which "Jock" Garden was convicted. I received a letter from the foreman of the trial jury- {: .speaker-KQB} ##### Mr Scully: -- When was the letter received ? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- After the trial was over. {: .speaker-L1A} ##### Mr Williams: -- I rise to order. I ask, **Mr. Deputy Speaker,** what a letter from a juryman has to do with this matter? {: #subdebate-45-0-s13 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- I do not yet know what use the honorable member for Wentworth **(Mr. Harrison)** proposes to make of the letter to which he has referred. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- The letter has a direct bearing on this matter. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- The honorable member must relate it to the subject before the Chair. He will not be permitted to refer to matters outside the report of the royal commission. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- The report deals with the conviction of " Jock " Garden on the charge of forgery. The Minister gave evidence in the case. The foreman of the jury- {: .speaker-L0F} ##### Mr Russell: -- What is the foreman's name? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- His name is Greenfield. He said that the jury wanted to add a rider to its verdict, but that the jurymen were advised that they could not do so. He said that the jury was convinced that the Minister's evidence could not be believed and that some further action should be taken in relation to the case. I took no action on the matter because the case was then *sub judice.* It appears that a similar statement was made to the press for the following article appeared in the Sydney *Daily Telegraph* of the 9th June, 1948 :- >The foreman and four members of the J. S. Garden trial jury said last night that the Federal Government should hold a royal commission into Garden's allegations at his trial. > >The jurors revealed that the jury sought to add to its verdict a rider that it was dissatisfied with some aspects of the Crown evidence on matters outside the question of Garden's guilt or innocence. They said they drafted this decision in a letter to the trial judge (Judge Stacey) but did not send it to him on the advice of a court official. The jurors were those who recently sat in the trial which ended with the conviction and imprisonment of Garden for forgery. > >The five jurors said they resented recent references by the Prime Minister **(Mr. Chifley),** to a larrikin lawyer. (In the House of Representatives last Thursday **Mr. Chifley** said that the only charges or statements likely to reflect upon **Mr. Ward** were those made by a convicted criminal). > >Refusing the Opposition demand for a royal commission into Garden's sworn allegations against **Mr. Ward, Mr. Chifley** said he would not accept the word of a convicted criminal or the innuendoes of any larrikin lawyer. > >The foreman of the trial jury said last night, " All the jury were quite prepared to see after the trial ended that an additional inquiry would be held. Not one of us thought the position would stand where it was. Throughout the trial each member of the jury commented upon how well **Mr. Simon** Isaacs (Counsel for Garden) conducted his defence; hia whole cross-examination was in accord with our impressions of some important aspects of the occurrences which we did not think made any difference on the question of Garden's innocence or guilt. > > **Mr. Isaacs** obviously is the larrikin lawyer **Mr. Chifley** referred to. In my opinion Isaacs did his job well ". The *Baily Telegraph* then quoted the opinions of the second, third, fourth and fifth jurors, each of whom was in complete accord with the statement made by the foreman. Here there was one jury, which convicted Garden but obviously disbelieved the Minister- {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- How does the honorable gentleman know that? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- Because of the letter that was sent to me by the foreman of the jury. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- Will tho honorable gentleman lay it on the table? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- Never mind about laying it on the table. The foreman made the same statement in the letter from which I have quoted. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- I want to know whether the honorable gentleman wrote it himself. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- Possibly the letter printed in the *Daily Telegraph* was written by somebody employed on the newspaper ! It is a queer fact that the letter quoted in the article and the letter that I received coincide. Here we had one jury that doubted the Minister's word and a second jury that discharged the accused in the conspiracy trial, both prepared to go against the Minister. Two juries, representing the legal backbone of justice in this community- {: .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr Chambers: -- Were there not twelve members of the jury? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- Not in the forgery trial. There were five jurors in the case who objected to the evidence of the Minister. Here we had two jurors that took a stand adverse to the Minister and his evidence, yet honorable members opposite say that this House has no right to express an opinion about such a momentous matter. Even the royal commissioner included in his report a severe and damning indictment of the Minister and his method of administering his department. In the light of that fact and the fact that two juries were prepared to disbelieve the evidence given by the Minister on oath, I say that it is essential that action be taken to ventilate the matter in this House. Whilst we accept the fact that **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood has absolved the Minister, there are certain factors associated with the affair that must be ventilated in the public interest. The proper forum for such a discussion is this House. I shall not discuss the matter further. I conclude by saying that, until the charges of maladministration can be refuted, and until the Government is prepared to authorize the inquiry that **Mr. justice** Ligertwood said would be necessary to enable him to clear his mind about certain aspects of the case, the Minister will remain an object of suspicion in the minds of the general public. For the sake of his own good name, to prevent any further criticism by the public, and to allay suspicion, the honorable gentleman should ask for a further inquiry to he held along the lines suggested by the royal commissioner. {: #subdebate-45-0-s14 .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL:
Minister for Information and Minister for Immigation · Melbourne · ALP -- The Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward)** himself requested that a royal commission be appointed to examine the allegations that had been made against his administration and against his personal integrity. The Minister knew in his own conscience that he had nothing to hide in connexion with the allegations. The royal commissioner, **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood, said about his conduct - I repeat what the Prime Minister has already read to the House - >Perhaps the best testimonial to the Minister's integrity in financial matters is to be found in the fact that, throughout the whole of the year 1948, continuous efforts were made to unearth material, which might be used to destroy his credit. It was of no avail. It would seem that when nothing based upon fact could be discovered, resort was had to rumours and insinuations. That is as clear and unequivocal a testimony as has ever been delivered in respect of a public man by any royal commissioner. And who was **Mr, Justice** Ligertwood? He was not a Labour appointee to a Supreme Court bench. By every criterion he would be unfamiliar with, if not opposed to, men associated with Labour politics. By birth, by education, by professional association and by every other association, he would at least have preconceived1 notions opposed to Labour men and the things that Labour men stand for. But he revealed himself in this case as an honest man who gave an honest decision upon the facts advanced before him in evidence. He gave that decision in respect of a public figure, in the person of the Minister for External Territories, who has been as much maligned, as much traduced, and as much vilified as any man in the public life of this country. Attempts to create an atmosphere adverse to my colleague were resorted to, with very few exceptions, by the newspapers of Australia. Anything that could be suggested by innuendo against the character and integrity of the Minister for External Territories was suggested1. Nevertheless, when the fierce spotlight of investigation was turned upon the Minister in the box, upon all those who gave evidence against him and for him, and upon his few business transactions, as in the miserable incident of the safe deposit box, the royal commissioner had no hesitation in saying, without the slightest qualification and without the slightest reservation, the words that T have quoted1. I repeat some of them - >Perhaps the best testimonial to the Minister's integrity in financial matters is to be found in the fact that, throughout the whole of the year 1948, continuous efforts were made to unearth material, which might be used to destroy his credit. And nothing was found ! The royal commissioner decided that here, in the person of the Minister for External Territories, was one who, by his conduct over the long years during which he had been a member of the Commonwealth Parliament, dating back to 1931, was an example of all that was good and proper in just and honest administration. There was nothing against the Minister. There was nothing against his family. Miserable and contemptible attempts had been made to drag his wife's name into the case. The mental torture that was perpetrated for eighteen months upon the Minister, upon his wife especially, because a man can always stand up to such attacks better than a woman, and upon their children was such that no honorable member on either side of this House would want to have to suffer it. The Minister for External Territories maintained his position from the beginning to the end, and the judge vindicated him as completely as ever a man was vindicated. But honorable members opposite can only say, " Well, there is something that Garden said or did. Garden was on the government pay-roll. Garden was employed in the Minister's office when he was Minister for Labour and National Service. Garden's services were continued. Garden was retained by the present Minister for Labour and National Service ". If one examines the association between Garden and the Minister for External Territories, one will see that there is not the slightest scintilla of evidence to suggest that they had even a close social relationship. The Minister for External Territories and his wife never once visited Garden and his wife. They never had any association except an association that, in the circumstances, was a proper association between two members of the Labour party, one being the Minister for External Territories and the honorable member in this Parliament for East Sydney and the other being his campaign director and the president of a branch of the Labour party in his electorate. If Garden had never been a member of the Darlinghurst branch of the Labour party, he would not have been brought into association with the Minister at all. The royal commissioner took these facts into consideration when he made his observations, and, whatever else he may have said in his report, he did not derogate in the slightest degree from the complete acquittal that he gave to the Minister for External Territories of any charge of wrongdoing and the complete vindication that he gave to his character and integrity. Though honorable members may disagree with the Minister for External Territories on political matters and though he may have disagreement on occasion with members of his own party on political matters, no one has ever dreamt for a moment that he was a corrupt or venal man or that he would do any mean or contemptible thing at the expense of the Commonwealth. No one believes for a second that he would take a bribe to forgo his duty or break his oath of office as a Minister of State for the Commonwealth of Australia. All the evidence given by his friends tallied exactly with what he gave. The attempts by the larrikin lawyer to besmirch him failed. {: .speaker-KZX} ##### Mr George Lawson: -- The Communist lawyer. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- Yes, we may even amend the phrase of the Prime Minister and call him the Communist lawyer, because, in subsequent court proceedings in connexion with the recent strike, the same gentleman, who sought to blacken the reputation of the Minister for External Territories, appeared as counsel for those people who were appearing in the court in answer to summonses from the judges on charges of having violated the arbitration laws of this country. I am not suggesting that any one charged in the court should not be able to use the services of the best lawyers available. A man in court may use the services of any lawyer at all. I do not seek to deny to any one the right to a fair presentation of his case, whether he be a Communist or an antiCommunist; but it is significant that the man who traduced the Minister for External Territories should have been the first man to appear in the courts for members of the Communist party. I mention the case not for the purpose of reflecting in any respect upon the proceedings of the Arbitration Court, but just to show that there was a united front by certain members of the Liberal party and the Communist party to try to drive the Minister for External Territories out of the public life of this country. Simon Isaacs refused to go into the witness box to answer the allegations of **Mr. Breen.** He was afraid. He was so contemptibly miserable that he pleaded some sort of privilege. The Bar Association in New South Wales has not yet dealt with him for his actions on that occasion. The judge said that he would refer the evidence given by **Mr. Breen** to the Bar Association after **Mr. Miller,** TLC, who appeared for the Minister for External Territories, had asked him to summon this particular lawyer to answer the allegations made by **Mr. Breen.** Isaacs has not yet appeared before any one. I have heard of people being struck off the roll before to-day. If I were a member of the New South Wales Cabinet I would have tried to have passed a special piece of legislation to remove Isaacs from the roll of legal practitioners in New South Wales. That would not be too severe a penalty for his contemptible conduct. It was admitted by Garden that in respect of every allegation made by Isaacs, except that in respect of the £5,000, he had not instructed his counsel to make tho allegations. My friends, the honorable member for Robertson **(Mr. Williams)** and the honorable member for Watson **(Mr. Falstein),** who are barristers, will be able to advise upon the point; but I understand that any accused person must instruct his counsel on the lines on which he desires his defence to be based. It is not permissible for counsel to invent a defence or to attack any person in a responsible position or involved in a case without firm instructions from the accused person. Isaacs threw caution to the winds, threw decency to the winds, and set out in a campaign to blackguard the Minister for External Territories, who. after eighteen months, and in spite nf all the calumny, emerges completely vindicated. {: .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr Chambers: -- Isaacs did not throw politics to the winds. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- The Minister for tho Army says that Isaacs did not throw politics to the winds. That was pain.fully obvious from the moment the proceeding began. Whether he was working for certain elements of the Liberal party - because there was the evidence of **Mr. Breen** to suggest that certain people in the Liberal party were involved in the attack on the Minister - or whether he was working for the Communist party alone, or for both the Liberal party and the Communist party, or for his own malevolent design, no one can gay, but he gave a display as a barrister that was a disgrace to the legal profession of Australia. The honorable member for Wentworth **'Mr. Harrison)** says that the chairman of the jury wrote him a letter after the first conspiracy triaL {: #subdebate-45-0-s15 .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- -There is no chairman of a jury; the Minister means the foreman *Of* the jury, {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- Well, the foreman of the jury. I accept the amendment of the honorable member for Bendigo, who is about to leave us for another sphere. The foreman of the jury wrote a letter to the honorable member for Wentworth. Why did he write a letter to the honorable member for Wentworth? Why did he not write it to the Prime Minister or to **Mr. Speaker?** Anyhow, what was he doing writing letters about a. case which had been adjudicated' upon ? His action was most improper. I have never heard the like of it. We did not know that the honorable member _ for Wentworth had received the letter until tonight. When he knows that the Minister for External Territories has no right of reply. He made his allegation, not before the Minister for External Territories made his defence of himself, but after the Minister had exhausted hie right of reply. I agree with honorable members who have interjected, that the foreman of the jury did something which is indefensible. Perhaps he was a member of the Liberal party. Perhaps he, too, wanted to make capital at the expense of the Minister. Perhaps, like **Mr. Simon** Isaacs, he was playing politics. If he were, the case against Garden must have been overwhelming, when the jury, consisting of people of the type of the foreman, convicted Garden of the offences that he had committed. Now, the honorable member for Wentworth says that the foreman of the jury stated that the members of the jury wanted to add a rider to their verdict in regard to the Minister for External Territories. I pitt it to the House that the jury which heard the case did not know that Forshaw had received £4,000. I think that my colleague, the Minister for External Territories, will verify that fact. The jurymen did not know that Forshaw had received £4,000 when they wanted, if they , did want, to add their particular rider. The fact that Forshaw received £4,000 was disclosed only when the royal commissioner began his investigations, and that was some time later. Are we to believe that the foreman of the jury was a better judge of what was right and proper than was the royal commissioner who examined all the circumstances of :-o case, and who was not bound by the laws of evidence as are judges and juries in cases in which persons are accused of having committed offences? A royal commissioner may admit any evidence that he likes, and may explore all sorts of possibilities and even probabilities in order to inform his mind so that he may make a right judgment. Does the observation of the honorable member for Wentworth suggest that the foreman of this jury, who is unnamed- {: #subdebate-45-0-s16 .speaker-KSD} ##### Mr MCLEOD: -- The name of the foreman was Greenfield. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- I shall put it this way: Does the view of the foreman of the jury rank as being of greater importance than the opinion of the royal commissioner? The royal commissioner, at least by training, by long years of service at the South Australian bar and by honorable association with the Supreme Court Bench of that State, is a man of integrity. The person who, in a moment of spleen, writes a letter after the case, is guilty of a cowardly and contemptible action. The opinion of the foreman of that jury is in direct conflict with the royal commissioner's report. It seems to me that another royal commission should inquire into the allegations of the honorable member for Wentworth, and yet another royal commission should investigate the manner in which the honorable member got hold of this letter from the foreman of the jury. But we are not anxious to waste the country's money in pursuing Greenfields or in following the honorable member for Wentworth in the bypaths which he himself has created, still seeking an opportunity to besmirch the name of the Minister for External Territories. It is to the credit of the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Menzies)** and the Leader of the Australian Country party **(Mr. Fadden)** that they have publicly declared that never for one moment did they believe that the integrity of the Minister was involved. Neither of those right honorable gentlemen has any reason to be grateful to the Minister for External Territories for sparing their feelings in political conflict. The Minister has been as severe on them as any honorable member could possibly be, and they, knowing him over the years, knowing his associations and knowing how he hated them in a political sense, were still prepared to give him the character which every other honorable member who knows him is prepared to give him. They have done the honest things and it is a pity that their followers have not lived up to their standards in that respect. It is regrettable that certain honorable members have occupied their time this evening in a meandering way, seeking through all the labyrinths of suggestion and innuendo to find something, if they possibly could, which would linger in the public mind to the discredit of the Minister for External Territories. The Minister has lived a long time in the political life of this country, and lie will continue to do so. {: .speaker-JYV} ##### Mr Fuller: -- He is too clean for them. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- He is clean from the stand-point of personal integrity and personal honesty. He will fight his fights in his own way. He knows what he believes, and he has the courage to say what he believes. Everybody may not agree with what he says. He may not agree with me personally on the things that, perhaps, I want to do for the good of this nation, but at least he is honest in the way in which he expresses his views. He never lacks the courage to say what he wants to say, and to take the consequences after he has made his statement. Honorable members who have attempted to besmirch his name to-night have read portions of the royal commissioner's re port, but they have not read the essential portions and they have even misread the portions which they have quoted to the House. They have torn various phrases from their context. They have avoided referring to that particular portion of the report which the Prime Minister **(Mr. Chifley)** has quoted and to which I have already made reference. They have failed to deal with other sections of the report to which I should like to refer. On page 36 of the document, the royal commissioner deals with the Minister's evidence. Indeed, that part of the report is entitled " The Minister's Evidence ". The royal commissioner considered that the whole of the circumstances of the case demanded that he should set aside a particular portion of the report which should be headed " The Minister's Evidence ". His Honour said - >In marked contrast to the evidence of Garden was that of the Minister. He was in the witness box for four days and he gave his evidence openly, frankly and with an air of sincerity and truth. Does anybody attempt to belie that! Does any honorable member opposite who has spoken in this debate question the judgment of the royal commissioner in that connexion? Has any honorable member opposite challenged the following sentence in that report : - >I see no reason to doubt any portion of his evidence. The royal commissioner continued - >Even in matters which told against him he was frank. What greater testimony can a man have than that? The royal commisioner continued - >For instance, knowing that I was disposed to be critical, as I still am, of Garden being kept in the position of liaison officer in the circumstance I have mentioned, he said that he had added his personal request to the written communications received by **Mr. Holloway** from the Members of Parliament. What was the request? It was that Garden's services should be. retained. The Minister for External Territories, if he erred at all in that matter, erred in a spirit of friendship for a man who was powerful in the trade union movement when the Minister was a struggling young man in politics. Times had changed, and "the Minister was in a position of great influence in this community. Garden had been rejected by the trade union movement. The Minister, in a spirit of friendship, wanted to do something for him. That is all that can ever be adduced against the Minister in that connexion. What he did was the natural sort of thing that the average person would do for somebody who had befriended him at an earlier period. He might not have thought too highly of Garden's politics. He might not have regarded Garden as being a very important person any longer. But the Minister knew that Garden was important in his own electorate, and he was entitled, on that ground, to have some consideration for a man who, at all events had been a member of a municipal council of a capital city in Australia and had been the member for Cook in this House for three years. The report continues - >He admitted that he waa over-patient with Garden's importunity on behalf of Parer and stated frankly that his reason was that he did not want to offend a man who was his campaign secretary, and had influence with the unions. The Minister could have avoided saying that if he wanted to be shrewd. But he was honest, and admitted that he had made a mistake. The report continues - >It was, however, this relationship between the Minister and Garden, who, both before me and in the criminal proceedings, gave rise to so much of the cross-examination on the basis that his partiality towards Garden called for an explanation. The only motive that Garden suggested was that the Minister was party to the Hancock and Gore transaction. That motive must, of course, be rejected and with its rejection there is no difficulty in accepting the Minister's explanation. I remind the House that those are the royal commissioner's own words. His report continues - >No other motive has been suggested. IT there had been any other motive going to the Minister's credit, I feel sure that Garden and his advisers would have been quick to suggest it. I should also add that the personal relationship between the Minister and Garden coupled with his office of liaison officer was a factor which enabled Farrell in negotiating the Hancock and Gore transaction to build up Garden as a " very important personage who wields an enormous power in Australia ". The great misfortune of this royal commission, anr! of all *nf* the things that preceded it, was that Farrell avoided going on his trial for conspiracy. If he had done so, not only " Jock " Garden would be in gaol to-night, because Farrell and certain other people also would be there with him. I do not think that any member of this House could regard Farrell as other than an unmitigated scoundrel who inspired the whole thing from beginning to end. He inspired Garden to try and use the Minister to get something that he had been trying to get for many years from Ministers in non-Labour governments as well as from the present Labour Government. Although Farrell failed everywhere, he is free to-night. Other men have had their reputations besmirched. I offer no criticism of Harcourt Garden and Parer, because they were acquitted. It is important that the House and the country should know what the royal commissioner said. It should be printed in *Ilansard* so that it will be on record for contemporary history, and for the information of those people who will not be reading the report of the royal commissioner. This paragraph appears in the report - >The Minister laid the whole of his financial affairs open to examination by an independent auditor. What more could a man do than that? The paragraph continues - >Neither in his nor his wife's bank accounts nor in his property holdings was there » trace of the £5,000 said to have been paid to him by Garden. The same thing applied to bis safe deposit, lt was shown to have contained only the Minister's will, the certificates of title to his house at Paddington and to five vacant allotments of land at Sutherland and elsewhere, his life insurance policies and documents relating to investments he has made in Commowealth Loans out of savings from his salary. This kind nf evidence is, of course, negative, but it is typical of the open and frank manner in which the Minister was prepared to give every assistance in the inquiry. I do not think that I could say any mora in defence of the Minister, and I do not think that I need say any more in justification of the belief that is universally held of the Minister. No- matter how people may like or dislike him politically, he is one of the cleanest men in public life in Australia. **Mr.** WHITE (Balaclava) ril.15].- We can understand the Minister for Information **(Mr. Calwell)** doing the. best he can for his friend, because he and the Minister for External Territories **(Mr. Ward)** have been political friends for a long time. But t could not help feeling that his apologia for the Minister in the unfortunate circumstances in which he finds himself is rather like the story of the negress who went to the funeral of her husband. At the grave side, when the clergyman recited the great qualities of the man, his cleanliness, and goodness, she said " J ust a minute parson, I think you have the wrong man in the box. Let us open it." This is not the man that we know. The Minister for Information says the man whom he has been praising is a great democrat, the friend of the world. We know quite a different person, whose character has been referred to over the years. However, I shall not throw any stones at him because he has been through a purgatory. It was wrong for the Minister for the Army **(Mr. Chambers)** to say that the Opposition sought this royal commission. What we sought was a different kind of inquiry. This royal commission was appointed at the Minister's own request, and it has exonerated him within the narrow confines of its terms of reference. We sought a royal commission to investigate affairs generally in New Guinea. We knew nothing of the timber trouble. I have before me the notice-paper of the 29th April, 1947, in which the following motion stands in my name: - >I move - > >That a Joint Select Committee be appointed to inquire into and report upon the following: The inadequacy of the administration which has been set up under the New Guinea Act **Mr. ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr. Sheehy).** - That has nothing to do with the matter before the House. {: #subdebate-45-0-s17 .speaker-KZR} ##### Mr WHITE: -- With respect, I say that it has. The concluding paragraph of **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood's report refers specifically to administration, the loose method of control brought into operation, and the calibre of appointees to the Government service. Although I do not want to be lengthy, I shall read lengthy extracts to prove my point, if the Chair forces me to do so. I think that the Chair will agree that my remarks are related to the matter before the House. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order ! I ask the honorable member to desist. {: .speaker-KZR} ##### Mr WHITE: -- In the penultimate paragraph of his report the royal commissioner said - >There are just two comments which I wish to add. First, I think that the authorities should give consideration to the question of prosecuting Farrell criminally. We all agree with that, and I think that honorable members will agree, also, with the remainder of his honour's comments in that paragraphh. Portion of the final paragraph of the report reads - >Each of them was brought temporarily into the Public Service and was given a responsible office. Each of them was allowed a measure of trust and discretion outside the routine of the department to which he was attached. Each of them betrayed his trust. In marked contrast was **Mr. Halligan,** the Secretary and Permanent Head of the Department of External Territories, who, over a long period, had faithfully discharged his administrative duties. In the routine of his department with its files and memoranda, were found . the solutions to many of the questions which arose in the course of the inquiry. These are the matters to which we have been trying to direct attention over the years. They are the matters, the solution of which prompted me to speak on this aspect to-night. A committee of the House should inquire into New Guinea affairs. The Minister has talked about peregrinations in New Guinea. I remind the House that when in government we of the Opposition gave New Guinea local government, yet the Minister has made it a closed country which might have been in Siberia or Tibet for all we knew. Had my proposal been accepted at that time and a joint committee of the Parliament gone to New Guinea, I am convinced that this scandal would have been unearthed, and that muddle and degradation would have been avoided. This blot would not have been put upon the name of the Parliament. I am glad that the Minister was not found guilty as it affects the whole Parliamentary institution. But when this Government uses the powers of the Parliament to blot out discussionbecause {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- The honorable gentleman has reflected on a ruling of the Chair. I ask him to withdraw his remark and apologize to the Chair. {: .speaker-KZR} ##### Mr WHITE: -- I withdraw the remark and apologize to the Chair. I am afraid that you have misunderstood me, **Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker.** I was not talking of your actions to-night. T am sorry that you are so touchy. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order ! The honorable gentleman must withdraw that remark. {: .speaker-KZR} ##### Mr WHITE: -- I withdraw the remark. Over the years the maladministration of our external territories by this Government has been notorious. Honorable members on this side of the House have pressed for inquiries to be made into, among other things, the treatment of the natives by the Government and the discontent that is rife among public servants in the territories. I have read in this House telegrams that I have received from public servants there. **Mr. Justice** Ligertwood has referred to the integrity of the Secretary of the Department of External Territories, **Mr. Halligan,** who has been a public servant for many years, compared with that of men like **Mr. Garden, Mr. Service** and **Mr. Urquhart** another appointee is a political supporter of the Minister for External Territories who was lifted from the obscurity of some seafaring job and appointed to the important position of Director of Shipping in New Guinea. The royal commission should have inquired into the whole of the administration of these great and valuable territories by the Minister. New Guinea wa3 and is one of our outposts. It contains the graves of many fine young Australians. It has been used as a stepping stone for an attempted invasion of Australia and it may be so used again. It may be that some eastern nations will infiltrate into it and make it very difficult for us to oust them. Papua and New Guinea have been placed in the custody of one man, who has refused to restore to the people there the degree of self-government that they once enjoyed, although recently a bill was passed by the Parliament which provided for a semblance of local government in one part of the territory only and for the merging of the two administrations. All these matters cry aloud for action, yet we are expected to forget the past, to say that the Minister for External Territories has done a good job and to agree with the Prime Minister when the right honorable gentleman says of him, " Well done, thou good and faithful servant". The Minister has been a liability to the Government. The Prime Minister must very often have said of him something similar to what was said by one of the English kings of Thomas a Becket, " 0, that I could be rid of this turbulent priest ! " We all know the old tag that it is the insolence of demagogues that is the ruin of democracy. This demagogue has lowered the standard of political ethics. Because I dared to say that, the judge specifically criticized the ethics involved in an outsider, Garden, who is on the payroll of one department being given access, to the departmental files and records of another department, I was vilified by the Minister. We hope that the honorable gentleman will reform, but 1 do not think that ho will. I was interested to-night to hear *the.* Minister for Information **(Mr. Calwell)** make one of his characteristic speeches. Lately, the honorable gentleman has become an authority on concentration camps and deportation. They should be anathema to an Australian if he knew anything about them. The Minister for Information referred to a certain barrister-at-law in a manner that would not be tolerated outside the Parliament. I do not know the gentleman concerned, who may be good, bad or indifferent. But speeches of that kind are bringing the Parliament into disrepute. It is ceasing to be a- deliberative assembly in which great national affairs can be dealt with and in which the views of honorable members can be put forward. If the administration of New Guinea had been the subject of inquiry by a joint committee of the Parliament, all this unpleasantness might have been avoided. The failure to appoint such a committee is one of the things that will bring the Chifley Government down. The Prime Minister has never said anything in support of the criticisms that have been uttered, but has done his best to clear the *matter* up satisfactorily for himself and the Government. The people will not tolerate actions of that kind. The right honorable gentleman will find very shortly that it is one of the factors that will force his Government out of office and bring back in its place a decent democratic government. Question resolved in the affirmative. {: .page-start } page 88 {:#debate-46} ### ADJOURNMENT {:#subdebate-46-0} #### Death of Mb. G. W. Martens and Mb. J. A. Beasley Motion (by **Mr. Scully)** proposed - >That the House do now adjourn. {: #subdebate-46-0-s0 .speaker-KZJ} ##### Mr LANG:
Reid .- I wish to mention a matter that has appalled me. During to-day's proceedings no reference has been made to the passing of two former honorable members who rendered considerable service to the Parliament. I allude to the late **Mr. G.** W. Martens and the late **Mr. J.** A. Beasley. **Mr. Martens** was a member of the Public Works Committee of this Parliament during the session 1940-43. He was a member of the Printing Committee for the sessions 1943-44, 1944-45, 1945-46 and of the House Committee for the sessions 1932-34, 1934-37, and 1937. He was also honoured by this House by being selected to serve as a member of the Select Committee on Tobacco in the sessions 1929 and 1929-31. **Mr. Beasley** was for more than a quarter of a century identified with some of the most critical moments of Labour's history in this country. As a young man he was entrusted with the presidency of the Sydney Trades and Labour Council, a most difficult position. It was his responsibility to interpret the decisions of that body, which represented the great mass of Australian unionists in New South Wales. It is a field in which there are many bitter struggles and constant conflicts of opinion. It is a miniature working-class parliament on its own. Then ho was entrusted by the Labour movement with the right of representing in this Parliament the traditional Labour stronghold of West Sydney. Service to the people is full of personal problems. Whatever material rewards there may be for a young and ambitious man in politics they are more than offset by the great personal sacrifices that are called for. Then there are the worries and the perpetual struggle to interpret the wishes of the people correctly. In the turbulence of politics in the New South Wales and Commonwealth spheres, **Mr. Beasley** was called upon to make many critical decisions that determined the course of his career. There is no middle course in such matters, and the final judgment about what is right and what is wrong must be left for history to determine. Such a life must of necessity he far more strenuous than the life, of the ordinary citizen. **Mr. Beasley's** death at a comparatively young age is yet another example of how much the nation and the Labour movement exact from those who serve them. **Mr. Beasley** is just another victim. The tragedy is that in the past many have served and have paid a heavy penalty. Yet after they have paid that penalty their families have been forgotten. I hope that that will not happen in this instance. Question resolved in the affirmative. {: .page-start } page 88 {:#debate-47} ### PAPERS The following papers were presented : - Apple and Pear Export Charges Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 52. Arbitration (Public Service) Act - Determinations by the Arbitrator, &c. - 1949 - No. 50 - Fourth Division Postmasters, Postal Clerks and Telegraphists' Union and others. Nos. 51 and 52 - Amalgamated Postal Workers' Union of Australia. No. 53 - Commonwealth Public Service Clerical Association. No. 54 - Australian Leather and Allied Trades Employees' Federation. No. 55 - Non-Official Postmasters' Association of Australia. No. 50 - Commonwealth Works Supervisors' Association. No. 57 - Federated Ironworkers' Association of Australia. No. 58 - Commonwealth Public Service Artisans' Association. No. 59 - Association of Railway Professional Officers of Australia. Nos. 60 and 61 - Commonwealth Public Service Artisans' Association. No. 62 - Civil Air Operations Officers' Association of Australia. No. 63 - Transport Workers' Union of Australia. Australian National Airlines Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 51. Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act - RegulationsStatutory Rules 1949, No. 46. Commonwealth Bank Act - Appointment - J. H. Olfen. Balance-sheets of Commonwealth Bank and Commonwealth Savings Bank as at 30th June, 1949 ; together with AuditorGeneral's reports thereon. Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 49. Commonwealth Public Service Act - Appointments - Department - Army - L. G. Bishop, T. K. Fisher. Defence - H. W. Berry, D. I. MacLean, S. J. Mayne, L. G. Reddy, A. W. F. Rogers. Interior - L. H. Coffey, R. G. Hewson, E. J. W. Juster. Labour and National Service - E. M. Oxenham. Parliamentary Library - C. W. N. Gilbert. Supply and Development - J. A. Dunn, N. H. V. Hoyling, W. A. Rachinger. Works and Housing - J. P. Birrell, F. H. Brown, G. J. Harrison, J. M. Hawke, B. Hyland, N. D. Hyland, L. F. Liscombe, G. P. Radecki, J. B. Redmond, A. S. Richards. Customs Act - Customs Proclamations - Nos. 749-751. Customs Act and Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, Nos. 53, 54. Defence Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 55. Defence (Transitional Provisions') Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 48. Immigration Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 45. Income Tax Assessment Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 50. Lands Acquisition Act - Land acquired for - Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization purposes - Deniliquin, New South Wales. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research purposes - Darlington. New South Wales. Defence purposes - Amberley, Queensland. Benalla, Victoria. Berkshire Park, New South Wales. Brighton, Tasmania. Colmslie, Queensland. Diggers Rest, Victoria. Garbutt, North Queensland. Greta, New South Wales. North Fremantle (Buckland Hill), Western Australia. Prospect, New South Wales. Rothwcll, Victoria. South Fremantle, Western Australia. South Plympton, South Australia. St. Marys, New South Wales. Wallangarra, Queensland. Westernport, Victoria. Department of Civil Aviation purposes - Albion Park, New South Wales. Broome, Western Australia. Carnarvon, Western Australia. Ceduna, South Australia. Cunnamulla, Queensland. Devonport, Tasmania. Eagle Farm, Queensland (2). Guildford, Western Australia. Mascot, New South Wales. Port Lincoln, South Australia. Richmond, New South Wales. Whyalla, South Australia. Department of Supply and Development purposes - Watheroo, Western Australia. Department of Trade and Customs purposes - Angaston, South Australia. Department of Works and Housing purposes - Guildford, Western Australia. Leichhardt, New South Wales. Immigration purposes - Dundas, New South Wales. Postal purposes - Adelaide, South Australia (2). Armadale, Western Australia. Avalon, New South Wales. Ballan, Victoria. Beresfield, New South Wales. Blakehurst, New South Wales. Bowral, New South Wales. Buderim, Queensland. Canley Vale, New South Wales. Castle Hill, New South Wales. Charlton, Victoria. Clayton, Victoria. Coogee, New South Wales. Darra, Queensland. Drummoyne, New South Wales. East Maitland, New South Wales. Eden, New South Wales. FernyCreek, Victoria. Forbes, New South Wales. Gordonvale, Queensland. Gosford, New South Wales. Grafton, New South Wales. Grenfell, New South Wales. Kangaloon, New South Wales. Kurrajong, New South Wales. Lang Lang, Victoria. Lawson, New South Wales. Marryatville, South Australia. Metung, Victoria. Mount Victoria, New South Wales. Murwillumbah, New South Wales. Nambour, Queensland. Nambucca Heads, New South Wales. Nedlands, Western Australia. Noble Park, Victoria. North Melbourne, Victoria. North Sydney, New South Wales. Orange, New South Wales. Redfern, New South Wales. Sale, Victoria. Sandy Bay, Tasmania. Sans Souci, New South Wales. Singleton, New South Wales. South Gladstone, Queensland. Springwood, New South Wales. Stanthorpe, Queensland. St. Marys, New South Wales. Subiaco, Western Australia. Three Springs, Western Australia. Unley, South Australia. Violet Town, Victoria. Warragul, Victoria. Willoughby, New South Wales. Wingham, New South Wales. Woodford. Queensland. Woonnna, New South Wales. Yeelanna, South Australia. National Emergency (Coal Strike) Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 43. Nauru - Native Administration Ordinance - Administration Order 1946, No. 1. Ordinances - 1947- No. 1 - Ordinances Revision. No. 2 - Census. 1948 - No. 1 - Commissions of Inquiry. Norfolk Island Act - Ordinance - 1949 - No. 1 - Matrimonial Causes. Northern Territory (Administration) Act - Ordinance - 1949 - No. 6 - Police and Police Offences. Regulations - 1949 - No. 4 (Health Ordinance). No. 5 (Aboriginals Ordinance). Papua and New Guinea Act - Ordinances - 1949- No. 1. - Ordinances Interpretation. No. 2 - Supreme Court. No. 3 - Public Service Ordinance Adaptation. No. 4 - Liquor. No. 5 - Liquor (Papua). Papua and New Guinea Bounties Act - Return for year 1948-49. Papua-New Guinea Provisional Administration Act - Ordinance - 1949 - No. 4 - Supply (No. 1) 1949-50. Passports Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 41. Pharmaceutical Benefits Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 44. Raw Cotton Bounty Act - Return for 1948. Social Services Consolidation Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 42. Social Services Contribution Assessment Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 47. Sulphur Bounty Act - Return for year 1948-49. Tractor Bounty Act - Return for year 1948-49. Trade Marks Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 40. War Service Homes Act - Land acquired at Nunawading, Victoria. Wire Netting Bounty Act - Return for year 1948-49. House adjourned at 11.33 p.m. {: .page-start } page 90 {:#debate-48} ### ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS *The following answers to questions were circulated: -* {:#subdebate-48-0} #### Mica {: #subdebate-48-0-s0 .speaker-JPT} ##### Mr BLAIN:
NORTHERN TERRITORY N asked the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and Development, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What are the names of the members of the mica pool? 1. Where is the head office? 2. Who is the manager of that office? 3. What is the address of the mica pool's cutting shed if such shed exists? 4. How many cutters are employed by the pool? {: type="A" start="C"} 0. Which officer negotiates the sales of parcels to mica-using companies or processors? 5. To what purpose is the lowest grade of Hartz Range mica which has been purchased at1d. per lb. being put? 6. What was the total weight and total cost in Australia of Indian mica brought into Australia in the last financial year? 7. What was the total weight of Northern Territory mica purchased by the mica pool during the last financial year and what was the total amount paid for that mica ? 8. What was the weight of the lowest grade of mica scrap included in last year's purchases and what was the amount paid for it? {: #subdebate-48-0-s1 .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr Dedman:
ALP -- The Minister for Supply and Development has supplied the following information : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The mica pool functions as a departmental: activity and there are no members of the pool as there wouldbe of a board or othersimilar authority. 1. 140 a'Beckett-street, Melbourne. 2. **Mr. W.** Turnbull. 3. There is no cutting shed. 4. None. 5. **Mr. W.** Turnbull, the manager of the pool. 6. This scrap mica is sold for grinding and is beingused when powdered in electrodes, for paint manufacture, for mixing with heavy duty oils, and in cement and plaster and for tyre dusting. 7. Complete figures for the financial year are not available. Up to the 30th April, 1949,. the total quantity of Indian mica imported amounted to 108,227 lb., valued at £34,232. 8. 111,880 lb., valued at £78,322. 9. 22,477 lb., valued at £98 13s.1d. {:#subdebate-48-1} #### Repatriation Mental Patients {: #subdebate-48-1-s0 .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: n asked the Minister for Repatriation, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many ex-service patients have, for any cause, been removed from the various mental institutions in each State since the 17th December, 1948? 1. How many ex-servicemen are at present in the several institutions? 2. How many ex-servicemen are at present in repatriation blocks and wards in these institutions ? 3. Were any recommendations for the better treatment of war neurosis cases made to the Minister or the Government by **Dr. Alan** Stoller, the Repatriation Commission's specialist in psychological treatment? 4. If so, what was the nature of his recommendations? 5. Have they been adopted? 6. If so, in what direction? {: #subdebate-48-1-s1 .speaker-JNX} ##### Mr Barnard:
Minister for Repatriation · BASS, TASMANIA · ALP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - These figures do not include discharged members of the forces who are the responsibility of the State, who were permitted to be housed within these blocks because beds could be made available to them. {: type="1" start="4"} 0. Yes. Certain recommendations have been madeby **Dr. Stoller.** 1. Expansion of the repatriation medical services by the establishment of psychiatric teams in each State comprising the patient's doctor, a clinical psychologist, occupational therapists, psychiatric social workers, education and training officers. The aim of the psychiatric service of the Repatriation Commission is to deal with cases at the earliest possible stage and to treat them at out-patient and general hospital level and so allow for application of modern therapies and techniques and to avoid certification as far as possible. 2. These and many other plans have been implemented since the appointment of **Dr. Stoller** to the staff of the Repatriation Commission. To implement fully the plans of the Repatriation Commission there is taking place the appointment of psychiatrists, psychologists, psychiatric social workers and other expert members of the teams required in the treatment of these patients. Some difficulty is being experienced, however, in securing suitable trained staff in Australia, and advertisements have been placed abroad for the position of psychiatrists and psychiatric social workers. Further difficulties are being experienced in the provision of suitable buildings for treatment of these patients. 3. Modernization of the psychiatric wards at the Repatriation General Hospital, Greenslopes, Queensland, is now almost completed. The new psychiatric out-patient clinic at Rosemount, is also nearing completion. On the 26th January, 1948, the Repatriation Pavilion at Wacol, Queensland, regarded as the most modern of its kind in Australia, was opened for the treatment of ex-service personnel suffering mental illnesses accepted as being due to service with the forces. A modern and up-to-date psychiatric out-patient clinic is in course of construction at the St. Kilda-road offices of the Repatriation Commission in Melbourne. Completion of this clinic has been held up for many months owing to building difficulties. An up-to-date occupational therapy unit has recently been established atthe Repatriation Mental Hospital, Bundoora. Victoria. Similarly, the occupational therapy facilities in the repatriation block in State mental institutions in New South Wales and Western Australia are also being extended and brought up to date in line with modern methods, and ideas. In Grace Building, located in the heart of Sydney, an up-to-date out-patient clinic has been under construction for many months, and it includesspecial provision for these patients. Numerous other buildings and reconstructions are held up lack of materials. Plans have been completed for the erection of a repatriation block toaccommodate 24 patientsat the State Mental Hospital. Lachlan Park, Tasmania Results inthe treatment of gross mental cases are most satisfactory. Age and Invalid Pensions. {: #subdebate-48-1-s2 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 11th February the honorable member for Bourke **(Mrs. Blackburn)** asked a question concerning seating accommodation for pensioners at paying centres. The Postmaster-General has supplied the following information: - >With further reference to your representations in connexion with the desired provision of seating accommodation at post offices -where social service payments are made, the inquiries disclose that chairs or forms are provided at most pension paying halls, and the larger post offices throughout the Commonwealth. There are, of course, some buildings in which the accommodation is so limited that space is not available for seating facilities, whilst in other cases where the number of payments made is small, the callers are given prompt attention and the need for rest facilities is not so great as at the busier centres. However, steps have been taken to ensure that suitable accommodation will be made available at all paying offices where the number of payments made justifies that course, provided that space is available for the purpose and that no congestion will be caused in the public portion of the office. You may be interested to learn that the department's plans for new post office buildings and remodelled structures envisage the installation of a bench to seat several persons, primarily for use of callers awaiting telephone trunk line calls. The accommodation will be available to pensioners, of course and, as *it* is seldom that there is any appreciable delay in effecting social service payments, it is felt that this provision will meet all reasonable requirements. {: #subdebate-48-1-s3 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP -- On the 15th February, the honorable member for Darwin (Dame Enid Lyons) asked me a question concerning pensioners who have to leave their homes in order to receive care during illness. The Minister for Social Services has supplied the following information: - >Under the present law, an agc or invalid pensioner may have an income of up to £78 per annum (£156 for a married couple) without the rate of pension being affected. The maximum rate of pension, £110 10s. per annum, is reduced by the amount of any income in excess of £78 per annum or, in the case of a married couple, by half the amount of any income in excess of £150 per annum. The term "income", of course, includes net rent derived from property (after allowing for outgoings such as rates insurance repairs, &c.) > >The value of any property owned by a pensioner, including house property and other assets, is also taken into account, but disqualication does not arise unless the value of the property exceeds £750 (£1,500 in the case of a married couple). Where the value is less than £750 (£1,500 in the case of a married couple), the annual rate of pension is reduced by £1 for every complete £10' by which the value (or half the value of their combined property in the case of a married couple) exceeds £100 but does not exceed £450, and by £2 for every complete £10 of any excess over £450. The home in which a pensioner permanently resides, furniture and personal effects are disregarded in determining eligibility for pension. > >There is no specific power under the Social Services Consolidation Act which would per mit the value of a house in which a pensioner is not permanently residing to be disregarded in considering eligibility for pension. The Prime Minister's reply to your question, however, outlined generally the practice of my department in dealing with cases where a pensioner is absent from his home. If the absenceis for a period of only a few months and thehome is not let to u tenant, the property is still regarded as the pensioner's permanent home and no alteration in the rate of pensionis made. A longer period of absence is allowed where my department is satisfied that there are good reasons for the pensioner's continued absence from the home such as medical treatment over an extended period and that the absence is only of a temporary nature. Where, however, the house is occupied by a tenant, the net rental derived from the property and itsvalue are taken into account and the pension is reassessed. > >The question of providing discretionary power to disregard income and property in order to afford relief in cases of the kind mentioned by you was discussed with the Treasurer in connexion with the preparation of the Social Services Consolidation Bill in 1947. After careful consideration of all aspects involved, the decision was reached that this concession should not he made as it would inevitably lead to a demand for still further concessions of similar nature which, if granted, would render the means test almost nugatory. > >Recently, 1 again discussed this matter fully with the Treasurer, who, however, took the view that the reasons advanced for an amendment of the law to provide discretionary power were not strong enough to warrant a reversal of the earlier decision. > >I should like, in conclusion, to assure you that the existing provisions of the law are administered as sympathetically as possible in the cases to which you have drawn attention. Trade Unions. {: #subdebate-48-1-s4 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 24th June the honorable member for Moreton **(Mr. Francis)** asked' me whether certain organizations had failed to comply with the provisions of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904-1934 relating to the filing of balance-sheets with the Industrial Registrar. As promised, I have had inquiries made into the matter and find that the facts are substantially as stated' by him. This situation arose from the fact that, while the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904- 1934 provided that balance-sheets should be lodged annually, the act did not prescribe any penalty for failure to do so. There was some laxity on the part or organizations in complying with the act as it then stood, but the Industrial Registrar was not in a position to enforce compliance with the act. To overcome this anomaly, provision was made in the amending act of 1947 for a heavy penalty for failure to lodge balance-sheets, as prescribed, and when the amending act came into operation, the Industrial Registrar initiated attempts to secure observance of the law. The majority of unions have now complied with the law and the Industrial Registrar is taking measures to obtain the compliance of all unions. Passports: **Mr. E.** V. Elliott. {: #subdebate-48-1-s5 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 21st June the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Lang)** asked me the following questions : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Whether a. passport has been issued to Eliot Volans Elliott, the Communist general secretary of the Seamen's Union, to enable him to attend a Communist conference in Italy? 1. Will the right honorable gentleman indicate the countries that Elliott has been given permission to visit? 2. The text of the official endorsement on the passport? 3. Is Elliott still a member of the Maritime Industry Commission and has he been granted leave of absence by the Commission to attend the conference? 4. What steps are being taken to ensure that information that has been made available to Elliott in his official position will not he taken out of this country? 5. Will the Registrar of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration be asked to ascertain what union funds are being expended on the trip 6. Has the attention of the Prime Minister been directed to Elliott's statement that he had proposed to visit the United States of America on his return home but that he had been refused a vise by the United States Consulate? 7. Will the right honorable gentleman state whether the Government is providing funds abroad for Elliott, who has only arranged for a one-way air passage. The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows: - 1, 2 and 3. E. V. Elliott applied for passport facilities and as he complied with all the required conditions a passport was issued in his favour. The document was made valid for travel to all countries within the British Empire and all foreign countries excepting India, the latter country being excluded in conformity with a request by the Indian authorities that passport facilities for travel to India should not be granted to Communists No official endorsement was inscribed in the passport for the purpose of obtaining special facilities in **Mr. Elliott's** favour. {: type="1" start="4"} 0. **Mr. Elliott** is still a member of the Maritime Industry Commission. It has not been customary for members of the commission to seek leave when any long absence is proposed, nor do the National Security (Maritime Industry) Regulations under which the commission is constituted require it. **Mr. Elliott** was not granted and did not apply for leave. Each member has a deputy who attends in his stead and during the absence of **Mr. Elliott** his deputy will attend any meetings. 1. It is not considered that during his membership of the commission he gathered any information which should not be taken out of the country. 2. The Registrar has no power to compel the union to submit details of individual expenditure from union funds. 3. I am informed that a vise to visit the United States of America was refused to **Mr.** Elliott. The reason was not disclosed, but it is understood is known to him. {: type="A" start="S"} 0. I refer the honorable member to the answer given by me to this question on the 21st June. Housing. {: #subdebate-48-1-s6 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 8th June the honorable member for Fawkner **(Mr. Holt)** asked me a question concerning the sale of houses under the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement. Further to the reply given by me to the honorable member on that date, I desire to inform him that the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement in clause 14 (1.) provides as follows: - >A dwelling may be sold by a State at any time after its completion but except with the consent in writing of the Treasurer of the Commonwealth a dwelling shall not be sold at or for a price less than the capital cost of the dwelling ascertained in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedule to this Agreement provided that the total repayments of principal (included in the annual amortisation allowance mentioned in sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph 4 of the First Schedule to this Agreement) in respect of the dwelling may be regarded as part of the purchase price for the purpose of this sub-clause. It was felt by the Commonwealth to Be desirable that a uniform basis of sale be adopted in all States. As I indicated in my oral reply to the honorable member, discussions have taken place between the Commonwealth and States with a view to agreeing upon such a uniform policy. It has, however, been found impossible to obtain a uniform basis acceptable to all States. In a recent letter to the Premier of Victoria, I stated that as it appeared impossible to obtain a uniform basis of sale of dwellings, I was prepared to agree, in principle, to his proposals for the sale of houses in Victoria on the basis of average cost, provided the State pays to the Commonwealth each quarter the full purchase price of the dwelling payable by the purchaser, in accordance with clause 14 (2.) of the Agreement and, in addition, assumes for all time responsibility for the full amount of any net losses arising under clause 14 (3.). Further information as to details of how the system is to be applied in Victoria is awaited from that State. {:#subdebate-48-2} #### Income Tax; {: #subdebate-48-2-s0 .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes:
NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES s asked the Minister for the Army, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it a fact that the pay of members of the Citizen Military Forces is taxed? 1. Is it a fact that such earnings were not taxable before the last war? 2. If so, will he confer with the Treasurer with a view to the waiving of taxation on such payments, in the interests of recruiting for home defence? {: #subdebate-48-2-s1 .speaker-JWR} ##### Mr Chambers:
ALP -- The answers to the right honorable gentleman's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No provision exists in the Income Tax Assessment Act for pay earned by a member of the Citizen Military Forces to be excluded from his total earnings when submitting his income tax return for the purpose of determining his taxation assessment. 1. Tile conditions as in paragraph 1 also applied at that time. 2. This position has already been given careful consideration, and it is not proposed to amend the Income Tax Assessment Act, but to adhere to the policy that has been consistently applied, that the measure of income tax payable should be based _on the total income receipts from whatever source, including overtime earnings and all other extraneous income. The Commonwealth policy of taxing the pay earned by members of the Citizen Military Forces is in keeping with the policy that is in force in the United Kingdom in relation to pay earned by members of the Territorial Army. {: #subdebate-48-2-s2 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 5th July, the honorable member for Parramatta **(Mr.** Beale) asked me a question regarding delays in the issue of income tax assessments. I promised to obtain further information for him on this subject. I have now ascertained that 2,657,739 taxable returns of income derived during the income year 1947-48 had been received by the Taxation Department at the 80th June, 1949. At that date assessments had issued for all save 79,371 of those returns. In addition 412,539 assessments for income years prior to 1947-48 were issued during the year ended the 30th June, 1949. Since that date assessments have been issued for some of the 79,371 returns mentioned and the department is still issuing assessments for these remaining returns. As I indicated in my reply in the House, delays in the issue of assessments are, for the most part, due to the failure of taxpayers to lodge returns promptly. The Commissioner of Taxation has kept me informed of the efforts made to overtake the arrears of work which accumulated in his department during the war. I am satisfied that considerable progress has been made in the issue of outstanding assessments, and I share the Commissioner's confidence that the arrears will be speedily overtaken. In reply to the honorable member's question regarding the amount of income tax outstanding, I desire to inform him that the amounts outstanding at the 30th June, 1949, were- Individuals, £43,796,186 ; companies, £11,911,865; war-time company tax, £176,075. Superannuation. {: #subdebate-48-2-s3 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 23rd June, the honorable member for Darwin (Dame Enid Lyons) asked me a question, concerning the position under the Commonwealth Superannuation Act of married women employed in the Commonwealth Public Service who have been deserted by their husbands or whose husbands are invalids. Supplementing my reply to the honorable member on that date, I now advise that the position under the Superannuation Act as it stands is that section 4c provides that a married women who becomes an employee after the commencement of that section, i.e., the 3rd August, 1945, shall not be entitled to, or required to, contribute to the fund or the provident account. There are many married women in the Public Service, some of whom have been deserted by their husbands, some living apart from their husbands and some who are not supported by their husbands. Any concession designed to admit them to the Superannuation Fund with the right to retirement on pension on the grounds of invalidity, or refund of contributions in the event of retirement on the re-establishment of the marriage on a normal basis, would have wide repercussions. It would also be most difficult to administer. Moreover, the Superannuation Fund has been established on an actuarial basis, which does not provide for the inherent risk involved in the admission of married women employed as contributors. The 1945 amendment of the act was very carefully considered by the Government before it was implemented by Parliament and I regret that, in view of the considerations involved, I cannot sponsor an amendment designed to meet the request of the honorable member. Coal Strike. {: #subdebate-48-2-s4 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 7th July, the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Lang)** asked me questions concerning unemployment occasioned by the recent coal strike. I undertook to obtain from the Commonwealth Statistician the available figures and he has now informed me that the number of unemployed trade unionists in the second quarter of 1932 was 124,068. The number of persons receiving sustenance at the 30th June, 1932, was estimated by the Commonwealth Statistician to be 673,840. The number of persons receiving unemployment benefit in Australia during the week ended the 9th July, 1949, was 92,263. There were in addition to this number approximately 40,000 persons who had lodged claims for the benefit but had not, at that date, commenced to receive payment. {:#subdebate-48-3} #### Commonwealth Shareholdings {: #subdebate-48-3-s0 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 21st June, the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Lang)** asked me the following questions, *upon notice -* >Will the Prime Minister have prepared - (a) a list of companies in which the Commonwealth has invested money in conjunction with private capital; (b) a statement of the total capital issued and the amount held by the Commonwealth; (c) a list of government directors in such companies; and (d) a statement of the amount of fees, allowances or expenses received by such government nominees ? The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. (i) Commonwealth Oil Refineries Limited; (ii) Amalgamated Wireless (Australasia) Limited;( ii i) Commonwealth Engineering Company Limited. 1. Issued capital - (i) 850,000 shares of £1 each (Commonwealth holding 425,001 shares); (ii) 1,335,518 shares of 8s.6d. each (Commonwealth holding683,165 shares); (iii) 350,000 shares of £1 each (Commonwealth holding 163,200 shares). 2. (i) Messrs. G. W. Martens and W. H. Tucker; (ii) Messrs.F. Strahan, J. G. Harrison and the Honorable John Stewart, M.L.A. (iii) Messrs. G. H. Watson, J. *K.* Jensen, W. Scott and P. F. Jones. 3. Directors' fees - (i) In accordance with the articles of association, directors' fees are paid at the rate of £300 per annum; (ii) for their service on the company's board, Commonwealth directors receive £300 per annum each out of the total amount determined, in accordance with the articles of association, by the company for the remuneration of directors; (iii) the company's articles of association provide that directors shall be paid for their services at the rate of £2,100 per annum to be divided among them in such proportions as they determine. The amount is divided equally among the directors. Directors' fees payable by the companies to directors who are officers of the Commonwealth Public Service are refundable to Consolidated Revenue. 4. Allowances and other expenses - The articles of association of these three companies provide only for the reimbursement of traveling and other expenses necessarily incurred by directors in attending meetings. In each ease, reimbursement of these expenses is regarded as a matter for arrangement between the company and its directors and no detailed information is available. {:#subdebate-48-4} #### Payments to Union Officials {: #subdebate-48-4-s0 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - On the 2nd June, the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Lang)** asked me the following questions, *upon notice -* >Will the Prime Minister furnish a list of payments made by the Commonwealth from the 30th June, 1945, to the 1st May, 1949, to the following trade union officials: - *(a)* J. Healy. *(b)* E. Roach, *(c)* Eliot V. Elliott, *(d)* Idriess Williams, *(e)* Abner MacAlpine, *(f)* J. Cranwell *(g)* A. Monk, o. Schreiber, > >E. Glasson, and *(j)* M. Duffy? As promised by me in my interim reply te the honorable member I now furnish the following information : - With regard to **Mr. Idriess** Williams, I refer the honorable member to the answer of that portion of his question concerning **Mr. Williams** given by me on the 8th June, 1948, *vide Ilansard,* page 1775 of that date. There is no record of any payments having been made from Commonwealth funds to E. Glasson or M. Duffy. No information is available regarding the former, and the latter, if he is identical with **Mr. M.** B. Duffy, is chairman of the Promotions Appeal Board of the Commonwealth Bank. {:#subdebate-48-5} #### Roads {: #subdebate-48-5-s0 .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: s asked the Minister for Transport, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Has his attention been drawn to reports that carriage of coal by road transport from Callide to Gladstone may have to cease within three months because the local highway is in disrepair? 1. Has he seen the claims by road hauliers that they are paying more than £100 a day in road taxes to the Main Roads Commission and will be forced out of business becnr.se the state of the highway has made truck maintenance uneconomical ? 2. Will the Government confer with the Queensland Government and arrange for the necessary repairs to lie carried nut so that the transport of this coal, amounting to 000 tons daily will continue, coal being so urgently required all over Australia? {: #subdebate-48-5-s1 .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward:
ALP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No. 1. No. 2. No. By way of explanation, I would like to point out that the Commonwealth Government is not directly responsible for the construction and maintenance of roads within Status, and that in the case of the road from Gladstone to the Callide coalfield, the responsibility lies entirely with the Queensland Government. The Queensland Government hae apparently been aware of the deterioration of the road in question, as it recently announced that a sum of £100,000 had been allocated for the constri ction of a new road, 14 miles in length, from the coalfield at Callide to a point on the Biloela-Gladstone road, 54 J miles from Gladstone. It is understood that the Main Roads Commission will be responsible for the contruction of this road, and that this body has been asked to carry out a survey immediately. For the information of the honorable member, it is advised that funds for mad works are made available to the State of Queensland under the Commonwealth Aid Roads and Works Act, No. 17 of 1947, and the Queensland Government can, if it so desires, finance this entire project from the funds so provided. {: #subdebate-48-5-s2 .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley:
ALP y. - Further to my reply to the question asked by the honorable member for Robertson **("Mr. Williams),** on the Srd June, concerning the distribution of proceeds from petrol tax collected under the Commonwealth Aid Roads and Works Act, I append a detailed statement setting out the figures desired by the honorable member : - >Allocations to Shire and Municipal Councils During the Financial Year 194-8-4-9 by the State or New South Wales FROM Funds Provided Under Section 6 (4.) or the Commonwealth Aid Roads and Works Act No. 17 of 1947- Roads in Sparsely Populated Areas, Etc. > > *Allocations* to Shire awd Municipal Councils During the Financial Year I94S-49,. *mc. -* >ALLOCATIONS. TQ, Shire AND. MUNICIPAL. COUNCILS DURING. THE FINANCIAL YEAR 19.48-49, ETC. -

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 7 September 1949, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1949/19490907_reps_18_204/>.