House of Representatives
29 September 1949

18th Parliament · 2nd Session



Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr. J. J. Clark) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 720

QUESTION

SOCIAL SERVICES

Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND

– In view of the continual barrage, from the Government’s .political opponents, of unfair allegations of wasteful, costly administration of Commonwealth departments, can the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services inform me pf the total amount paid in social services benefits during the past year ; the percentage cost of the administration of the Department of Social Services; and the comparative cost of similar departments in the United Kingdom and New Zealand?

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

– I am. able to give tha honorable member figures relating to social services for the year ending June last. The total amount paid in social services benefits in that year was £74,550,000. The cost of administration of the whole of the department was 1.22 per cent, during that year. I have not seen the United Kingdom or the New Zealand budget for the current year, but I saw last year’s budgets of those two countries, and the honorable member may rest assured that our costs of administration in respect of social services are at least 2 per cent, lower than the costs of either of those countries.

page 721

QUESTION

EMPLOYMENT

Mr HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Prime Minister a question with respect to a statement that he made in the House yesterday concerning transfers of workers. If I understood the right honorable gentleman correctly he said yesterday, in answer to ii question without notice, that in speaking at an Australian Labour party conference in Sydney he did not mention the transfers of whole communities, and did not at any time say that people would be required to transfer compulsorily from one job to another. I now ask the Prime Minister whether he said at the conference -

There, might be times when it (the Government) could not guarantee that workers could stay put in their particular industry . . . We realize that there may have to be transfers nf workers and in some cases whole communities to other forms of work. It is quite curtain that everybody will not be able to stay at home because there will have to be transfers of labour if there is to be expansion. I am not going to fool anybody about that.

Did the Standard weekly, which is official organ of the Labour party in New South Wales, correctly report the right honorable gentleman on page 3 of its issue of - the 22nd October, 1948, when it printed’, verbatim, the remarks that I have quoted ? If the Standard report was not correct, was the newspaper asked to make a correction, and, if so, when did it publish such correction?

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

– It may be that the words that the honorable gentleman has quoted are words which I used at the conference in Sydney to which he has referred. However, I cannot see anything in the statement that he has quoted which could be defined as an intention to move any worker compulsorily anywhere. I made it clear at the conference, as I did to the House yesterday, that the objective of the Government was to provide employment for everybody who desired employment. I made it clear that that did not mean that in every instance men would be able to stay at some particular job on which they were engaged if the particular work ceased. For instance, a great number of men are engaged in the construction of the Warragamba Dam, near Sydney. That work will not go on for ever. Therefore, when it is finished, those now employed on it will naturally move to some other work, perhaps of a similar nature or same other class of employment. I have not read the report to which the honorable member has referred. However, the quotation he made contains no reference to the compulsory movement of either communities or individuals. I have no doubt that the report is correct and I have no desire to depart from anything that I said at that conference.

page 721

QUESTION

PRODUCTION

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of repeated statements that our overall production of goods and services is much lower to-day than it was in pre-war years, and as many people consider such statements to be gross exaggerations, can the Minister for Labour and National Service say whether there exists any reliable machinery by which the public mind can, from time to time, be informed accurately upon such a matter? If so, can the Minister give the House some idea of what the position really is in respect of this matter?

Mr HOLLOWAY:
ALP

– The honorable member’s question, which raises a matter of great importance, is rather difficult to answer mainly because of the maldistribution of labour forces which was brought about under war-time conditions and which still exists to some small degree. For that reason, it is a simple matter to prove that, production of a particular commodity is still below the pre-war level, and, at the same time, it is equally easy to show that the production of other commodities has, since the end of the war, not only caught up with, hut also outstripped, pre-war output. Therefore, one can answer the honorable member’s question fairly only by dealing with the all-round picture of production. The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Commonwealth and State statisticians periodically issue information on the subject of production; and our official statistical organizations are regarded throughout the world as being at least on a par with the best organizations of a similar kind in any other country. From time to time official statistical offices in Australia issue statistics dealing with particular industries and also with the volume and value of production as a whole. In addition, there are a number of economic experts who examine the statistics issued officially and give their own interpretation of them. I suppose that most honorable members have read the public statement made recently by Professor Copland, in which he estimated that our overall production has increased by 12 per cent, since 193S-39. Further, when giving evidence recently before the Full Bench of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, Professor Higgins, of the Melbourne University, dealt specifically with production, and estimated that our overall production had increased by 10 per cent, compared with the peak output of 1938-39. In support of his own estimates, he cited estimates made by Professor Copland, Dr. Stevens and Mr. Colin Clark.

Mr Spender:

– I rise to order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Frequently, you have ruled that argumentative matter cannot be introduced into questions and answers. The Minister is offending against that ruling hy quoting opinions expressed by certain persons.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– Order ! The Minister has been asked a question and is endeavouring to furnish certain information. He is entitled to the courtesy of being permitted to reply in his own way. If the Chair were called upon to rule out of order all questions which invite argumentative answers, I am afraid that the majority of questions asked would fall within that category.

Mr HOLLOWAY:

– Professor Higgins occupies the Ritchie Chair of Economics, at the University of Melbourne, which deals with research in connexion with this subject. I believe that most people would consider that Professor Higgins has made a fair analysis of the figures. In my opinion his analysis is conservative.

page 722

QUESTION

CURRENCY

Dollar Deficits - International MONETARY Fund.

Mr McEWEN:
INDI, VICTORIA

– Will the Prime Minister inform the House whether it is correct, as reported in Sydney during last week-end, that the Australian Government has decided to make an approach, jointly with the Government of Great Britain, to the International Monetary Fund or some other dollar financial authority for a joint loan to Australia and Great Britain? If no such decision has been taken, is an approach for a joint loan contemplated? If the Australian Government is considering a joint loan application, as distinct from the proposal to obtain a loan entirely on its own account, which was foreshadowed as a possibility by the Treasurer in his budget speech, what would be the purpose of making an application jointly with Great Britain?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– As the answer to both the first and second questions is “ No “, an answer to the third question is unnecessary. There has been no consultation between the two governments about a joint approach to any fund or bank for a loan. I have no knowledge of any decision having been made by the United Kingdom Government to apply to make drawings from either the International Monetary Fund or the International Bank. Although I indicated in my budget speech that the possibility of obtaining a dollar loan was being considered, no particular proposal had been surveyed or examined in that connexion. The position is still as it was then. No such application has been made by the Australian Government. I do not know whether the United Kingdom Government has yet made any decision about drawings. I have received no indication of the possibility of any joint application. The suggestion was quite fantastic, because the International Monetary Fund has not given thought to allowing drawings on the fund for more than one year. I should imagine that the general rule would be that drawings should be made over a period of years. Australia has not yet made any application for drawings from the International Monetary Fund.

Mr FADDEN:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND

– Will the Treasurer state whether it is a fact that Australia is entitled to purchase approximately 50,000,000 dollars yearly from the International Monetary Fund? Is it further a fact that there would be no interest payments whatsoever on that 50,000,000 dollars? If so, does the Government propose to take advantage of those available interest-free dollars to provide for the essential dollar requirements of Australian rural industries in order to obtain such items as petrol, tractors, motor vehicles, pest exterminators and other items necessary to enable farmers to increase production?

Mr CHIFLEY:

– I shall arrange to let the right honorable gentleman have a copy of the Bretton Woods Agreement, which indicates the position of each of the members of the International Monetary Fund. Australia has a right, subject to the approval of the fund, to make what are known as drawings from the, fund.

Mr Fadden:

-. - It has a fundamental right to do so, apart from that.

Mr CHIFLEY:

– The right honorable gentleman has asked a question-

Mr Fadden:

– Why not answer it properly ?

Mr CHIFLEY:

– If the right honorable member had a conference with himself and answered his own question it would save .me all this physical effort. Subject to the approval of the fund, Australia has a right, as have other members of the fund, to draw, under the old valuation, the equivalent of 45,000,000 dollars annually.

Mr Fadden:

– Of 50,000,000 dollars.

Mr CHIFLEY:

– It is not quite true to say that the drawings do not have to be repaid. They have to be repaid. If drawings are repaid within a period of three months no interest is charged, but for periods in excess of three months interest is charged at an increasing rate until it finally reaches 5 per cent. Despite what may be said to the contrary, drawings ultimately become a debt that must be repaid. I have tried to make it clear on other occasions that Australia will draw on the fund or raise loans only to the extent absolutely necessary to meet bare essential requirements within our present financial commitments, but apparently my statements have not penetrated the minds of some honorable members opposite. We shall continue to have regard to the fact that we have agreed with other Commonwealth countries to reduce dollar expenditure by approximately 25 per cent.

Mr Fadden:

– While other Commonwealth countries are drawing on the fund.

Mr CHIFLEY:

– Perhaps I had better furnish a written answer to the honorable member.

Mr Fadden:

– The Treasurer would do better if he did so.

Mr CHIFLEY:

– It is not of much use my answering questions asked by the right honorable gentleman if he seeks to answer them himself with statements that are mostly incorrect.

page 723

QUESTION

LAND SETTLEMENT OF EX-SERVICEMEN

Mr FULLER:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Minister for Post-war Reconstruction inform the House whether the Umbango Estate, which is situated in the federal electorate of Hume, is to be acquired for the land settlement of ex-servicemen?

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

– The acquisition of the Umbango Estate for inclusion in the war service land settlement scheme has been approved by the Commonwealth. Of course, the actual acquisition will be a matter for the New South Wales Government. This will bring the total number of estates acquired for this purpose in New South Wales to 475. Almost 7,775,000 acres of land have now been acquired by Governments for the land settlement of ex-servicemen throughout Australia. In addition the Australian Government is also making loans available to ex-servicemen who desire to settle on the land. The total number of loans made available so far is approximately 12,000, .and they involve a total of approximately £16,000,000. That is entirely a Commonwealth financial responsibility.

page 724

QUESTION

ARMED FORCES

Militia Pay

Mr HOWSE:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the low recruiting figures for the militia forces, and the fact that militiamen are voluntarily giving up a great deal of their time, sometimes at considerable financial loss - I refer particularly to men up to the rank of warrant officer - to equip themselves to defend Australia in time of need, will the Minister for the Army consider following the example that has been set by Great Britain, where the pay of territorial forces, I understand, is exempt from taxation?

Mr CHAMBERS:
Minister for the Army · ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– I am having the position examined’ at the moment. I have submitted a statement to the Treasurer, and, at a later date,. I hope to be in a position to indicate to the House the Treasurer’s attitude towards the proposal.

page 724

QUESTION

WAR NEUROSIS

Mr SHEEHY:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Following my representations to the Minister for Repatriation on the subject of statements made in South Australia by certain organizations about the treatment of anxiety neurosis cases, I ask the Minister now whether he has any further information that he can give to the House on this important subject.

Mr BARNARD:
Minister for Repatriation · BASS, TASMANIA · ALP

– I have received further information from South Australia. The honorable member has been interested in this matter for some time, and I am very pleased to be able to inform him that the stories circulating in South Australia about the treatment of psychiatric cases in that State are without foundation. I have received from the secretary of the South Australian branch of the Returned Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen’s Imperial League of Australia a letter which contains some interesting information about this matter. Fifty-eight representatives of service organizations, associate organizations, such as the Australian Red Cross Society, the Legacy Club, and the Fathers’ Association of South Australia, and certain civilian organizations, met to consider this question. They compared the information that was in their possession and carried’ the following resolution: -

That this meeting, representing all servicemen’s organizations, Australian Red Cross and other bodies interested in the ex-service nien and women, expresses its confidence in thu Government and its medical officers and staffs in the approach they ave making in this very vital matter, and pledge themselves to cooperate and assist the authorities in all matters appertaining to the welfare of memtally ill ex-service personnel.

That resolution was carried unanimously, and it answers most effectively the criticism that has been levelled at the Repatriation Department and at the Government in recent months. I appreciate the action by the honorable member for Boothby in bringing this matter to my attention.

Mr BEAZLEY:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I direct a question to the Minister for Repatriation which arises from the fact that his department hae been unsuccessfully advertising in Western Australia for some time for the services of a psychiatrist to treat war neurosis cases in that State. There has been no response to those advertisements. If this state of affairs continues, does the Minister intend to raise the salary offered, or does he intend that there should be no psychiatrist? As the position has been advertised throughout the British Empire, is it a fact that the Australian salary is necessarily advertised in the press of South Africa, New Zealand and Great Britain as being four-fifths, in sterling, of the rate in Australian currency? If so, does the Minister consider it likely that there will be applications for the position in those circumstances? In view of the fact that many institutions need the services of psychiatrists, is the Minister prepared to reconsider the rate of salary offered for the position?

Mr BARNARD:

– It is true that advertisements have been inserted in the Australian press, including the British Medical Journal, and overseas newspapers seeking the services of psychiatrists for Australian repatriation hospitals. There are two reasons, I think, why we have not had any response to those advertisements. The first, and the more important, is that the :services of such specialists are being sought throughout the civilized world. We have some psychiatrists, .but they are grossly overworked. We have not been able to engage enough officers to meet our every-day needs. The same situation exists in every other English-speaking country to-day. The situation might be improved if higher salaries were offered, but I do not think that it would solve the problem, as there is a general shortage of qualified psychiatrists.

Mr Hughes:

– What salary has been offered ?

Mr BARNARD:

– I could not say offhand. Various salaries have been advertised. We are seeking a number of psychiatrists. Western Australia is not -the only State affected. We “ have vacancies in all capital cities. The rates of salary are determined by the Government as a matter of policy in consultation with the Public Service Board.

page 725

QUESTION

WHEAT

Mr LANGTRY:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the attention of the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture been directed to a statement by Mr. H. K. Nock, treasurer of the .Farmers and Settlers Association of New South Wales that wheat-growers have been deprived by the Government of £70,000,000 through the operations of the various wheat pools? Is the Minister in a position to state whether this statement represents just another wild dream of Mr. Nock? Is Mr. Nock correct in stating that £29.000,000 is now held in the Wheat Stabilization Fund?

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

– I have seen a similar statement attributed to Mr. Nock, which was published in the newspaper, Land, of which I understand he is a director. After reading the statement it would appeal- to me that Mr. Nock merely gave expression to the rambling thoughts of a senile mind, and a mind frustrated by the fact that the Government’s wheat stabilization plan was put through this Parliament after every State government in Australia, irrespective of political colour, had approved of it. The legislation was passed after every interested State government had arranged to take a poll of wheat-growers on it and after the wheat-growers had signified their approval. The statement made by Mr. Nock that there is £29,000,000 in the stabilization fund is entirely incorrect. One of the great features of the stabilization plan is that it provides security for the wheatgrowers, and I am pleased to say that the strength of the fund is now £21,500,000. I direct the attention of the honorable member for Riverina and of the country generally to the fact that because of the financial strength of the stabilization fund the wheat tax paid by growers from the 1945-46 and 1946-47 crops has since been refunded to them. Should the fund continue to increase I have no doubt that further repayments to growers will be possible. Mr. Nock also alleged that tremendous financial losses have been suffered by the growers, but the most convincing evidence that wheat-growers continue to approve of the plan is thu fact that I have received requests from them asking that its period of operation be extended. Furthermore, Mr. Nock’s assertion that growers have sustained tremendous financial losses assumes that the consumers of this country should be called upon to pay the extremely high prices at present ruling for wheat in the world’s markets, which would of course, greatly increase the local price of flour from which our bread is manufactured. It entirely overlooks the fact that wheat-growers enjoy the advantage of purchasing many of their requirements at controlled home-consumption prices. I do not think that any administration, whatever its political complexion might be, would be prepared to force up the price of local wheat to the level of overseas prices. Mr. Nock also omitted to mention that the stabilization plan protects growers against any catastrophic fall which may occur in the price of wheatoverseas.

page 725

QUESTION

NAURU

Mr McBRIDE:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Will the Prime Minister say whether it is correct, as reported in Adelaide, that consideration has been given by the Government to appointing Mr. R. S. Richards, Leader of the Opposition in the South Australian House of Assembly, to the post of Administrator of Nauru?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– I understand that applications were invited for the position mentioned, and Ibelieve that the closing date for applications was the 15th August, last, or, possibly, the 15th July. Those applications have not yet been placed before Cabinet; in fact, they have not yet been considered, and I do not know, nor, as far as I am aware, does any other Minister, with the possible exception of the Minister for External Territories, whose department administers Nauru, know what applications have been received for the vacant position. If Mr. Richards is an applicant for the position his application will be considered, but I emphasize that no consideration has yet been given to the selection of any person to fill the position.

page 726

QUESTION

DEPORTATIONS

Mr RUSSELL:
GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Has the attention of the Minister for Immigration been drawn to a sub-leader which appeared in the Melbourne Sun News-Pictorial yesterday, in which it was stated that “William Regan, a British seaman -

Is the latest victim of Mr. Calwell’s bizarre passion for fashioning cats’ cradles of redtape?

Will the Minister inform the House of the reasons for his decision that Regan must return to England? Is there any proof of the statement that the Minister is reported to have made to the effect that the desertion of members of ships’ crew is seriously interfering with the efficient operation of shipping services between England and Australia?

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

– I read the newspaper article in the Melbourne Sun News-Pictorial to which the honorable member has referred, concerning the removal from Australia of people who have no right to remain here. It was a most unfortunate statement, and contained the usual unfair criticism of myself and the Department, of Immigration, which I administer. Regan was landed in Australia when he was sick, and told that he could remain here for three months. I should be very happy to allow all deserters from vessels, particularly British men, to remain here, but if we were to permit that practice there would be very few vessels sailing between Great Britain and Australia. I have with me a statement from Sir Leslie Morshead, general manager of the Orient Line in Australia, that deals with this point. A number of us probably are descended from people who deserted from or stowed away on ships in order to enter this country before really effective immigration laws came into operation. But the truth of the matter is that we cannot permit people, even if they have landed for hospital treatment, to stay here if the shipping companies, to which they have obligations, desire that they return to the United Kingdom. Regan said that he was being sent back to England, and that he could register and return to Australia as an assisted’ immigrant. On the face of it, the wholething seems absurd, but that is not the real story. The truth is that William Regan was discharged from SS. Culter for hospital treatment on the 7th March. When he left the hospital, he expressed a desire to remain here permanently, and I gave him permission to stay in Australia for three months. I consulted representatives of the shipping company, and they said that they desired his services. Therefore, I told him that he would have to go hack to the United Kingdom. However, there were other reasons why he should be compelled to leave this country. He stated that he had a wife and two children in England, and that he desired to bring them, to Australia. Before the expiration of the three months’ period, my department was advised by the parents of a girl aged nineteen years, who lived at the home where he was staying, that Regan had left and that the girl had accompanied him and had taken his belongings and her belongings.

Mr Fadden:

– That was coincidental.

Mr CALWELL:

– It is not a laughing matter. The father, a retired naval man, is a very decent person, and he was most concerned about his daughter. I have got Regan out of the country, but the girl has not returned home and the unfortunate parents are terribly worried lest the girl be seriously harmed if the infatuation continues. That is the story about Regan. The sub-leader in the Melbourne Sun NewsPictorial is typical of many sub-leaders which have been written in a number of newspapers about the actions of my department. I shall now tell the House what Sir Leslie Morshead has told me about the matter. I conferred with him last evening because I have been approached by the press with complaints that my statements have not been verified on reference to London shipping offices. Sir Leslie has authorized me to make the following statement : -

On behalf of the Overseas Shipping Representatives Association, Mr. Bendow and I interviewed Mr. Calwell in Sydney on the 7th September, 1948, and expressed concern about the number of deserters from British ships. Though warrants are regularly taken out by shipping companies, very few deserters are apprehended. Not all of these are returned to the United Kingdom.

These desertions cause delay and impair the efficient running of ships. Unless effective action is taken there is a danger that passenger ships would have to carry larger crews which would mean that passenger accommodation would be encroached upon and so, fewer migrants carried.

It was represented to the Minister that every effort should be made to arrest deserters, and on conviction that they be declared prohibited immigrants.

Mr. Calwell realized the seriousness of the position and promised that appropriate action would be taken.

The officers of my department and I know all the answers, and the answers are always very clear, and, if I may say so with all humility, they are always very convincing.

page 727

QUESTION

UNITED NATIONS

Declaration of Human Eights

Mr ADERMANN:
MARANOA, QUEENSLAND

– The Minister for External Affairs, on behalf of Australia, has concurred with other associated countries in the United Nations in the universal Declaration of Human Rights. Will the right honorable gentleman inform me whether such a commitment requires parliamentary ratification? If the answer is in the affirmative, what does the Government intend to do in that direction? What obligations, if any, rest on Australia as a consequence of the declaration, particularly to the aborigines of this country ? If no further action is contemplated, are we to regard such action through the United Nations as merely a pious declaration to be carried out by those who feel disposed to do so ?

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

– The Declaration of Human Rights was the first of three steps which the United Nations proposed to take. The first step is a declaration. Provision is then made for a convention binding nations to accept the terms of it. The third step is the provision for implementation. So far, only the first step has been taken, and that is that a statement has been made in broad principle of the objectives that should be pursued. All members of the United Nations have adopted this declaration without dissent. The declaration has been placed before the Parliament, not by way of a formal motion for adoption, but during debate, and there has been no objection to its broad principles and purposes. It has a bearing on the relationships of people within a country to native peoples like our aborigines, and broadly speaking, it is a statement of aspirations and objectives. It is the first step towards doing something that will be binding internationally when, eventually, the declaration is adopted in the form of a convention.

page 727

QUESTION

MOTOR VEHICLES

Manufacture of Wheels

Mr THOMPSON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Can the Minister for Post-war Reconstruction say whether imported steel is to be made available to the firm of Rubery Owen and Kemsley Limited, of South Australia, to augment local supplies, and enable the company to complete its programme for the manufacture and supply of motor wheels to the manufacturers of motor vehicles in this country ? Can the Minister give some indication whether imported steel is to be made available to the company? I understand that the company has brought in about £250,000 worth of plant from England for the purpose of manufacturing motor wheels. I should like to know from the Minister whether full assistance will be given to the company to proceed with its work.

Mr DEDMAN:
ALP

– As the result of representations made to me by the honorable member on this subject, discussions took place between representatives of the firm of Rubery Owen and Kemsley Limited and officers of the Division of Industrial Development in the

Department of Post-war Reconstruction. The firm is occupying premises leased to it by the Government in a munitions factory that was established during the war. The firm is trying to negotiate contracts for the supply of wheels to firms manufacturing motor vehicles in Australia. I understand that it will be able to manufacture 200,000 wheels a year if it can get enough steel. About 1,000 tons a year would be needed. Unfortunately, the supply of locally produced steel is not sufficient, and my department has arranged with the Minister for Trade and Customs for the importation of 120 tons of steel each quarter for this firm, and it is hoped to get more later. The firm is to he congratulated on its initiative in setting up this new enterprise in Australia,

page 728

QUESTION

PETROL

Mr TURNBULL:
WIMMERA, VICTORIA

– I ask the Prime Minister whether it is a fact, as reported, that the Australian Government has hypothecated to its own use an amount of petrol per annum equal to approximately 60 per cent, of the supply that was available, under the recently terminated rationing scheme, to the whole State of Tasmania, If so, does that mean that, in the event of a reduction of the supply of petrol, the Australian Government does not intend to share in the economies that other bodies must practise and that government enterprise operating in competition with private companies will be placed at a distinct advantage?

Mr CHIFLEY:
ALP

– I do not know of any special allocation of refined petrol that has been made to Commonwealth departments. As Prime Minister, I have written personally to each Minister of the Government and to each government department stating that the quantity of petrol used by government departments must be reduced as far as essential needs will permit it to be reduced. I have also appointed officers of the Public Service to supervise the consumption of petrol by government departments. The honorable gentleman will realize, therefore, that, as far as government departments are concerned, all possible steps have been taken to conserve petrol, and as little as possible will be used in future. I do not know whether the second portion; of the honorable gentleman’s question refers to aviation spirit. A determination has been made by the Minister for .Shipping and Fuel, after consultation with other Ministers and myself, regarding the allocation of aviation spirit to companies that operate aviation services m Australia. Having regard to all the circumstances, I think that the determination is a fair one. If the honorable gentleman requires further information, 1 shall supply him with it later.

page 728

QUESTION

MR. L. W. HAMILTON, M.P

Newspaper Report - Use of “ Hansard “ “ Flat

Mr HAMILTON:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I wish to make a personal explanation which, I submit, involves an important question of privilege. It concerns the use by a newspaper of a report that appeared in an unrevised and confidential Hansard proof, which honorable members refer to as a ilansard “flat”.

An article appeared in the Sunday Times of Perth on Sunday, the 25th September. It was headed, in very prominent black type -

Hamilton M.H.R. Must Withdraw or be Branded a Liar.

The reason for the outburst is contained in the following extract from the newspaper : -

Much more serious than that is Mr. Haamilton’s statement that the article was by (here vu quote from Hansard) “Victor Courtney wlm. incidentally, has previously stated that we must liquidate the British Empire if socialism is to progress.

That report is incorrect. The words “ liquidation of the British Empire if socialism is to progress “ related to a statement by Sir .Stafford Cripps and not to one by Mr. Courtney. The Hansard report that will appear in the permanent volume will make that clear. The Principal Parliamentary Reporter has advised me that the use of the words “who, incidentally”, which, unfortunately, will appear in the “ proof “ number, are incorrectly related to Mr. Courtney and that the error was not detected in time for a correction to be made in the “ proof “ number. That was due to the fact that my own proof did not reach me in time for the correction to be made, as I was engaged upon work in ray constituency, 200 miles from Perth, when the proof addressed to me reached Perth.

The point that I am concerned with at the moment is that the newspaper report was not an extract from Hansard, as the Sunday Times claimed, but an extract from the Hansard “ flat “, every issue of which carries in large black type the heading -

Unrevised and Confidential. This issue is for the immediate convenience and sole use of recipients. As its contents have not been edited or checked, it is not to be quoted from or used in official files.

The words “ Unrevised and Confidential “ and “ Not to be quoted from or used in official files “ are underlined.

I reiterate that my remarks in relation to the British Empire referred to Sir Stafford Cripps and not to Mr. Courtney, as honorable members who listened to my speech on the budget will recall. I do not know Victor Courtney, although I know of him. 1 did not make the statement as alleged, and therefore I have nothing to withdraw. Further, I would not desire to cast aspersions or doubts upon any man’s integrity, honesty or loyalty without absolute proof.

One serious aspect of this matter is that apparently a cutting from an unrevised and confidential Hav&ard “ flat “ had been given to Mr. Courtney. In fact, he informed me over the telephone that he had a cutting from Hansard. As the Hansard containing that report has not yet been published, the extract obviously must have been taken from a “ flat “. These first proofs, or “ flats “, have a very restricted and rigidly controlled circulation and are for official purposes only. The reason for this strict control of the use of the “ flats “ is that it is recognized that, through inadvertence on the part of the Hansard reporter, the Government Printer, or an honorable member himself, the proof, which is prepared at speed and under heavy pressure, may contain a misstatement. That, in fact, is what happened in this instance.

This matter raises a question of farreaching importance to honorable members in the discharge of their parliamentary duties. The “ flats “ should never reach the hands of outside persons. I should be glad, therefore, Mr. Deputy

Speaker, if you would inform me, and in doing so inform the House, whether there is any procedure of the House by which honorable members can be protected against charges that are made under the claim that Hansard is being quoted when, in fact, the official Hansard has not been published.

Further, Mr. Deputy Speaker, will you, as the custodian of the rights and privileges of the members of this chamber, initiate inquiries so as to ascertain how the “ flat “ in this instance came into the hands of unauthorized persons, particularly as a breach of privilege of this character could be designed for a political purpose ?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Clark:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I consider that I should comment on the statement made by the honorable member, insofar as it reveals a misuse of th e Hansard “ flats “ amounting to a gross breach of faith, on the part of some person who receives them. The “ flats “, are marked -

Unrevised and Confidential. This issue is for the immediate convenience and sole use of recipients. As its contents have not been edited or checked, it is not to be quoted from or used in official files.

A limited number of these “ flats “ are issued to Commonwealth departments, private secretaries to Ministers, the leaders of parties in both Houses, and also members of the diplomatic corps. None are made available to press representatives. In the matter adverted to by the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Hamilton), it is obvious that an uncorrected proof was made available to the newspaper mentioned. Since I have been acting as Speaker I have refused several applications for the regular issue of these proofs, because I felt, from my own observations, that the convenience is being abused. I have discussed the whole matter with Mr. Speaker, and I know that his views coincide with mine. It will be remembered that the matter was raised by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Menzies) on the 16th March, 1944, and that the position in regard to the issue of such proofs was then stated by Mr. Speaker.

In the circumstances I intend to submit the whole matter to Mr. Speaker, with the suggestion that the issue of these uncorrected proofs be reviewed. If it is decided to continue the issue I would suggest that the Privi.leges Committee he asked to report whether the unauthorized use of the proofs is a breach of privilege.

Mr Archie Cameron:

– Is Mr. Deputy Speaker making a motion?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– There is no motion.

Mr McEwen:

– What about inquiring who made the “flat” available?

page 730

BUDGET 1949-50

In Committee of Supply: Consideration resumed from the 28th September (vide page 714), on motion by Mr. Chifley -

That the first item in the Estimates under Division No. 1 - Senate - namely, “ Salaries and Allowances, £12,400 be agreed to.

Mr LEMMON:
Minister for Works and Housing · Forrest · ALP

– In supporting the budget, I say at the outset that one could not fail to be proud to be associated with the Government and the Prime Minister and Treasurer (Mr. Chifley), who were responsible for it. It has been said that the budget has not produced any surprises. I consider that it has produced one of the greatest surprises that the Parliament and the people of Australia have ever known, because on the eve of a general election, when the great mass of the people thought that the budget might seek to offer a bribe to the electors to return this Government to office by their votes, it does nothing of the sort. The budget marks the present Treasurer’s record service in his great office. No other Treasurer has served this country for so long a period continuously as has the present Treasurer. The budget is also a record in that it spells one word for the people of Australia. That word is “ security “. This budget is founded on a sound financial policy that has made provision for any economic recession that might affect this country as a result of conditions overseas. Right through the budget there is that note of underlying caution which, I consider, has created throughout Australia a great degree of confidence in the Treasurer and which has made the production of this budget possible. The Treasurer took this country through the

Avar period practically unscathed economically. During the war this country, in proportion to its population, had a greater number of people directly and indirectly engaged in war activities than any other allied country. While that great task of conducting our war effort, which put such a great strain on this country, was being undertaken, the Treasurer did not increase our overseas indebtedness by one penny. Even during the war period, in fact, he was preparing for post-war conditions. He knew, from past experience, what economic upsetsmust follow a world conflagration. He made preparations, therefore, to ensure that this country would not be mortgaged to overseas bondholders, as it was during World War I., and the years that followed it. At that time this country was mortgaged, first to bondholders in the United Kingdom, and then,, when those bondholders considered that our capacity to pay interest on overseas loans was being reached, to the United States for loans at interest rates ranging up to as much as 7 per cent. Those debt charges became one of our greatest problems, at a time when our overseas prices dropped and our income from exports was low, that the then Treasurer had to meet. During the darkest days of World War II. the present Treasurer was laying the foundations of a financial policy that would ensure that neither the present nor future generations would have to find the money to pay for our war effort to foreign bond.hoIders. His policy was that we should finance our war effort from within Australia itself. The result was that during that period, when we were under the great financial strain imposed by war on a country with a population of only 7,000,000 people, we did not increase our overseas commitments. In fact, we reduced them by about £109,000,000. At the same time, because of our sound financial position and the high regard i» which Australian securities were held abroad, we were able to convert loans at reduced rates of interest and thereby effect a saving of £578,000 from which the people of Australia are now reaping the benefit. In addition, the Government successfully handled the problems associated with the nation’s transition from a war-time to a peace-time economy. Throughout that period it withstood pressure groups and other influences which inevitably are brought to bear upon the leaders of governments during general elections. The Treasurer has never altered his course in steering the financial ship of State ; and I have no doubt that thanks to the good judgment of the electors he will continue for many years to keep the finances of this country on an even keel.

I propose to deal at some length with the reserve of works programme which has been prepared to protect Australia against any recession that may occur in the future. First, I should like to make it clear that that programme, which is estimated to cost £743,000,000, has not been prepared solely by the Australian Government. It has been evolved by the National Works Council which consists of representatives of all the State governments as well as those of the Australian Government. Mr. Hoy, who is the executive officer of the council, worked out the details of the programme in conjunction with the engineers and architects of the Department of Works and Housing. Those works embrace a very wide field and will be carried out in each of the States. I shall refer to some of them in order to indicate how they will ensure that a recession shall not be allowed to recur in this country. After World War I., overseas prices for our primary products suddenly declined, and Ave were obliged to liquidate our overseas balances because of our loss of earning capacity as a nation. Under those conditions a fear complex developed in this country as it did in other countries also. The building industry was the first industry to feel the impact of that recession, and the same complex spread to other industries with the result that at one period as many as 750,000 Australians were out of employment. We have now planned to ensure that we shall not again experience those conditions in this country. Most of the works included in the reserve of works programme are engineering and constructional projects. The programme consists of a total of 6,850 different undertakings. I mention that fact because honorable members opposite, particularly the honorable member for Indi (Mr. McEwen), have criticized the Government’s plans in this direction. They have implied that the only works that have been planned to serve as a buffer against any recession are such schemes as the standardization of railway gauges, the Snowy Mountains hydro-electric project and undertakings in remote places like the Ord River district, where the workers would be forced to go for employment. The fact is that none of the schemes mentioned by the honorable member for Indi is included in the 6,850 individual projects which compose the reserve of works programme. Those projects will be carried out, not only in each of the States, but also in practically every major town in the Commonwealth. They do not include the scheme for the development of roads in the Northern Territory for the purpose of increasing beef production to provide greater supplies of beef to the United Kingdom. Preparations in respect of 28.3 per cent, of the projects included in the reserve of works programme have already been advanced to such a stage that they can be put into operation immediately should a change for the worse occur in our economic circumstances. In respect of those works, tenders can be called immediately, and that course will be followed as soon as we see any sign of a fear complex arising in industry. One of the most difficult problems in stemming the onset of a recession is to abolish the fear complex. As we shall be in a position to let tenders for so many works practically at a moment’s notice we shall be able to deal with that problem, because those works will have wide ramifications in the numbers and classes of tradesmen to which they will give employment. For instance, the construction of earthworks will give an impetus to engineer repair shops and other associated industries. The construction of buildings such as schools, hospitals and houses, estimated to cost £247,000,000, is the greatest single item of the entire programme. Such undertakings will provide employment for all the building trades, brick and cement works and steel and iron works and other industries which supply basic constructional materials.

That section of the programme will guarantee to those industries a constant demand for all the products that they can supply. In that way we shall keep the wheels of industry turning. The next highest item in the programme is that of reconditioning railway and tramway tracks, the condition of which depreciated greatly during the depression and war periods. The ever-growing demand for maintenance work on these facilities is a guarantee not only to employees in the steel industry but also to the manual workers who perform that type of work. Then we come to the provision of £86,000,000 for the construction of dams and weirs. These engineering projects will necessitate the use of a great quantity of heavy equipment. The fourth highest item relates to the laying of water, sewerage and drainage pipes, and the fixing and fabricating of steel installations. This wide variety of work will require the services of tradesmen and artisans in many categories. It is therefore apparent that at the onset of a recession the Government will be able to undertake 28 per cent, of the projects planned, which represents 4’3.5 per cent, of the value of all work contemplated. If a recession were to start to develop to-morrow in this country because of a collapse of overseas prices, wo would be able immediately, to call tenders to implement a works programme costing over £300,000,000. This is the greatest possible assurance, not only to the workers, but also to the people that are engaged in the production of materials in this country. This programme has been so drawn up that there will not be a great movement of men away from their homes, as was the case during the dark days of the depression, when thousands of men were engaged on unproductive work, such as shovelling sand. It is not intended that the labour of Australia shall again be wasted in that way. This great works programme will be of lasting advantage to Australia. I point out that every one of the jobs included in this £743,000,000 programme will have to be undertaken within the next ten or fifteen years in any event in the interest of the general economy of this country. Inevitably there will be periods of world recession in the future.

Instead of allowing these economicblizzards to hit our people first, and send them into a flat spin, as happened during; the last depression, the Government has taken steps to counter the effects of any economic upsets that may occur in thefuture. As honorable members know, a serious economic readjustment was experienced recently in connexion with thedevaluation of the currency. This indicates just how quickly an economic recession could strike us. We are prepared,, however, and should such a recession occur, work will be available immediately for every Australian who wants it. That work will be of a type that will be of lasting benefit to the economy of this country. This is the greatest assurance that the workers could have, and people engaged in business activities may now go ahead confidently, in the knowledge that the goods that they produce will always be required.

The greatest possible compliment waspaid to this budget by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Menzies). As all honorable members know, the right honorable gentleman is the first to take up the cudgels when the opportunity presents itself for him to wax eloquent. He does not hesitate to treat honorable members to a display of his great oratorical ability, which we all acknowledge. However, although the budget speech was delivered on the 7th September, we had to wait for 14 days to elapse before hearing from the right honorable gentleman the official view of the Opposition. The budget was so well received by the people of this country, and instilled such confidence in them, that instead of batting first, the right honorable gentleman permitted the honorable member for Warringah (Mr. Spender) to open from the Opposition side of the chamber. That indicates clearly that the Leader of the Opposition wanted to feel his way before making any comment. The one real point that the right honorable gentleman made was that prosperity can be gauged only by the quantity of goods purchased, not by national income. After we had waited for 14 days to hear the right honorable gentleman’s views of the budget, that was his only constructive comment. This is, in effect, an elementary point in ordinary economics, such as a school boy would enunciate before leaving the State school.

Mr Langtry:

– Perhaps this is an illustration of the old adage that silence signifies consent.

Mr LEMMON:

– That may be so. The right honorable gentleman’s ability to criticize and analyse a proposition is well known. The budget was so sound, and had been received so well by the people of this country, that that was his only material observation. It was not a criticism. The right honorable gentleman regaled honorable members with a very valuable analysis of the situation that had developed as the result of the devaluation of currency and concluded by saying that devaluation was a challenge to greater production efforts in the sterling area. I do not share the right honorable gentleman’s pessimism about the effects of devaluation. Although even the economic advisers to the Government may feel some misgivings about the future, I believe that undue importance should not be attached to the estimate given by the Leader of the Opposition that we shall have to increase our exports to hard currency areas by at least 40 per cent, to maintain our existing credits. The effects of devaluation will not all be disadvantageous. One result should bc an easing of the demand for dollar goods in sterling areas. That applies particularly to what may be termed nonessential goods. In devaluation, I see achallenge not so much to industrial workers in this country and in the United Kingdom, as to the captains of industry, because our altered currency relationship with .the dollar areas means, in effect, that a 30 per cent, ad valorem tariff has been placed upon dollar imports. That Ls a challenge to industrialists in the sterling area to undertake the manufacture of many goods formerly imported from dollar countries. Local manufacturers now enjoy a competitive advantage which they have never had before.

The Leader of the Opposition, pursuing his pessimistic thoughts, asked how production could be increased in this country in view of the fact that we already have a state of full employment. I repeat that the challenge to increased productive efforts is not so much to the industrial workers as to the manufac turers themselves. The real reason why the United States of America to-day has 55 per cent, of the world’s industrial production is not that American workers are better than Australian or United Kingdom workers, but that factory organization in the United States of America surpasses anything that we have ever known. That is the fundamental reason for America’s industrial leadership. Therefore, I say that increased production in the sterling area will come not from longer working hours, but from the modernization of manufacturing methods and plant. For instance, one frequently hears criticism of the low output of bricks in this country. To me, the wonder is that any bricks are produced at all. Conditions in the clay pits and in the brick-making industry generally are prehistoric. Bricks are still being made by hand as they were when my grandfather was a little boy. I have not seen one modern tunnel kiln in this country. When I became Minister for Works and Housing, I examined the brick-making industry in Australia, and I found it in a state of disintegration. I have directed that modern brick kilns, as efficient as any in the world, shall be established in our capital of Canberra. That is being done at present. I conclude my remarks on this matter by saying that I am confident that devaluation presents great opportunities to many sections of the community. I hope that the captains of industry particularly, will take advantage of their opportunities by modernizing their factories and workshops and undertaking production of many items which, so far, we have had to purchase from dollar countries.

I shall touch briefly on housing. About a year ago, I estimated that, during the financial year 1948-49, approximately 56,000 houses would be commenced in this country and that, in the same period, approximately 52,000 houses would be completed. I find now that the number commenced - I am referring to homes and flats constructed privately, under the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement, under the war service homes scheme - was actually 60,000, or 4,000 more than my estimate, and that the number completed was 52,500, or 500 more than my estimate. In the last ten years .before the war, the number of homes built throughout Australia averaged 27,000 a year. Therefore, last year’s contribution of 52,500 by Australian workmen is an extremely creditable effort. I am confident that the figure for the current financial year will he considerably more because approximately 70 per cent, of the new Australians who have been brought to this country by the Minister for Immigration (Mr. Calwell) in the last twelve months, have gone into industries associated with building, including brickmaking, tile works, cement works, steel production and timber cutting and milling. The contribution that these new Australians will make to our building programme will he considerable. Under the War Service Homes Act, 576 homes were made available to ex-servicemen in 1945-46; 2,508 in 1946-47, 3,876 in 1947-48 and . 6,285 in 1948-49. These figures reveal the great impetus that has been given to the provision of war service homes by the Labour Government since the termination of the war. This increased activity was made possible largely as the result of the re-organization of the administration of war service homes by this Government. Indeed the building programme improved so rapidly, that six months ago, I was able to arrange for the immediate construction of homes for all war widow applicants. In making houses available to all war widow applicants without delay the Government gave practical expression to its desire to give the utmost assistance to those who had lost their husbands during the war. Let us compare the present position in relation to the construction of war service homes with the position which existed when .anti-Labour governments were in office. At the 30th June, 1938, no fewer than 479 ex-servicemen of World War I. were still on the waiting list for war service homes.

Mr Pollard:

– At that time 10 per cent, of the working population of Australia was unemployed.

Mr LEMMON:

– That is so. In spite of the fact that there were then thousands of building tradesmen out of work, the government of the day built only 21 war service homes in the financial year ended the 30th June. At the 30th June, 1939, when unemployment was still at a high level, 474 ex-servicemen of World War I. were still waiting for war service homes, but in that year the government built only 37 homes. Thus, although 21 years had elapsed since the termination of the war, hundreds of ex-servicemen were still waiting to be given an opportunity to take advantage of the benefits conferred on them by the War Service Homes Act. The president of the Liberal party, Mr. R. G. Casey, has said that if a Liberal government is returned to office at the next general election, it will have thousands of homes built for young couples. In view of the sorry record of anti-Labour governments in the past in the housing field, can we place any reliance on such a promise? In 1937, when Mr. Casey was Treasurer of the Commonwealth, Labour members of the Opposition desired to discuss the estimates for the War Service Homes Commission, but he gagged the debate and refused them an opportunity to do so.

Mr Pollard:

– He built a house for himself in Canberra at about that time.

Mr LEMMON:

– That is so. Although he had announced that the Government of which he was a member would make available approximately £20,000,000 for the construction of houses for the people, the only house he built was one for his own use in Canberra. It cost between £7,000 and £8,000, and the Commonwealth bore the expense. It now houses the Canadian Legation.

Mr Pollard:

– He also built a dog kennel.

Mr LEMMON:

– I understand that he also made a valuable contribution towards solving the housing problem of the day by building a dog kennel for a dog owned by a former Prime Minister, Mr. Bruce.

The pledge given by members of the Australian Labour party to uphold the platform and objective of the party has been frequently referred to in this debate. Honorable members opposite have most dishonestly misrepresented the facts in relation to that pledge. The party’s sole objective is to socialize industry production, distribution and exchange. The objective is accompanied by a declaration, to which I wish to draw attention. I well remember the occasion when the honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron) was represented by the honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) as having said, in effect-

Mr Archie Cameron:

– If the Minister is not able to quote the exact words, he should not mention the matter.

Mr LEMMON:

– The honorable member for Dalley stated that the honorable member for Barker had said that he did not believe that the farmers should have the right to control their own products. The honorable member for Barker immediately rose in his place, read the Hansard report of his speech and objected to the misrepresentation of his words.

Mr McDonald:

– Is the Minister sure that it was the honorable member for Barker and not the honorable member for Corangamite ?

Mr LEMMON:

– It was the honorable member for Barker, and he took strong exception to only a portion of a sentence being quoted without its context.

Mr McDonald:

– And quite rightly, too.

Mr LEMMON:

– Honorable members opposite, who object very strongly when they believe that they have been misrepresented, have indulged in a great deal of misrepresentation about the declaration that is made by all members of the Australian Labour party. Both the declaration and the objective were agreed to about twenty years ago.

Mr Archie Cameron:

– That is not so ; the declaration was then ruled out of order. [Quorum formed.’]

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Sheehy:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Order! The Minister’s time baa expired.

Mr. BLAIN (Northern Territory) ! 4.10] . - Before attention was directed to the state of the committee, the Minister for Works and Housing (Mr. Lemmon) was trying to blind the people of Australia to the real objectives of this socialist Government by throwing dust in their eyes. Having been dealt with mercilessly by the honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron) last evening, the Minister tried to hoodwink the people to-day. However, he will discover that the people are not dumb-bells, and that the Government cannot hide its socialist objectives.

The committee is discussing the Commonwealth budget for the financial year 1949-50. Last week, the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Thompson) endeavoured to explain to honorable members precisely what a budget is. I thought that the honorable gentleman gave that dissertation for the benefit and information of the Treasurer (Mr. Chifley), who had introduced this budget. Other honorable members also have explained the meaning and significance of the budget. Every one knows what it is, but the honorable member for Deakin (Mr. Hutchinson) used rather an apt metaphor to describe it when he likened it to a mirror which reflected the past and also gave us a vision of the future. I should like to remind1 the honorable member for Deakin that a reflector must be backed with silver in order to ensure a reflecting surface. But I desire to refer to another reflecting surface, namely, the surface of public opinion. The Government, by bravado, is trying to hide its responsibility for the conditions that are reflected in the budget and is plainly apprehensive about its fate at the forthcoming general election. Honorable members opposite fear the wrath of the people. They see a dread vision reflected from the surface of public opinion. The wrath of the people will assuredly fall on this socialist Government on the 10th December next, when the general election will be held. Almost every Government supporter has given a dissertation in an endeavour to hide the Labour party’s real objective, which is to socialize everything in Australia.

Mr Duthie:

– How could the Labour party do that?

Mr BLAIN:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

– The manifesto of the Labour party advocates the socialization of industry, production, distribution and exchange. The honorable member for Warringah (Mr. Spender), who opened the budget debate on behalf of the Opposition, made some pertinent remarks that deserve the approbation of every free person in Australia. I am completely in agreement with the honorable gentleman’s statement that Australia does not respond to the socialist approach and treatment. Of course it does not! As I shall proceed to show, the Northern Territory, in particular, does not respond to the socialist approach. The Government boasts of its plans to develop that vast area of the Commonwealth, but the Northern Territory cannot possibly respond to socialist treatment, even if the people of the great cities in the southern parts of Australia do so. The honorable member for “Warringah also described the budget as defeatist, and he indicated an overlapping of governmental authority that was resulting in fantastic waste. In using those words, the honorable member certainly “ said a mouthful “. His assessment of the position is perfectly correct. He also stated that the Government watches the rising cost of living, but takes no preventive measures. He shrewdly showed that the Government is financing its policy, not from income tax, but from indirect taxes. As the worker makes a substantial contribution to Commonwealth revenue through indirect taxes, the Government is virtually taxing his shirt off his back. The honorable member for Warringah also urged’ the Government to increase the price of gold in order to strengthen the Australian economy. For years the honorable member for Barker and I have been trying to convince the Government of the wisdom of that policy. As a result of the recent devaluation of our currency, because of the socialists’ failure abroad, the price of gold has been increased to approximately £15 per oz., but the Government cannot claim any credit for that. The Minister for Post-war Reconstruction (Mr. Dedman), who has represented this country at international conferences on trade since the war, has really “ sold “ Australia. The Havana agreement has destroyed the resilience of new countries to trade.

The Minister for Works and Housing criticized the sound views that were expressed by the honorable member for Warringah, but I award that honorable gentleman 100 marks plus for his speech. Let me say at this point, that I congratulate the Government on its will to do something for the Northern Territory. I desire to pay that tribute now, because later, I shall not be offering bouquets.

I shall show that the Government’s method of developing the Northern Territory is so fantastic that cattlemen regard it as a joke. I urge the Treasurer to accept my invitation to visit the Northern Territory in order to gain at first-hand a knowledge of how Commonwealth money that is being expended in that part of the Commonwealth, is being, metaphorically, poured down the sink. The comparatively few new settlers who are being established on the land there do not justify such substantial expenditure as is being incurred. In the public interest, the Treasurer should see for himself how money is being wasted in the Northern Territory, and he should make a check on the Minister for the Interior (Mr. Johnson) and the Minister for Works and Housing, who are responsible for the fantastic methods of expending the money that are being employed. The Government should immediately alter the present policy, unless it decides quickly to settle many more people in the Northern Territory. If time will not permit me to deal with these matters fully in this debate, I shall take the opportunity, when the proposed vote for the Northern Territory is under consideration, to indicate to the Government what I believe should be done to warrant that expenditure.

The Government has adopted the fantastic policy of constructing roads instead of railways in the Northern Territory. Before progress is made with those works, the Government should undertake the sub-division of the large holdings in that vast area. I hope that the Treasurer realizes that this matter is most serious. Whilst congratulating the Government on its will to do something for the Northern Territory, I remind honorable members that it is merely following the advice of those of us who went, ahead twenty years ago to map out a policy for the development of that part of the Commonwealth. I feel justified in reading an extract from my maiden speech in this .chamber on the 9th December, 1934, about the Northern Territory. It is as follows: -

We have heard of nothing but wheat, wheat, wheat; and the idea seems to be firmly fixed in the minds of honorable members that the southern parts of Australia are really the only parts of it that count. I trust that the problems and possibilities of Northern Australia will be considered with sanity and sympathy, and that we shall, by a measure of economic nationalism for our tropical regions develop the pastoral, agricultural and mineral resources of this huge area, so that, before very long, a new light, another star, will burst in the firmament of the Commonwealth activities, the star of the Northern Territory.

As honorable members will acknowledge, the Government is only following my advice, and I congratulate it on doing so. Yesterday, the honorable member for Denison (Dr. Gaha) stated that, in many matters, he was 25 years ahead of his time. I have always said that it takes fifteen years to convince the Commonwealth of the need to carry out a developmental policy in the Northern Territory. I warn the Government that the Northern Territory cannot be developed by a socialist programme and regime. Any opinion to the contrary is complete nonsense. Even the churches have revolted against the Government’s socialist policy, a fact of which honorable members opposite are aware. At a conference of the representatives of all churches held at Newcastle yesterday, delegates were extremely critical. A report of the meeting, which is published in the Sydney Morning Herald to-day under the heading, “ Socialists’ Cure is Worse than Disease, says Priest “, reads as follows : -

The Reverend Dr. P. J. Ryan said to-night that socialist theorists who sought to abolish private property as a cure for modern economic ills were advocating a remedy which would prove worse than the disease.

Dr. Ryan, who is the director of Roman Catholic Social Science, was speaking at the Religion and Life Week conference at Newcastle.

He said the injustice of industrial capitalism consisted of the concentration of ownership.

The answer was not to concentrate it still further ;by handing all over to the State.

He said Socialism was an out-moded theory, which arose as an extreme reaction against the excesses of industrial capitalism of the last century.

What we need is not less capital, but more capitalists; not the abolition of property, but the wider distribution of it among private owners, Dr. Ryan said.

This Government, however, supports monopolies. In the Northern Territory, it gave away 11,000 square miles in 1944 to the Alexandria Station. The news- paper report of Dr. Ryan’s statement continues -

We want this to enable the worker to become an owner so that lie might achieve economic independence and political freedom.

The industrial capitalist admitted in theory the right of personal property, but denied it in practice to the great majority of his fellow men.

The Socialists’ .proposed remedy for this condition would intensify and aggravate all the evil against which they have rebelled and add new evils of its own.

Private ownership is a natura.], instinctive and necessary thing which derives immediately from the nature and needs of men.

With the right of private ownership there goes serious duties and responsibilities.

We maintain, therefore, that the right of private ownership is limited by the requirements of the common welfare.

Private ownership is necessary for the welfare of the family. Hand over all ownership to the State and the State, not the father, becomes the provider.

Once the State becomes the provider, bureaucrats will tell families just to what extent they are to be allowed to exist.

There we have the matter in a nut-shell. Now let us see what the representative of the Presbyterian Church had to say. I again quote from the newspaper report as follows : -

The Reverend W. Young, Presbyterian representative, said: “There is conflict in society to-day between the idea of individual possessions in the Liberal theory, and the idea of collective ownership in Socialist or Communist theory.

The public ownership idea found its expression in Marx’s theory that all evil derived from the rise of private property, and assumed that the socialization of property would destroy all the inequalities of economic power.

Marxism is under the spell of too romantic a conception of human nature.

It thinks that the inclination of men to take advantage of each other is a corruption deriving from private ownership, and that socialization will eliminate this tendency.

The socialists, who support this Government, have been found out by the churchmen, and exposed by the Opposition. What case have they to put before the people in the forthcoming election campaign? Now let me go back a little. Two years ago, the Prime Minister (Mr. Chifley), with a great flourish of trumpets, announced tha.t Australia was about to enter “ the golden age “. We have since learned that “ the golden age “ has been reserved for the Commonwealth Treasurer, and for a few socialists who have not been averse to becoming capitalists themselves. They love money just as much as any one else does. “ The golden age “ has turned out to be a thing of tinsel, except for the rabbits, which are rapidly approaching their millennial age, as the Minister for the Interior noted on his recent tour. For the people generally, the Chifley Government has provided “ the scarlet age “, “ the red age “, “ the age of socialism “, which must lead to “ the black age “ of depression and despair. The Government is preparing for that age now, as the Minister for Works and. Housing has announced. If we had other than a socialist government, it would not be necessary to prepare a harum-scarum plan for reserve works such as the standardization of railway gauges, &c. Let us treat the country as one would a growing tree, which should be pruned from the base up. The Minister for Works and Housing is behaving as if the tree were already old and worn out, producing, a little fruit only on the tips of its branches. He has not even placed before the Parliament proposals for an economic survey of the nation, so that we may know what are our resources as a- preliminary to developing them. He seems to regard Australia as finished, and he stands by waiting for the blow to. fall. Then, when the depression is on us again, the> matter for many of our workers will be one of getting back to the pick and shovel.

Mr Haylen:

– An economic survey of the Northern Territory has already been made.

Mr BLAIN:

– Then let us get on with its development. The Government has not even provided a scheme of national social services, as it promised to do. Some day, no doubt, there will be a real national scheme on a contributary basis, such as was proposed by the Lyons Government and was fought tooth and nail by the Labour party. Let us remember that the basis of our social services was laid by other than Labour governments. In years gone by, invalid and old-age pensions, the maternity allowance and child endowment were instituted, by non-Labour governments. Naturally, it was the duty of succeeding governments to effect improvements, but this Government has tried to make the people believe that they are not paying for social services. In recent years, little has been done in the way of providing social services, except to threaten to conscript and penalize doctors. The national superannuation scheme has been abandoned because it would be too costly. The Government has introduced a half-baked free medicine scheme, for which the people pay through the nose without getting any medicine in return. Under, the Government’s proposals, the people would have no right to choose their own doctors.

In drawing up its plans for a national health service, the Government has neglected and, snubbed those who have made it their business to give the people a medical service, including medicine. The Minister for Health (Senator McKenna), in his speech on the National’ Health Bill last December, admitted that he had completely ignored the friendly societies, which provide a magnificent social service based upon personal initiative, enterprise, and humanitarian feeling. There are 750,000 members of friendly societies in Australia. Therefore,, about 2,000,000 Australians, including the dependants of members, benefit from the activities of the societies. This represents approximately 30 per cent, of the entire population ; yet. the. Minister admitted: that he had given no thoughtto the position of the friendly societies. The Government has not consulted with them, or- given them, a place in its proposed health scheme. Neither has it listened to the doctors who, believing that prevention is. better- than cure; submitted an alternative- health scheme eighteen months ago. That plan provided for three major activities, namely, the prevention of disease by improving nutritional, housing and educational standards-, the securing of optimum efficiency of medical treatment through the fullest use of existing medical and hospital facilities, and the subsidizing of State health organizations so as to enable the States to expand and improve existing services, build modern hospitals, and provide ample modern equipment. The Government’s efforts to bribe the electors into supporting its plan to conscript the doctors does not make sense. It has even enlisted the support of the Australian Council of Trades Unions in an effort to achieve its object. It has scrapped all common-sense considerations.

This brings me to the burning question of health services in the Northern Territory. I do not retract one word of anything that I have said in this chamber about the hospital services in the terri tory. Although I am opposed to the establishment of nationalized medical services in the more populous southern areas, I agree that we must have government schemes in isolated regions, such as Tasmania, the north-western part of Western Australia, western -Queensland, and the Northern Territory. The whole issue in the Northern Territory has been confused, first, by personnel difficulties and, secondly, by disputes that have involved unpleasant personal recriminations that I need not discuss now. I am anxious to assist the Minister for Health, because I believe that he is trying to provide the Northern Territory with an efficient medical service, and I have even congratulated him upon his efforts to set things right. However, the job of establishing a smooth-working and efficient organization will take a long time. Darwin and Alice Springs have grown up. Darwin has a population of about 5,000 and Alice Springs has a population of about 3,000. Those people want to have doctors in private practice, and there is scope for the work of private practitioners in those towns. The Government could help to fulfil the wishes of the people by guaranteeing an income of £700 or £800 a year to a doctor in each town under its scheme and allowing him to retain the right to engage in private practice. Men and women want to have ‘the right -to choose their own doctors. Doctors engaged in private practice in the “territory should be allotted beds in the hospitals for their patients. The people of the territory are crying out for this elementary right.

I -have engaged in correspondence with the Minister for Health over a period of many months in an effort to persuade him to arrange for hospitals in the Northern Territory to be conducted as -hospitals in other parts of Australia are conducted. I have suggested in this chamber on three previous occasions that the Government should allow the hospitals at Darwin, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs to be managed by elected hospital committees. Under the Government’s system, doctors leave the territory to seek better conditions elsewhere. The last one who left, a very sane man who is a friend of mine, did not make a great public outcry about his departure in the communistic newspapers or in any other newspapers. He simply wrote an amiable letter to the Minister for Health as the Minister pointed out in the House. No umbrage was taken on either side. He merely pointed out that he could not fit in with the system of regimentation involved in the Government’s scheme and intended to engage in private practice elsewhere. He did the right thing. That man returned to the Northern Territory after the war and asked me to make representations to the Minister with a view to obtaining for him the right to engage in private practice. He had been there twenty years previously.

Mr Thompson:

– How many doctors would be required for the territory?

Mr BLAIN:

– One doctor in private practice at Darwin and another at Alice Springs in private practice would satisfy the requirements of the people, according to what they have told me. Unfortunately, doctors will not undertake the financial risk that would be involved1 in going to those places on their own account to establish practices. Therefore, the Government should guarantee them ,a certain amount of work under its scheme and allow them to practise independently as well. Dr. Riley wrote to me in 1947 seeking my help to gain for him the right to send his patients to the government hospitals and the right to practise privately. His requests were refused, and eventually he accepted a government position. However, he was unable to tolerate the government system, under which he was virtually treated as a log of wood through the system of remote control.

Dentists in the Northern Territory also suffer similarly. Qualified professional men do not like being treated as pieces of furniture. They like to have a certain amount of authority and the right to control their own professional activities.

The dental organization in the Northern Territory is a part of the medical organization. The dentists have told me that they want to be placed in a separate organization, under the charge of a dentist, so that they will not be obliged to take instructions from a member of another profession who is not familiar with their work. That appears to me .to be a reasonable request. All sorts of annoying restrictions irritate doctors and dentists in the territory. Only recently, some minor repair work had to be done at the hospital at Tennant Creek. The doctor naturally thought that he had only to go to the office of the Department of Works and Housing, 200 yards away, and ask for the repairs to be done. But the procedure was not so simple as that. A requisition had to be sent 300 miles to Alice Springs, then 1,000 miles to Darwin, then to Adelaide, and finally to Canberra for final approval, after which it had to be send back by the same devious route. Honorable members may think that that is a fantastic story, but it is the truth. How can any qualified medical practitioner be expected to put up with that sort of thing? I am keen to help the Government to establish an efficient medical service for the territory. It should allow hospital committees to function, and give hospital secretaries the authority to order repairs, which should be carried out immediately. The doctors should have reasonable authority instead of being required to refer almost every decision to the head-quarters of the centralized medical service at Canberra. The Northern Territory health service will not operate efficiently while this Government persists in rejecting my appeals for the granting of authority to doctors and the election of hospital committees. Until my suggestions’ are accepted and put into practice, the people of the territory will continue to suffer as the result of doctors becoming disgusted with the restrictions and red tape and leaving to go elsewhere. Doctors leave the territory not because they lack ability but because, as human beings, they want to express themselves freely and will not allow themselves to be regimented’.

If the Government wishes to pay all or some of the cost of doctors’ fees, it can do so without any of the ballyhoo in which it has indulged. It could pay the money direct to patients, who could make their own arrangements with the doctors, in the same way as maternity payments are made, without fuss and1 bother. Under such a simple scheme, the patients could go to the doctors and hospitals of their choice instead of virtually being directed by the Government, as happens under the present scheme. Unfortunately, the Government prefers to impose its will upon the 7,000 doctors of Australia and make them into bureaucrats with thousands of forms in triplicate to sign and handle as mere front-rank soldiers in the great paper war that is hampering every form of business and activity in Australia to-day. The doctors have rightly objected to becoming paid financial agents of the Government. They have objected to a scheme that would make available to all and sundry the private medical records of their patients. A shocking example of that sort of thing occurred in this Parliament recently, when the Minister for the Army (Mr. Chambers) read the personal medical record’ of a soldier in Japan. If a Minister could do such a thing, nothing would be secret under a national medical service. The doctors object to a scheme under which they would be required to spend more time filling in forms than upon the treatment of their patients. The real reason why the socalled free medicine scheme has not come into operation is that the Government’s prime objective is to impose a. system of conscription upon doctors and patients alike rather than to give to the patients the full range of medicines that the doctors consider to be necessary for them. There is a general revolt against the scheme throughout southern Australia.

The high taxes that the Government has imposed have not led to an increase of production. On the contrary, in our primary industries and in some of our basic secondary industries, they have caused a decrease of production. For instance, many dairymen who at one time milked 60 cows are now milking only 20 or 25, because, as they will say if they are asked, the difference between the returns from 25 cows and 60 cows would go only to the Treasury. We know that many farmers are selling potatoes and other commodities surreptitiously in order to avoid taxation. Surely it is a sound argument in favour of a reduction of the taxes that are at present paid by primary producers to say that such a reduction would enable us to export greater quantities of food to our kinsmen overseas. The food-producing industries of Australia have suffered disastrously during the last decade. Since 1938-39, dairy production has declined by 41,700 tons a year. Our annual production of whole milk has decreased from 1,1S9,000,000 gallons to 1,168,000,000 gallons, but in Canada and America the output of this commodity has increased considerably. The area under crop in this country has decreased by nearly 9,000,000 acres. Even the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture (Mr. Pollard), who, despite statistics, stoutly contended for years that Australia’s primary production was increasing, has recently issued a warning that wo may soon have to import foodstuffs, including meat. That would be a tragic situation for a country, the whole economy of which is still based upon primary production. In the field of secondary industry, it is tragic to note that Australia is the only steel-producing country in the world in which the production of steel has decreased in recent years. For the six months that ended in December, 1947, the production of ingotsteel in Australia was 660,000 tons, but during the six months that ended in December, 1948, only 540,000 tons were produced. The corresponding figures for pig iron are 627,000 tons and 534,000 tons. The position of the coal industry is so well known that I shall not insult the committee by quoting figures. The slackening of production in these vital industries, which is due to high taxation and Communist-inspired stoppages, is mainly responsible for the difficulty that is at present experienced in obtaining wire netting, fencing wire, barbed wire, galvanized iron, windmills and other equipment that is needed by primary producers for maintenance and expansion. Those remarks apply with special force to remote areas such as the Northern Territory. The Government has one fixed idea. It is the imposition of a form of socialized control upon every man, woman and child in Australia. All other considerations have been subordinated to that objective.

On page 5 of the budget speech the following passage appears : -

The Commonwealth has plans for encouraging the development of the cattle industry in Northern Australia, and so increase 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.

There are great differences of opinion in the Northern Territory and western Queensland concerning the soundness of the idea of transporting cattle by road. Road transport of cattle has been successful in the Alice Springs area over distances of up to 250 miles on unsealed roads and up to 350 miles on bitumen roads, but there is evidence that this form of transport is not satisfactory over distances greater than those. It is, therefore, necessary to revise our ideas of the suitability of road transport for moving large mobs of cattle. Mr. Kurt Johansen, who has done a magnificent job in the Alice .Springs area, has designed his own vehicles for the transport of cattle by road. Four trailers are towed by one unit, and each trailer will carry 20 or 25 small cattle and a smaller number of large cattle. Mr. Johansen has really made history ‘by transporting cattle from the properties of the small producers in the Alice Springs area. My view, however, is that the northern part of the Northern Territory will not be adequately developed unless railway facilities are provided. The big mobs of cattle are in an area extending from the Kimberleys to the Leichhardt River on’ the Gulf of Carpentaria. I suggest to the Government that large-scale road construction projects should be abandoned and that railways should be constructed from Mount Isa. to the Barkly Tableland, from Alice Springs to Tennant Creek, and from “Wyndham to the great cattle areas of Inverway and the Victoria River Downs area. Some roads could be constructed, -and road trains could be used to feed the railways. The Government should consult those people who have had experience of transporting cattle from the Barkly

Tableland to Mount Isa. It would cost almost as much money to construct allweather roads as to construct railways.

At a later stage, I shall discuss the question of the subdivision of land in the Northern Territory. I consider that the Government has acted wrongly in subdividing land before announcing what its policy is to be in regard to the location of roads and railways.

Mr SHEEHAN:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP; ALP (N-C) from 1940; ALP from 1941

.- The budget that has been presented by the Treasurer (Mr. Chifley) is a sound and practical one. It will ensure a continuance of the security and wise administration that have been features of all the post-war budgets. The Treasurer has been able to balance the budget during the last two financial years although the budget last year indicated that there might be a deficit of £17,000,000. This year, there is an estimated deficit of £35,000,000. I consider that if the present policy and administration is maintained it may be possible to balance the budget for the year ended the 30th June, 1950.

The Opposition has attacked the budget from all angles. It has made the most spurious statements regarding the Government’s activities over the last twelve months. But some newspapers, which generally do all they can to support the Opposition parties, have been fairly reasonable in their praise of the budget, as will be seen from quotations that I shall give from two of Victoria’s leading newspapers, the Argus and the Age. The Argus published a leading article that described the current budget as an “L.C.L. budget”. The article stated that the Treasurer had produced a lower cost of living budget. That is a frank comment from a reputable daily newspaper in Victoria and stands in contrast with the views of honorable members opposite. On the same day the Melbourne Age said, under the headline “National Accounts in Good Order “ -

In broad results the Federal Budget is a record of achievement, of sound, even conservative, management of huge resources and of prudent foresight.

The statements of those two newspapers do not indicate any reason for the honorable member for Warringah (Mr. Spender) to make such an extravagant and silly statement as he made when he said that the budget was “ a budget of no hope “. The budget is one of no hope for the profiteers, exploiters and racketeers who support honorable members opposite. That was in the mind of the honorable member for Warringah when he made his silly statement. As I have said, the budget is indeed one of no hope for those who support, with their huge financial resources, the parties represented by honorable members opposite. Recently the Sydney Daily Telegraph published a financial supplement that paid many indirect tributes to the efficient administration of the Labour Government. That supplement was published on a non-party political basis, and was, in effect, a stocktaking of the country’s economic resources. After its publication the Daily Telegraph asked Mr. McGirr, the Premier of New South Wales, for his reaction to it. Mr. McGirr unhesitatingly replied that the record of prosperity recorded in each section of the Daily Telegraph supplement, in itself was a golden tribute to the sterling work of Labour government in control of national and State affairs. Five months ago the Sydney Morning Herald also published a non-political financial supplement which was the most eloquent, if subconscious, boost ever accorded a Labour government by any anti-Labour newspaper. The headlines of the articles contained in that financial supplement show how staggering the articles themselves were in their import to the campaign directors of the Liberal party. Here are a few of them -

British industry in Australia.

Why London is turning to our shores.

People’s savings deposits at all-time peak.

External reserves reach record level.

Nation’s money income soars to £2,000 million.

Commonwealth surplus builds up.

Big expenditure on public works.

Record public works plans for 6,445 projects.

The articles published under those headlines pay golden tributes to the stability of Australia’s economic position. They prove conclusively that the Labour Government’s conduct of the affairs of the nation, although they call forth no respect or consideration from honorable members opposite, at least have won praise from the big newspapers of Sydney and their financial editors. When the Minister for Works and Housing (Mr. Lemmon) spoke this afternoon, he attempted to prove how spurious were the statements made by honorable members opposite regarding the meaning of the socialization objective of the Labour party.

Mr HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944

– It was only an attempt. He did not prove it.

Mr SHEEHAN:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

– He did not have an opportunity to provide proof because the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Harrison) took advantage of the forms of the House to waste a good deal of the Minister’s time. The Minister was attempting to explain Labour’s socialization objective and the declaration that has gone with that objective ever since 1921. [Quorum formed.] The tactics employed by the honorable member for Wentworth during the speech of the Minister for Works and Housing will make the people suspicious of the Opposition because the use of such tactics arises from the fact that the Opposition is afraid to have the complete declaration made familiar to the people. Actually the socialization objective and the accompanying declaration have received no publicity whatever from any one opposed to the Labour party. Instead, our opponents are always producing spurious arguments against the objective. The objective is the “ socialization of the means of production, distribution and exchange “. The declaration on that objective was carried at the conference of the Australian Labour party in 1921, and was re-affirmed at the triennial conference of the party that was held in Canberra recently as last year. Here are the exact words of the declaration -

That the Australian Labour Party proposes Collective Ownership for the purpose of preventing exploitation, and to whatever extent maybe necessary for that purpose;

That wherever private ownership is a means of exploitation it is opposed by the Party; but,

That the Party does not seek to abolish private ownership, even of any of the instruments of production, where such instrument is utilized by its owner in a socially useful manner and without exploitation.

Because the Opposition fears that objective and regards the declaration as an attempt to explain the objective away, I shall ask honorable members opposite this: Do the Leader of the Opposition and his party believe in exploitation? Do they believe that the owners of any instruments of production should be’ allowed to utilize them in anything but a socially useful manner, that is to say, as a means of exploitation? The honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr.. Blain) said that in a speech at Newcastle this week, a Catholic divine, Dr. Ryan had spoken against socialism and had said that it would lead to the abolition of private enterprise. I think that Dr. Ryan would certainly speak in defence of private ownership, but not in defence of monopolists. The Labour party declaration on the socialization objective is also in defence of private ownership, where there is no exploitation. I shall quote a clear-cut statement by Archbishop Mannix, of Melbourne, of what he considers that the Labour party’s objectivemeans. I read the following extract from the Advocate, Melbourne: - “We are hearing much about the plank in the Labour platform for the nationalization of production, distribution and exchange “, said Dr. Mannix. “ But nobody seems to have remembered that when the plank was inserted in the Labour platform it was carried against a strong minority … On the following day the same conference, by a majority, gave an interpretation of that plank, which differs little, if at all, from the pronouncement made by the bishops in the pamphlet that was circulated last Sunday. “ The strange thing,” continued His Grace, “ is that the opponents of the Australian Labour party assert that it is the policy of thatparty to nationalize everything from the banks down to the smallest shop in Brunswick. But what to my mind is stranger still is that the Labour party has never made the least reference to the official interpretation which might easily satisfy even the most exacting Catholic Actionist.”

According to another report, Archbishop Mannix said -

Might I trespass on you for a moment to refer to something quite new to me that I read in the News Weekly last week. Probably I should have been better informed. We are hearing much about the plank in the Labour platform for the nationalization of production, distribution and exchange. But nobody seems to have remembered that when the plank was inserted in the Labour platform it was carried against a strong minority. There was a great deal of heart-burning and heartsearching in the minds of those at that conference who put the new plank into the Labour platform. On the following day the same conference, by a majority, gave an interpretation of that plank, which differs little, if at all, from the pronouncement made by the bishops in the pamphlet that was circulated last Sunday. In this interpretation it was set out by the Labour conference that nationalization did not mean opposition to private property or that all production, distribution and exchange should be nationalized. It was made clear that only those things which otherwise would be exploited, to the injury of the community, should be nationalized. As far as I can see, this is exactly what the bishops in the pamphlet have set out. The strange thing is that opponents of the Australian Labour party assert that it is the policy of that party to nationalize everything from the banks down to the smallest shop in Brunswick. But what to my mind is stranger still is that the Labour party has never made the least reference to the official interpretation which might easily satisfy even the most exacting Catholic Actionist. I assume that what I read in the News Weekly is a correct narrative.

Mr Holloway:

– When was that statement made?

Mr SHEEHAN:

– The report from which I just read was published in the Advocate on the 23rd September of last year. Members of the Liberal party pretend to believe, and they seek by specious arguments to lead the people to believe, that the Australian Labour party, because of its objective is allied with the Communist party. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Australian Labour party hates and detests communism. It will have no truck with Communists. It not only spurns the Communists’ sneaking pretence to align themselves on the side of the workers, but also opposes Communists politically, in the trade unions and in every field of social activity.

Mr Harrison:

– I rise to order, Mr. Temporary Chairman. I should like you to rule, first, whether the honorable member himself wrote the speech he is reading; and, secondly, whether he is in order in reading it.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Sheehy:

– The honorable member has not raised a point of order. Honorable members in all parts of the chamber frequently read from copious notes and quote from newspaper articles, and that practice is followed more generally in budget debates.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– The honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Harrison) is a little confused because honorable members on this side will no longer sit back and “take” the Opposition’s spurious attacks upon the Labour party’s objective. Supporters of the Labour party rarely get an opportunity to explain the party’s attitude towards the Communist party, and when we do so, the newspapers refuse to give publicity to our statements. Two conferences of the Labour party have been held recently, the first having been the federal triennial conference and the second the conference of the New South Wales branch of the party. Both of those conferences carried resolutions condemning the Communist party, but neither of the resolutions was published in the newspapers. Therefore, I take this opportunity to read them for the benefit of honorable members opposite. The following resolution was carried at the eighteenth triennial Federal conference of the Labour party which was held at Canberra on the 27th September of last year : -

The conference reaffirms its repudiation of the methods and principles of the Communist party and the decisions of previous conferences that” between the Communist party and the Labour party there is such basic hostility and differences that no Communist can be a member of the Labour party. No Communist auxiliary or subsidiary can be associated with the Labour party in any activity and no Labour party branch or member can co-operate with the Communist party.

  1. The conference further declares that the policy and the actions of the Communist party demonstrate that that party’s methods and objects aim at the destruction of the democratic way of life of the Australian people and the establishment in its place of a totalitarian form of government which would destroy our existing democratic institutions and the personal liberty of the Australian people. We therefore declare that the Australian Labour party, through its branches, affiliations and members must carry on an increasing campaign directed at destroying the influence of the Communist party wherever such exists throughout Australia.
  2. We affirm that the Labour movement offers the most effective and safest method of preserving democratic liberties, or protecting and improving workers’ living standards, and we -

    1. Congratulate those sections of the Labour movement who are carrying on a persistent and determined campaign against Com munist influence in their respective organizations; and
    2. In order that the menace of the Communist party might be understood by all, we recommend to the Executive that it prepare and issue a report on the workings and policies of the Com munist party in Australia.

At present two by-elections are being held in New South Wales ; one in a country electorate and the other in a metropolitan electorate. Although the Communist party has nominated a candidate in each instances, neither the Liberal party nor the Australian Country party has done so. Probably they realize that they would suffer the same fate as they suffered in the two by-elections recently held in Queensland. However, there is a fight on in those two current byelections, and the Labour party alone has been left to fight the Communists in each of them. I shall now read the resolution relating to communism that was passed at the last annual conference of the New South Wales branch of the Labour party -

The conference declares that now is the time for a more determined drive by Labour people for democratic ideals and against Communist intrigue and infiltration. Regardless of past failures the Communist party will intensify its demands to force political strikes on the Australian people. We can, therefore, expect a continuation of the campaign of sabotage against Labour governments. Labour should anticipate these inspired attempts to create discontent in industry which could easily result in the slowing down and hampering of production, on which our national prosperity and the welfare of our people depend. Labour can also expect increased attempts in efforts to infiltrate and destroy the Labour movement from within. Therefore, Labour party members in association with properly constituted Australian Labour party industrial groups by exercising maximum influence on the job, through their trade unions and in defence of working-class standards, could play a decisive part in countering this Communist conspiracy.

We declare that now is the time for all Labour people to combine on a sustained campaign against Communist intrigue, infiltration and interference with trade union rights. We instruct the incoming executive to issue a continuous supply of literature, and to use all methods of propaganda to expose the tactics of communism. We state emphatically, that the members of the Labour party have shown their capacity to deal with the danger of communism by open attack more successfully than by the ‘imposition of a ban which would drive the Communists underground, or by the introduction of legal measures which could interfere with trade union rights. We believe that the law airit now stands provides adequate safeguards, and that increased legislative powers could easily tend to create a sense of false security, whereas we require Labour party members to play an increasingly active part inside and within the rules of their respective trade unions, in the belief that an aroused and active trade union movement is our best safeguard. This conference acknowledges our movement as progressive, powerful and inspiring, and we record with pride the achievements of Labour, including a policy of full employment, and its programme of industrial and social reform as a further effective means of combating communism.

Mr Harrison:

– In other words, use words but not action.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– The honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Harrison 1 has heard what the conference declared.

Honorable members interjecting,

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN Mr Sheehy:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Order! I ask the honorable member for Cook (Mr. Sheehan) to resume his seat for a moment. It appears to me that, by organized interjection, some honorable members are interrupting the honorable member for Cook unnecessarily. The Chair insists that these interruptions shall cease. 1 will name the next honorable member who interjects.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– The honorable member for Wentworth is very upset because I am giving publicity to Labour’s activities against communism. During many debates in this chamber the Opposition has trenchantly attacked the Australian Labour party for its alleged alliances with the Communists. There was absolutely no foundation for thos* attacks. Many of the things said could well have been left unsaid, because no reasonable or sensible person could sug>gest that the hundreds of thousands of people who go to the polling booths on election days to support the Australian Labour party would do so if Labour was allied in any way with the Communist party. The honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr. Blain) has referred to the utterances of Dr. Ryan. Actually, Dr. Ryan spoke in defence of private property. So also does Labour’s socialization policy defend private property.

As honorable members are aware, I have the honour to represent a very big manufacturing area. It is probably the biggest industrial area in Australia. In my electorate there arc from 2,000 to 3,000 factories, which manufacture everything from the proverbial needle to an anchor. I contend .that the Government acted wisely when it decided to accept as reparations from Germany valuable machinery, data, and other records in the interests of the manufacturers of this country. The assistance that has been rendered to private enterprise, particularly private manufacturing, has been phenomenal. In the course of a broadcast speech recently, the Prime Minister (Mr. Chifley) stated-

Nearly 6,000 different reports covering important phases of Germany’s manufacturing industries are held by the Division of Industrial Development. About 2,000 of these are of special defence significance. The remainder are freely available to industry and already more than 200,000 copies have been placed in the hands of manufacturers and others. In Addition, the Division of Industrial Development possessed film records of many thousands of important German documents containing -details of secret processes, drawings of special machines, factory layouts, patents and specifications. Local manufacturers have made -good use of nearly 0,000 of these documents in the last 18 months. More easily measured :in value are nearly 8,000 tons of machinery, comprising 2,500 separate allocations, which Australia has received as reparations in the foat three years,

This is very important in connexion with the industrial potential of Australia. The right honorable gentleman continued -

Among these are a modern diesel-engined coastal ship; a 5,000-ton plastics press; electric motors and generators; heavy engineering equipment; a great quantity of machine tools, and plant for making ball bearings. Of outstanding importance has. been a 5,100-ton hydraulic forging press now being installed at Newcastle for the heaviest types of steel forging.

This is proof positive that the Government has not been unmindful of the needs of industry in this country. The Minister for Works and Housing (Mr. Lemmon) recently visited some industrial areas in Australia, and he stated subsequently that it was shameful to see how backward some of the factories were compared with up-to-date factories overseas. We are now receiving as reparations some of the best plant and material available, from, one of the leading industrial countries of th.j world, in recognition of Australia’s participation in World War II. At a later stage in his speech the Prime Minister said -

Two eminent German engineers have prepared plans for gasification of brown coal - a project which could greatly influence the economy of this country. Another is developing advanced methods for open-cut mining of brown coal … To become eligible for work here, German scientists and technicians must be able to offer a service not otherwise available to Australia and they must pass a rigid security screening. If they fit into Australia’s way of life they may remain and become full citizens.

The Government was very wise to obtain these scientists and engineers because our secondary industries are a most important factor in the national and economic life and security of our people.

The Government has been very active with relation to the land settlement of exservicemen, and the New South Wales Government has been most co-operative. Up to the 31st August this year, in that State alone, no less than £7,960,073 had been expanded on the acquisition, development, and improvement of estates. In addition, living allowances aggregating £216,754 had been paid by the Commonwealth to ex-servicemen, apart from advances totalling £2,105,345. In many instances the Government encountered hostility and opposition from large landholders who did not want to make areas available to the men who had served their country so well in campaigns in the Middle East and New Guinea. The Government did a splendid job on behalf of these ex-servicemen. The land that was made available to them was so good that already £423,763 of the advances to them has been repaid. Nearly one-quarter of the loans that those men received has been paid back although the scheme has not been in operation for very long. That proves conclusively that the Government is concerned with the welfare of all sections of the community.

When some years ago, the present Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr. Holloway), then Minister for Health, introduced a scheme for assisting invalids to earn a living and so become independent of the invalid .pension, I offered some criticism of the proposal. I have to admit now, however, that the scheme worked splendidly. Dealing with budgets, we in this chamber are prone to talk in terms of millions of pounds; butinvalid members of the community are compelled to talk in terms of pennies and sixpences. For many years they were a forgotten people. The Government held the view that many of them would be quite willing, if given the opportunity, to enter industry and become productive units in the community. For this purpose, an organization was set up throughout Australia, functioning mainly in the capital cities. Attention was given mainly to invalids suffering up to 75 per cent, or 80 per cent, incapacity. The aim was to rehabilitate them, and restore them to industry where they could earn their own living. The scheme is now operating very successfully. As I have said, when it was first proposed, I was rather critical of it. I felt that invalid pensioners would be dragooned into industrial plants, where, due to handicaps, including perhaps minor mental afflictions, or partial paralysis, they would be fearful lest they should not make good and yet be deprived of their pensions. But what is the position to-day after a short period of years? A total of 1,462 invalid pensioners have been brought under the scheme. Of that number, 260 are now capable, as the result of their training, of earning a living and are independent of the invalid pension. They receive full rates of pay in industry. Approximately 750 others are undergoing treatment, and 200 are receiving vocational training. That achievement appeals to me very much. I have good reason to know what invalidity means. The scheme has been remarkably successful and I regard it as one of the best phases of the Government’s social security programme.

Mr RUSSELL:
Grey

.- We have before use a remarkable budget presented by a remarkable Treasurer. Just how sound it is, is clearly demonstrated by the Opposition’s approach to it. Honorable members opposite have refrained religiously from criticizing the budget. They have even abandoned their constant harping on communism and the coal-miners. They do not appear to be capable of handling the budget debateat all. I listened with much interest, as I always do, to the speech made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Menzies). The right honorable gentleman gave fi lucid explanation of what he considered to be the probable results of the devaluation of sterling. However, he had very little, if anything, to say about the budget itself.

The honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. McBride) said that never before had so many Australians got so little for their pound. In my view, never before have so many Australians had so many pounds. The honorable member dealt with production which, he claimed, had increased by only 15 per cent. That claim has since been disproved by several speakers from this side of the House. In 1938-39, the total number of factories in Australia was 26,940. By 1947-48, that number had grown to 37,375, an increase of 10,435. In 1938-39, factory employees numbered 565,000, and by ‘ 1947-48 their ranks had been increased by 284,000 to 849,000. Those employees are, of course, distributed over a wide variety of industries-.. In Australia to-day manufacturers areproducing many commodities which, ten. years ago, most people did not think, could be made locally. It was thought that Australia had neither the artisans* nor the knowledge for certain types of production. That belief has been completely shattered by Australian workmen who are doing such a remarkable job to-day. Opposition members would have us believe that there is an undue concentration of workers at such places as Newcastle, but I point out that Newcastle is still 2,500 men short of its requirements. . Employment has’ increased in almost every phase of industry.

The honorable member for ths Northern Territory complained of a lag in primary production. I represent the largest wheat-growing electorate in the Commonwealth. With the re-drawing of electoral boundaries, I shall shortly bo handing over to the honorable member for Wakefield territory which produces 80 per cent, of Australia’s barley crop. It is a slur on the men on the land to say that Australian primary producers are not doing their best. It is a reflection on their loyalty to the Australian Commonwealth and to the Empire. There is widespread recognition throughout our country districts’ of the debt that we owe to the British people for their magnificent war-time achievements.

Mr McBride:

– Tell us about the coalfields.

Mr RUSSELL:
GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– I shall deal with something in which the honorable member is interested. I have the greatest respect for the honorable member’s general knowledge. In his budget speech, he referred to the ability and initiative of Australians in the field of production. I have before me the financial report for the year 1948-49 of Elder Smith and Company Limited’, of which the honorable member for Wakefield is chairman of directors. The report states -

Continued rural prosperity and all-round expansion, of the business, including the growing merchandise department, are reflected hi record earnings hy Elder, Smith & Co. Ltd. for the year to June.

At £380,087, disclosed profit shows a jump of £135,714 on the previous year, and is more than double the 1946 figure of £163,438.

Dividends are being raised to .1.0 per cent. - the highest level since 1029 - with payment of a bonus of 2 per cent., the total distribution requiring £277,410.

Mr Barnard:

– No wonder the honorable member for Wakefield is in a good humour.

Mr RUSSELL:

– I agree with the Minister. The report continues -

The balance of profits lifts shareholders’ funds to £4,125,714, comprising capital £2,774,100 and reserves £1,351,614. The latest result is struck after increasing taxation provision from £206,000 to £207,000, and raising the provision for depreciation from £45,343 to £60,986.

It also allows for a transfer of £15,543 to staff provident fund, whereas the 1948 profit was arrived at before an appropriation of £20,419 for this purpose.

I am pleased that a South Australian company with a South Australian chairman of directors is in such a flourishing position. I am confident that my esteemed friend, the honorable member for Wakefield, would be too modest to cite these figures. Perhaps I had better not say any more on this subject lest the graziers in my electorate - and after the 10th December next I shall represent five-sixths of the total number of graziers in South Australia - may say that Elder Smith and Company Limited and other stock companies have been charging them commission on the sales of their products at too high a rate. I am also indebted to Elder Smith and Company Limited for a copy of a statistical return relating to the number of new residences erected in the metropolitan area of Adelaide. In 1931 and 1932, when thousands of tradesmen were out of work, and honest working men were tramping the streets and the highways in a hopeless attempt to find a job - and the hardest job that any man can be asked to do is to look for a job - not one single house was built in the city of Adelaide. At Port Adelaide, which is in the electorate of the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Thompson), only one house was built in 1931. At Burnside, which is a good class area, seven homes were built. At Woodville, five were built and at Mitcham eight. Only one was built at Brighton. In the towns of Glenelg, Henley and Grange and Hindmarsh not one house was built. Only one house was built in each of the towns of Kensington, Norwood, Payneham and St. Peters. Two were built at Thebarton and three at Marion. In the whole of Adelaide and its suburbs only 51 homes were built in 1931, compared with 3,323 in 1948 under the “ socialist “ Government. What better socio list could we have than the Premier of South Australia ? What did he do with the Adelaide electricity supply? How was he able to bring the Legislative Councillors into line and make them do what they did not want to do? What did he do with the Leigh Creek coal-field ?

What has been the attitude of the Opposition parties towards the exserviceman who offered his all for them and theirs and for the community generally? When the Opposition parties were in office in 1935-36 they built only 25 homes for ex-servicemen. In the following year they were consistent and built 25 homes. In 1937-38, they were not quite -so consistent, because they built only 23. In 1938-39 they built 29. Thus, from 1935-36 to 1938-39 they built a total of only 102 war service homes throughout the whole of the Commonwealth, for those who had risked everything they had in defence of their country. During the same period the Opposition parties showed their great gratitude to ex-servicemen who had done much for them by evicting 61 men from war service homes! Let us compare their record with that of the present Government. Since the cessation of hostilities, the Labour Government has granted loans for the purchase or building of war service homes to 19,140 applicants.

Mr White:

– Somebody has been pulling the honorable member’s leg.

M:r. RUSSELL.- The honorable member for Balaclava (Mr. White) will have both legs pulled on the 10th December next. Rr -establishment allowances have benn approved to the number of 11,241. Agricultural loans numbering 12,178 have boon approved. The Government also has achieved a splendid record in the land settlement of ex-servicemen. Exservicemen who have returned from World War IT. have not been placed on land of the type made available to returned servicemen from World War I. by non-Labour governments. I well remember how, in the years af ter World War I., men were settled on the land - and I use the term “ settled “ in its ironic sense - by the. anti-Labour governments. They were so truly “ settled “ that very many of them had to join the great band of the unemployed, tramping through the cities and the countryside seeking employment where they could during the depression years. The present Government has taken steps to ensure that all land selected for soldier settlement shall be capable of maintaining an ex-serviceman, his wife and his family in a reasonable degree of comfort. The Government has approved of the allotment to ex-servicemen of 7,459,956 acres, all of it of a type which will enable settlers to make a good livelihood. Furniture grants to widows have numbered 5,013; loans have been granted to 20,076 small business people; and gifts for tools of trade have numbered 252,430. The total cost of the re-establishment programme of the Government to date is £86,404,523. These figures should be sufficient to indicate to the listening public that the Labour Government has treated ex-servicemen most sympathetically.

All applicants for membership of the Australian Labour party, of which 1 am proud to be a member, must sign a statement that they aTe not members of the Communist party. I should like to know whether that rule obtains in other political parties a.nd organizations. The South Australian Farmer, which is not an industrialist newspaper, published on the 15th July last the follow ing leading article entitled, “ Mr. Menzies’ Blunders “ : -

The Federal Lender of the Opposition (Mr. Menzies) is as verbose as ever as to what should be done about communism - declare the organization illegal. . . What is Mr. Menzies? The latter has proved himself at a loss before in a crisis, and is going through the same performance again, oblivions of hia previous incompetency and unconcerned about his blunders. He was so lacking in ability to carry on the war that he had to be scrapped and Labour take over. . . The way of dealing with Communists has been declared repeatedly - destroy their source of power - dissatisfaction amongst wage earners. This is wholly beyond the ability of Mr. Menzies or his party to realize or remedy. Henry Ford told men of political views like Mr. Menzies and his followers that there would never be peace in industry or in the world until the producers could purchase the goods they produced. . . Australia is fortunate that Mr. Menzies is not in power during the present crisis. The sa.me goes for Mr. Fadden. As his verbosity on the subject outdoes that of Mr. Menzies, so does he suffer in intelligence accordingly.

I am not a vain man, but I think that I am justified in giving the little vanity in my make-up expression by reading another extract from the Warmer of the 20th August, 1946. The person referred to is none other than myself. It reads as follows : -

A stock complaint of the common critic is his peevish statement that the only time the district representative of Parliament is seen is just prior to an election, lt would seem that this comment is now applicable to a section of electors, for the Liberals are hastily forming branches of their organization pending the Federal elections - a political stunt, pure and simple. It is not a matter of interest in the government of the country at all times, hut effort to win party success at the elections. That is not politics. If the people want good government they must consistently work for it. This last hour organizing is particularly obnoxious in the Grey Division. The most carping critic and disgruntled elector could never charge the Federal member, Mr. Russell, with neglect ot the district. Mr. Russell has been all that a representative could be in this respect, and has never spared himself in the interests of his constituents, regardless of their political views. Individual or bodies, lie has given the utmost attention. All the thanks and appreciation he gets from eleventh hour Liberals is organization to defeat him at the polls. A man must needs have a strong nature, to prevent him becoming bitter at such ungrateful treatment. If this is the character of Liberalism the less the country sees of it the better. It broadcasts its type of outlook. Election results are always uncertain, but if ever a member had promise of success it should lie Mr. Russell. No one can fault hits stewardship. On these grounds it should be safe to predict the smallest Liberal vote at the coming elections that was ever cast in the Division of Grey.

The Sydney Sunday Sun, on the 18th September last, published the following statement in a leading article: -

The London Times gives Chifley a pot on the back for Australia’s strict adherence to the Cripps Austerity Plan-.

The Times says - “Mr. Chifley is entitled to point with pride to the progress which his country has made “.

I do not think that the London Times can be described as an. industrialist newspaper. A similar view of the stability of the Australian economy is held by Mr. C. R. McKerihan, the president of the Rural Bank of New South Wales. According to a report in the Sydney Sun of the 17th September, Mr. McKerihan said that Australia was in a better position than ever. To-day, I received a letter from a highly respected citizen who lives on Eyre Peninsula, in South Australia. He wrote -

I had a great look around Europe and America for fourteen months. It’s an eyeopener. We here by comparison live in an isolated island. Yet Australia is the cheapest country in the world to live in and that really well.

The Leader of the Australian Country party (Mr. Fadden) , in his speech on the budget, referred to the earning capacity or the saving capacity of various sections of the community, and made particular mention of the primary producer. I cannot compare my small professional practice with the accountancy business of the right honorable gentleman, hut I have just completed an audit for a district council which embraces a thriving town in South Australia and includes a large number of primary producers of all types. In the last two years the district clerk has collected every penny of the rates. A few years ago, that official found it utterly impossible to collect any money from many ratepayers. The improved economic condition of the people, as shown in that instance, is a tribute to the administration of the Australian Labour Government.

The right honorable member for Cowper (Sir Earle Page) referred to the recent coal strike, and claimed that the Government should have permitted the

Australian Workers Union to work the mines.

Mr Harrison:

– Hear, hear!

Mr RUSSELL:

– The honorable member for Wentworth supports the opinion that has been expressed by the right honorable member for Cowper. Of course, members of the Opposition had a motive in making that suggestion. They hoped to cause dissension among the unions, but they were disappointed. The Australian Workers Union was not asked to work the coal mines because no members of that industrial organization were out of work.

I am most concerned about the suggestion to deviate the railway line from Leigh Creek to Port Augusta through Copley, because that would entail the bypassing of Quorn. I cannot see any reason why another route should be selected. The matter has already been raised in the South Australian House of Assembly by Mr. Riches, a member of the Labour party. Naturally, we would expect a Labour member to take an interest in this matter. In reply, the Premier, Mr. Playford, told Mr. Riches that any substantial deviation in the Leigh CreekPort Augusta railway would probably have to be considered by the State Government before the Commonwealth could proceed. I sincerely trust that when the proposal is submitted to the Minister for Transport (Mr. Ward) and he, in turn, presents it to Cabinet, the Commonwealth will refuse to alter the present route. A substantial deviation of the railway line would mean ruin for every railway employee in Quorn and the businessmen of that town. I remind honorable members that during the coal crisis, the men who are employed on this 3-ft. 6-in. gauge railway repeated tha magnificent work that they had performed during the war. They moved between 12,000 and 13,000 tons of goods over this obsolete line. If necessary, the existing curves and .gradients could be altered without difficulty, and the traffic could still be taken over the range between Quorn and Port Augusta. Railway employees are now accommodated in Quorn and fettlers are housed along the railway line as far as Hawker and other places. If a substantial deviation were made, other accommodation would have to be provided for them. Telephone lines also would have to be installed along the new route. At present, there is an abundance of water on that side of the range, but we have no guarantee of water on the other side of the range. Even if a plentiful supply were discovered, I am sure that it would be very salty, and entirely unsatisfactory for’ railway requirements. I hope that the Government will show its appreciation of the loyalty displayed by these railway employees who, during and since the war, have worked hard and rendered yeoman service.

There is another matter about which I am concerned, as I am sure all honorable members are. I refer to the serious outbreak of poliomyelitis, or infantile paralysis. This disease should be scientifically investigated by a central institute under Commonwealth control. We have in Australia capable scientists who could undertake work of this kind. Those engaged in research work into tuberculosis have proved themselves to be the equal of scientists in any other part, of the world. We have been told that the danger of infection is greatest when people congregate in crowds, but against that theory, there is the report of a man 45 years of age who contracted the disease while employed on the transAustralian railway line, where he certainly had no Opportunity to get into a crowd. Similarly, cases have been reported from Eyre’s Peninsula, which is very thinly populated. It is evident that more scientific research is needed in order to discover methods of fighting this disease.

About twelve months ago, the honorable member for Wentworth, when referring to the alleged shortcomings of this Government, was accustomed to say : “ This was brought about chiefly by Chifley “. I maintain that never before were the people of Australia so happy and contented as they are now. Never were they so prosperous; as the figures released by the banks clearly indicate, and the happiness and prosperity of the people of Australia are due chiefly to Chifley.

Sitting suspended from 5.55 to 8 p.m.

Mr. MCDONALD (Corangamite) vassed that I do not intend to discuss it at great length, but I express my astonishment and concern at the fact that, in a year when revenue is estimated at £535,000,000 the Treasurer (Mr. Chifley) has budgeted for a deficit of £35,000,000. When revenue is buoyant, a government or a private individual should make some efFort to set aside a sum for the days of regression, about which we have heard so much from honorable members opposite. Various honorable gentlemen on the Government side of the chamber have tried to lead us to believe that the prosperity that Australia has enjoyed during the last three years was brought about only because a Labour government was in office. The truth is that revenue is buoyant, not because we have a Labour government, but in spite of that fact. Primary producers have had three very good seasons in succession and, as has been the case after every war, they have received extraordinarily high prices for their products on the world’s markets in the immediate post-war years. The prosperity of our rural industries has been maintained in spite of the fact that production has been carried on during the past three years under very considerable difficulties. The primary industries were deprived of much of their man-power during the war. The proportion of enlistments in the armed services from country districts was probably higher than from any other part of the Commonwealth, and our farms were short of labour even before conscription was introduced. The producers carried on in spite of that severe handicap, and now they are receiving very good rewards for their labour. It has been said that mortgages have almost disappeared from the scene in our rural areas. That is true. I do not join issue with the Government on that statement, but that state of affairs has resulted from the individual efforts of the primary producers. Furthermore, they have contributed considerable sums from their profits to the already swollen coffers of the Commonwealth Treasury.

A comparison of the Estimates presented to this Parliament by the Treasurer during the past few years with actual revenue shows that the right honorable gentleman did not expect to gather nearly as much money as he has collected from the taxpayers during that period. His estimate each year has been millions of pounds less than the total that he has finally collected. Thus, the Treasurer has been singularly fortunate in holding office during a period in which Australia has been producing large quantities of commodities that are required by other countries and for which those countries are willing to pay high prices. The Government takes credit to itself for the manner in which money has rolled into the Treasury, but I remind it that this condition of prosperity has been achieved only by the energy and industry of taxpayers, particularly those who are engaged in rural pursuits. Australia owes a great deal to its primary producers. They have been responsible for adding to the national economy an amount of £600,000,000. That money has been distributed through the community, but a very large proportion of it has ultimately found its way into the coffers of the Commonwealth Treasury, with the result that the Government has been in a position to balance it3 budget and say to the people, “ Look what we have accomplished in the post-war period “. Primary production has been carried on under very great difficulties because of the shortages of materials that are essential to successful farming. Supplies of fencing material and of equipment necessary for water reticulation and the improvement of the carrying capacity of land have been very scarce. Although the Government claims that the national income from primary production is very much greater now than it was under the administration of former governments, the volume of production has increased very little, if at all. The increased income arises from the fact that the prices paid for our products have increased, in some instances, by 200 per cent, or 300 per cent, since before the war. This fact is responsible to a great degree for the prosperity that we enjoy to-day.

Mr Blain:

– The £1 is worth only onethird of what it was worth before the war.

Mr McDONALD:

– Yes, the purchasing power of the £1 to-day is much less than it was in 1939.

I shall deal now with some of the arguments that were used by honorable mem bers opposite in discussing the budget. For the most part, they took the opportunity presented to them by the debate to rehearse in this chamber the election speeches with which they hope to tickle the ears of the voters between the 14th November and the 10th December. They devoted very little attention to the budget. The honorable member for Robertson (Mr. “Williams) ridiculed the idea that this Government would ever attempt again to nationalize the banks. He declared that banking nationalization was as dead as the dodo, and I think that he hoped in his heart that that was so. However, his assurance contrasted strangely with the assertion of the Minister for Transport (Mr. “Ward), that bank nationalization must become an accomplished fact. We wonder which honorable gentleman is right. If I were a betting man I should put my money on the Minister for Transport.

Mr Conelan:

– The honorable gentleman would be a bad judge if he did so.

Mr Mcdonald:

– in 1945, th?

Banking Bill was introduced into this chamber. The intention of the Government was to establish the Commonwealth Bank as a central bank and to make tintrading banks subservient to it. During the debate on that bill, the Prime Minister (Mr. Chifley) made the following remarks : -

The Government is convinced that active competition by the Commonwealth Bank with the trading hanks and other financial institutions will ensure that these services shall be supplied to the people of Australia adequately and cheaply.

In the course of the same debate, the Minister for Post-war Reconstruction (Mr. Dedman) said -

I turn now to what I consider ought to be the structure of the banking system in this country. I consider that it ought to have at its apex a central bank, under which there should be functioning the various banks that undertake trading activities. The alternative would be, of course, to have only one bank undertaking the activities of the central bank and monopolizing the whole field of trading hanks as well. That could perhaps bn described as nationalization or socialization of the banking system. The Government has not selected that system, but proposes an alternative which it thinks is better fitted to this country.

Mr Harrison:

– Which Minister said that?

Mr MCDONALD:

– It was the Minister for Post-war Reconstruction.

Mr DEDMAN:
ALP

– It was a good speech.

Mr McDONALD:

– It was a good speech, but I regret that the Minister did’ not live up to it. That is characteristic of mo3t of the speeches that the, honorable gentleman has made in this chamber. The Banking Bill 1945 was subjected to a good deal of criticism by members of the Liberal party and the Australian Country party, but eventually it became law. All local governing authorities were then ordered to transfer their accounts to the Commonwealth Bank and to trade with that bank. Om; authority, the Melbourne City Council, decided - and it was to its credit that it did so - to take the matter to the High Court. It felt that the order was an intrusion upon its rights and that it wai being made the victim of a dictator. The committee knows the result of the action in the High Court. Then, in a fit of pique, the Treasurer suddenly made tb> following announcement -

Cabinet to-day authorized the Attorney General.. Dr. Evatt, and myself, to prepare legislation for submission to the Federal Parliamentary Labour party for the nationalization of banking, other than State banks, with proper protection for shareholders, depositors, borrowers, and the staff of private banks.

Mr Conelan:

– Hear, hear!

Mr MCDONALD:

– I notice that a cry of “ Hear, hear ! “ has come from the Government side of the chamber but is was lacking in enthusiasm. Some honorable gentlemen opposite, like the honorable member for Robertson, would prefer to think that the Banking Act is as dead as the dodo. Some of them have claimed that the fact that the electors returned the Labour party to power at the general election of 1946 placed the hall-mark of public approval upon the banking legislation of 1945. Even if it did, it certainly did not give the Government a warrant to introduce the legislation. The Government cannot have it both ways. The reaction of the general public to the Banking Act is not to be wondered at when one remembers that only one in twelve of the persons who were using banking facilities when that measure became law banked with the

Commonwealth Bank. “We know the sad history of that act. This Labour Government, which hitherto had always maintained that the High Court of Australia should be the final arbiter in any dispute affecting Australia’s domestic affairs, rushed as quickly as it could to the Privy Council in England and sought to have the decision of the High Court upset. However, the attempt was unsuccessful. I venture to say that during the forthcoming election campaign honorable gentlemen opposite will soft-pedal on the question of the nationalization of banking, but I take this opportunity to warn the people of Australia that if they return this Government to power on the 10th December it will claim that it has a mandate for the nationalization of banking. I believe that when the people realize that it is the intention of honorable gentlemen opposite to interfere with their freedom to such a degree as that, they will give an adequate reply to those who believe in socialism, but who, in many instances, are afraid to preach it.

A lot has been said in this debate about the treatment by former governments of ex-servicemen who were settled on the land. I want to give the lie direct to some of the statements that have been made by honorable gentlemen opposite upon this matter, as I did when I spoke in the debate on the War Service Land Settlement Agreements Bill in 1945. It has been said that exservicemen who were settled on the land after the 1914-18 war were badly treated by the people of Australia. I maintain that the Australian returned servicemen were treated better than were the ex-servicemen of any other country.

Mr Lemmon:

– The honorable gentleman should not talk nonsense. Some of them went broke when the first depression hit them.

Mr MCDONALD:

– The Minister foiWorks and Housing (Mr. Lemmon) is, as usual, on the wrong foot. In 1929, when Mr. Justice Pike submitted a report on land settlement, S3 per cent, of the original soldier settlers in Victoria were still on their land Of the soldier settlers in New South Wales, 71 were still in occupation of their blocks.

Mr Lemmon:

– That is not true.

Mr MCDONALD:

– I ask, Mr. Temporary Chairman, that the Minister for Works and Housing he requested to withdraw that remark. I am not in the habit of making false statements. The remark is objectionable to me.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Hadley:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND

– If the honorable member for Corangamite objects to the remark made bv the Minister, I ask that it be withdrawn.

Mr Lemmon:

– If my remark is objectionable to the honorable gentleman, I withdraw it. His statement is still untrue.

Mr McDONALD:

– I did not expect any other form of withdrawal. When I gave those figures in this chamber in 1945 they were not questioned by any honorable gentleman opposite.

Mr Dedman:

– We have not time to question all untrue statements.

Mr McDONALD:

– If the Minister for Post-war Reconstruction had to correct all the untrue statements that he has made, he would not have much time to do anything else. Up to 1943 land settlement schemes had cost the various governments of Australia no less than £43,000,000, or £6 5s. a head of population, or £1,200 for each soldier settler. I remind the committee that no ex-serviceman was placed upon the land unless he wished to go on the land. First, he had to obtain a qualification certificate entitling him to make application for a block.

Mr Scully:

– He did not have to do so under the old act in New South Wales.

Mr McDONALD:

– Who is making this speech ?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Hadley:

– Order! The honorable member for Corangamite (Mr. McDonald) will resume his seat. I told honorable members last night that interjections are too frequent in this chamber, particularly from the front benches. The interjections last night which led me to make that remark came from the front benches, and that is again the case to-night. I ask honorable members to refrain from interjecting and to allow the honorable member for Coorangamite to make his speech without interruption.

Mr McDONALD:

– I was proceeding to say that no settler was able to go upon a block until he had received a qualification certificate setting out that he was a fit and proper person to .take up land. The settler inspected the block, satisfied himself of its value, and then proceeded to work it. I admit that some settlers proved to be failures, but I ask the committee to remember that at that time it was not only the soldier settler who encountered difficulty, but also other land owners as well. Those were days when Australia suffered from drought conditions and our primary products were bringing particularly low prices on the markets of the world. Even men who at that time had been established on the land for 20 or 30 years had to seek assistance from the government under the Farmers’ Debts Adjustment Act so that they could stay on their holdings. To say that former governments showed no concern over .the soldier settler is quite wrong.

Mr McLeod:

– What rate of interest did soldier settlers have to pay on their holdings in those days?

Mr McDONALD:

– I am glad that the honorable member has raised that point. I understand that they paid 5-J per cent, interest.

Mr McLeod:

– They paid 6£ per cent.

Mr McDONALD:

– They paid H per cent, to the sinking fund, which meant that they paid only 5 per cent, on the holding. Let me tell the honorable member for Wannon (Mr. McLeod) that to-day the soldier settler does not know what interest he is paying. In Victoria, wheremany men have settled under the scheme for the land settlement of ex-servicemen, not one settler knows what he will be charged for the block that he is working. To my mind that is an absolute scandal. Ex-servicemen who are settled on blocks are working them well, and are endeavouring to improve them, say “We do not know what we are going to pay for our blocks. The more we improve them, the higher will be the valuation and we do not know what they will eventually cost us.”

After World War I. houses that to-day would cost £1,800 to build were built at a cost of £600. If the rate of interest on capital were 5^ per cent., a year’s interest on the cost of building a war service home after that war would have been only £33. The interest on a similar war service home built now at a cost of £1,800, even if the interest rate were only 2^ per cent, per annum, would be £43 a year. Apart from having to pay £10 more interest per annum than ex-servicemen would have had to pay after “World “War I. for a similar house, the purchaser of such a home now faces a capital debt three times as large. That fact cannot be gainsaid.

I turn now to the subject of prices control. In numerous debates in this chamber I have heard honorable members on the Government side say often that the Opposition was responsible for the defeat of the prices referendum.

Government Members. - Hear, hear!

Mr McDONALD:

– Honorable gentlemen opposite pay an unconscious and unintended tribute to a small opposition when they say that we were capable of persuading 60 per cent, of the electors of Australia to vote against giving the present Government permanent power to control prices. I do not think honorable members on this side of the committee flatter themselves that they were responsible for the result of the referendum, but, if the honorable members on the Government side of the chamber care to think and say so, let them continue to do so. The power asked for in the referendum was a very different power from that imposed upon the community by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Menzies) when he was Prime Minister. Honorable members will recall that the present Opposition, when it was last in office, introduced price-fixing legislation because they knew that it was necessary in war-time. “When that legislation was before the Parliament, the present Leader of the Opposition, who was then Prime Minister, warned the Parliament and the people of Australia that the powers asked for were tremendous powers to be vested in a central government. He also said that no government should continue to have those powers after the war had terminated. But the present Government, drunk with power, said after the war had ended, “ “We ought to have these powers of control permanently. Let us get the people while they are in a good mood to give us permanent powers over these matters in respect of which we had only temporary power during the war “. But the people were so fed up with price fixing and all its attendant evils that they almost unanimously refused the powers that the Government requested. “Why? They did not refuse the Government those powers because of speeches made by members of the Opposition. The real reasons for that refusal were the racketeers, blackmarketeers, and other lawbreakers who had brought the whole of the pricefixing system into disrepute. Unscrupulous individuals had waxed fat preying upon the general public without any action being taken against them, and that fact influenced the votes of the electors.

I turn now to petrol. It is an indication of a great weakness on the part of the Government that it has been unable to ensure that Australia would have an adequate supply of petrol for the needs of both primary and secondary industries. I could understand such a position obtaining during the war years, when so much petrol was required for war purposes. But the war has been over for four years. Australia produces goods that are in great world demand and for which there are plenty of markets. Surely it is a sign of a tremendous weakness on the part of this Government that, with all those goods to sell to the world, we are unable to obtain sufficient petrol to meet our requirements. It would require only an increase of 15 per cent, of the amount of petrol already entering the country to meet our needs fully. It is said that the administration of petrol rationing costs the community about £250,000 annually. The Government would save that huge amount of money if there were no petrol rationing. Further, the sale of an additional 15 per cent, of petrol would provide the Government with another £2,000,000 in petrol tax. Therefore, if there were no rationing of petrol and if an increase of 15 per cent, of the present imports were permitted the Government would be better off by £2,250,000 and the general public would be more satisfied than it is now. If there had been no petrol rationing in the post-war years industry would have been given more impetus to get itself into full production again. It is a very sore point with country dwellers that the Government collects such a huge sum in petrol tax and devotes so little of it to the purpose for which the tax was imposed. Last year the Treasurer collected about £17,000,000 in petrol tax, and transferred about £7,000,000 of that sum to the States, to be used for the construction and maintenance of roads. But honorable members should understand that that sum was not to be used by the States. In Victoria five-sixths of the roads are the responsibility of municipal and shire bodies. A similar position exists in New South Wales. If more of the money collected in petrol tax had been made available for road construction and maintenance purposes, the local bodies in the States would have been able at least to maintain the roads that they built in former years. The Minister for Transport has said that the Government’s first concern in making that money available was to ensure that roads in sparsely settled areas would be maintained. Any one who listened to the Minister would have thought that he had made a great discovery. Every one knows that from the moment a road is constructed it immediately becomes a wasting asset and requires to be constantly maintained if it is to serve the purpose for which it is provided.

At a time when incomes are high and revenue is buoyant, the Government, shows a lack of imagination budgeting for an expenditure which will exceed by £35,000,000 the amount of revenue it expects to receive. Even the ordinary business man would take the customary business precaution during a particularly good period of putting something by for a rainy day. If it is wise for an individual to observe that principle in ordinary business affairs how much more so should a government observe it? I conclude as I opened my speech, by expressing my surprise and concern that the Government is budgeting to expend in a year of buoyant revenue the sum of £35,000,000 more than it estimates that it will receive in revenue from all sources.

Mr CONELAN:
Griffith

– I had intended to confine my attention to the budget speech, but I am compelled to answer some of the wild statements that have been made by the honorable member for Corangamite (Mr. McDonald), who has just resumed his seat. The honorable member dealt with the budget for only two minutes at the beginning of his speech and he did not refer to it again except in his concluding remarks. He said that when a country is prosperous it should set aside something for a rainy day, and he condemned the Treasurer (Mr. Chifley) for budgeting for a deficit of £35,000,000 for the current financial year. However, the honorable member did not tell the committee or the people that, during the last three years, the Government has paid off over £100,000,000 of this country’s indebtedness overseas, that it has accumulated balances in Great Britain amounting to £465,000,000 to meet commitments abroad, that it has set aside an additional £8,500,000 for the payment of war gratuity .to ex-servicemen which falls due in 1951, and that it has established a credit of £SO,000,000 in the National Welfare Fund for the payment of social services benefits. Those facts represent achievements of which any government could be proud, and I am very proud of the record of the Treasurer’s achievements during his record term of office.

The honorable member for Corangamite had much to say about the nationalization of banking. He took the honorable member for Robertson (Mr. Williams) to task because that honorable member said that the nationalization of banking was as dead as the dodo. I believe that everybody excepting members of the Liberal party and those interested in the private banking institutions will agree with that view.

Mr Holt:

– The Minister for Transport does not agree with it.

Mr CONELAN:

– The Minister for Transport (Mr. Ward) has his own opinion as an individual on that subject just the same as the honorable member for Fa,wkner (Mr. Holt) has, although I do not think that many people woud take any notice, of the honorable member’s opinion on any subject of importance. I have no doubt that, if the Minister for Transport had his way, private banking institutions would be nationalized. If the proposal were practicable I should support the nationalization of banking. However, under the Constitution the Government is prevented from nationalizing the private hanks unless it first obtains power from the people at a referendum to enable it to do so.

Mr Anthony:

– Why does not the Government take a referendum on that issue ?

Mr CONELAN:

– The Government may do so when if, receives the reasons for the Privy Council’s decision in the recent banking appeal and has an opportunity to study them. But in the present circumstances the Opposition parties cry out about the nationalization of banking merely in order to draw a red herring across the trail. And they howl about socialism and communism for the same purpose. To-day, 25 per cent, of the employees of private banking institutions are canvassing from house to house throughout the Commonwealth for the purpose of spreading propaganda against the Government. Yet members of the Opposition parties are always complaining that the workers are not producing enough. It must be clear to them that that 25 per cent, of the employees of the private banking institutions who, by the way, are afraid of losing their jobs if they do not engage in that canvassing against the “Government, must be redundant employees. We can understand why private banks are using so many of their employees in the dissemination of progaganda against the Government when we remember that last year the Commonwealth Bank made a profit of £7,750,000, the greater proportion of which sum will be paid to Consolidated Revenue and thus will be returned to the people.

Mr Barnard:

– And the Commonwealth Bank made a profit of £6,250,000 in the preceding year.

Mr CONELAN:

– That is so. The honorable member for Corangamite said that ex-servicemen of World War I. received a fair deal from anti-Labour governments when they returned to this country. He is the only man I know who believes that. Perhaps, I shall disabuse his mind of that illusion by quoting from the views that were expressed by exservicemen’s organizations concerning the treatment that was meted out to exservicemen by tory governments at that time. I read the following extract from a report that was published in the Melbourne Argus of the 2nd March, 1922, four years after the end of World War I.-

The Prime Minister (Mr. W. M. Hughes) informed a deputation from the E.S.L. that directions had been given to the Public Service Commissioner that the Service must be “ raked with a fine comb “ to make room for unemployed men.

We know, of course, that the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Harrison) is advocating a similar policy to-day. He has said that half of the employees in the Public Service should be sacked. He also wants to run a fine tooth comb through the Public Service so that more labour can be made available for the benefit of vested interests. The Argus of the 21st March, 1922, published a letter written by the chairman of the Commonwealth Council of the Limbless Soldiers Association pleading that employment be found for unemployed limbless soldiers. I read the following extract from a report published in the same newspaper of the 31st March, 1922 :-

The Prime Minister said that unemployment, which was much more rife in every other Allied country than in Australia, had come to Australia. Instructions had been given that temporary employees who had not gone to the war should be dismissed and soldiers put in their places. Soldiers had been dismissed from the Defence Department owing to the reduced vote. Work might be found for them by the extension of telephonic and telegraphic services.

On the 1st April, 1922, the same newspaper published the following report dealing with the establishment of a fund for the relief of distressed unemployed ex-servicemen -

Mr. David, Secretary of the Victorian Branch of the R.S.I/., said, in challenging the Federal Government - “ The bald fact remains that these men are out of employment and they are returned soldiers. I do not see how there can be any opposition to an attempt to help these men, although they have been repatriated. With a definite knowledge that there are married men on our employment roll whose families are destitute and starving their former comrades and the sympathetic public are recognising the absolute necessity for the immediate provision of a fund to relieve their hardships.

That is typical of the treatment that was meted out to the ex-servicemen by the government that was in power at that time. The honorable member for Corangamite supports the political organizations which constituted that Government. These things took place four years after “World War I. Let us consider the position to-day, four years after World War II. Every ex-serviceman of the recent war who wishes to learn a trade or profession has either been rehabilitated’ or is receiving instruction. Over 300 ex-servicemen are still attending universities in Australia. Every man in this country who wants to work can readily find a job. If he is not satisfied with a job that he accepts, he can readily obtain another position. Such cond. tions have never before been experienced in .this country. Yet the honorable member has the audacity to suggest that the ex-servicemen of World War I. received better treatment from an anti-Labour government than this Government has extended to ex-servicemen of World War II.

Since I have been a member of this Parliament I have had the privilege of hearing many budget speeches. At the outbreak of World War II., the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Menzies) was Prime Minister and Treasurer of this country. The right honorable gentleman presented to the Parliament the first budget to reach the £100,000,000 mark in this country. It was known as the “ first century budget “. Since then, as honorable members know, the budget has increased tremendously, and has now reached the colossal figure of £573,000,000. In common with other honorable members on the Government side of the chamber, I am proud of the fact that the present Prime Minister and Treasurer (Mr. Chifley) has balanced the budget for two successive years. But what was the attitude of honorable members opposite who are supposed to be business men and who represent big vested interests-

Mr Falkinder:

– That is nonsense.

Mr CONELAN:

– I know that the honorable member for Franklin (Mr. Falkinder) is only a little fellow, but he will grow. I repeat that honorable members opposite are supposed to represent vested interests. The honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. McBride) is one of the leaders of primary industry in this country, and is the chairman of direc tors of a very influential firm in South Australia that made colossal profits last year and in previous years. We all know what would happen if his general manager was not able to balance his. accounts and produce a favorable result. Yet the Opposition is critical of the Treasurer because he has been abVto balance his budget for two successiveyears. That had not been accomplished for very many years previously. During; the war years, there were frequently gaps of from £200,000,000 to £300,000,000 to bebridged. No criticism was forthcoming then, when money was needed for destructive purposes, and in order to protect the big vested interests that honorable members opposite represent. Yet to-day when the workers of this country are receiving a fair deal the Opposition is up in arms and clamouring for reductions of taxes for their friends. I remind honorable members that since the termination of hostilities reductions of taxes amounting to no less than £280,000,000 have been effected. One has only to refer to the daily newspapers to find that business undertakings in this country are making huge profits. Only yesterday I read an announcement that; the Electrolytic Zinc Company of . Australasia Limited had declared a dividend of 25 per cent. Not a bad deal at all ! The firm with which the honorable member for Wakefield is connected has made large profits, and recently declared a bonus of 2 per cent, in addition to the 10 per cent, dividend already announced. But let us consider the lot of the ordinary people in this country. When they save a few pounds and deposit that money with the savings banks in this country they receive only 2 per cent, interest. Indeed, no interest whatever is paid on deposits in excess of £1,000. I point out that time and again the huge business undertakings of Australia have watered their stock in order to increase the shareholding of those people who are privileged to have their money invested in them. To-day’s prosperity is reflected in the returns not only of the savings banks but also of the trading banks. In 1938-39, £246,000,000 was deposited in the savings banks of this country. That ‘ figure has risen to £714,000,000 to-day, which is an increase of 200 per cent. I remind honorable members that that money has been deposited by the workers of Australia, who are now enjoying good conditions generally. In 1938-39, £119,000,000 was deposited in the trading banks. Of course that is not such a huge sum to the trading banks ! To-day, however, the deposits in those banks have risen to £565,000,000, an increase of 400 per cent. Yet, honorable members opposite continue to cry out about this Government’s administration. If the figures that I have cited do not prove that we are enjoying prosperous conditions, I do not know what would prove it.

Only last week, when I was in Mel’ bourne, I w7as privileged to meet the leader of the anti-Labour group in the Melbourne City ‘Council. In the past we have heard that that body was responsible for the banking legislation being challenged. This man had just returned from a six months’ trip overseas. In the presence of other councillors and several members of this Parliament, he told me that he was very happy to be back in Australia because it was God’s own country - the best country in the world. I was very interested to hear such a. comment by a very critical anti-Labour man. The honorable member for renison (Dr. Gaha) also has just returned after five months abroad, during which time he travelled through many countries. He has expressed similar sentiments.

Two years ago I had the opportunity of travelling overseas and visited many countries. In my opinion there is no country in the world comparable with Australia. I returned by ship to New Zealand, and continued my journey to Australia by air. About the time that 1 was expected to arrive in this country a friend said to my wife, “What do you think Mr. Conelan is doing now?” She replied, “If I am any judge, he will be down on his hands and knees kissing the soil “. I repeat that this is God’s own country, and we are privileged to live here. Instead of honorable members opposite being “ knockers “ on their own country, they should go down on their knees and thank God fervently that they are privileged to live in this fine land.

Honorable members opposite have been most critical of the Government’s taxation proposals. As I have already said, since the war relief from direct taxation totalling £280,000,000 has been granted. Despite the assertions of honorable members opposite that the rates of taxation in this country are inordinately high, I remind them that we are paying less in, taxes than are the people in any other European country in the world. We are certainly more fortunate in this respect than are the people of Great Britain, Canada and New Zealand. The following interesting statement appeared in an American newspaper recently : -

Washington. - Taxes are now so high in the United States that the American people work on an average more than one day of every four for their Government, says Senator Robert A. Taft.

He is one of the most bitter anti-Labour senators in the United States of America. In the United Kingdom too, the people are paying heavy taxes. Australians are very fortunate indeed that their burden is comparatively light. In fact, -many taxpayers in this country actually pay less income tax now than they paid before the war, in spite of the colossal sums of money that were wasted on the war. Whilst I do not support the principle of Gallup polls, their findings are frequently quoted, and to-night, I shall refer to the results of one of them. A Gallup poll taken in this country earlier this year showed that the great majority of Australian taxpayers, particularly those on the lower incomes were looking forward with relish to the tax cuts that came into operation in July last. Throughout the Commonwealth, the Gallup poll revealed a general belief that the Government was giving the greatest relief possible. Interviewers for the Gallup poll asked members of the public-

Considering everything, are you satisfied, or dissatisfied, with the income tax reductions to apply in July?

It is amazing to think that anyone could be satisfied with a tax reduction, but it was found that one householder out of every ten did not pay any income tax at all. However, of the taxpayers interviewed, two out of three were satisfied with the proposed cuts. That represented a remarkable reversal of opinion in twelve months. In March, 1948, it was ascertained that 38 per cent, of Australian taxpayers were satisfied with tax reductions. By March, 1949, that figure had grown to 53 per cent. Whereas the number of dissatisfied taxpayers was 60 per cent, in March, 1948, it was only 27 per cent, in March, 1949. In March, 3 948, 2 per cent, had no opinion to offer ^ hut in March, 1949, 20 per cent, held no fixed opinion, indicating, of course, that they too were satisfied. Those figures are remarkable.

Australian industries are sharing in the general prosperity that the people of this country are enjoying. I have referred to the business with which the honorable member for Wakefield is associated. I am not jealous of him; I only wish that I, too, was in it. Vigorous expansion of manufacturing industries has been one of the dominant features of Australia’s post-war economy. More than 900,000 Australians are now employed in manufacturing industries compared with 625,000 in 1939. Between the end of the war and January, 1948, industry announced plans for developmental expenditure totalling £144,000,000. In this surge of development since the war, more than 2,200 new manufacturing projects have been announced. These have been financed by Australian, British and American firms. Never before in our history has such concentrated development occurred. We have now reached the stage when one out of every three wage-earners relies on manufacturing industries for a livelihood, and the volume of manufacturers in this country now considerably exceeds thai, of primary products. Of course, our primary products bring to us great external earnings, and I am sure that everybody will agree with the old saying thai we are on the sheep’s back. Notwithstanding all the talk that one hears about socialism, Australian primary producers, under Labour’s administration, have had a. marvellous deal, and we sincerely hope that their good fortune will continue in spite of the .devaluation of sterling. T trust that we shall never again suffer a depression as the result of a calamitous reduction of the prices of our primary products overseas.

In spite of material shortages and other difficulties, we have taken advantage of our opportunities. Australia expanded, by leaps and bounds during the war, and has continued to expand rapidly ever since. It is regrettable indeed, that a war is apparently necessary to make such achievements possible. After the passage of the 1945 banking legislation, through this Parliament, the Leader of the Opposition had the temerity to say that if the Opposition parties were returned to office at the then forthcoming election, they would repeal that legislation.

Mr Harrison:

– He did not say anything of the kind.

Mr CONELAN:

– It is in Hansard. I am not like some honorable members who wish that they could have certain passages deleted from Hansard; but their utterances catch up with them astime marches on. In the last policy speech made by the Leader of the Opposition, he did not refer to the 1945 act and to-day, neither he nor any of his colleagues are game to make any reference to that legislation, the repeal of which would permit private bankinginterests once again to take control of the Commonwealth Bank through a Commonwealth Bank Board. The reestablishment of the board would mean that farmers with big overdrafts would again be forced to their knees.

Honorable members opposite repeatedly raise socialism as an election bogy. I am a socialist, and I am sure that I do not look too bad. I admit that I follow rigidly the planks of the Labour party’s platform. Socialism is featured largely in antiLabour propaganda. The Opposition parties have substantial funds at their disposal, and they expend them lavishly with radio stations and newspapers, in their efforts to make political capital out of what they term Labour’s socialistic policy. What is the socialist objective of the Labour party? Where does that party draw the line? Honorable members opposite, who talk about the evils of nationalizing our banking system and other things, should remember that they cannot fool all the people all the time. They know quite well that Labour has not the power to nationalize even the honorable member for Wentworth. The technique of antiLabour propagandists is not to tell deliberate lies, but to deal in half truths which are really worse than lies. The objective of the Labour party is contained in its platform and its constitution, documents which are available even to members of the Opposition. Labour’s objective is published every year and it has remained unaltered for 28 years. Part of it is the socialization of industry, production, distribution and exchange. At the same time as that objective was written into Labour’s platform in 1921, there was also written into the platform a declaration which antiLabour parties ever since have endeavoured to keep from the people. That declaration was discussed at and approved by the triennial conference of the party which was held as recently as last year. Honorable members opposite who attack the Australian Labour party quote only the objective and ignore or suppress the declaration which accompanies it. That is a vicious and all too common form of untruth. The platform and constitution of the Australian Labour party are printed and published and are available to honorable members and the people of this country who desire to read them.

Mr Holt:

– Who wrote the statement which the honorable member is now reading?

Mr.CONELAN. - It was written by the general secretary of the Australian Labour party.

Mr Harrison:

– He prepares the honorable member’s speeches.

Mr.CONELAN.- Unlike the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Harrison) I do not enjoy the privilege of having the assistance of a paid publicity officer. I prepare my own speeches. The declaration reads as follows: -

  1. That the Australian Labour party proposes collective ownership for the purpose of preventing exploitation, and to whatever extent may be necessary for that purpose.
  2. That wherever private ownership is a means of exploitation it is opposed by the party.
  3. That the party does not seek to abolish private ownership even of any of the instruments of production where such an instrument is utilized by its owner in a socially useful manner without exploitation.

It is plain dishonesty for honorable members opposite to quote the objective and ignore the declaration. No doubt these dishonest tactics will be continued during the current election campaign, but the people will not be fooled by them.

The subject of communism has not been discussed in this chamber at any length since the coal strike. Before that strike took place whispers were being spread around the country that the Prime Minister was a Communist and that he would do this, that, or the other thing; but the moment the striking coal-miners broke the law the right honorable gentleman showed us what he could do. Let us see how the Opposition parties arc tied up with the Communists. This year a by-election for the Geelong seat in the Victorian Parliament was contested by candidates from the Australian Labour party, the Liberal party, and the Communist party. That seat had always been regarded as a safe Labour seat, but at the by-election the Liberal candidate, Mr. Montgomery, gained a majority solely because he was given the second preferences of the Communist candidate. At present campaigns are in progress for by-elections in the State electorates of Cessnock andRedfern in New South Wales. Both of those seats have been regarded as safe Labour seats. In this case the Liberal party has not nominated candidates but is supporting the Communist candidates.

Mr Harrison:

– That is entirely untrue.

Mr.CONELAN. - Let us examine the position that exists in Queensland. I had the privilege of being appointed campaign director for the Labour candidate who contested a recent by-election in that State. The Labour candidate had been returned by a majority of 345 votes at the last general election. As the result of his subsequent death a by-election became necessary. At the general election no Communist candidate contested the seat and, as I have said, the Labour candidate was returned by a majority of 345 votes. In that State the candidate first past the post wins the seat. In the by-election to which I have referred, candidates were nominated by the Australian Labour party, the Liberal party and the Communist party. It is obvious that the Communist party nominated a candidate to contest the seat solely for the purpose of attempting to defeat the Labour candidate. The tieup between the Liberal party and Communist party is apparent Notwithstanding the entry of the Communist party candidates into the field the Labour majority was almost trebled. To those honorable members who propose to go “ walkabout “ and to contest seats other than those which they now represent because they are afraid of the Communists, I say that I abhor communism as much as or more than they do. I hate the Communists even more than I hate the tories. The link between the Liberal party and the Communist party is stronger to-day than it has ever been before in the history of this country, lt is to be seen in the tory Brisbane City Council. Tory representatives in that Council support a fascist organization and the principal speaker at a meeting of that organization held last Tuesday night was an ex-Communist. There is a definite link between the “ commos “ and the tories. The people of Australia will not be fooled by them, because they know that if any party stands between the extreme right and left wings of political thought it is the Australian Labour party.

I have referred previously to the nationalization of the private banking institutions. Twenty-five per cent, of the employees of the private banks, who must be excess officers, are now going around the country annoying people in their homes with, misleading propaganda notwithstanding that nationalization of the private banks is an issue which is as dead as the dodo. Some of the publicity which those bank officers distribute is not unlike the Joe Palooka comic strip. The people are too shrewd to fall for propaganda of that kind.

I have drawn attention to the connexion between the Liberal party and the Communist party. I have pointed out what the Australian Labour party means by its objective of the socialization of the means of production, distribution and exchange. I have drawn attention to the fact that honorable members opposite utter only half-truths about Labour’s platform. I have said that it is plain dishonesty on the part of honorable members opposite to quote the objective of the Australian Labour party without at the same time quoting the declaration that accompanies it. When I have travelled through the States as a member of the Public Works Committee 1 have found that the three anti-Labour States are the most ‘highly socialized States in the Commonwealth. The Premier of South Australia, Mr.. Playford, who, I am sure, the honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. McBride) and the honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron) regard as a good’ type of citizen, as I myself do, socialized the electricity undertaking in that State. Some of his tory adherents in the Upper House opposed him but he brought them into line by telling them what would happen to them if they did not support his proposal to take over the electricity undertaking. The coal-mine at Leigh Creek has been taken over by the Government of South Australia, and, therefore, must be regarded as another socialized’ enterprise.

Mr Archie Cameron:

– The Government of South Australia started the Leigh Creek mine.

Mr CONELAN:

– I agree that the State Government started the mine, but it continues to control the project. A tory government in Victoria controls the generation and distribution of electricity, and is doing a magnificent job. It also controls the coal mines in that State. Both of those activities are good socialized industries, and I have not the slightest objection to the fact that they are under government control. The greatest State in Australia, which is Queensland, has had Labour governments for more than 30 years, and it has handed over coal mines to private enterprise. That Government is allowing the people who have money and initiative to develop the Callide and Blair Athol coal mines. Although all the evidence points to the contrary, honorable members opposite persist in complaining about the government control of industries, and socialization. The Government of Tasmania controls the important hydroelectric schemes of that State. Do honorable members describe that activity as a socialized industry? We constantly hear the cry in New South Wales, “ Nationalize the coal mines _ut the State Labour Government lias not done so. When primary producing industries have been nationalized, a tory government has almost always been responsible for that action. Yet honorable members opposite have the audacity to complain about government control of industry! The Australian Country party has supported a policy of orderly marketing which, in effect, has nationalized primary producing industries. The honorable member for Maranoa (Mr. Adermann) is the chairman of the Peanut Board, which is the greatest socialized industry in Queensland. The wool, meat, butter, cheese and wheat and other grain industries are controlled socialistically, but honorable members opposite have not complained about that fact. The truth is that primary producers are better off to-day than they have ever been in their lives. That statement is equally true of other sections of the community. Even the leader of the tory party agrees that enterprise must be regulated, as the following newspaper extract shows : - “It will be impossible in these complicated days to get back to completely free enterprise said the Federal president of the Liberal party ( Mr. Casey ) in Launceston last night.

Mr. Casey was discussing his tour of Tasmania. He was seeking, he said, support for the maintenance of regulated free enterprise.

He said the Liberal party did not aim to get back to complete freedom of free enterprise. Some control was needed because of the complicated times.

Free enterprise had to be regulated in the interests of the people. “ We have every faith in the judgment of the Australian people if they have the facts of our situation presented to them in a fair and reasonable way. The presentation is up to our party and its supporters.”

The party’s policy would be stated within the next six months, Mr. Casey said.

That report wa.s published on the 18th March, and the Liberal party has not yet stated its policy. The extract continues -

Every party in Opposition had the same problem as to disclosing its policy. At present, Labour was most anxious to wheedle the Liberal party’s .policy, -

Of course, the Liberal party has no policy. The extract continues - “ Our policy-making is very well advanced “, lie said. “ When it is announced publicly in full it will be found to be a constructive policy to improve the situation of all sections of the Australian people.”

Last night Mr. Casey addressed a party meeting in Launceston, giving the broad outlines of the policy.

That is remarkable indeed. The Liberal party’s policy may be summed up in one word, “ Nil “. Mr. Casey must have told the party meeting precisely nothing.

Mr Dedman:

– Who is this Mr. Casey ?

Mr CONELAN:

– He is the federal president of the Liberal party, and, unfortunately, we shall have him among us next year. Honorable members opposite have complained that the Government is antagonistic towards private industry. What are the facts? I have shown clearly that Australian industries to-day are enjoying great prosperity. Their share prices have never been higher than they are at the present time. Industries are expanding by leaps and bounds, and their profits have never been higher than they are to-day. Some industries are paying dividends of 25 per cent. I believe that we should go down on our knees and thank the Lord that we live in such a glorious country as Australia.

Mr Archie Cameron:

– That is a new way of saying prayers.

Mr CONELAN:

– It is a good one, too. We live in a great country of which we should be very proud. Under Labour administration, Australia has a great future. The people are happy and contented, and are well fed and clothed. They have great confidence that the present prosperous conditions will continue so long as the Labour Government remains in office.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Hadley:

– Order! The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr SHEEHY:
Boothby

.- I desire to say a few words about this budget which has been presented to the Parliament and to Australia in this year of grace 1949. When I use the term “ this year of grace “, I believe that we have everything to be thankful for, because this country to which we have the privilege to belong is in such a grand financial position. This is the second time since the end of the war that the Treasurer (Mr. Chifley) has been able to tell the country, “ We have finished the financial year with a balanced budget “. That achievement is unique in the history of federal politics. I listened with interest to the speech by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Menzies) on the devaluation of the currency. It must have been apparent to honorable members and to the Australian people that the right honorable gentleman bad nothing to say about the budget itself. The reasons are clear.

Mr Fuller:

– It is a good budget.

Mr SHEEHY:

– It is one of the best budgets that has ever been presented to the Australian Parliament. I said that the Leader of the Opposition had very good reasons for being silent about the budget. This is the fourth year since the end of the war - a war of a magnitude previously unknown to mankind. While the war was in progress, the Leader of the Opposition said to the Australian people, “If we get out of this war in what we stand up in, we shall have done a magnificent job “. That attitude was reflected in his budget. The Labour Government, however, notwithstanding colossal expenditure on war, and the need to regiment the people, and marshall the forces of the nation for victory, has presented two balanced budgets in the course of four years. The running of a country is very much like the running of a home, except that it is on a bigger scale. For almost the first time in their lives, the majority of Australians have been able to balance their domestic budgets. That is why, in a nation-wide gallup poll, 94 per cent, of the people declared themselves to be happy citizens.

I have been surprised at the antiBritish attitude of some honorable members opposite, and particularly at their assertion that we should have charged the hard-working people of Britain more for the commodities that they bought from us. On every possible occasion, the Leader of the Australian Country party (Mr. Fadden) has attacked the Labour Government in Great Britain. Not long ago, he had an opportunity to visit Great Britain, and study conditions there for himself. He was selected, as I was, to be one of a party of parliamentarians togo abroad, but he did not go. He wasreported in the Adelaide press to havesaid that he would not go overseas because the international position was too bad-

Mr Fadden:

– What rot !

Mr SHEEHY:

– I am merely repeating what was published in the newspapers.. What could he achieve by remaining? He was not leader of the Government, nor even Leader of the Opposition. Had’’ he visited Great Britain, he could haveseen for himself the magnificent effort being made by the British people. A byelection occurred in Glasgow while I wasthere. Before the election, Labour members of Parliament told me that they thought their candidate would win, and, sure enough, he did. That was thetwentyninth by-election in succession that had been won by the Labour party,, and it was under a system of voluntaryvoting. Could such results be obtained if the people were dissatisfied with the Government ?

The honorable member for Corangamite (Mr. McDonald ) spoke of the alleged’ trials and tribulations of the primary producers, and he blamed the Government for everything. He told us that there was a scarcity of petrol, wirenetting, fencing posts, trucks and tractors ; yet, in 1947-48, wheat-growers reaped the biggest harvest ever produced in Australia, and in the following year 174,000,000 bushels of wheat wereharvested. The purpose of the budget’ is to let the people know where therevenue of the country comes from and how it is expended. It gives a review of past expenditure, and a preview of projected expenditure. Some honorable members opposite claimed that exservicemen had received a raw deal under this Government. The fact is that the LabourGovernment has set itself out to do everything possible to re-establish those who served their country so well during the war. A total of £88,750,000 has been expended on re-establishment by this Government. I remember that, after World1 War I., re-establishment for a great many returned soldiers consisted in a job chipping grass off footpaths at Christmastime. Under the re-establishment schemeinaugurated by the Labour Government,. ex-servicemen have been given the opportunity to take university courses, and in South Australia alone, £157,800 has been paid out in tuition fees, while students have drawn living allowance amounting to £625,750. For technical and vocational training, the Government has paid out £483,000 in South Australia. Living allowances paid to trainees in that category have amounted to £722,750. But government assistance has not ended there. It extends also to rural training. That also is something new for ex-servicemen. The Government has given them the opportunity to widen their knowledge and gain fresh experience so that they can farm their properties to the best possible advantage. The cost of that branch of the reconstruction scheme in South Australia has been £32.000, and allowances paid to trainees have amounted to £88,750. 1 have stated those figures so that the people of South Australia may know what the Government has been doing with their money. Tools of trade have been provided for ex-servicemen, as gifts, at a cost in South Australia of £.1.64,000. Loans totalling £16,750 have also been made to tradesmen.

A great deal has been said during this debate about war service homes. Since the end of World War II.. a total sum of £3,000,000 has been provided for the construction of war service homes in South Australia. I shall discuss this subject at some length because honorable members opposite have declared from time to time that the Labour Government has done nothing to provide homes for ex-servicemen and their families. I have vivid recollections of what was done by the Lyons Government in 1935, when the war service homes administration in South Australia was carried on by the Sta te Bank of South Australia.

Mr Blain:

– A good institution, too.

Mr SHEEHY:

– I agree entirely with the honorable member. It was a good institution. In fact, it was far too good for ex-servicemen in the opinion of thu Lyons Government. That is the point to which I have been directing my remarks. The Lyons Government removed control of the war service homes scheme from the State Bank of South Australia in 1935 and established a separate organi sation because it considered that the State bank had been dealing far too leniently with ex-servicemen whose payments had fallen into arrears because of the depression conditions that obtained at that time. Yet, in spite of that shocking record, honorable members opposite rise in this chamber and declare that this Government has let the ex-servicemen down by failing to provide them with a chance to obtain homes for themselves. It was the Lyons anti-Labour Government that objected to the considerate treatment that was meted out by the State Bank of South Australia to ex-servicemen who were in straitened circumstances through no fault of their own. The honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Thompson), who was a member of the State Parliament at that time, will remember the circumstances as clearly as I do.

Excellent progress has been made with the war service homes scheme under the administration of the present Minister for Works and Housing (Mr. Lemmon). A record total of 750 war service homes was built in South Australia last year. In addition, 336 homes were purchased on behalf of ex-servicemen from thi South Australian Housing Trust, which also has done a good job. The total number of homes purchased from the trust for ex-servicemen is 502, for which the War Service Homes Department has paid £690,000. Honorable members opposite cannot boast of such achievements by anti-Labour Governments. The Minister for Works and Housing reminded us this afternoon that only 43 war service homes were built in 1939 although there were 400 applications that year. A comparison of that record with the achievements of this Government discredits the claims of honorable members opposite. This Government has done a magnificent job on behalf of ex-servicemen, and rightly so. I do not ask honorable members opposite to rely only on my claims. The figures that I have stated present the facts. The Federal President of the Returned Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen’s Imperial League of Australia, Mr. Eric Millhouse, who is also president of the South Australian branch of the league, has praised the Government’s efforts on behalf of exservicemen in glowing terms. I had the opportunity to attend in company with the Minister for Information (Mr. Calwell), a meeting of ex-servicemen at which Mr. Millhouse paid to this Government a tribute that I have never heard equalled. After hearing it, I spoke to pressmen who were present and said, “ I hope you will run this stuff “. They said, “ We will certainly run it. This is something new. This is something good “. But not one word of what Mr. Millhouse said on that occasion appeared in the newspapers next day! It was left to the Adelaide Mail to publish his statements on the following Saturday. At that time, Mr. Millhouse was about to go overseas with a commission from the Minister for Immigration (Mr. Calwell) to visit camps for displaced persons in Europe with the object of securing new citizens for Australia.

Mr Thompson:

Mr. Millhouse is not a Labour supporter, incidentally.

Mr SHEEHY:

– That is true. I shall quote his statements from the Adelaide Mail. Honorable members opposite may try to refute them, but they will not be able to do so truthfully. This is what was published in the Adelaide Mail on the 20th August last -

For 15 years Mr. Millhouse, now 57, has been on the State Executive of the B..SX. and he has had this to say about ex-servicemen : - “ Ex-servicemen are faring better since thelast war than they did after World War I., particularly in rehabilitation training for trades and universities “.

That is the very point that I emphasized earlier. It supports what I have said about this Government’s efforts to provide for the welfare of the men who fought for this country and for civilization. The report of Mr. Millhouse’s statement continued- “ Land settlement, although slow of necessity, seems to bc on a much ‘better footing. Rehabilitation as a whole has been fairly successful in spite of .a few hold-ups “.

The education of the people is the responsibility of the States, but at the end of June, 194:9, the Commonwealth had made grants amounting to £2,500,000 to universities in respect of buildings, maintenance costs and equipment. It is making a sum of £100,000 a year available to ihe universities for research purposes. A sum of £1,250,000 has been paid ‘to -university technical college students, and 5,800 students have received assistance. The education of the people is, as I have said, the responsibility of the States, not of the Commonwealth, but that is what this Government has done. We have taken a step further along the road to the achievement of higher standards of education for the people of this country.

The Labour party has been charged from time to time with being allied with the Communists. The Minister for Information gave the lie direct to that charge last night when he produced a Liberal party “How to Vote” card, on which Lawrence Sharkey, the Communist, was placed in the sixth position and the Labour .party candidates last. I have always said, and I always will say, that the Communist parity is an auxiliary of the Liberal party. The objectives of both parties are the defeat of Labour governments and the lowering of the .standards of living of the people. The Communists know that it is only by achieving those objectives that the Communist party can hope to survive in Australia. During the recent general coal strike, I addressed fourteen meetings and outlined the position to thousands of workers. I should like to know what honorable gentlemen opposite did during that strike. The South Australian press commented upon the fact that at the fourteen meetings to which I have referred there was not one interjection. Let us see what the South Australian press had had to say about the coal strike and communism. Incidentally, I give to representatives of the press statements regarding my activities in the Boothby electorate, but although they publish details of those activities .they do not link my name with them at all. The Adelaide News published the following article on the 12th July, 1949:-

Out on a limb . . . Some people have been clamouring for months that the Communist party should be banned or otherwise assailed. The Federal Government held ,its hand. It begins to look now as if the Federal Government was wiser than its critics.

Another article, published in the same journal on the 11th August, 1949, reads as follows : -

A battle won. The Communist leaders who plotted the coal strike have lost it and th« Australian people have won. The Beds have been beaten by -public opinion, by the rallying of- the A.LiP. forces on the coal-fields, by the influence of the A.C.T.U., by the opposition of rational trade unionism, and by resolute Government action,

The Government to which the article refers is this Labour Government. 1 can remember the time when trade unions were fined by anti-Labour governments for their absentees, but the fines were never collected. The honorable member for Fawkner (Mr. Holt) has said that the Menzies Government did not care how long the 1940 coal strike lasted. We were at war then. Did the Menzies Government take the action to end that strike that this Government took to end the last general coal strike ? Of course it did not. It would have run foul of its allies if it had done so. Another article that was published in the Adelaide News, written by Mr. L. P. Jervis, a correspondent who covered every meeting that I addressed during the coal strike contained the following passage :- -

With the coal strike tottering to a dismal end, Communist influence in South- Australian trade unions is at its lowest ebb for 15 years.

That gives an indication of the success of the activities of the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Thompson) and myself. It is a new technique on my part to quote from- newspapers. I can assure the House that the cuttings which I have in m.y hand; are my own property. They have my name stamped on them. In an article published in the Sydney Truth the following passage appeared : -

Yet Messrs Menzies and Hughes are promising to stop unrest if only the electors will put them back on the Treasury benches. Industrial trouble would probably increase by 500 per cent, if the Liberal party took over. That seems; to be the general opinion of political observers.

The next matter with which I propose to deal is the allegation that this Government has strangled industry. This afternoon, the honorable member for Grey (Mr, Russell) informed the committee of the financial, position of Elder Smith & Company Limited, one of the poor little fir-ms that is alleged to have been strangled-! On the 18th February, 1948’,. Ohe- Adelaide Advertiser’ - a very good newspaper - published an- article in which the following words appeared.: -

A record year in South Australian industries. The gross value of output of South Australian factories’ and works last year was £86,700,000.

The number of factories in South’ Australia has- increased by 40: per cent., the number of workers by 70 per cent., and the value of output by 200 per cent. That is due to the wise administration of the affairs of the Commonwealth’ by Labour governments since the late John Curtin assumed the office of Prime Minister.

I have ascertained from the Treasury how much money has Been invested in this country by American investors since the war ended. It has been suggested that American investors are reluctant to invest in Australia because we- have a Labour government, but the fact is that since the end of the war a sum of 75,000,000 dollars has been invested in Australia. The money has been used to establish new industries and to expand established industries. The Labour party believes in a policy of full employment, and it is only by the establishment of new industries in Australia and the expansion of existing industries that full employment can be maintained.

The Leader of the Opposition has said that when he is returned to power he will’ re-establish- the Commonwealth. Bank Board and abolish the office of governorship of the bank. He made no apologies for saying, that. In fact, he has made that statement more than once. The appointment of the Commonwealth Bank Board is the very reason why industry is now lagging in this country, yet the right honorable gentleman has said that he will re-establish the board. Then we have a younger’ member of the Opposition, the- honorable member for Calare (Mr. Howse) saying - I shall not profess to- quote his- words- exactly, because I should not like to misquote him, as I think quite a lot of him as- a man, but he said, in effect; to the Government: - “I believe- that the Government has the plans- for the works that it has announced that it will undertake. I believe that it has the blueprints,, but where is ifr going to get the money “ ? That was the young master coming forward to speak the mind of the old master. He repeated the statement’ of the Leader of the Opposition, “ We shall abolish the governorship of the bank and re-establish the Bani. Board’”, and then, said regarding our works programme, “ But where is the Government going to get the’ money” ?

The pattern is clear. The cat is out of the bag. I warn the workers, the middle class and the small business people of this country, who can survive only if the workers in industry are fully employed, that the Opposition parties if returned to power will abolish the governorship of the Commonwealth Bank, reinstate the Commonwealth Bank Board and then say, when they are asked in time of need to embark upon great public works to provide employment, “ But where are we going to get the money “ ? The people of Australia should place their faith in the Chifley Government, which will get the money to do the job of maintaining employment in bad times as it got the money to win the war. If the last war were still in progress the Government would still be finding the money to fight it.

I turn now to the nationalization of industries. The Premier of South Australia is the greatest socialist Premier in Australia, although his Government is nominally a Liberal government. He nationalized the Adelaide Electricity Trust. He opened a nationalized coalfield and name to the Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr. Holloway) for all the advice that he could get about how to establish his coal mine.

Mr Calwell:

– And for all the money he could get, too.

Mr SHEEHY:

– That is correct. I desire to tell the people of South Australia that the Australian Government has made available £200,000 for the development of the Leigh Creek coal mine which the Premier of that State opened up. But its assistance does not stop there, because the coal won from that mine has to be hauled over a section of the Commonwealth Railways. To enable the South Australian Government to produce coal from that mine cheaply, the Australian Government has allowed the State a cut rate for the haulage of coal over the Commonwealth Railways. It would accord the same assistance to any government that happened to be in office in South Australia. The tonnage rate for ordinary freight from Leigh Creek to Adelaide is 20s. 7d., but coal from that mine is being carried on the Commonwealth Railways for 6s. a ton, thus saving the South Australian taxpayers £375,000 a year. Such matters were not made known to the people during the recent coal strike. They were not published in the press of South Australia, although I distributed1 thousands of pamphlets to acquaint the people with the position. The honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. McBride) said earlier in this debate that the value of the Australian £1 had decreased. He said that £1 was not worth as much to the pensioner as it was worth in the past. All I have to say in answer is that when the age pension rate was last reduced the reduction was made by a Liberal government, or perhaps it was a United Australia party government - I cannot recall exactly what name the senior Opposition party had at that time. That government forced age pensioners to mortgage their homes against the amount of pension they received. If such an action was not tantamount to reducing the value of the pound to the pensioner I still have something to learn. The honorable member also gave figures about the progress of the Commonwealth Bank. He said that in 1935 it had only 6.5 per cent. of the country’s banking business, and that in 1943 that percentage had doubled. It is only natural that the Commonwealth Bank should have doubled its activities between those years. That is as plain as a pikestaff ! While the Commonwealth Bank was governed by a board the bank was strangled. Only since the Governorship system was reinstituted has the bank had an opportunity to develop properly, and it is only natural that, because of the bank’s new policy under the new system the people should assist in its development.

Now I turn to another socialized project conducted by the Government of South Australia. I refer to the Savings Bank of South Australia. An article in the Adelaide News of the 17th September is headed -

Savings Bank’s Successful Year

Upward Trend Continues

Depositors’ Balances Exceed £66,000,000

An advertisement on the same page carries the following words under the title of the bank : -

Guaranteed by the Government of the State of South Australia.

Mr SHEEHY:

– Of course it will not be nationalized.

Mr Calwell:

– It is already nationalized!

Mr SHEEHY:

– The bank is guaranteed by the Government of the State of South Australia irrespective of the Government’s political shade. But the wealth of the State is the real guarantee behind the bank.

Now let me say something else about the inventions of the Liberal party regarding nationalization. The Premier of South Australia attended a Liberal party conference at which he used the following words : -

If Labour is returned at the Federal elections, the Prime Minister will find means to bring about the nationalization of the banks.

I say that that statement is completely untrue. The people have to realize that whatever those opposed to this Government may tell them, the Australian Government, irrespective of its political colour, is bound by a written Constitution outside the provisions of which it cannot go. Our opponents talk about nationalized steel, nationalized milk shops and nationalized lolly shops. I challenge any honorable member on the opposite side who still has to speak in this debate to show me one word in the Constitution that indicates how the Government could nationalize those businesses. I shall now quote to the committee an extract from the South Australian Hansard because I consider it to be worth quoting. I am not like the honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron), who tried to put something across in this chamber about socialism, and said that he was reading from a typed sheet the platform of the Labour party. When the Government of South Australia took over control of the Adelaide Electric Supply Company, the Premier of that State was reported to have said -

While believing it desirable to interfere as little as possible with private enterprise, the Premier considered that such concerns as the Adelaide Electric Supply Company and the Gas Company provided public utilities and were monopolistic and therefore should be controlled.

In view of that statement, the Premier of South Australia can rightly be described as a socialist. On one occasion the Leader of the Opposition appeared on the same platform as the Premier of South Australia and denounced this Government’s proposals to nationalize the airways and private banks; but when a member of the audience asked1 the right honorable gentleman how he could reconcile the views he had just expressed with his appearance on the same platform as the leader of a government that had nationalized electricity services, coal mines and water supply services in South Australia, all the right honorable gentleman could say was, “ I am not here to discuss State politics “.

I urge the electors of South Australia to analyse the position in which they find themselves under the present Australian Government and to compare their present prosperity with the conditions experienced in this country under anti-Labour governments, when hundreds of thousands of Australians walked the streets in search of employment. No citizen of South Australia has been obliged to look for work since the Labour Government assumed office in 1941. On this occasion, for the second time since the end of the recent war, the Treasurer has balanced his budget. That is a remarkable achievement, particularly when we recall that during the war the Leader of the Opposition said that if Australians came through World War II. with only the clothes they stood up in they would do well. Yet, honorable members opposite criticize the Government. I noticed, however, that none of them has offered any serious criticism of the budget. The Leader of the Opposition, in his speech, did not even touch upon it.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

– Order ! The honorable member’s time has expired.

Progress reported.

page 769

ADJOURNMENT

Royal Australian Air Force: East

Sale Air Training Station - Civil Aviation:qantas Empire Airways Limited - Importation of Portable Typewriters and Roto Duplicators from Germany.

Motion (by Mr. Dedman) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr WHITE:
Balaclava

.- As I have not had an opportunity during the last few days to ask a question of the Minister for Air (Mr. Drakeford), I propose to say something about the matter I have in mind. I refer to the unfortunate loss of an Anson training aircraft at the East Sale air training station. Honorable members know that during the war many lives were lost at that station due to its proximity to mountains and the sea. Therefore, I ask that when the inquiry into the recent accident is being made, attention should also be given to the question of the suitability of that station for training purposes and whether it would not be advisable to transfer the station to say, Amberley, in Queensland, which would have the additional advantage of being nearer to possible theatres of operation in the event of the outbreak of another war. I do not criticize anybody in this matter. Unfortunately, loss of life occurs in training operations as well as in war-time; but following the loss of five young lives in the recent disaster we should now consider whether East Sale is a suitable location for a training station. Other persons who are more competent than I am to offer an opinion on the matter share my belief that the present location is not suitable for that purpose.

I have not yet received a reply to questions which have been standing in my name on the notice-paper since the beginning of the present period of the session. The questions, which are addressed to the Minister for Civil Aviadon, are as follow : -

  1. What quantity of mail has been carried on the Qantas run to England since the Government took over control !
  2. What amount was carried on the other Qantas runs during the same period t
  3. What subsidy was paid on the mail carried to England during that time?
  4. What was paid on the mail carried on other Qantas runs?

The Minister said recently that Qantas

Empire Airways Limited had made a profit since the Government took over control of the organization. I ask him, therefore, either to lay on the table the balance-sheet of that organization or to make it available in the library.

Mr. DRAKEFORD (Maribyrnong - Minister for Air and Minister for Civil

Aviation) [10.6]. - The accidents that occurred during the war at the East Sale air training station caused me, as Minister for Air, a great deal of concern. I am sure that both before and after the war ended the Air Board examined the question whether the location of that station was suitable for training of the type now carried out there. However, as the honorable member for Balaclava (Mr. White) who served in the Air Force in the war, has again raised the matter, I shall bring his remarks to the notice of the Air Board so that when the departmental inquiry into the recent accident at East Sale is being made, consideration can ako be given to that aspect.

With respect to the honorable member’s question relating to Qantas Empire Airways Limited, I notice that a similar question stands on the noticepaper in the name of the Leader of the Australian Country party (Mr. Fadden). I can only say that that matter is being examined. I point out that considerable time will be required to obtain the information for which the honorable member has asked, because the carriage of mails is jointly undertaken by British Overseas Aircraft Corporation and Qantas Empire Airways Limited. For instance, in certain circumstances, British Overseas Aircraft Corporation may have made a run that Qantas was scheduled to make, and vice versa. Adjustments have to be taken into consideration when giving the details. I stress that there is no intention to delay it any further than is required to obtain the information.

Mr White:

– We should like that information before the Estimates are discussed.

Mr DRAKEFORD:
Minister for Air · MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA · ALP

– I consider that honorable members should have the fullest information possible on matters of this kind when the Government is operating airlines, so that they can offer intelligent, and, I hope, helpful criticism. I know that the honorable member for Balaclava had socialistic leanings towards government airlines at one time-

Mr White:

– A partnership, perhaps.

Mr DRAKEFORD:

– Although he wants the Government in when that is advantageous, he does not want the Government in it when he is looking after the interests of private enterprise, as he usually does in this House. He regards anything else as completely obnoxious. The honorable member has also asked whether the report and balance-sheet of Qantas Empire Airways Limited will be made available. I propose to lay those documents and also the report of Trans-Australia Airlines on the table of the House very soon. At present they are undergoing audit. I imagine that the honorable member will then find it unnecessary to ask any more questions about this matter because the information will be set out fully. I know that the honorable member likes to see successful concerns in operation. That gives him some satisfaction which he does not appear to be receiving now. However, there is no desire to avoid the possibility of criticism, and I am not suggesting - nor have I suggested at any time - that there is no room for criticism. I quite understand that what the honorable member has brought forward with relation to East Sale was not said by way of condemnation. He is merely asking that an examination be made to see whether a site that would be more suitable for the purpose of training airmen, and where they would be involved in what he considers to be less risk, can be found. So far as I am aware they are not subjected to any more than ordinary risks at East Sale, but the accident seems to have been one of a type that occurred during the war period, when training was much more intensive than now.

Mr White:

– I remind the Minister that the sea and mountains are in close proximity to East Sale. That is not so n t Amberley.

Mr DRAKEFORD:

– I lived at Sale in my early years, and whilst I do not claim expert knowledge on this subject, I cannot see that the personnel are subjected to any more danger at East Sale than they would be subjected to elsewhere. After all, trainees, whoever they may be, have eventually to undergo training over mountainous areas and over the sea. It would be quite impossible to find a location where no risks would be involved.

Mr White:

– I am not suggesting that.

Mr DRAKEFORD:

– I shall be glad to examine the matter that has been brought forward by the honorable member, and I will furnish him with the information desired in due course.

Mr HOLT:
Fawkner

.- I desire to raise a matter that has been brought to my notice by a well-known Melbourne firm of importers and distributors of office equipment and supplier. Whilst the matter that the firm has brought to mv notice is of particular interest to its members, it is of general interest also in relation to trade between Australia and either the western zone or the Russian zone of Germany. Should the Minister for Air (“Mr. Drakeford) be agreeable to pass this information on to the Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator Courtice), I shall be pleased to make details available to him. I am advised that in recent months this firm has had offers from several firms of the agency or distributing rights for the Olympia portable typewriters, which come from the Russian zone of Germany. My informant says that there are two factories making this machine. One is in the Western Zone and the other is in the Russian Zone. As honorable members are aware, the Western Zone of Germany is administered jointly by British, French and American representatives. The offers emanated from the Russian. Zone. My informant states that upon inquiry why his firm could not be offered Western Zone products, he was informed that it had been found easier to obtain a licence from the Commonwealth customs for merchandise from the Russian Zone. He has pointed out that during World War II. portable typewriters were considered luxuries, and their manufacture in Great Britain was stopped by government decree. That action was apparently endorsed by the Australian Government, because the importation of portable typewriters was prohibited for some time. I understand that the major British manufacturers have not yet been able to resume production of portable typewriters, owing to the big demand for standard model machines for office use. It appears, therefore, that. Australia is being exploited as a useful market for typewriters manufactured in the Russian Zone of Germany^ and that this might ultimately be detrimental to the British manufacturers who are at present trying to make up the leeway in respect of standard office typewriters. The question that has been raised is why import licences for merchandise from the Russian Zone of Germany are easier to obtain than licences to import goods from the Western Zone, which is under the joint control of the Western Powers.

I have been told, also, that this firm has been trying for about two years to secure approval to bring Roto duplicators into Australia from the Western Zone. Despite its efforts, however, the issue of a licence, which would enable it to renew its agency, has been refused. That make of machine is well-known in this country, and I gather from the correspondence that has reached me that it enjoys an international reputation for efficiency. My correspondent says that the Department of Trade and Customs has not given any reason for the refusal, other than that this is a matter of high politics. Apparently the department has stated that, as high policy is involved in this matter, the issue of an import licence must be refused. It is somewhat difficult to understand the reasons for this decision if it is a fact, as alleged, that comparable office equipment is being imported from the Russian Zone of Germany.

Enclosed with the letter to which I have referred was an advertisement that appeared in a recent edition of the Melbourne Herald with relation to Olympia and Rheinmetall portable typewriters. The advertisement stated that immediate deliveries of those machines could be made. Apparently these are the typewriters that are coming in from the Russian Zone of Germany, to which my informant has referred. On the surface it would appear that if import licences can he made available for the importation of goods from the Russian Zone of Germany, there is no sound reason why a similar facility should not be extended to people who desire to import goods from the Western Zone. Possibly the trade policy of the joint organization that has been established in Germany has something to do with it. Alternatively, it may be that the British Government has intervened and requested that the issue of a licence for the importation of this kind of equipment be restricted. If that were the case, however, I should imagine that the same considerations would apply to exports from both zones of Germany. I have no knowledge of this matter other than what has been brought to my notice by my correspondent. As I have already said, I shall be glad to make the letter available to the Minister, and I trust that he will institute an inquiry to clear the matter up and enable me to send a satisfactory reply to the firm that has brought it to my notice.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 772

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Air Navigation Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 70.

Apple and Pear Organization Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 67.

Australian Broadcasting Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No.66.

Commonwealth Electoral Act and Referendum (Constitution Alteration) Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 62.

Commonwealth Public Service Act - Appointments - Department -

Labour and National Service - G. D. Grant.

Treasury - G. T. Wright.

Defence Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 68.

Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No.60.

Defence (Transitional Provisions) Act -

National Security ( Industrial Property ) Regulations - Orders - Inventions and designs (16).

National Security (Prices) Regulations -Orders- Nos. 3436-3442.

Lands Acquisition Act - Land acquired for Postal purposes - Torquay, Victoria.

Naval Defence Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, Nos. 58, 64, 60.

Northern Territory Representation Act,

Northern Territory (Administration) Act and Commonwealth Electoral Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 61.

Raw Cotton Bounty Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 57.

Sales Tax Assessment Acts (Nos. 1-9) Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 65.

Seat of Government Acceptance Act and Seat of Government (Administration) Act - Canberra University College - Report for 1948.

Supply and Development Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 59.

Wheat Industry Stabilization Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 56.

Wine Overseas Marketing Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1949, No. 63.

House adjourned at 10.18 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 29 September 1949, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1949/19490929_reps_18_204/>.