Senate
17 May 1939

15th Parliament · 1st Session

  1. Senate
  2. 15th Parliament
  3. 1939

The President (Senator the Eon. J. B. Hayes) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 357

RAYON INDUSTRY

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

– by leave - In the Senate yesterday Senator Abbott referred . to a report that had appeared in the press in connexion with the establishment in Australia of the rayon industry. The matter was brought under the notice of the Prime Minister, who has requested me to inform honorable senators that the only foundation for the statement in the Sydney Morning Herald of the 15th May was that he was interviewed by a prospective manufacturer of certain printed fabrics, including printed rayons. The Prime Minister referred him to the Trade and Customs Department so that he might obtain the necessary information as to the steps that should he taken by a prospective manufacturer in making representations. My leader has asked me to add that no commitment of any kind has been made, nor has the matter yet come before Cabinet.

page 357

QUESTION

MILITIA TRAINEES

Conditions at Enoggera Camp.

SenatorFOLL (Queensland - Minister for the Interior). - by leave - Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings), in his speech on the motion for the first reading of the Customs Tariff, referred to the Government’s proposal to increase the strength of the Commonwealth militia forces, and went on to say -

There are 3,000 men encamped at Enoggera, in Queensland, which is one of thecoldest spots in that State, and those men have no uniforms. They lack sufficient clothing. They must go cold because the Government is not ready.

I regarded that statement as being so serious that I immediately got in touch with the Minister for Defence. He communicated with the Military Board, and, to-day, received the following reply: -

With reference to message regarding uniforms and blankets for troops in Enoggera ramp, the Military Board advises that every request for blankets from units has been met. There are ample stocks of blankets in ordnance for immediate issue if required. Every man incamp has an issue of uniform, either service or working dress, and every man has a great coat. The Assistant Adjutant and Quartermaster-General, 1st District Base, has visited the camp each day and no representations have been made regarding any shortage.

I considered it necessary that this explanation should be offered in reply to the statement made yesterday by the Leader of the Opposition.

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · QUEENSLAND · UAP

– If an inaccurate statement is made, it should be corrected as soon as possible.

Mr PRESIDENT:

– Order ! The Minister’s statement was made by leave. Any honorable senator wishing to reply must first obtain the leave of the Senate.

Senator Collings:

– The Minister’s statement is not an answer to my question. I again ask, are we to understand that it will be the practice in the Senate henceforth, that Ministers who may be hurt by statements made by honorable senators from this side may offer an explanation but we shall not have the right to reply?

Senator Cooper:

– The Minister merely corrected an untrue statement.

SenatorFOLL. - If any honorable senator makesa statement of this kind which is inaccurate, I shall take the earliest opportunity to correct it.

Senator COLLINGS:
Leader of the Opposition · Queensland

– by leave - I desire to make a brief statement regarding the remarks of the Minister representing the Minister for Defence (Senator Foll). The answer that he gave to the charge made by me yesterday, which was a specific one, did not deal specifically with the camp to which I referred. I object to my statements being termed inaccurate by the Minister, and by interjection from an honorable senator opposite, untrue, unless my refutation is recorded at the same time. I repeat that I made a specific charge. It is a matter of public knowledge that the conditions of affairs

I indicated now prevails at the Enoggera camp, unless it has been disbanded since I left Brisbane. That charge is being made in the press of Brisbane, and parents are greatly disturbed because of the fact that lads coming from homes in which they are carefully nurtured are subjected in camp to the risks of winter. It is now cold at night in Brisbane, and particularly at the Enoggera camp. I did not say that all of the boys were without sufficient clothing, but the statement by the Minister was that all had been issued uniforms or working suits. He knows that some of the lads in camp are working in shorts, some in khaki, and some in other material, whilst a number of the lads have had to provide their own clothing. At the Enoggera camp, young men who have undertaken military duties voluntarily are running the risk of contracting influenza or pneumonia, because they are insufficiently clad. 1 did not go into details, but I said that, because the Government is not ready for them, these young men are running unnecessary risks.

page 358

QUESTION

ALIEN MIGRANTS

Industrial Conditions in Melbourne.

Senator CAMERON:
VICTORIA

– Has the Minister for the Interior inquired into the charges made recently by SirFrank Clarke, President of the Legislative Council in Victoria, to the effect that unsuitable aliens were being admitted to Australia, either as refugees or migrants, and were being employed under conditions which constituted serious breaches of Arbitration Court awards or wages board determinations ? If such an inquiry has been made, what were the results? If not, will one be made?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– Immediately the statement made by Sir Frank Clarke appeared in the newspapers, I instructed the department to ascertain whether it was accurate or otherwise, and also to ask Sir Frank Clarke, if he had made the statement, to inform me of any cases that had come to his notice. I have been advised that Sir Frank Clarke did not mention any particular case, but stated that some one had told him something. For many months an official of the department has been investigating charges of this kind. I ‘ may add that- -all Commonwealth or State industrial awards are policed by officers of the court. Furthermore, every migrant, before receiving his landing permit, is asked to make a declaration that he will not employ any person unless under award rates, nor accept employment under other than award conditions. I assure the Senate that every effort is being made by the Government to ensure that the state of affairs suggested in the statement attributed to Sir Frank Clarke shall not be allowed to occur. I have not yet received from the department a report giving the results of the investigation.

Senator LECKIE:
VICTORIA

– In his reply with regard to the statement of Sir Frank Clarke, the. Minister for the Interior said that awards of the Arbitration Court were policed by officers of the court. Will the Minister tell us what he means by “officers of the court”. As far as I am aware, the only officers who police awards are the trade union secretaries, who have the right of entry to industrial establishments.

Senator FOLL:

– Perhaps I made a slight error in regard to that matter. I was thinking of Mr. Blakeley, for instance, who carries out certain- inspections concerning the operation of awards of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court, and acts as an officer of that court; but trade union secretaries, as the honorable senator has pointed out, have every opportunity to police awards of courts and wages boards.

page 359

QUESTION

REGISTRATION OF ALIENS

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Has the attention of the Minister for the Interior been drawn to the report furnished by the Commissioner of Police in South Australia, Brigadier-General Leane to the Premier of that State containing suggestions for improvement of the methods of registering aliens upon entering Australia? If he has not seen that report, will he take steps to obtain a copy of it, and give consideration to it as soon as possible?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– I have not seen the report, but I shall be glad to have a copy of it and consider it.

page 359

CANBERRA HOUSING CONDITIONS

Senator BROWN:
QUEENSLAND

– In view of the dreadful slum conditions in certain parts of Canberra, will the Minister for the Interior state whether the Government is adopting an active policy regarding the building of houses, in order that these slum dwellers may be able to live in conditions which conform to civilized standards. .

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Government is pushing ahead with its housing scheme for Canberra, and during the current year 250 additional cottages will be built.

page 359

WATERSIDE WORKERS’ CONDITIONS

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD.Will the Minister for the Interior state whether, if Mr. Blakeley has not already investigated the conditions of waterside workers at the various ports in Australia, such an inspection will be made?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– :I do not think that it would be possible for Mr. Blakeley to undertake that work, as his time is, I understand, already fully occupied. If the honorable senator suggests that an inspection such as he has indicated should be made, I shall be glad to bring the matter under the notice of the Government.

page 359

QUESTION

PROPOSED LYONS ANNUITY

Senator BROWN:

– In view of the enormous interest and sympathy that have been evinced in the proposal for the payment of an annuity to the widow of the late Prime Minister in order to give her security for the rest of her life, I ask tlie Leader of the Senate whether the Government is taking any action to afford similar security to all widows in Australia who are in- necessitous circumstances?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– This Government has done for widows as a Cl: SS as much as any government in any other country. The- question of the payment of an annuity to the widow of the late Prime Minister is still under consideration in the House of Representatives.

Senator BROWN:

– The honorable senator has not really answered my question.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. J. B. Hayes). - The honorable senator must accept the answer given by the Minister.

Senator BROWN:

– Very well, Mr President, I shall accept it and ask another. In view of what will be done, and rightly so, to assist the widow of the late Prime Minister, does the Government intend, in the near future, to introduce legislation with the object of providing security to the hundreds of widows and orphans who are now in necessitous circumstances ? I have used p’.ain, simple language, and there is no necessity for the Minister to dodge the issue.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order!

Senator BROWN:

– What I want is a plain, straightforward answer to a plain straightforward question.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order! If the honorable senator does not obey the Chair, I shall take steps to make him do so.

Senator BROWN:

– I do not care what steps you take.

The PRESIDENT:

-I name the honorable senator.

Senator McLEAY:

– In order to obviate my taking the painful step of moving for the suspension of the honorable senator, I ask him to withdraw that remark.

Senator BROWN:

– What remark?

The PRESIDENT:

– The honorable senator said that he did not care what steps I took to make him obey the Chair.

Senator BROWN:

– I really do not care !

The PRESIDENT:

– Order ! The honorable senator must not say that.

Senator BROWN:

– I know I should not, and in deference to you, Mr. President, and because I have the greatest regard for you I withdraw the remark; but I want the Minister to answer my question in a straightforward way and not indulge in childish evasion.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order ! The honorable senator should not accuse the Minister of childish evasion. He must withdraw that remark.

Senator BROWN:

– I withdraw the word “ childish “-it is an insult to children; and I” shall say it is evasion. I want a straightforward answer from the Minister.

The PRESIDENT:

-I ask the honorable senator to resume his seat.

Senator McLEAY:

– In reply to the honorable senator, I point out that it is not customary to answer questions, without notice, which relate to government policy. The honorable senator, I think, is aware of what has been done in the past in connexion with the matter he has raised and also of the proposal now under consideration in the other chamber. -

Senator BROWN:

– I am not aware of it.

page 360

QUESTION

CITY BUILDINGS AT CANBERRA - LEASING OF OFFICES

Senator BROWN:

– Has the attention of the Minister for the Interior been drawn to the following statement which appeared in the editorial in to-day’s Canberra Times: -

Some months ago, Mr. Casey was responsible for the leasing, remodelling and furnishing in the city buildings at Canberra, of considerable office space for the Invalid and Old Age Pensions Branch of the Treasury. Thu space was not used because Mr. Casey insisted that his staff should be situated in immediate proximity to the rest of the Treasury staff.

Is that statement true? If so, for what period has this particular office space been leased by the Treasury, what has been the cost of remodelling and furnishing these offices and what is the rent? Is it in.tended to do anything at all with this office space? If not, could it be again remodelled with the object of housing those poor devils who are living in slums in Canberra?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– I suggest that the question, after the latter part of it has been edited, be placed on the notice-paper.

Senator BROWN:

– I do not wish to be impertinent, Mr. President, but I wish to know whether the latter part of my question is not in order?

The PRESIDENT:

– It- is not in order.

Senator BROWN:

– Do you mean to tell me, Mr. President, that I cannot ask a question as to whether-

The PRESIDENT:

– The honorable senator is aware of the standing orders governing the asking of questions. The honorable senator referred to the housing of the poor devils living in slums in Canberra. He .must know that he may not offer comment when asking a question.

Senator BROWN:

– I withdraw “ poor devils “ ; I wish to withdraw them from the slums and to house them properly.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order! The honorable member must not make a speech.

Senator BROWN:

– Am I not allowed to put that question on the notice-paper, Mr. President?

The PRESIDENT:

– The honorable senator is allowed to put it on the noticepaper. 1” am not going to stand very much more of this conduct. The honorable senator is interrupting the proceedings of the Senate and I ask him to resume his seat.

Senator BROWN:

– I take exception to that statement. I wish to know whether or not these buildings can be remodelled with the object of accommodating men who are now housed in slums in Canberra.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order ! The honorable senator must resume his seat.

Senator BROWN:

– I am not interrupting the proceedings of the Senate. If money can be wasted in this way, well then, sufficient money can be found in order to provide proper housing for these men.

The PRESIDENT:

– I name Senator Brown.

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– I think, Mr. President, that you have been very lenient towards the honorable senator. It is with very much regret that I move -

That Senator Brown be suspended from the sitting of the Senate.

Senator BROWN:

– I ask a question about slums and I am to be turned out of the Senate. Money should not be wasted like this. I shall go out with pleasure.

Question put -

That Senator Brown be suspended from the sitting of the Senate.

The Senate divided. (President - Senator the Hon. J. B. Hayes.)

AYES: 16

NOES: 12

Majority 4

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Senator Brown thereupon withdrew from the chamber.

page 361

THE LATE RIGHT HONORABLE J. A. LYONS

The President informed the Senate that he “had received from Dame Enid Lyons a letter thanking the Senate for its resolution of sympathy and condolence in connexion with the death of. the Right Honorable J. A. Lyons.

page 361

QUESTION

NATIONAL INSURANCE

Senator COLLINGS:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. What has been the total cost to date, since the passing of the bill by Parliament, of the National Health and Pensions Insurance Act, showing Government administration costs, including (a) printing of official stationery and documents, explanatory memoranda issued to the public and all other propaganda material; (b) compensation and all other amounts paid to approved societies?
  2. What is the estimated amount of claims for compensation now being prepared by approved societies?
  3. What, if any, compensation is it proposed to make to secretaries and other employees of approved societies who have been thrown out of employment by the collapse of the scheme, many of whom left other positions not now available to them?
Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The information is being obtained, and will be furnished as soon as possible.

page 362

QUESTION

WILUNA MILITIA UNIT

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that requests from the Wiluna Roads Board for the establishment of a militia unit at Wiluna have been refused?
  2. Is th Government aware that Wiluna is in population the second largest inland centre in Western Australia?
  3. If so, why is the opportunity to receive military training denied to the youth of that centre ?
  4. In the circumstances, will residents of Wiluna be similarly exempted from the necessity for enrolment on the national register?
Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answers : -

  1. Requests for the opening of a training centre at Wiluna have not been approved.
  2. Yes.
  3. Owing to Western Australia having attained its quota, the difficulty of the provision of officers and staffs for training and administration, and the distance from established training centres-
  4. No.

page 362

QUESTION

WHEAT INDUSTRY*}

Losses on 193S-39 Crops - Wheat Industry Assistance Act.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

What action is being taken by the Government towards carrying out its announced intention to provide a stabilized price for wheat which will ensure to all Australian wheat-growers a payable price for the next harvest?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Prime Minister announced last week that, in view of the pressing nature of the economic problems facing the wheat industry, he had suggested to the State Premiers that these problems should be the subject of early consultation between the Commonwealth and the States. Arrangements for the suggested consultation, which will be preceded by a detailed discussion between State and Commonwealth experts, are now being made. It is anticipated that the experts will meet next week, and the Ministers towards the middle of June. Stabilization of prices will be one of the subjects discussed.

Senator WILSON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

In view of the fact that the Australian Wheatgrowers Federation, the Wheatgrowers Union of Western Australia, the South’ Australian Wheatgrowers Association, the Victorian Wheatgrowers Association, the New South Wales Farmers and Settlers Association, and the New South. Wales Wheatgrowers Union, have adopted a plan for wheat stabilization, will the Government invite a representative of each of these associations to confer with it on its proposal to stabilize the wheat industry ?

Senator McLEAY:

– The answer to the honorable senator’s question is as follows : -

The Government is at all times prepared to avail itself of the best assistance offering.

The honorable senator’s suggestion will receive consideration.

Senator UPPILL:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

  1. In view of the Prime Minister’s statement deprecating the introduction of wheat legislation on the eve of harvest operations, will the Government give an assurance that the proposals for wheat stabilization will be introduced this session?
  2. What is the present position of the Government’s proposals?
Senator McLEAY:

– The answers to the honorable senator’s questions are as follows : - - I and 2. It is not possible to indicate at this stage what the policy of the Government will be. The matter is being dealt with urgently.

Senator CUNNINGHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Leader of the Senate, upon notice -

In view of the serious plight of the wheat industry, will the Government take immediate action for the purpose of assisting the wheat-growers of Australia who have incurred substantial losses on their 1938-39 crops?

Senator McLEAY:

– The’ homeconsumption price scheme for wheat will provide a fund which it is estimated will yield 5d. per bushel to farmers on all wheat of the 1938-39 crop sold or delivered for sale. In addition, a special provision of £500,000 is being made out of the fund to provide assistance to those farmers who suffered from adverse seasonal conditions in the 1938-39 crop year.

Senator KEANE:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

Will he supply the names of senators and members of the House of Representatives who participated in the benefits of the Wheat Industry Assistance Act, and the amounts received or to be received by each member?

Senator McLEAY:

– This is a matter controlled entirely by the States, and it is not considered that any useful public purpose would be served by making the necessary investigations and then publishing such information.

page 363

QUESTION

EXTERMINATION OF RABBITS

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and Development, upon notice - 1.. What is the present position regarding the experiments conducted at Wardang Island with virus for the destruction of rabbits?

  1. Is there any reason why the virus should not be distributed to those settlers who, after reading of the progress of the experiments with this virus, would like to give it a practical trial?
Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Minister for Supply and Development has supplied the following answers: -

  1. The second experiment in connexion with the rabbit virus has now been completed at Wardang Island. The methods employed for disseminating the disease went far beyond those which would be used under natural conditions. In spite of that arid of the density of the rabbit population, the final result was almost inappreciable, the death-rate being practically balanced by the birth-rate. According to the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, the only conclusion to be drawn is that the unaided virus would prove valueless in controlling rabbit populations under natural conditions. The council states that, from observations which the investigators have- made, it appears that the sick rabbit lives only about two or three days, and that as soon as it becomes sick it leaves the colony and wanders aimlessly away. It, therefore, has little opportunity to infect other rabbits in the colony and probably no opportunity to infect rabbits from other colonies. Thus, although the virus is very virulent to rabbits, its capacity to kill off a rabbit population is defeated by the instinctive behaviour of the animals. The council adds that there is a remote possibility that an insect affecting rabbits, such as the red rabbit flea, may be capable of carrying the infection from one to another. This method will be investigated. It is emphasized, however, that the chances of success along these lines are not very bright.
  2. The Commonwealth Government will not agree to the release of the virus except upon the recommendation of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, and the -council will not make any such recommendation unless there are reasonable prospects of the virus succeeding as an agent in connexion with the control of rabbit populations. It has been shown that, up to the present, the virus is not effective in this regard and, moreover, it would be dangerous to permit inexperienced persons to handle a virus of this type.

page 363

QUESTION

DEFENCE PROGRAMME

co-operation of western australiaRailway Workshops Annexes.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Has the Government received representations from the Premier of Western Australia assuring the full co-operation of that State in regard to defence, and asking that the defence programme should be utilized to assist in the expansion of secondary industries in that State?
  2. To what extent have the secondary industries of Western Australia been utilized in meeting the industrial needs of the Defence Department?
Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Prime Minister has supplied the following answers: - 1 and 2. A communication in the terms indicated by the honorable senator has been received from the Premier, of Western Australia. The matter is at present under consideration, and a further reply will be made available as soon as possible.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

What steps have been taken to ensure the manufacture of munitions in Western Aus- “ tralia ?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answer : -

Generally speaking, peace requirements of munitions are obtained from government factories. In time of emergency, however, requirements of munitions beyond the present potential capacity of those factories would be obtained from commercial sources, and arrangements to that end are now being organized. It is not the intention, however, that bulk orders wjll be placed with commercial firms for peace requirements. Whilst no provision has yet been made for the actual manufacture of munitions in Western Australia, departmental technical investigators have inspected the leading engineering firms in Perth. An inventory of plants and assessment of capacity has been made, and the directions in which these firms could assist in emergency has been recorded for use if required.

Senator KEANE:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

How many armament annexes . have been attached to State Government railway workshops ?

Senator FOLL:

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answer : -

Arrangements are in Land for the attachment of two armament annexes to the New South Wales Railway Workshops and two to the Victorian RailwayWorkshops. In addition, arrangements have been made for the South Australian Railway Workshops to create appreciable capacity for the manufacture of tools and gauges necessary for armament production.

Senator FRASER:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Has any agreement been arrived at with the State Government of Western Australia for annexes to the Midland Junction Railway Workshops ?
  2. If so, will the Minister make a statement on the question, as has been done in connexion with annexes in other States of the Commonwealth ?
  3. If not, on what grounds has Western Australia been excluded?
Senator FOLL:

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answers : -

  1. No.
  2. See reply to No. 1. 3.. Raw material for the production of ammunition is at present produced only in the Eastern States of the Commonwealth and the filling of shell with high explosive and assembly of ammunition is carried out in Victoria. It would therefore be uneconomical to pay heavy freight charges incurred in the transport of raw materials to Western Australia and the return transport of finished shell to the filling factory in Victoria.

page 364

QUESTION

DRYDOCK FOR CAPITAL SHIPS

Senator CUNNINGHAM:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Does the Government propose to include in its defence programme the construction of a dry dock on the western coast of Australia?
  2. If so, at which port?.
  3. Is it the intention of the Government to proceed with the resumption of construction work at the Henderson Naval Base, Cockburn Sound, Western Australia?
Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answers : - 1 and 2. The Government has arranged for an . eminent engineer to visit Australia to advise as to the location ofa dry dock and pending consultation with him, no decision on this matter will be made.

  1. The present Naval Development Programme does not include any provision for work at Cockburn Sound.

page 364

QUESTION

PHOENIX OIL EXTRACTION COMPANY

Senator ASHLEY:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Will he investigate the claims of the Phoenix Oil Extractors Proprietary Company that it has perfected a machine for the extraction of oil from coal, which product can be put on the market at 5d. a gallon?
  2. In view of the importance of this development to the defence of Australia, will he have immediate inquiries made into the process of the extraction of oil from coal, and make the information obtained available to this House?
Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answers : -

  1. Yes.
  2. A large amount of information regarding the various processes for the extraction of oil from coal has been collected by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. A report on this matter was submitted by Sir David Rivett, Chief Executive Officer, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, to the Government, and this report was subsequently printed as a parliamentary paper in June, 1937. In addition, and in the same year, a report on the hydrogenation of coal was ‘ submitted by a committee appointed by the Government and issued as Parliamentary Paper No. 60.

page 364

QUESTION

DRILL HALL AT BEECHWORTH

Senator BRAND:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

Has any provision been made on the Estimates for 1939-40 for a drill hall at Beechworth ?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– I am unable at this stage to advise whether provision for this work will he made on the Estimates for 1939-40.

page 364

QUESTION

POSTMASTER-GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT

Temporary Mechanics

Senator BRAND:

asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that many returned soldier temporary mechanics in the PostmasterGeneral’s Department, although they have completed two years’ continuous satisfactory service, have not been recommended for permanent appointment?
  2. If not recommended by their senior officers, why have satisfactory reports over a period of two years not been taken into consideration ?
  3. Will the Postmaster-General consider the question of creating more permanent positions in the artisan group, with the object of bringing returned soldier temporary artisans into line with other sections of the department?
  4. As conduit workers are highly skilled, and in view of the possibility of their services being required for many years to come, will the Postmaster-General consider bringing these men under sub-section (9) (c) of section 84 of the Commonwealth Public Service Act?
Senator McBRIDE:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– Inquiries are being made, and a reply will be furnished to the honorable senator as soon as possible.

page 365

QUESTION

DEFENCE EXPENDITURE

Senator KEANE:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

From what source does the Government intend to obtain the’ £71,000.000 required for the defence of Australia during the next three years?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Treasurer has supplied the following answer : -

For the current financial year, 1938-39, the estimated expenditure from revenue was £9,544,000, from loan £4,400,000, from trust funds (representing excess receipts of previous years) £3,500,000. It is not possible at this juncture to make a considered statement as to the future policy of financing defence expenditure, but a statement will be made in connexion with the Treasurer’s budget for 1939-40.

page 365

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING COMMISSION

Employment of Foreigners

Senator FRASER:

asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the Australian Broadcasting Commission is employing aliens in its broadcasting orchestras, to the detriment of Australian musicians?
  2. Is it a fact also that some of those mentioned have only been in the country a few months ?
  3. If this is so, will the Postmaster-General take the necessary action to prevent Australian musicians being displaced?
Senator McBRIDE:
UAP

– The PostmasterGeneral has supplied the following answer : -

Inquiries are being made of the Australian Broadcasting Commission, and a reply will be furnished as soon as possible.

page 365

QUESTION

EXPORT OF LAMBS

Senator GIBSON:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

In view of the lamb export having reached the quota fixed by the United Kingdom, what action does the Government propose to take to ensure an outlet for the coming season’s surplus ?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– It is not anticipated that there will be any difficulty in marketing in the United Kingdom the whole of the current year’s export surplus of mutton and lamb.

page 365

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

asked the Minister in charge of War Service Homes, upon notice -

What action is the Minister taking to give relief to those holders of war service homes whose properties are being charged for at a price above their real value?

Senator COLLETT:
Minister without portfolio administering War Service Homes · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · UAP

– The answer to the honorable senator’s question is as follows : -

  1. Briefly stated, the classes of assistance available under the War Services Homes Act cover: - (a) the erection of homes; (6) the purchase of homes; (c) the discharge of mortgages. In cases coming under (a) the applicant pays only the capital cost of the land and dwelling-house. Under (b) or (c) the applicant selects the home as suitable to his requirements and then approaches the commission for an advance under the act to complete the transaction.
  2. The commission grants assistance also in respect of homes which are held for disposal. In accordance with the provisions of the act these are sold at valuation.
  3. In none of the transactions referred to in (1) or (2) can it be said that the properties are being charged for at a price above their real value at the time the sale or purchase is completed, consequently no action is necessary in the direction suggested by the honorable senator.

page 365

QUESTION

UNEMPLOYMENT

Senator ASHLEY:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. In view of the serious position of between 40,000 and 50,000 unemployed workers in New South Wales, will the Minister representing the Prime Minister give consideration to a national effort being made by the Government, which will provide some work for the unemployed in all States?
  2. In view of . the acute unemployment problem will the Government give consideration to the introduction of a 40-hour week?
Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Prime Minister has supplied the following answers : -

  1. The question of unemployment is one which comes primarily within the purview of the State governments, but the Commonwealth Government has at all times endeavoured as far as practicable to assist the alleviation of the unemployment problem. The Commonwealth has, in the past few years, contributed to the relief of unemployment in various ways. Direct grants have been made to the States for unemployment relief works, and a great deal of employment has been provided by the Commonwealth’s expanded works programme and the large increase of defence expenditure. Provision has been made in the current financial year for expenditure of over £16,000,000 for works in Australia. The present defence programme has been increased to an amount exceeding £70,000,000, spread over three years. This expenditure has provided and will provide a great amount of employment for the workers of Australia. The Commonwealth’s financial resources are now being strained to the utmost in connexion with defence expenditure, and I am sure that the honorable senator will agree, that the Commonwealth is doing all that it can reasonably be asked to do along the lines desired by him.
  2. The general question of the introduction of a 40-hour week was discussed at a conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers which met at Canberra on the 13th August, 1937, when the conference rejected by four votes to three a resolution affirming the necessity for the early introduction by the Commonwealth and the States of legislation designed to provide for a national 40-hour week. The Government- considers that before there can be any genera! adoption of shorter hours in Australia, the full facts regarding the economic effects’ must be ascertained and that the mattermust in the first instance be fully examined by a properly constituted tribunal. In this connexion the Government would be prepared to do anything in its power to facilitate the determination by the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration of the question of a shorter working week.

page 366

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN CURRENCY

Senator CAMERON:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

To what extent has the purchasing power of the £1 note been depreciated up to date as compared with that of a sovereign, and by whose authority has it been so depreciated?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– Inquiries are being made and a reply will be furnished as soon as possible.

page 366

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH LOANS

Senator CAMERON:

asked the Minis ter representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

What was the amount subscribed by the Commonwealth Bank to the last three internal loans, including the conversion loan ?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Treasurer has supplied the following answer: -

It has been the invariable practice of the Treasury to publish particulars of subscriptions to loans only where the subscriber has given consent to publication. This question was accordingly referred to the Commonwealth Bank, which has advised that the Bank Board does not consider it to be in the public interest to disclose the amount of its subscriptions to individual loans, except when, in its opinion, special circumstances make it desirable to do so.

page 366

QUESTION

RAILWAY GAUGES

Kalgoorlie - Perth Section

Senator CUNNINGHAM:

asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

What has been done to hasten the extension and construction of the 4-ft. 8½-in. railway gauge from the Kalgoorlie railway station to Perth ?

SenatorFOLL. - This work will be considered in conjunction with the main scheme for the provision of a uniform railway gauge from Brisbane to Perth, which has been included on the agenda for the proposed conference of ‘Commonwealth and State Ministers for Transport.

page 366

QUESTION

DEFENCE

Publication op Photographs.

Senator KEANE:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice- -

  1. Has the Minister for Defence seen the reproduction in the Sun-News Pictorial of last Saturday of the picture showing the City of Melbourne, the suburbs, and environs of Port Phillip Bay?
  2. From a defence point of view, is it advisable that pictures showing such important landmarks should be published at the present time?
  3. Is it a fact that the Sydney Sun a couple of years ago published a picture of Sydney and surrounding suburbs?
Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answers : -

  1. Yes.
  2. The important landmarks in pictures of cities taken from the air are shown in maps and plans which may be purchased. Also, many of the landmarks may be seen from high buildings and from aircraft. From the defence point of view, photographs showing details of defence works should not be taken or published, and such action is subject to penalties under the Defence Act and Crimes Act.
  3. Yes.

page 367

QUESTION

MILITIA TRAINEES

Allowance toSustenance Workers.

Senator CAMERON:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Has the Minister’s attention been directed to a report which appeared in the Age of the 25th April, which stated that the Prahran Council (Victoria) in consequence of no provision being made by the State Government for sustenance workers who had enlisted in the militia and were required to go to camp, had recommended that such workers be paid an allowance equal to the basic wage while they were in camp? If not, will the Minister direct that inquiries be made as to the correctness or otherwise of the report, but, if so, has he taken any action in the matter?

SenatorFOLL. - I have not seen the report referred to, but I shall have inquiries made.

page 367

AIR RAID PRECAUTIONS

SenatorFRASER asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

What action, if any, has the Defence Department taken in Western Australia for the protection of the civil population in the event of air raids?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answer : -

Western Australia, in common with the other States of the Commonwealth, accepted in August, 1030. at Adelaide, and . again on 31st March. 1939. at Canberra, the responsibility for developing the necessary plans for the protection of the civil population against the effects of air attacks.

The Commonwealth Government has rendered the State authorities in Western Australia assistance in the matter of technical advice and by providing certain instructors to assist in the training of personnel of those services essential to the successful operation of an air raids precautionary scheme.

The Government of Western Australia has been supplied with a schedule indicating the quantity of training equipment issued to the State to date, together with an indication of the additional item of equipment to be issued as stocks become available. Similarly, a schedule showing air raid precaution publications issued to date and further proposed issues has been supplied to the State.

The Premierof Western Australia has also received a statement indicating the nature and quantity of air raid precaution equipment which it is proposed to make available to the State to be held in reserve for issue to personnel of State essential services in time of national emergency.

At the conference of Commonwealth . and State Ministers at Canberra on 31st March, 1939, the Premier of Western Australia received a statement from the Commonwealth Government setting out in detail the various matters which would require consideration in the compilation of an efficient State air raids precautions scheme.

The Premier of Western Australia has been advised by the Commonwealth Government in a separate special despatch as to the broad basis upon which his air raid precaution scheme should be developed.

The Commonwealth Government has appointed a qualified officer to undertake the duties of air raids precautions liaison with the various States. The Premier of Western Australia has been advised that this officer will visit that State, by arrangement, at an early date and will be available to discuss with the State officials on the spot the various aspects and requirements of the local air raids precautions scheme.

page 367

COMMONWEALTH NOTE ISSUE

SenatorKEANE asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

What is the amount of the note issue at present and what is the gold backing of same?

Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Treasurer has supplied the following answer: -

The present amount of notes in circulation is £48,280,124 and the reserve £16,029,604. In terms of Section 60K of the Commonwealth Bank Act 1911-32 this reserve may be held in gold or in English sterling or partly in gold and partly in English sterling.

page 367

QUESTION

DEFENCE DEPARTMENT

Number of Employees in Victoria.

Senator CAMERON:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

How many employees, other than members of the staff and the Permanent Force, were employed by the Defence Department in the State of Victoria as at 31st December, 1938; and how many of such employees are now employed by the department?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answer : -

The number of employees other than members of the staff andthe Permanent Forces employed by the Defence Department in the State of Victoria as at 31st December, 1938, was 3,464. The number now is 5,203.

page 368

QUESTION

UNEMPLOYMENT BELIEF

Senator KEANE:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. What amount has been made available by the Commonwealth Government to States for unemployment relief for the years 1932-39?
  2. What amount, directly and indirectly, has been made available to primary producers?
Senator McLEAY:
UAP

– The Treasurer has supplied the following answers: -

  1. Direct grants by the Commonwealth to the States for the relief of unemployment are -

page 368

QUESTION

NEW GUINEA

Salamaua-Wau Road

Senator COOPER:

asked the Minister representing the Minister in charge of External Territories, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that a Road Loan Guarantee Bill was passed at Canberra in July of last year for the purpose of constructing a road from Wau to Salamaua, New Guinea?
  2. Is it the intention of the Government to. proceed with the construction of this road?
  3. If so, has the route that this road is to take been decided yet?
  4. If so, what is the route and the distance between the two terminals?
  5. Have any alternative routes been considered ?
  6. If so, what are they and what is the distance of each route?
  7. Have estimates of the cost of building the road over different routes been submitted?
  8. If so, what are they?
Senator COLLETT:
UAP

– The Minister in charge of External Territories has supplied the following answers: -

  1. The New Guinea Loan Guarantee Act . 1938 was passed in July, 1938, by which the Commonwealth Government guarantees the repayment of, and the payment of interest upon, a loan not exceeding £150,000 to <be raised by the Administrator of the Territory of New Guinea for the purposes of the construction of a road between Salamaua and Wau.
  2. 3 and 4. It has been decided to construct a road from Salamaua to Wau by the shortest practicable route. The route selected is the Bitoi River route of approximately 50 miles, known as route “A.” The estimated cost of construction of a road over this route is £180,000. 5, 6 and 7. The following alternative routes have been considered: -

Route “ B “ - Bitoi Ridge. Distance, ‘ approximately 55 miles. Estimated cost, £194,000.

Route “ C “ - Buangs-Snake River. Distance, approximately 96 miles. Estimated cost, £197,000.

Route “ D “ - Markham Point, Gabensis, Wampit. Distance, approximately 116 miles. Estimated cost, £195,000.

page 368

QUESTION

MUNITIONS ESTABLISHMENTS

Senator KEANE:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

In view of the difficulty experienced in securing employment at the munitions establishments, will the Minister indicate what are the prospects of unemployed men securing work at these places?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answer : -

It is not anticipated that there will be any substantial increase of the numbers of employees at munitions establishments in 1939-40 as the factories are now almost fully staffed. There are approximately 29,000 applicants registered for employment and wherever practicable such appointments as it may be necessary to make will be made from those registered.

page 369

QUESTION

ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE

Riverina Training School

Senator ARMSTRONG:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Could a copy of the detailed report of the official party led by Group Captain Wrigley investigating the Royal Australian Air Force flying training school in the Riverina, regarding the comparative suitability of the area selected and the area between Narranclera and Grong Grong, be made available to the Senate its soon as possible?

Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The reply of the Minister for Defence is “ Yes “.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

In reference to the selection of Wagga as the site for a Royal Australian Air Force flying training school, is it a fact that negotiations had been entered into for the resumption of the land at Wagga before the report of Group Captain Wrigley and his party was finalized?

Senator FOLL:

– The reply of the Minister for Defence is “ No “.

page 369

QUESTION

MOTHER’S DAY TELEGRAMS

Senator KEANE:

asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

How many telegrams were sent through the post offices last week-end in connexion with Mother’s Day?

Senator McBRIDE:
UAP

– The PostmasterGeneral has supplied the following answer : -

Complete particulars of lodgments throughout the Commonwealth will not be available until- early in June. On the basis of the number accepted at the Chief Telegraph Offices, however, it is estimated that approximately 55,000 Mother’s Day Greetings telegrams were dealt with.

page 369

QUESTION

AMMUNITIONRESERVE DUMPS

Senator BRAND:

asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

Will the Postmaster-General take steps to ensure that the broadcasting of the location of ammunition reserve dumps throughout the Commonwealth is discontinued?

Senator McBRIDE:
UAP

– A reply to the honorable senator’s question will be furnished at an early date.

page 369

QUESTION

ANTI-AIRCRAFT GUNS

Senator BROWN:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Is it true that for some time after the making of Australian anti-aircraft guns these could not be used because of the lack of certain gauges, which could not be imported from Great Britain?
  2. Are these gauges now being received?
Senator FOLL:
UAP

– The Minister for Defence has supplied the following answers : -

  1. No.
  2. See answer to No. 1.

page 369

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Department of External Affairs - Annual Report

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

.- I lay on the table of the Senate the annual report of the Department of External Affairs for 1938, and move -

That the paper be printed.

In doing so I am glad, as Leader of the Senate, to be able to accede to the wish of honorable senators that I should present a statement on the international situation, and on- the consequent attitude of the Commonwealth Government. The opportunity is a suitable one to inform honorable senators of the views of the Government on these matters. We have lived for several months in a state of continued tension, with periodical crises in international relations. It is proper that neither Parliament, nor through it the country, should be left in any uncertainty as to how the Government regards its responsibilities.

First, however, I would make some reference to the paper which I have tabled. This report contains, in a detailed and authoritative form, an account of the course of international events in that year, and it constitutes also a record of Australia’s participation in those events, the Commonwealth’s relations with particular countries, and the activities of the Department of External Affairs. The narrative of events in Europe, America and the Far East here given is, as we know, only a part of the complex whole of world affairs with which we are now confronted, and every month since December, 1938, has added its new chapter. I hope to be able to give to the Senate a full account of the momentous events since the beginning of the present year and of existing conditions as they are known to the Commonwealth Government. For the moment I shall avail myself of this appropriate opportunity to speak of the other and more domestic significance attaching to the document now in the hands of honorable senators.

The basis of all policy must be the full possession of the facts, and I am convinced that in this respect the Commonwealth Government is far better provided than is commonly supposed. Some of the present machinery for obtaining information from abroad is shown in this report. This, in itself, is of great scope, and we also have other means of direct contact and communication with British representatives in various countries. Furthermore, we have the direct channel of information from the United Kingdom Government through the Dominions Office, which is available to all the dominions; and this, in the last few critical months, has been indispensable.

A week ago there was a full debate on foreign affairs in the House of Representatives. There a clear and precise statement of the Government’s attitude was made by my colleague, the Minister for External Affairs (Sir Henry Gullett) and the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies). I would not be expected to-day to diverge to any extent from the fully considered declarations made on that occasion. Nevertheless, even in the interval since then, there have been certain changes in the outlook abroad, and I hope before I conclude to give to honorable senators a complete picture of the situation. “What is the situation to-day ? Broadly it is that we, in the British Commonwealth, in common with other peaceloving nations, are faced by an open intention on the part of two powerful States in Europe to gain their ends by the menace of force, and to pursue their national policies by means which have little relation to the recognized processes of fair discussion and compromise. Confronted by this clear evidence, Great Britain has, in the last few weeks, been forced to adopt a strong forward policy, and by its leadership it has enabled great progress to be made in the building up of a system of organized resistance to further aggression.

The steady deterioration of international relations up to the early part of this year is familiar to us all. It is a calamitous record in Europe of contention, disappointments and threats. After the settlement of the Sudeten German question at Munich last September, there appeared for a time to be some hope that the principle of conciliation and reasonable discussion for the settlement of further questions liable to disturb the peace of Europe had at last won acceptance. In the case of Germany, in particular, this hope seemed to be reinforced by the explicit assurance given by the German Chancellor at that time to the effect that Germany contemplated no further territorial changes in Europe of a major kind. But it was, unhappily, not long before grave doubts arose of the permanence of these undertakings, and of Germany’s real desire to secure the adjustment of her international difficulties by negotiation, and not by the employment of force, either openly or in the background. Germany continued to subordinate the whole of its economy to the tireless piling up of armaments, and its trade position .showed increasingly little relation to the standards of stable and constructive business intercourse. Also, the organized ill-treatment of the Jews: and the violent tone of public utterances and officially inspired press articles, indicated the strong influence of extremists in the counsels of the Reich.

The uncertainty and fears aroused by the internal condition of Germany were further heightened by an intensive campaign in the Italian press, demanding territorial and other concessions from France. These claims were not presented officially, but they were accompanied by considerable movement of troops and war materials to the Italian colony of Libya in North Africa, adjoining Egypt and French Tunisia. The danger latent in these Italian moves was greatly increased by Herr Hitler’s assurance that, if Italy were engaged in war, no matter for what cause, Germany would be on its side.

This situation was met by Great Britain and France by a renewed declaration of solidarity, and a vigorous drive to make themselves strong to defend peace. Their stand, and the strong declarations by the United States Government in favour of the exercise of democratic principles, undoubtedly staved off for a time any further advance by the dictators. But it was only for a time. The whole internal economy of Germany was directed towards military ends, and its trade position became increasingly bad. On the 15th March, German armed forces occupied the Czech provinces of Bohemia and Moravia, and thus effected the final disintegration of the Czechoslovakian Republic.

This action was taken despite Herr Hitler’s public assurance last September, that, after the solution of the Sudeten problem, Germany had no further territorial demands, and that Germany did not desire Czech nationals incorporated in the Reich. The result of the coup was not merely that Germany acquired a highly important strategic position in Central Europe, together with large bank reserves, immense munition works and supplies of -armament material, but also that Germany was finally revealed as a nation which, if unopposed, might aim at the domination of Europe, and, perhaps, even of the world, by force of arms.

Following these events,, there could be but one answer on the part of those powers whose supreme interest is peace, and particularly on the part of Great Britain, which had, in the previous year, taken more and more the initiative in endeavours to ward off the catastrophe of war in Europe.

Faced with a new menace, Great Britain was forced to adopt new methods to meet it. The policy of the United Kingdom Government has always been first to secure and then to maintain peace, and this policy as a long-term objective has not changed. There is still no intention of over-riding any just claims on the part of other nations, still less of encircling them with the aim of restricting their fair liberty of action ; but firmer measures than the previous efforts at conciliation are now clearly necessary in order to meet the clear threats of force. Great Britain, therefore, took the initiative in the formation of a new European coalition against aggression, and, when it appeared that this task might not be accomplished sufficiently quickly to forestall the plans of the dictators, it accepted without delay military commitments to Poland, Roumania and Greece. The possibility of a German attack on; Poland prompted the granting to that country of the Anglo-French guarantee, which is now on a basis of mutual assistance in the event of aggression; and the Italian military occupation of Albania on Good Friday, together with German pressure in south-eastern Europe, led to the Anglo-French guarantee to Greece and Roumania.

The determined action of the peaceloving powers, although aimed merely at self-preservation a.nd the peaceful solution of difficulties, was denounced violently by the German press and radio, and warnings were given that what was called the policy of “ encirclement “ would be met by “ preventive action “. The British Government, however, with the full knowledge of the dominions, continued in its efforts to widen the basis of the antiaggression bloc, and it was greatly supported by the attitude of the Government of the United States of America, which denounced strongly the German occupation of Bohemia and Moravia and the Italian action in Albania.

These efforts have not yet reached their conclusion, but already the results achieved are substantial and impressive. It has been the object of British policy to link up the separate guarantees given to Poland, Roumania and Greece in a complete system of mutual assistance. For this purpose, the participation, in particular of Russia and Turkey, is obviously in the highest degree desirable. As regards Russia, however, there have been difficulties which could not be ignored in the way of inviting direct Soviet participation in the guarantees to Poland and Roumania. Accordingly, it was suggested to the Soviet Government that it should make a declaration to the effect that, if Britain and France were involved in hostilities in discharge of their obligations to Poland and Roumania, the Soviet Government would lend assistance. This suggestion seemed to the Britisih Government to be consistent with recent declarations of Soviet policy by Russian spokesmen themselves. Almost at the same time, however, the Soviet Government put forward the counter proposal Of a wide and comprehensive agreement for mutual assistance in Eastern Europe, which, in the view of the British Government, raised those difficulties which it had sought to avoid. Negotiations are still in progress, and it is satisfactory to note that the resignation of M. Litvinov as Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs has not, apparently, brought any change in Soviet policy.

A notable achievement last week was the conclusion of a provisional agreement between Great Britain and Turkey. The agreement is provisional in the sense that it contemplates a long-term reciprocal arrangement, pending which the two countries have undertaken that, in the event of war in the Mediterranean or resulting from an act of aggression, they will be prepared- to co-operate effectively, and lend to each” other all aid and assistance in their power. Britain and Turkey are also consulting together with the object of establishing security in the Balkans.

This agreement is welcomed by the Commonwealth Government, particularly in view of the important effect it is bound to have on political stability in the Mediterranean, an area of special significance to Australia. It is hoped that the understanding will shortly be followed by a similar agreement between Turkey and France.

We can still hope that the way is not yet entirely closed to the settlement of the present European differences by discussion at a conference table. The responsibility now lies with Germany and Italy, and the final word has still to come. Before that word is spoken we may also hope that these two powers, which are now joined in a formal military alliance, will pause, or, rather, that their leaders will pause, before all the great internal achievements of the Fascist and National Socialist revolutions are cast away in war, of which the outcome can only be common disaster.

The recent great efforts of the United Kingdom Government on behalf of peace and security in Europe have been made with the full knowledge, and with the full support, of the Commonwealth Government. We have now to consider what our own position will be if, after all, these endeavours fail.

In the event of the United Kingdom becoming involved in a war arising out of the present situation, Australia will at once be called upon to make a decision on the course to be followed. I turn to the words used by the Prime Minister in his profoundly important declaration of the 26th April last. He then said -

The peace of Great Britain is precious to us, because her. peace is ours: if she is at war, we are at war, even though that war finds us not in European battlefields, but defending our own shores. Let me be clear on this; I cannot have a defence of Australia which depends upon British sea-power as its first element; I cannot envisage a vital foreign trade on sea routes kept free by British sea power, and at the same time refuse to Britain Australian co-operation at a time of common danger. The British countries of the world must stand or fall ‘ together.

Further, the Minister for External Affairs stated on the 9th May, during the debate in another place -

The Commonwealth Government is satisfied beyond any doubt that the United Kingdom and the democracies associated with it have no intention other than one that is purely defensive against aggression. If, therefore, in pursuance of this policy, the Government of Britain is at any moment, plunged into war, this Government will, on behalf of the Australian people, make common cause with the Mother Country in that war.

I have reserved to the last my references to Japan and the United States of America.

I made some mention earlier of the very great moral weight attached in the present circumstances in Europe to American opinion, and to the acts of the present Administration in the United States of. America. Australia must welcome these indications, not only for their intrinsic value, but also because of the community of feeling which we have with the American people, and of the sense that our own destiny in this region of the world is closely linked with America.

As for Japan, I maintain that, in looking to the future relations which we must inevitably have with this great power nearest to our shores, we are entitled to look somewhat beyond the present circumstances, and to reflect on the long and traditional friendship which has existed between the Japanese Empire and the British peoples. There is nothing to be gained by disguising the fact that, to some extent, Japan is to-day standing

On a balance. In its associates of the Anti-Comintern Pact, Germany and Italy, it has new friends. Can it be said that it has more to gain from casting in its lot with them than from returning to its old friendship with the British Commonwealth? In considering Australia’s international position, it is natural that we should think first of our position in the Pacific. In that region much of our future destiny will be determined, and there, also, we are coming to realize that we have a direct and primary responsibility for looking after our own interests. It was with these ideas in mind that the Prime Minister, in his recent outline of Australian policy on his assumption of office, said that in the Pacific, Australia must regard itself as a principal. He added, “ I do not mean that we are to act in the Pacific as if we were a completely separate power. We must, of course, act as an integral part of the British Empire. We must have the fullest consultation and cooperation with Great Britain, South Africa, New Zealand and Canada. But all of these consultations must be on the basis that the primary risk in the Pacific is borne by New Zealand and ourselves.”

The Government has intimated that it is looking to the day when Australia will have its own diplomatic representation in the principal Pacific countries. Such a development is the natural and necessary corollary to the responsible part which Australia has now for some years filled in this region of the world. If we are to fill that part adequately, it is indeed essential on the long view that we should have our own sources of diplomatic information, and our own facilities for direct contact with governments with whom Australia is bound to have continually closer relations.

Senator COLLINGS:
QueenslandLeader of the Opposition.

– I thank the Leader of the Senate (Senator McLeay) for the statement which he has - just read. I am not deceived by the fact that it has been read to this chamber because, originally, the Government had no intention of doing anything of the sort. ‘ . A statement on somewhat similar lines, but more complete, was made some days ago in the House of Representatives, and a distinct slight was offered to the Senate when, obviously, a similar statement in this chamber was not deemed necessary, even as a matter of courtesy. Without wishing to be unkind to the Leader of the Senate, I say that even now that statement would not have been read to the Senate had the Government business to put before this chamber. The honorable senator opened his speech by saying -

The basis of all policy must bc the full possession of the facts.

The statement which he has just read gave us none of the facts. (Senator Ashley. - Only what we have read in the press.

Senator COLLINGS:

– That does not alter the statement which I have just made. The statement read by the Leader of the Senate is merely a re-hash of statements which have already appeared in the press, but those statements have very little, if any, real relation to the facts. No honorable senator who has given any attention whatever to the subject is unaware that statements of fact are rarely made on international relations because governments do not dare to tell the truth at any time when difficulties are ahead in that sphere. I say definitely that, although I am taking part in this debate - and I am very doubtful whether I should be doing so but for the question I asked yesterday as to why the Senate should not be given an opportunity to hear such a statement - I , am not the least deceived as to the value of the Minister’s statement, or of the statement made in the House of Representatives or of any debate which we might have on this question. I say that, because I have yet to find a government which is prepared to give anything but one-sided consideration to international affairs. We approach all these questions not with peace, but with the very opposite, in our hearts. That is our attitude as individuals. It is very difficult, and especially at a time such as the present, to get rid of our racial prejudices. Because of that difficulty, I doubt very much whether during this debate we shall be able to approach the question in anything like the proper spirit - a spirit which has some relationship to the seriousness of the position as we find it. I am just wondering whether we in this chamber are capable - and honorable senators, at least, should be capable if anybody is - of taking a calm view of international questions and of our relationship thereto. That will be very difficult, although I hope that those who speak in this debate will endeavour to do so.

I propose to emphasize one or two things which I believe to be facts. I am tired of theorizing and talking platitudes, and of approaching this question all the time in what I believe to be an entirely wrong spirit. On this occasion, then, I wish first to establish, if I can, a few facts. One of the most important facts to realize and remember is that to-day the people of no country desire war. I mean the common people, the people who record their votes and elect us to this chamber, and, in other countries, elect representatives to their deliberative assemblies. They do not desire war; that is a fact, not an argument, and it stands out in my mind far clearer than anything which the Leader of the Senate expressed in his statement this afternoon. Furthermore, it is a fact that in every country the leaders say that they do not desire war. Then, how is it that we are getting ready for one? How is it that, to-day, we are faced with the fear of another worldwide catastrophe? If the people of the world do not desire war, and their leaders assert that they do not desire war, where is war to come from? That is not an argument. After all, an argument can be destroyed by a more eloquent speaker following; but you cannot destroy a fact. You may pull it about from mouth to mouth, from newspaper to newspaper, and from country to country, but, inevitably, it remains a fact. It is a fact that the peoples of the world do not desire war, but it is a fact also that there are vested interests in the world to-day that must have war if they are to continue to hold the power which they wield for evil in the world. Such vested interests are not confined merely to armament firms, although it is with such concerns that calamities really begin, or to people who become wealthy out of war. There are tens of thousands of working men whose insecurity in life is the dominant factor of their lives, and because employment is their urge and need day by day, month by month and year by year - the Leader of the Senate pointed out in answer to a question this afternoon that huge sums being spent on defence will be utilized for the relief of unemployment; - expenditure on defence inevitably means that there is created in their minds a vague hope in war, because war will give to them jobs and wages, and food and shelter. If war, unfortunately,- comes, and you have to get the workers to engage in it, then, “probably for the first time in years, they will be guaranteed by the nation not only food, clothing and shelter, but also a measure of compensation afterwards should they survive the struggle and require succour. It is true also that great financial interests must have war, because out of war they make their greatest profit. We are sometimes told, and it is a statement which goes unanalysed time and again, that international relations are above party politics. I wish to register my disapproval of that statement. At least they are not above the Labour party’s politics. We say that, to every man or woman who is engaged in public service in whatever sphere of public life, this subject must be political, whether it be raised in the municipal, State or Federal sphere of government. There can be nothing higher than the service men and women render to their country in the realm of political action. We on this side of the chamber do not, of course, lay claim to any greater credit in that regard than is due to those who are opposed to us, but our party lays it down that in every phase of warfare “its policy is one of arbitration and conciliation. In that connexion I remind honorable senators of a speech which I made in this chamber not very long ago, in which I said -

I am sure that I am voicing the feeling of every honorable Senator when I say how intensely relieved we all were when it was found last week that, almost at zero hour, war, which previously had seemed so imminent, had been averted. War was averted by negotiation. Labour believes to-day, as it has always believed, in peace by negotiation - not negotiation after the last cannon has roared forth ‘its message of death, and bombs and gas have wreaked their frightful havoc upon innocent citizens, but before such things begin. Every war, irrespective of its duration, must end some day; and always, when that day comes, and the armistice” is declared, the terms of settlement have to be arrived at by negotiation.

I am accepting this debate this afternoon as an opportunity to stress the fact that peace by negotiation is a far grander and more glorious achievement than the termination of war by negotiation. We talk of knowing all the facts, but we know that every country, including Australia, has its diplomats at work. Nations enter into pacts to do certain things in given circumstances, but we know that those pacts are broken, willy-nilly, .when trouble commences. We talk of knowing all the facts when we do not know the terms of the entangling alliances that are made with various countries, or anything of the machinations of the war machine or the armament racketeers. The very fact that the Leader of the Senate to-day said that Australia will take steps to establish legations in various countries shows that the Government is aware that it does not know all the facts. Every nation in the world says that it has no desire to act aggressively against other nations. So far as Australia is concerned, I say on behalf of people of all shades of politics, that I am confident that there are few individuals in this community who desire war. I do not believe that the Australian people desire to become aggressors; but the interesting fact is - it is a fact, and not merely an argument - that every country says that it is arming only against aggression. If that be true, then there are no aggressors. If every nation is merely taking steps to defend itself against aggression, then there is no aggressor, and, consequently, the whole structure collapses.

Senator Dein:

– There are aggressors.

Senator COLLINGS:

– I deliberately refuse to deal with that aspect to-day. One honorable senator may say that a certain nation is an aggressor; another will speak in similar terms of a different country; a third will say that neither of the. others is correct, and will point to a third nation as an aggressor. Speaking recently on the public platform in Queensland, the Prime Minister spoke to this effect: “Who says that our enemy is Japan? Why do people in Queensland declare that Japan is the enemy against whom we” have to arm?” I do not declare that Japan is our enemy. If we are to get any benefit out of this discussion we must approach the subject, not in any spirit of racial enmity towards any other nation, or combination of nations. Unless we are prepared to say from our place in this chamber that we, as individuals, have undergone regeneration - I do not mind if it is described as a spiritual rebirth - are prepared to state definitely that we have no enemies, and decline to recognize any country as an enemy, anything that we may say may be dangerous rather than helpful, for it may incite to retaliation rather than co-operation.

I believe that I speak for every member of the Opposition when I say that war is the inescapable and natural corollary of a bad social order. If that be a fact, then there is a sphere in which we can commence operations. Unless the whole of our individualistic and competitive institutions are thrown overboard; unless, instead of hatred, there is love; instead of competition, there is cooperation; instead of ill-feeling and all that it means there is goodwill; war is inevitable. . Things to-day are different from what they were 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago. With every nation becoming more and more adept in what we are pleased to describe as the methods of civilization; more industrialized and self-contained, and, therefore, producing more of the things that it needs to keep its people in a reasonable standard of human comfort, the search for markets for surplus products becomes more intensive. First, there is competition between nations which are great industrialists; then their agents, like commercial travellers go from country to country endeavouring to make trade agreements for the sale of their products. Finally, as the field! becomes more and more restricted, with the result that the commercial travellers are no longer effective, the day inevitably arrives when war must be resorted to in order to find new markets. Yet the Leader of the Senate read to-day a statement which did not give to this chamber even the glimmering of an idea that he is capable of distinguishing causes from effects. We know the effects - they are the things of which we are afraid, and against which we are preparing - but the causes are the things that we have to tackle. Whilst I believe that by wise government - and here I offer no criticism of the present Government-

Senator McLeay:

– How would the honorable senator deal with Hitler?

Senator COLLINGS:

– I do not intend to be led into provocative by-ways. It is easy to say, “ We must not consider this question calmly. Do not allow Senator Collings to carry you away to a reasoned consideration of the subject. Throw Hitler into the arena, so that you can forget peace, and get hack to hatred and the spirit of the beast, and tear one another to pieces “. That is not the way to consider this subject.

As to my reference to vested interests - armament firms, financial interests, and working-class vested interests - I say deliberately that if tx means can bt found to take profits out of war there will never be another war. We have been told in this chamber that the Commonwealth Government is taking all necessary steps to ensure that no one in Australia shall make any unreasonable profits out of war preparations. Both the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) and the Minister for External Affairs (Sir Henry Gullett) have declared that safeguards will be instituted to prevent the making of undue, profits. I say that it cannot be done, for the Government will not be allowed to do it. I believe, however, that some day the people, will see that profit is taken out of war. In this connexion, I wish to read from an American publication of the 26th January last -

Two hundred and fifty-eight dollars is the sum currently standing in its bank account to the credit of one of Britain’s largest aerial armament firms. Of three such firms, none has more to its credit in the bank than $300. Snoopers discovering this interesting state of affairs have disclosed one of the neatest and sweetest banking and bookkeeping records yet seen. Simplicity is the keynote, and the reward is the fact that five out of every $100 spent by British taxpayers on aerial rearmament goes into the pockets of certain bankers, with nothing whatever to show for it.

The system, which is liable to be political news before long, works this way”: Messrs. SoandSo, airplane manufacturers, have a big government arms contract. The government kindly arranges not to pay them in cash * for the time being.” Messrs. So-and-So keep $250 in the bank. From the bank they borrow half a million or a million dollars at five per cent, interest on the tacit security of the government contract. So the bank gets five per cent., which Messrs. So-and-So then include in their costs, on which - as a result of what is laughingly termed “ profit limitation “ - they are allowed a ten per cent, profit. So they, in turn, raise the total profit on the deal by one-tenth of five per cent, on the total cost, and the taxpayer pays.

Senator McBride:

– From what authority is the honorable senator quoting?’

Senator COLLINGS:

– The journal, which is open to the inspection of the Assistant Minister, is an authority which cannot be lightly passed over, but in case the Assistant Minister is suffering from illusions, I shall attempt to help him. I believe that the present Government is determined, so far as it is able, to prevent profiteering in connexion with the defence of Australia. I know the means by which it proposes to do so, for it has made a statement on the subject; it proposes to inquire into the cost of the things that are to be made and delivered, and then to allow what it describes as a reasonable profit. That sounds all right, but it is not the way to take profit out of the manufacture of armaments. There is only one way by which it can be done ; we must see that no private individual or company of individuals shall make profit out of “armaments in times of peace, and certainly not when the nation is at war. But to do that we should have to re-cast the whole system of government.

Senator McLeay:

– And when it had been re-cast, what would happen?

Senator COLLINGS:

– I call attention to this cablegram -

page 376

QUESTION

BOOM IN BRITISH ARMS SHARES

London

Evidence of the biggest arms boom in history is that the shares of armament companies have risen since the Munich Agreement by £20,000,000, says the city editor of the Daily Herald.

Vickers Armstrong shares have risen by more than £8,000,000; Baldwin’s by £5,000,000; United Steel by £2,500,000; John Brown by £2,150,000; and Guest-Keen by £1,286,890.

I could go further and direct attention to the boom that there has been in shares throughout Australia. I could show that already profits are being made. The Government cannot” tackle this job until its individual members cease to hold shares in these concerns, which make a profit out of preparing for war in times of peace, and still greater profits in a national emergency. I ask honorable senators to give credence to the speech I am making. I assure them that I do not approach the. subject of defence in a spirit of political antagonism, because if there is one subject into which I put my heart and soul, and in regard to which there cannot be the slightest doubt of my sincerity or any suspicion that I am attempting to secure advantage over a political opponent, it is the subject of universal peace as opposed to universal war. I ask honorable senators to recall what must have been the atmosphere and the psychology of the members of the British House of Commons in September, 1938. Honorable senators opposite have not forgotten, as I never shall, the atmosphere that prevailed in this chamber during that crisis. For days we were afraid to open the morning newspapers because we were expecting to read that the first blow in another great international conflict had been struck. Mr. Stokes, a member of the British House of Commons, wrote in September, 1938 - TOO TRUE.

Whether war comes on us as a result of this dreadful mess in Europe or whether it is bought off by throwing another slice of the world’s surface to the dictators, let us realize that there is a way out of this lunacy wherein the peoples of one nation are taught that their enemies are the peoples of other nations, whereas, in fact, they have a common enemy - a system which allows a comparatively small group of people to control the earth, with its natural resources, so that they may revel on the proceeds of labour whilst those who work, or would work, fare scantily or go without.

Senator COLLINGS:

– Cannot we get away from the superficial? Cannot I be spared the mental agony of having to listen to a remark such as that, even though it be merely an interjection? Of course, what Mr. Stokes wrote is merely a statement. But it is the statement of a man with an ideal. There never has been any great accomplishment in the world’s history, nothing of real value has ever been achieved, which did not commence by a statement by somebody whose vision was ahead of that of his fellows. May I remind Senator Dein that the Great Master Himself made statements, a number of them in parables. He used parables deliberately, because even in those days there were men like Senator Dein who would not understand statements made in any other way. I am endeavouring to be earnest in this matter. I am trying to put a case which I think needs to be put clearly. I am endeavouring to put an ideal which has but few supporters. It is only a statement by Senator Collings, but it is actuated by the best of motives. There are great newspapers in Australia to-day that are asking that some higher ideal shall , be accepted than the common one that is based on the belief that the nations are flying at each other’s throats. For example, the Melbourne Age of the 16th May stated -

There is a tendency, which should be resisted, to relegate domestic and local issues to the background. Violence in Europe and menaces to world peace have absorbed interest and attention, to the relative neglect of our own affairs other than the national task of rearming and organizing to meet an emergency.

I say with all respect to the Government of the day that we cannot go on plunging towards a national catastrophe, indifferent to all other things worth while. If we do that and the catastrophe falls, we shall be unprepared to meet it, however much money we may spend in preparing for it. In concentrating on one subject, we shall be neglecting other phases of our national duty and responsibility, and unfitting the people adequately to defend their country when the call comes. The article continues -

It is timely to remind Australians that their apparatus of self-governing machinery, Federal, State and civic, cannot be neglected or virtually immobilized without adverse effects on the community.

While not omitting any precautions prompted by the world situation, we can and should, as a community, devote more thought to public questions relating to the normal life of a democracy. The building and improving of our own social order demands constructive thought, criticism, study and planning.

To every question we ask we are told that the Government is unable to provide work in certain directions because of the greater importance of preparing for the aggressor, who apparently is nowhere on the horizon, because no one will admit that he is the aggressor. The article continued -

Given an adequate discharge of obligations inherent in the war atmosphere, it would be beneficial to retrieve from neglect those issues and concerns that make up the normal background of the people’s lives. The crisis has disrated local problems from fair consideration. Since an increased share of the national effort and earnings is to be earmarked for defence, there has been a tendency to assume that works and services of daily utility and practical convenience must be treated as unimportant.

I am not criticizing the Government; I am not condemning it. I am putting these phases of the question to the Government and to its supporters in this chamber. I say quite definitely, as Mr. Bruce said at a Geneva conference, last year or the year before, that it must be definitely understood that the question of preparedness for defence must go hand in hand with ever-increasing social security and social service.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. J. B. Hayes). - Two hours having elapsed since the commencement of the sitting, Orders of the Day must, in accordance with the Standing Orders, now be called on.

Motion (by Senator McLeay) agreed to-

That the Orders of the Day be postponed until after the further consideration of the motion moved by Senator McLeay in relation to the printing of the report of the Department of External Affairs for the year 1938.

Senator COLLINGS:

– I shall now refer briefly to some of the remarks made by the Minister for External Affairs in the House of Representatives. He said - sentatives. He said -

Practical inferences from such a valuation would sterilize effort in many directions where it is needed to maintain assets, to preserve efficiency, to serve .the general well-being. Despite the international tension, domestic problems merit continuous and intelligent public attention.

I Agree with that; I am making a plea that we approach this subject from a new angle. The problem cannot be solved by approaching it from the old angle. As I said earlier, we must have the individual as well as composite regeneration before any discussion concerning our relationship with other countries can be of any value. The Minister for External Affairs continued -

The time has come when Australia should show a keener interest, and play a larger part, in discussions and consultations upon foreign “affairs, and especially, as my right honorable leader (Mr. Menzies) has already said, in the affairs of the Pacific.

The information which comes to the Commonwealth hour by hour over the period of each day in which overseas telegrams are received is remarkable for its range and detail. All that is of the least importance upon current foreign affairs is known in Canberra a few hours after it has been handled, by the British Foreign . . .

I am glad to hear that ; but members of Parliament do not have the information within a few hours.

Senator Cameron:

– Or within a few days.

Senator COLLINGS:

– No, or within a few weeks or months except to the extent that information is made available in the Australian press. I have already alluded to vested interests in war, and I desire to say that the conduct of the press pf Australia during recent months has been a disgrace to a civilized community. Read any of the great journals, and what does their so-called news amount to ? Another country is to be crucified, another crisis is at hand.

Statements are made that have no foundation except in the imagination of some reporter or editor. We read such statements as “ It is believed “, “ It is officially stated “, “ Although unconfirmed it has been stated “k and that sort of thing. Do such statements, appearing in the newspapers from one end of Australia to the other, help the Australian people to study the position in a calm, reasoning, and unprejudiced state of mind? They have the opposite effect. These newspapers deliberately set. out to establish a state of war hysteria and to get the people of Australia into such a condition that the bidding of overseas financiers and armament racketeers are accepted with little or no question. The Minister for External Affairs further stated : - 1

When we are disposed to take a gloomy view of the present crisis, we should not overlook that we. have been living in a similar and sometimes an even more acute state of crisis for nearly four years, and so far have escaped general European and world war.

It would be a good thing if Sir Henry Gullett meant that, and I am sure that he did. The newspapers of Australia must stop their damnable practice of crying war, and emphasizing imaginary dangers when it is well known that within recent months we have been getting further and further from the danger of war. I remember how relieved we all were when the Munich Agreement was signed. I remember one Australian newspaper - I forget which one - saying a few weeks later “Now that the emotional and mental strain has been relieved, now that men are beginning to collect their reason which they had almost lost in the trying times of a few weeks before, the question is being generally asked ‘ What price has been paid for peace ‘ ? “ This newspaper said it would be far wiser to ask “ What price would we have paid for a world war?”

Senator Wilson:

– Does the honorable senator suggest that there should be a censorship of the press?

Senator COLLINGS:

– I am not suggesting anything of the kind. Even members of the Government in this chamber have expressed personal grievances against the press. I never do that. After more than 50 years of public life - not the whole time in Parliament - my opinion of the press is that when T receive its approbation I have cause to be ashamed. Whenever I feel that perhaps my public record would need to be bolstered up a .bit, I point with pride to what this or that newspaper has said about me, and I am perfectly happy. As honorable senators know, I am not in the ha’bit of raising personal grievances in this chamber, but I say with all the emphasis at my command that this Parliament has a duty to protect the people of Australia from the press. I do not mind very much what is said about me hy the mad dogs of journalism - perhaps I should substitute the word “ newspapers “ because there is very little journalism in this country - but I believe that a sane Commonwealth government would publish its own newspaper not for the purpose of expressing party opinion, but in order to tell the truth about government policy and state the why and wherefore for its actions. Such a newspaper should alone carry government advertisements. No other journal in th* country should get them. Then, if people wished to tender for government jobs and desired to .be properly informed of the government’s attitude, they would turn to that newspaper, knowing that it could be relied upon.

Senator E B Johnston:

– People can read the government advertisements in the Commonwealth Gazette. (Senator COLLINGS.- I know they can, but members of parliament are about the only people who know now to get hold of it.

Senator Keane:

– In war, even that publication would be censored.

Senator COLLINGS:

– Of course it would.

Senator Cameron:

– Labour newspapers especially would he censored in war time.

Senator COLLINGS:

– Perhaps I would not have made this suggestion of a government-owned newspaper but for the kindly remark made by Senator Wilson, though I do not suggest that he intervened a little while ago in order to help me or because he wished to establish a calm, unprejudiced and reasonable atmosphere in this discussion. Like Senator Dein and some other honorable senators whose voices have been heard this afternoon, his desire is to prevent that. Without wishing to foe unkind to these honorable gentlemen, I claim that they belong to that section in the community which does not desire universal peace as a solution of the troubles confronting us. They are prepared eternally to keep on trying to smooth over, instead of removing, the things that produce war. I do not want to do that. I want to stress always the glories of peace rather than the glories of war, and to have this truth taught to the children in our schools. There was a time, in the early history of humanity, when, perhaps, some glamour attached to war. Then men went into combat for personal reasons. But that day is gone. To-day there is ‘no glory about war. Conflicts between the peoples of nations in enmity no longer resolve themselves into hand to hand combat in which men try to defeat their adversaries, believing that their cause is. right. Modern war is not even a battle of front-line trenches. Civilian populations provide the victims. Bombs dropped from tlie air produce terrifying results, not only immediately, but also through the psychological effect on the victims, so that eventually not one fibre of resistance is left in them. Then follows capitulation. No longer can there be a “ glorious “ war or a “ gentlemanly “ war. It is necessarily terribly cruel and relentless. Therefore, I plead with my fellow senators to attempt at least individual regeneration, so that in future we may concentrate in a different way, and with happier results, on this great problem of international relations.

Before concluding my remarks, I wish to express a few thoughts which, I believe, are worth passing on. We are not to-day dealing with the subject of Australia’s defence. That is not an issue which fittingly* belongs to the statement made this afternoon by the Leader of the Senate. We shall have other opportunities to debate that subject, and honorable senators on this side have made their views quite clear on it. We say that Australia, like other countries, is caught in the vortex of international distrust and misunderstanding, and that the job of protecting the people of this country devolves upon the Government and this Parliament. We raise no quarrel on that point, although we may differ from the Government about some of the details of its proposals. Probably the Leader of the Senate did not expect that his statement this afternoon would be used as I am using it. Probably he had the idea that it would permit some of us on this side to say things that would be better left unsaid.

Probably the honorable gentleman expected me, as Leader of the Opposition, to approach the subject from an entirely different angle, but I shall continue to speak along the lines I have indicated. Having at our command a powerful press and the equally powerful modern miracle of wireless, the sooner we realize that we can make a wonderful contribution to world peace, even from this chamber or the House of Representatives, the better it will be for this country and the world as a whole. Let us put. on one side conflicting political views and try to achieve some good by facing the real causes, and not merely the effects, of wai”. I have in my hand a brief extract from some remarks- made by an American, the Reverend George D. Heron, a prolific writer on worth-while subjects, whose work I admire very much. In his wonderful book, Between Caesar and Jesus, he included a chapter dealing with civilization, which he summed up in these words -

In fine, civilization denies to man the highest right of all rights - tlie right to do right.

I ask honorable senators to help to establish a set of social, industrial and economic conditions which will not deny to man the highest of all rights. I shall not elaborate the point: honorable senators will be able to apply for themselves the moral which it contains. Nor shall I read statistics dealing with the costs of world war, because honorable senators know of them. My sincere purpose is to ensure that every effort shall be made to prevent another world war from happening, because, terrible and costly as the last war was, its cost and its effect would be proved to be infinitesimal in comparison with a world war to-day. Such a conflict would destroy, not only material things, but also those spiritual things of our civilization, which with all its defects, is still of some value and can be improved’. We must face the facts. Because I feel that the price which civilization would have to pay for another world upheaval is too terrible to contemplate I am this afternoon urging a different approach to the consideration of international relations. Ruskin, one of the finest of English writers, said -

Men are enlisted for the labour that kills: let them be enlisted for the labour that feeds: and let the captains of the latter be held as much gentlemen as the former.

To that I add that men are enlisted for the mentality that kills, not in arms but in parliaments and in society. And further, I add - let men he enlisted for the labour that feeds bodies and souls.

My purpose throughout this speech is to stress the idea that there is real glory in an attempt to prevent war and to establish peace. Most honorable senators have read that wonderful poem by Thomas Bracken, entitled Not Understood. It begins -

Not understood, we move along asunder;

Our paths grow wider as the seasons* creep

Along the years; we marvel and we wonder

Why Life is Life, and then we fall asleep

Not understood.

What a marvellous sentiment that contains! “Our paths grow wider as the seasons creep “. We want our national paths to converge and meet, so that the peoples of the world will understand one another’s needs, psychology and general outlook on life. The poem finishes with these lines - 0 God! that men would see a little clearer,

Or judge less harshly where they cannot see!

Oh God ! that men would draw a little nearer

To one another - they’d be nearer Thee,

And understood.

Those are really worth-while sentiments. Let us use this occasion in an attempt to prevent any future widening of the paths which lead us apart instead of bringing us together.

Honorable senators know the part played by Abraham Lincoln in the struggle for freedom by the United States of America. He also said something worth while on the subject of peace. Those honorable senators who interjected - I prefer to think thoughtlessly - I rebuke by quoting these words of Lincoln -

With malice towards none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in.

My final words are these: I began this afternoon by refuting the statement that this question of universal peace, as opposed to universal war, is above party politics. It is not above party politics. It is the supreme responsibility of party politics and some day, somewhere,- somehow, politics will solve the problem. We shall solve it, I think, when we realize the beauty contained in this quotation from the works of Edward Carpenter -

He that will be servant of all, helper of most, by that very fact becomes their lord and master. Seek not your own life, for that is death. But seek how . you can best and most joyfully give your own life away - and every morning ‘forever fresh life shall come to you from over the hills.

Let us seek that morning of which Carpenter speaks. Let us look beyond the hills, and beyond parliament, into our own hearts and soul. Let us ask ourselves “ Are we ready for universal peace ? “ If we, as individuals, are ready for peace, let us ask ourselves the further question - “ Are we ourselves resolved to go forward in the work that we have in hand at the moment and finish it ? “ Let each of us do his bit, according to his opportunities, to bring in that new life, which Carpenter says, will come to us from over the hill?.

Senator ABBOTT:
New South Wales

– It will be agreed by every one who has had the pleasure of listening to the speech just delivered by the Leader of the Opposition- (Senator . Collings) that, no matter whether we agree with some of the things which he has said or not, we have at least heard what will go down in the annals of this chamber as an oration which does the highest credit to our parliamentary institutions. For my part, I would almost term it a classic. I * do not agree . entirely with everything that the honorable gentleman has said, but I have to acknowledge that he has displayed a moral courage that is too rare in public life, not only in our own country, but also in other lands. I humbly congratulate the honorable gentleman upon his masterly effort in the cause of peace. I feel that this speech came from his heart; that it expressed real sincerity without any element of political subterfuge, trickery or expediency.

Yesterday, and to-day also for a little time, the honorable gentleman seemed perturbed, anxious and disappointed at the lack of opportunities given to honorable senators to discuss this important, subject.

I remind the Leader of the Opposition and my other fellow senators of something which I have said before in this chamber, and which, I think, cannot be too often stressed. We descendants of the mother parliament have inherited- the same rights and privileges as those won by our political ancestors in the Old Country. Subject to our own standing orders, the practices, usages and forms of the House of Commons apply to this Parliament. If the Leader of the Government in this chamber, whether it be a Labour or a non-Labour government, displays impatience with -the desire of private members, to bring any matter under the notice of this chamber, reference to May will show that any private member of this branch of the legislature, as well as any member of the House of Repre.sentatives. has the inherent right to submit a motion for an expression of the opinion of this chamber on any matter of domestic or international concern, so long as a similar motion is not already on the business paper. That is a privilege which should be kept alive. When I first availed myself of it, I was certainly, to repeat an expression employed by the Leader of the Opposition, “ not understood “, and I had to break down the idea that the government of the day had the sole right to say on what subjects this chamber should be invited to express its opinion. I repeat that we have an inherent right, whether with government approval or disapproval, to express our opinion as a chamber in regard to any motion submitted by a private member. That right should not be lightly given up, and I hope that honorable senators will always keep firmly in mind the fact that they possess it. A few months ago I said in this chamber that too often the finger of ridicule has been pointed at the Senate. We should show that this chamber is a body in which we are alive to our right to express our opinions concerning Australian affairs and international relations.

Some time ago, when Mr. S. M. Bruce was in Australia, members of all parties were invited to meet him for friendly and informal discussions of international affairs. After one such meeting in Sydney, which was attended ‘by members of all parties, the honorable member for Capricornia (Mr. Forde) expressed the opinion that he had listened to one of the finest expositions on the international situation that he had ever heard. He went on to criticize the Government of the day because such an explanation had not been given on the floor of the Parliament, but he overlooked the fact that on that occasion Mr. Bruce had previously explained that many .of the matters which he was prepared to discuss were of a very confidential nature. When my honorable friend, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, criticizes the Government on the baldness of some of its statements regarding international affairs, he should remember the fact that we cannot discuss, such matters quite so openly as we might in private conversation outside this chamber. “Therefore, the charge of want of frankness with the rank and file of parliamentarians cannot be sustained. From time to time we should be enabled to debate international problems, and I thank the Government for the opportunity afforded this afternoon.

Following upon the very fine speech delivered by the Leader of the Opposition, I fear that my contribution to the debate will be a comparatively poor one. The honorable senator referred at some length to the position in Europe. Generally, I agree with him that, if the disaster of world war fell upon humanity through the present disorders in Europe, the existing balance of civilization would be completely disturbed. In fact, it seems that what we are pleased to regard as Western civilization might go down for ever. ‘Therefore, it is the solemn duty of British parliaments and of the Englishspeaking races to join hands in a supreme effort to preserve world peace. We should co-operate with the sister dominions, with the Mother Country, with the great republic of the United States of America, and with all people similarly-minded in the cause of peace, to spare no effort to avert a world war. The Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies), in a broadcast speech delivered shortly after his accession to office and the formation of the present Government, announced as the policy of his Ministry that Australia stood for internal justice and external security. One can applaud that statement, but it seems to me that more should have been said. If we believe in internal justice and external security, do we not also stand for external justice?

Senator Collings:

– And internal security ?

Senator ABBOTT:

– Internal justice could be taken to cover internal security. That, I think, was in the mind of the Prime Minister, and I should like, re- spectflly, to complete his statement. I desire him and all Australians to say that we stand for external justice also, because through that we hope to be led into the paths of external security.

In subsequent speeches announcing the policy of the Government regarding international affairs, the Prime Minister spoke of relations in the Pacific. Australia is one of the border nations of this great Pacific pool. We hope and pray that the Pacific will prove true to the name that was long ago conferred upon it. We trust that, with sincere understanding, friendship and co-operation among all the nations interested in the Pacific, we shall be able to keep it worthy of its name. I welcome the Prime Minister’s remarks foreshadowing the establishment of diplomatic relations with certain countries bordering the Pacific, but there, again, I think that he did not go quite far enough. As I read the press report of his speech, he anticipated the establishment of diplomatic relations with the United States of America and Japan. I should like Australia to go further than that. At the present time, in pursuance of this desire for external’ justice, we should not for one moment place ourselves in the position of judging between conflicting interests in the Pacific; we must be neutral in every possible way. We must stand for what we say we stand for - peace in the Pacific. We should establish similar relations with what I believe will be the great country of China. I hope that what I am . about to say will not be misunderstood. I do not wish it to be thought that I am indulging in hostile criticism; but recently a dispute arose which caused very great embarrassment. This took the present Prime Minister, who was then AttorneyGeneral, to Port Kembla, where he was called upon to deal with a most difficult situation. I am not criticizing in any way the attitude which the right honorable gentleman took up in relation to that matter, .because through our neglect in the past to pass proper neutrality legislation he was placed in so embarrassing a position that, with the material with which he had to deal, be probably could take no course other than that which he took.

Nevertheless, the position was unfortunate. However, it can be remedied and we can establish a correct attitude towards other nations. It is not for-us as a people to attempt to judge in the conflict between the two great Eastern powers to whom Mr-. Menzies referred as “ our nearer northern neighbours “. It is not our conflict, and we must in no way set ourselves up as the judges of right and wrong. We know, however, that in the Pacific two great peoples are at war ; and it is a very bitter war. We want our relationship with our neighbours in the Pacific to he as correct as possible, and there is no reason why we should not have complete friendship with both of those powers.

I felt that it was, at least, unfortunate that the waterside dispute at Port Kembla occurred at all. Had we had proper neutrality legislation on our statute-book at the time - and the need for it remains because similar trouble might crop up at any time in relation to any other power in the Pacific, or elsewhere - we should not have .been unhappily obliged to threaten the unfortunate wharf labourers concerned with the withdrawal of their licences, involving their right to earn a living and threatening the comfort of their wives and families. Had the demands of the strikers been granted, that decision might have been interpreted as an attempt to apply sanctions. That aspect was put by the Attorney-General, as the Prime Minister then was. He also pointed out that the strikers were attempting to decide the foreign policy of this country. That, of course, they had no right to do. Had we had neutrality legislation on our statutebook which, for the sake of argument, might have given the Governor-General the right to proclaim certain materials as munitions of war, the whole difficulty could have been settled by proclamation. It is very important to retain the goodwill of both Japan and China after this unhappy conflict is ended. We shall want to trade with them, and to resume the ordinary intercourse between nations. I saw a letter which came from the Chinese head-quarters to the effect that there -was fixed in the minds of the Chinese people the idea that Australia was permitting the export of munitions to Japan. That letter was shown to me .by a gentleman in Sydney who told me that it came in acknowledgment of the efforts of some Australian ladies to relieve destitute refugees in the war zone. The writer thanked these ladies for their kindness, and expressed the utmost goodwill towards the people of Australia for many similar kindnesses in the past towards the Chinese people. But, he added, that he wished that the Commonwealth Government could be persuaded not to permit the export of munitions to Japan, and thus help to bring further misery upon the people of China. I know that that is a mistaken idea, because we have not exported munitions to Japan. That impression was probably formed as the result of our exporting pig iron to Japan. As evidence that Australia is never one-sided in its sympathy for those in distress, I recall that when the dreadful earthquake occurred in Japan many years ago, the Australian people made the first effort to provide relief for the sufferers, and sent to Japan as a gift a shipload of food. I hope that at all times our sympathy will readily go out to any people in the Pacific, should they suffer from cataclysms or other misfortunes which are not the fault of the individual victims. I repeat that it is very important for Australia to retain the goodwill of both Japan and China. Very rightly, the Prime Minister has pointed out that we have no quarrel with that country. Australia admits Avith gratitude the help given by the Japanese Navy in convoying our troops during the Great War. I am sure that the Japanese people have nothing but the warmest feeling towards us, particularly when they recall that spontaneous outpouring of sympathy from Australia when they themselves suffered a great disaster. Truly is it said, “ One touch of nature makes the whole world kin “. I have not attempted in any way to take sides in this dispute, but I emphasize again that we should have been in a happier position had we had on ‘our statute-book neutrality legislation which would have “enabled us to avoid the extraordinary position which arose at Port Kembla. On the one hand we expressed doubt as to whether we had sufficient iron for our own needs, and, on the other, in declaring that we could not allow any section of the people to determine our foreign policy, or to apply sanctions, we were obliged to force the workers concerned to load for export material which most of us would suspect would eventually be used for the manufacture of munitions. It is time that Australia woke up to that position. I again urge the Prime Minister, and the Government, to consider the advisability of enacting neutrality laws which will protect us against any suggestion of being in any way other than neutral, either in actions, or in sympathies, when a dispute occurs between other countries. For these reasons, I should like, with the Prime Minister’s permission, to add to his statement that Australia stands for internal justice and external security, the declaration that Australia stands also for external justice. We must avoid any gesture that may be construed to mean that we stand for external partisanship or injustice. In a very interesting speech which he delivered in Sydney, the Prime Minister is reported in the press as having stated that the Government proposed to appoint representatives in the United States of America and Japan. I respectfully suggest to him, and to the Government, that we cannot distinguish between the two great peoples of the East. It is not for us to say which will be the dominant power there, and, for the sake of our future relations in the Pacific, we must treat all countries alike. Therefore, I suggest that if the Government appoints a diplomatic representative to Japan, it should also appoint a similar representative to China. In his speech the Prime Minister said -

You do not keep the peace by exhibiting prejudices or passion in relation to those who might be our friends.

That is perfectly true. It is a sentiment which the Leader of the Opposition expressed very ably in his speech this afternoon. The Prime Minister continned -

We- make no contribution to peace in the Pacific by hostile action towards Japan . . .

That, also, is perfectly true, and we must avoid even the appearance of hostility to China. The Prime Minister went on to refer to the Port Kembla dispute. I do not propose, at this juncture, to say more about that subject except to agree that the sentiments which he expressed are true in respect not only of Japan, but also of China. Under the heading “ Working for Friendship “ the Prime Minister is reported as saying -

You have to pay for friendship; you have to work for friendship. It is not something that floats down out of the golden cloud. It is something you must build by mutual understanding, and close contact with another country ….

No one applauds that statement more than I do. I have hammered at this subject over and over again, and I shall continue to do so. Because I realize the necessity for establishing close contact with other countries I have clamoured, not only in this chamber, but also on the public platform, and in the press, that we should clear the rubbish off the track of radio in order to give our people their right to understand the minds of the people in every other country. You cannot make peace with documents. In the words of Major-General Coxon, “Peace must be made in the hearts of men “. That means in their understanding. The Prime Minister is perfectly right when he says that we must get close to the peoples of other countries in order to understand them. Steps should be taken by this, and other governments, to establish closer contact between their peoples. I am not satisfied with the understandings established » between diplomats, or with the searchings of so-called diplomatic experts who continually trot forward formulas and other curios from the tool-box of diplomacy. I wish to see established a real understanding whereby the man in the street in one country will understand something of the daily life of the man in the street in other countries, and whereby each will appreciate the aspirations, troubles and views of the other. If such intercourse were established, we should have less of the misunderstanding of which the Leader of the Opposition spoke this afternoon. I, for one, applaud the statement of the Prime Minister that we must get closer to the peoples of other nations. Why do we deny to the peoples of the world the benefits that science has conferred upon us? Marconi has given to the world a wonderful instrument. Merely by turning a knob, the smallest child can hear sounds from Tokyo, New York, Dresden, Moscow* Berlin, London, and elsewhere, even though it does not know what those, sounds mean. The value of this means of communication is realized by those who use radio for the dissemination of propaganda. At certain times of each day the possessor of a radio receiver in Australia can hear German propaganda in English; in which such terms as “ Dear friends in Australia” are used. At the moment, I am not concerned as to whether that propaganda is right or wrong-, I mention this in order to show that this God-given invention is a channel whereby the people of one country can get to know something of the daily life and the ideals of the peoples of other countries. It is almost a tragedy that the politicians of the world cannot see that they must make use of the inventions of science for the benefit of mankind. At the beginning of this year a great science congress was held in Canberra, and last year, in connexion with the sesqui-centenary celebrations of New South Wales, a congress of radio engineers from all over the “world met in Sydney. That gathering of radio engineers was considered of such importance that the great Marconi himself had accepted an invitation to be present; only the hand of the grim reaper prevented his being there. As I pointed out in this chamber some time ago, Major-General Harbord, president of the Broadcasting Corporation of the United States of America, attended the congress, and delivered an address which might well have been made in support of a motion which I made in this chamber two or three years ago. He pointed out how the world had neglected to utilize the achievements of science for the benefit of humanity, and how Marconi, that great wizard of radio, had stitched the nations of the world together with a threadless needle. He went on to say that, while the language barrier which prevented the full use of radio continued, the efforts of the great pioneers were to some extent nullified. Honorable senators may not know that Sir Ernest Fisk is considered to be one of the greatest authorities on radio in the world. He, with Sir Alfred Davidson, Mr. Scullin, a former Prime Minister of Australia, Sir Donald

Cameron, Sir Frederick Tout, and others, who could see the importance of breaking down international barriers, saw fit to attend the congress, and Sir Ernest Fisk also accepted the position of trustee of the organization which was formed. He has pointed out over and over again that it is possible to reach in their homes 150,000,000 or 170,000,000 people by means of radio. I remind honorable senators - and it may appeal particularly to honorable senators opposite - that for the benefit of those who desired to protect their financial interests, the ingenuity of the nations of the world was sufficient to devise, and bring into effect most successfully, an international patents convention, by which standardized laws relating to patents were enacted in the parliaments of all the signatory powers. Agreement was reached because there was a will to protect the rights of patentees. Is there any reason why the governments of the nations cannot undertake the task of arranging for .an international convention to clear the rubbish off the track of radio? Mr. David Hennen Morris, that great American who for several years represented his country in Belgium, has reminded us that radio has overcome national barriers, only to find that the barrier of language prevents friendship when men attempt to communicate with one another. The time is coming in the affairs of the world when peace will not mean merely an absence of war - a negative peace - but will be the result of directed effort. The Prime Minister said so in his admirable speech in Sydney to which I have referred. If peace is to come to the world, we must “plan and work for it.

Senator Collings:

– And pay for it.

Senator ABBOTT:

– Yes. We must do all these things if we are to ensure a lasting peace. It is not sufficient to cry “ Thank God for peace “, merely because we are not at war. We do not know the day when war may break out, and therefore we must strive for an active peace - a peace in which individuals making up the nations of the world will lay claim to the inherent right of every human being to know the mind of his fellow men in every other country. Those are some of the ideals for which we must work. This afternoon the Leader of the Opposition said that those who held ideals must be prepared to face ridicule at first; but his remarks implied that, in time, their faith would be rewarded. Of many idealists it has been said that they were ahead of their time, but the ideal which I present to this chamber is not premature. After the discussion of my motion in favour of an international thought exchange, I received from almost every country in the world such a mass of correspondence, much of it in languages which I did not understand and therefore I have been unable to reply to it - as to reveal the great interest that the discussion had created in other countries. Many men and women in different parts of the world are working to the same end. Major-General Harbord, whom I have already mentioned, and many other notable people are actually working on the idea of constructing an international channel of thought exchange - a universal language. I am not concerned as to which language will ultimately be chosen, but I do say that an earnest attempt should be made to provide a means whereby the people of one nation can understand their fellow men of other nationalities. It can be done. It is idle to say that I am advocating a fantastic dream ; it has already proved to be practicable. It is just as possible to provide by international agreement for a channel of thought exchange, and for all the signatory .powers to undertake to teach it in their primary and secondary schools, as to do some of the things to which I have referred. Most of us in this chamber are too old to learn a new language ; but if a universal language were taught in the schools throughout the world, we should have, in another fifteen years, a race of children who would know something of the lives and conditions, as well as the outlook, of people of different nationalities and countries.

Senator Gibson:

– That is almost the case in Europe to-day, where many people speak half a dozen languages.

Senator ABBOTT:

– Among the people of Czechoslovakia there were four or five mother tongues. My proposal would not affect the mother tongue of any people, but it would enable the people of all countries to understand radio broadcasts from practically any part of the world. There is no real danger that harmful propaganda will be broadcast, for I believe that the people of the world generally are sufficiently intelligent to be capable of exercising wise judgment. At the Science Congress held in Canberra early this year, I had the privilege of distributing a paper which I called The Debt of Politicians to Science. I shall not quote from it in detail, because I have already referred to a good deal that is in it, but I point to the fact that some time ago when we were perilously close to war with Germany, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr. Chamberlain, said that it was not to be supposed that ours was the only point of view; the other fellow had his point of view also. He then departed from the orthodox methods of the Foreign Office, and set out to understand that other point of view. Only by seeking that understanding was a war averted at the time. Although it cannot yet be said that his action led to a permanent peace - I pray God it may have that effect - I point out that a recognition of the principle to which I have referred averted war, at least for the time being. However, Mr. Chamberlain’s method, although a vast improvement on the old devices of diplomacy, cannot ensure that the people of one nation will completely understand the people of other nations. The only way to obtain that understanding is for the peoples themselves to insist upon their right to understand one another. There is in existence, although it is perhaps only yet in its infancy, an organization to which I have already referred whose aim is the creation of a better understanding between the rank and file of the peoples of various nations. The paper written by me, and distributed amongst the members of the Science Congress which met in Canberra this year, concluded with these words -

Science 1ms’ certainly done its part. Howlong will “ politics “ be so bankrupt of vision as to neglect the effort which is its debt lo science as the complement of the work of scientists? “Political Science”, with its pandering to expediency, its lack, of vision and courage, can easily fall into the lowest category of all sciences. But why need it do so?

An organization already in existence to-day can do much to achieve these ideals. “We must admit that the political side of the League of Nations does not appeal to a majority of the nations to-day; but there is one aspect of the League which does appeal to them. I believe that those nations which will not have anything to do with political covenants favour association with the Institute of Intellectual Co-operation, which has done good work, and has a great future. I am glad that Australia has associated with that body one of its sons - Mr. Stanley Melbourne Bruce - of whose statesmanship we are so proud. If active steps were taken by this Government to act with him it would be found that those who will have nothing to do with the League of Nations politically will willingly co-operate with the Institute of Intellectual Co-operation.

Sitting suspended from 6.8 to 8 p.m.

Senator DARCEY:
Tasmania

– I looked forward with great interest to the promised statement on foreign relations which was delivered this afternoon by the Leader of the Senate (Senator McLeay). My interest was intensified by the fact that for many years I have been president of the Executive of the League of Nations Union in Hobart, and I have followed the changes in the international arena as closely as I have studied the political situation in Australia. In order to understand thoroughly the present European situation, it is necessary to study antecedent events; to have a thorough knowledge of international incidents leading up to and during the Great War, in which high finance played such an important part.

Every student of international events of that time will admit that the shadow of the Warburg brothers was over all international financial transactions. Paul Warburg, one of the brothers, was the chief financial adviser of President Wilson, and his brother Max occupied a similar position in relation to the Emperor of Germany. Thus there was the anomaly of one brother being in each camp, and since finance is international in its operations, neither stood to lose anything in the war. With the permission of the Senate and for the information of honorable gentlemen, I shall read the following report of an address which appeared in the Sunday Times, a leading Brooklyn, Ohio, publication. It indicates the part which high finance played in the Great War -

If war should come, the fate that would befall Europe and its governments was well defined by a well-known Englishman in a speech at a city club luncheon in Cleveland, Ohio, as reported by the Sunday Times, on Easter Sunday. He “ predicted that a world war would start during 1939, from which America would emerge as ‘dictator of the world ‘ “.

He added that the conflict would “reduce Germany, Italy, France and England to ruins”!

The great powers of Europe in ruins, and America dictator of the world!

Let it be stated at once that the true identity of the masses opposed, from the point of view of who will gain and who will lose (which, of course, is the only realistic basis of decision) is Europe against America and Russia (politically and economically in vassalage to America).

No appreciation of this statement of fact is possible unless it is realized who constitute the real rulers of America and Russia, as distinct from the figureheads officially reputed to be in control.

President Roosevelt’s own position was succinctly described by Walter Lippman in the New York Herald Tribune on the 27th June, 1932. He said: “It is evident that Roosevelt is not the leader of the forces behind him. He isbeing used “-

He was being used by the banking interests. As honorable senators will recall, prior , to the entry of the United States of America into the war, President Wilson had put out peace feelers based on his celebrated fourteen points. The report continued -

Mr. Walter Lippmanis in a position to know. He, it should be remembered, is commonly credited with being the author of President Wilson’s Fourteen points. In the Encyclopaedia Britannica, matter is quoted to the effect that this document, laying down the general conditions of peace, was drafted by Dr. S. Mezes, D. H. Miller and Walter Lippman.

The real rulers of America are the great New York bankers, the leading group being Kuhn, Locb and Company. The controller of this group is Felix Warburg, whose father, Paul Warburg, was well known as the “ Father of the United States of America Federal Reserve Board “.

That means the Federal Reserve Bank, which, like the Bank of England, is supposed to be a government institution, but is not -

Before the war a de facto dictatorship was imposed upon the policy of the United States of America by the “ concentration of banks “ controlled by Warburg. So great was the popular clamour in America in 1912 against this banking trust that President Wilson, who was -a protege of Kuhn, Loeb and Company, was obliged to set up a commission of inquiry.

The report presented by the commission of inquiry to Congress, contained findings which were alarming. “A banking trust” did exist: It included five principal banks, which controlled 112 important banks, as well as numerous financial and industrial groups scattered throughout the United States of America and other parts of the world; the power of the “ combination “ was enormous. In adding together the capital sums represented by the banks which formed part of the “trust” and by enterprises dependent upon them, the commission arrived at the almost incredible figure of 22,245,000,000 dollars, or more than 556 milliard French francs, and at 5 dollars to the £1, 4,449,000,000 English pounds, all of which was grouped in 1912 around Jacob Schiff, and was dependent upon his sole will.

The commission of inquiry was in no way deceived, and concluded its report in the following impressive terms: “The powerful grip of these men is placed upon the lever which controls all credit, and its wheels turn or stop at their signal “-

I repeat that the misuse of this great money power is the cause of the world’s troubles of to-day -

The result of this inquiry was the formation of the Federal Reserve Board. Thereby far from being loosened, the bonds, in which Kuhn, Loeb and Company held the American Government, were still further tightened.

The contact of this all-powerful banking group with President Roosevelt is effected through its close associates - Bernard M. Baruch and Felix Frankfurter, who are the President’s chief “ advisers “.

The measure of Baruch’s domination of the American Government is evidenced by his own reply to cross examination at a Senate official inquiry, at which he claimed : “ I suppose I was the most powerful man in the United States of America during the war “.

During the war, Bernard Baruch was head of the War Industries Board. In him reposed authority over: -

The use of capital in the private business of Americans.

Over all materials.

Over all industries.

Over all classes of men to be called to military . service.

Over the personnel of labour in the country-

Would any man desire greater power than that? I doubt if any man in the history of the world has ever been vested with such power -

No project could be financed without his consent. And what is the most significant of ali the considerations governing his assent was that he should fix the remuneration of the capitalist, the wages of the workers and the prices of the products - prices not only to the Government for war supplies, but prices to the civilian population. After the war, Baruch went to the economic conference at Paris, as chairman of the American Commission

That was the conference at which the peace treaty of Versailles was te be discussed. Notwithstanding that they had at their command this enormous financial and economic power, the nations’ represented at that gathering made the greatest mess financially that any body of men has ever made, Keynes, the wellknown English economist, condemned the financial clauses- of the treaty at sight, and left the commission. The truth is that the bankers were thinking of their own interests, and how much they could get out of the various governments. The Warburgs, .as I have stated, were on both sides -

The power which Baruch wields to-day is summed up in the two statements which

Appeared in the Jewish Examine, - “ One of the key Roosevelt advisers is Bernard M. Baruch, a power in the Wilson administration. In the absence of the Secretary of State’ Hull and the President from Washington, Mr. Baruch we regarded as the unofficial President. Professor Felix Frankfurter, who has declined a number of important positions in the Roosevelt administration, has nevertheless had his recommendations accepted in filling; nearly half a dozen of the most important legal posts in the Government and continues to function as one of the President’s most trustworthy advisers.”-

From Fortune, a monthly magazine published in the United States of America, I cite these passages - “ Bernard M. Baruch is called into frequent conferences with the president. He has financed many a congressional campaign; and is surrounded by a Praetorian guard of senators who hang on hia every word. The figure of Baruch is swelling into enormous dimensions on the horizon of public life. He has been given credit for Hoover’s appointment of Eugene Meyer, Jr., us Governor of the Federal Reserve Board. He is the mystery mon of Washington and Wall-street.”-

The report continued -

No understanding of the diplomacy of the American Government can be. valid which does not recognize that the policy Qf that Government is dominated by the powerful New York bankers referred- to.

The powerful banking interests which rule the American government are also- the power which governs Russia.

The evidence in support of the fact that the Russian Revolution and the- subsequent Governments of Russia were financed and controlled by the banking interests which govern America is monumental.

It is. only necessary here to refer to the chief document treating of the financing of the Russian Revolution. This is the one drawn up- by the- American. Secret. Service and transmitted by the French High Commissioner to his government. It was published by the Documentation Catholique of Paris,, on 6th March, 1020.

Section 1 states that “ it was found out that the following persons, as well as the- banking house mentioned, were, engaged in this work of destruction.:. - Jacob. Schiff, Guggenheim,, Max Breitung, Kuhn, Loeb & Co., Felix Warburg, Otto Kain, Mortimer Schiff,. S.. H. Hanauer-

If honorable senators will1 bear in mind the pronunciation of these names, it; will not be difficult to determine their nationality -

Kuhn, Loeb and Co.. had a. complete monopoly of the contracts for the industrialization of Russia-

From this it will be; seen that Russia is actually under the thumb of American finance. Russia endeavoured to avoid orthodox methods of finance, but the world money power was too strong, and finally the Soviet had to appeal to the bankers for financial aid in order to carry on its developmental schemes -

The banking interests which govern America and Russia have the most powerful international connexions. How “ unexpected “ as well as extensive is indicated by the fact that during the Great War, whilst Max Warburg was the trusted financial adviser of the German Emperor, Max Warburg’s brother Paul Warburg, director of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. and founder of the Federal Reserve Bank was, as “ G-rand Treasurer of the United States of America”, playing a similar role at the side of President Wilson. The artful conspiracies and paralyzing hindrances with which the Allies found their path beset, may be imagined; while it should be borne in mind that those engaged in the terrible struggle never had the least suspicion-

It is well known that during the war areas in the northern part of France, in which coal and iron resources were located, were not touched by shell fire, although at almost any stage of the conflict they could have been destroyed. They were protected by the financial interests. Had they been destroyed the war would have come to a conclusion much sooner than it did. But it does not suit high finance to get a war over quickly -

It is .interesting to record that Max Warburg was one of the leading representatives sent by Germany to the Versailles Peace Conference, whilst his brother Paul Warburg of the same financial house, was one of America’s chief representatives.

The interests of this group of bankers who control America and Russia are international, and their aim is the disruption of Europe with u view to their complete domination of it-

Honorable senators will realize, I think, that governments are not aware of this. Although they may not believe it, they are under the thumb of high finance -

The two post war political heads of Russia have stated the intentions of the naming interests who control them. Away back on November 26th, 1020, Lenin proclaimed: “Our salvation would be more readily assured if the imperialist powers became embroiled in a war.”-

A week or so ago we hoped to win Russia over to our side in connexion with the present troubled situation in Europe, but Russia hesitated because its Government really had no voice in the matter at all-

On February 21st, 1935, the Political Bureau of the Communist International, the highest organ of the International, after being addressed by Stalin, passed a resolution in which it said: “The Political Bureau is definitely convinced that a new world war is absolutely inevitable, but explains this as the obvious preparation for the world revolution-

Lenin, almost during his first term of office, said that it would be impossible to realize the communist ideal unless the whole world was involved -

With the aim of self-preservation, and in the interests of the world revolutionary movement, the Soviet Government must do all possible to enter the camp of the States which build the strongest coalitions.”-

Russia is not yet satisfied that it would be joining the strongest combination of nations, if it took sides with Great Britain and France -

The stage is rigged for Europe to destroy herself, and nothing is more certain than that, if the personnel of the European Governments play the roles so carefully designed for them by the financial interests who rule America and Russia, they will automatically sign their own personal death warrants-

Should the threatened world war occur, the people who have trusted in governments for centuries will no longer have faith in them, and, no doubt, parliamentary government will go to the wall -

Europe can be saved at this late hour if the members of her governments will recognize the common enemy, and unite against it. A Europe divided is the aim of American policy, whatever may appear from the “ surface “ diplomacy of President Roosevelt, who can only keep the support of public opinion for himself by deceiving it as to his true aim. As all the international news-agencies and almost the entire press of Europe is controlled directly or indirectly by American banking interests, it is quite easy for him to do that. The continuous war scare which is worked up in that press by publishing every rumour, is one of their methods.

The true aim of American policy was stated by a leading political spokesman of the real rulers of America, Senator Key Pittman, in March this year. He said: - “ It is to our interest to maintain a substantial balance of power in Europe. If any one group obtained substantial predominance we should be faced with- the necessity of defending the Monroe doctrine on the American continent.”-

The suggestion is that the people of the United States of America must repel attack from any European power, and the stronger they become the more certain it is that they will have to defend the Monroe doctrine on American soil -

In that statement is an admission that a united Europe would sound the death knell to the American policy for world hegemony.

Immediate action to counter this threat to Europe is needed. Prominent persons in Britain, Germany, Italy and France with whom this organization has been in touch, directly or indirectly, are already co-operating in a form of action which if pursued energetically and over a wide enough area would do much in bringing about decisions which would avert the threatened catastrophe. The action required is essentially one for individual initiative and not for committees, councils or any form of open association-

I join with Senator Abbott in complimenting the Leader of the Opposition (.Senator Collings) upon his excellent speech. ] have listened to many orations by my leader, but I have never heard him with greater pleasure than to-day -

Each person taking part in this effort has his own connections and channels, through which he can work. The action at this stage consists solely in spreading throughout Government’ and influential circles in Europe the subject matter of this circular supplementing it with such facts as are necessary and can be obtained from other sources.

Action already taken has confirmed the correctness of the assumption which forms the basis for pursuing this matter: a Peer of this country, who recognizes the truth of what is written here, proceeded to contact certain high personages and discovered that before his effort at enlightenment; they were among “ the many far too stupid and simple to see the situation as it is.”-

If the statesmen of Europe cannot see who is wielding the power, and who are the opponents of the people, the general public cannot be expected to know. It is the duty of every honorable senator, and of every Australian who takes an interest in his country and desires world peace, to do what he can to break the money monopoly.

Honorable senators will have realized by this time why I have made a special study of banking and finance. The document that I have just read will help them to appreciate the small part which kings, emperors and presidents of republics play in national affairs.

Senator Gibson:

– And dictators.

Senator DARCEY:

– The only political parties which have broken the bank monopoly are those of the two great dictators in Europe. As I pointed out in this chamber some time ago, high finance was in great favour with the dictators for a while. A dictator controls the minds of millions of people, whilst high finance has only one mind to control - that of the dictator. But we live in a money economy, and even a dictator can do nothing without finance. The dictators found that high finance still had a grip on their countries, but Hitler used the national credit for the purpose of national defence, and in that respect left Great Britain far behind. If the governments adhere to orthodox methods of finance, they will assuredly go down.

Senator Abbott:

– Every young German goes into a labour camp on leaving school. Does the honorable senator want that in Australia?

Senator DARCEY:

– No ; but I am showing what we have to compete against. If we borrow money at 3 per cent., how can we pay for bur defence programme?

I have pointed out that the finding of the Monetary and Banking Commission was that the Commonwealth Bank should issue money to the Government free of interest, and I asked whether the Prime Minister would instruct the bank to issue sufficient credit, interest free, for the adequate defence of this country. Honorable senators will recollect that the reply received by me was that the Prime Minister was not prepared to instruct the bank to issue credit. The purpose of the credit, which was the adequate defence of Australia, was deliberately suppressed. I contend that that was a mere evasion which was wholly unjustified.

Senator Foll:

– The statement by the commission about the lending of money free of interest was one of the most stupid ever made by such a body.

Senator DARCEY:

– That report was the biggest surprise the Lyons Government ever received, but it should be remembered that the commission was presided over by a Supreme Court Judge. The commission had over one hundred sittings and took evidence from two hundred witnesses. It gallivanted all over Australia for about twelve months, although it could have obtained all the evidence it required in Melbourne. All the banks are members of the same association; the interest charges on deposits are the same, and they charge the same rates on overdrafts. All the insurance companies and other big lenders of money work on “similar lines. In addressing a recent annual gathering of the Hobart branch of the Economic Society of Australia and New Zealand, I remarked to the chairman, who was a banker, that the commission need not have left Melbourne, but that it was a well-paid body and had sent in a bill to the , Commonwealth for about £27,000. I said that if a Supreme Court judge could not find out all about banking in .a year, after examining hundreds of witnesses, he should not have been appointed to preside over such a commission.

Senator Foll:

– “What happened was a strong argument against royal commissions.

Senator DARCEY:

– Prior to the Christmas adjournment, I inquired if the Government was prepared to discuss the report and recommendations of the commission before the recess, and I received an affirmative reply, but the promise was not carried out.

Senator Wilson:

– Social credit was condemned by the commission. “Senator DARCEY.- I cannot bold myself responsible for the ignorance that exists on that subject. It is of no use to find fault with the medicine. As T have said before, finance is government and government is finance. At the meeting of the Economic Society in the Town Hall in Hobart, on opening my campaign, I was introduced by the Treasurer of Tasmania, Mr. Dwyer Gray, who said that although he had to understand the subject of finance, he considered that I had mastered it. He had heard me addressing the Economic Society of Hobart, the Faculty of Economics of the University of Tasmania, and the bankers’ association on international finance for an hour and a half without notes. There is a vast difference between borrowing money from the private banks at 3$ per cent, and the Commonwealth Bank making credit available interestfree. I had a question on the noticepaper to-day in regard to this matter, and for the second time the question has been hedged by the Government. Some years ago when the late Prime Minister was explaining in the House of Representatives how he had floated a £12,000,000 loan to rehabilitate the wheat farmers, ‘a member asked how much of the amount was bank money and how much was subscribed by the people.

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. J. B. Hayes). - The honorable senator is not dealing with the subject of international affairs.

Senator DARCEY:

– I was interrupted by the Minister for the Interior (Senator Foll) and I replied to him. I am still dealing with finance, and finance certainly controls foreign affairs. I have given indisputable proof of that fact.

I am a member of the League of Nations Union, for I believe that the League has the machinery necessary for the maintenance of peace. I still work for the League because it has done good work, apart from its efforts to prevent war. It has dealt with the drug traffic and with the traffic in women and children. Through the International Labour Office it has tried to raise the status of labour throughout the world by prevent ing cheap-labour countries from reducing wages in other countries which are prepared to recognize the justice of the claim for reasonable condition’s of employment. I was about to tell honorable senators of the shock I received on learning of the attitude of the League of Nations towards the international financial ring. Following the war, Austria found itself in a worse state than any other country in Europe. That country had been cut up to make Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and various other states. Conditions in Vienna- were easily the worst of any European city. In these circumstances the Catholic Chancellor of Austria, Count Siepel applied to the League of Nations for a loan of £12,000,000 for the purpose of rehabilitating Austria. He got the money, and immediately proceeded to carry out the work of rehabilitating his country, but in an unorthodox way. He started to subsidize the manufacturers. It is well-known to economists - on this point, I might mention that I have studied economics under Professor Copeland, Professor Giblin and Dr. Roland Wilson, who are now high authorities in Canberra’s eyes - that any new money coming into circulation raises prices. The word inflation is used very loosely by many people; it should never be used except in conjunction with two other words, “ of prices “. Therefore, when we speak of inflation we should say “ inflation of prices “. Any new money coming into circulation will raise prices, unless prices are fixed. This able Austrian statesman fixed prices. He proceeded to subsidize the manufacturers. For instance, a baker would sell his bread at 3d. a loaf, but the Government through a national credit fund would raise his return to 4d. In that way, purchasing power was increased by 25 per cent., and, at the same time, inflation of prices was prevented. However, this method was unorthodox, and orthodox financiers who were finding the money told Count Siepel that he must discontinue his scheme or they would stop his credit. This is another instance of how high finance governs the legislators of a country. Strakosch, and his German friends, were the financiers to the League of Nations. They did not desire it to be shown, as Count Siepel was proving, that the orthodox method of finance could be improved upon. If that were done they would be robbed of their profits. Eventually they stopped credit to Austria, with the result that that country went bankrupt. Thereafter, it did no good until Hitler took it over a year ago. Vienna was once the richest and most fashionable capital in Europe; to-day it is the poorest city in that continent. That change was brought about by high finance preventing the rehabilitation of Austria. High finance controls all of our great newspapers. It may be information to honorable senators that the Melbourne Argus, on its own statement, when it was being floated into a company with a capital of £1,000,000 - a company of which the Prime Minister was a director-

Senator Leckie:

– Mr. Menzies was never a director of that company.

Mr DARCEY:
TASMANIA

– I am glad to be corrected. Did not Mr. Menzies, or. the legal firm with which he is connected, do a lot of work in connexion with the flotation of that company ? There are lots of ways of making money out of a company without being a director of it. Recently I read in the Argus that Mr. Bruce might be induced to give up his position as High Commissioner for Australia in London in order to become a member of the House of Commons. That paper stated that should Mr. Bruce decide to enter the House of Commons - generally speaking, the electors decide - his great business acumen would no doubt secure for him many valuable positions on directorates in the city of London. To return to my point, the overdraft of the Argus, on its own statement, was £224,000. Before a company can get an overdraft of that amount from a bank it must legally assign to the bank real money to the value of £500,000. It is clear, therefore, who runs the Argus. This observation applies to every big newspaper in Australia.

Senator Gibson:

– The shareholders run the Argus.

Senator DARCEY:

– The shareholders pay the calls, and they will he paying some pretty big calls very shortly. I point out that this great newspaper was owned by. two families over a period of 80 years. This company established an evening newspaper, The Star, and lost £175,000 on the venture. The bank then thought of its overdraft and decided to overcome its difficulty by getting in public money. It decided to float a public company. Despite the fact that The Star had lost £175,000 in twelve months, the bank asked £500,000 for goodwill.

The PRESIDENT:

– The honorable senator must confine his remarks to the question before the Chair.

Senator DARCEY:

– I have said sufficient to show the ramifications of high finance. Honorable senators cannot get away from the statements which I have made to-night. I have known for years that the Commonwealth Bank can issue interest-free money.

Senator Gibson:

– But the honorable senator just told us that by issuing new money we would raise prices.

Senator DARCEY:

– I said that money could be issued without raising prices, provided the latter were fixed. I recall that when speaking in this chamber on a previous occasion the honorable senator interrupted me by asking whether I had come here to teach honorable senators. I replied that it was a good thing that I had learned political economy before I entered the Senate, and added that in endeavouring to teach honorable senators I had some very backward pupils. However, I propose to persevere in that task. I hope that honorable senators will take notice of what I have said. I am an old man with many years of -experience, and some people say that age and experience give wisdom. That may or may not be true ; it depends upon one’s mentality. However, I believe that I have told a new story to the Senate to-night. On a previous occasion after I had spoken for 25 minutes, some honorable senators opposite approached me and asked whether what I had said could be true. I replied, “Yes, -did I come here to try to mislead you? It is true.” If I cannot penetrate the conservative minds of honorable senators opposite-

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– The honorable senator cannot get his ideals into the minds of his colleagues.

Senator DARCEY:

– I am enunciating the first plank of the Labour party’s platform - community control of credit; otherwise my leader would have pulled me up long ago. I have spoken at some length, but I hope that I have not spoken in vain. To honorable senators opposite I say, “ Your system cannot last. In fact, yon do not know whether it will last until to-morrow.” If we cannot lay the blame for the present condition of world affairs, dreadful as it is, ait the door of world governments, who on earth are we to blame? We are sent here to govern Australia, and we should see to it that orthodox finance does not usurp our powers. When journeying from Canberra to Sydney recently, a member of the Government asked me to explain how the Government’s proposed defence expenditure could be financed through the Commonwealth Bank free of interest. I gave him an hour and a half. He said that I talked to him from Canberra to Sydney, but that is not correct; he left the train at Goulburn. On another occasion, an honorable senator opposite asked me when I was going to give another talk on finance, and I replied, “Are you not aware of the fact that a proposal is now before the Senate to appropriate £10,000,000 for defence, and that I have just spoken on the subject for 25 minutes, showing the absurdity of borrowing this money at 3£ per cent, and loading the taxpayers of Australia in perpetuity with that burden of interest ? “ He replied, “I must have been playing billiards.” Whatever other failings I may have, nobody can question my earnestness of purpose. I was 68 years of age when I stood for election to this Parliament. I have come here for one purpose. I believe that what I have said* to-night should convince honorable senators that there is only one trouble in the world to-day, and that is the wrongful use of money by international high finance. I hope that honorable senators will take some notice of a man old enough to be the father of some of them. Although I am new to this Parliament, I have taken an interest in politics all my life, and I hope, that my efforts to-night will meet with a measure of success.

Senator KEANE:
Victoria

.- I join with the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings) in expressing appreciation of the opportunity afforded us by the Leader of the Senate (Senator McLeay) to discuss international affairs, the- first opportunity we have had since “the present crisis arose. This subject is of outstanding importance. I listened with attention to the speeches of the

Leader of the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition, and Senator Abbott. Those three speakers expressed the sacred ideal of world peace as lucidly, fairly, and sincerely as I have heard the ideal expressed anywhere. The Senate should insist, as it did on this occasion, that whenever an important discussion is launched in the House of Representatives, whatever be the subject, equal opportunity shall be given to this chamber to hold a similar debate. The Senate has been allowed to deteriorate as a branch of the legislature, and we should seize every opportunity to rectify that position. But for the request of the Opposition, we should not have had this opportunity to debate international relations. I feel sure that our deliberations will prove helpful to every honorable senator. I commend Senator Abbott for his statement regarding the ideal of peace- in the Pacific. For his information, I point out that, “at a recent conference of the Labour movement in Melbourne, the question of world peace was discussed, and as the result it was resolved that a conference of representatives of nations bordering on the Pacific should be called immediately, with a view to giving effect to the ideal expressed by the honorable senator. That conference will be convened at an early date, and it should receive the fullest encouragement from the Government. I do not admit the right of the press to issue, as it has been allowed to do in this country since the international crisis in September, provocative matter which has been entirely anti-Australian. We should not permit such matter to be disseminated through our newspapers and over the radio while the Government is trying to re-assure the people. It cannot be denied that in September last a real danger existed. The Government must have known that there was great danger.

Senator Wilson:

– How would the honorable senator stop the publication of such statements?

Senator KEANE:

– I would do what the Hughes Government did between 1914 and 1918; I would censor statements that were not in the interests of the people of Australia. Members of the press have carte blanche in the galleries of this Parliament; they are free to criticize members of the Government and of the Opposition ; at any time they can publish a story dealing with the dangers of the international situation. The Melbourne Swu, one of the Murdoch papers, recently published an aerial picture of Melbourne and its surroundings. Notwithstanding the statement of the Minister, in reply to a question which I asked, that the publication of such a picture was not dangerous, I point out that it was about as clear a map of the city of Melbourne and its surroundings as could possibly ‘be obtained. Similar pictures of other Australian cities have been published from time to time. The liberty of the press in this country has become licence, unlimited and unrestricted.

Senator Wilson:

– That is what Hitler says.

Senator KEANE:

– The present Government occupies the treasury bench because of the influence of the press which to-day is trying to boost the new Prime Minister. Senator Wilson asks what T would do. I would stop the indiscriminate issue of statements on any matter affecting the safety of this country unless the information on which they were based was originally given officially by the head of the Government. I have said that on numerous occasions from public platforms in different parts of Australia. A.s the result, I do not look for reports of my meetings in the press. I do not wish the press to report me; like my leader, Senator Collings, if I find the press saying this or that, I shall definitely go “ over .the top “ - and not on the side to which I am pledged at the moment. There is in Australia one newspaper which has taken a stand against such reports; I refer to the Bulletin. From time to time it has published leading articles along the lines of my remarks to-night; it has consistently deprecated loose and wild talk of alarming situations. The writers of these harmful articles are employees of the newspaper companies who draw on their imagina tion in order to make their publications attractive. Every newspaper has its cable editor. Senator Wilson laughs. Has he ever seen the ca’ble editor at work? Does he know that from a cable containing eight or nine words the cable editor may produce a column in his” newspaper the next morning? I have had some experience of these things, and I know what is done. I have a clear recollection of what happened in connexion with the crisis of last September. When the British Broadcasting Commission gave directions through Daventry that Australia, in common with other parts of the Empire, was to disseminate the whole of the urgent news, the Associated Press forbade its distribution. If it was so easy for private enterprise to censor news, it should be even easier for the Government to do so.

The La’bour party supported the appropriation of £63,000,000 for the defence of this country. Like other honorable senators, I am easier in my mind now that the international situation is less tense. I do not cross swords with the Minister for Defence (Mr. Street), who, doubtless, is in possession of more information than are honorable senators of the Opposition ; but I do say that the expenditure of £63,000,000 ‘is a heavy liability for the Government to undertake. If the international situation has eased, the Government should make some effort to divert a portion of that money to meet some of the urgent social needs of the community. A lot of trouble is caused by extravagant utterances made for political reasons. I do not think that a subject like defence should be discussed in that way. The policies of the Labour party and of the Government in relation to defence are well known. The Labour party’s policy is in writing, whereas the policy of the Government can be made or unmade overnight. The Opposition accepted the statement of the Government that it had information that Australia was in danger, and for that reason the Opposition remained silent. It believed that the Government should not be handicapped in dealing with the defence of this country.

I do object, however, to the Govern-, ment issuing propaganda indicating that its defence programme is providing a lot of. work. The works to be carried out are to be undertaken by private contract, whereas a Labour government would undertake the work on the day-labour system. I know that most honorable senators from Victoria are inundated with requests to find employment for men at the- Maribyrnong munitions factory. The Minister has1 tola us that 29,000 men have registered1 for work there. In- other words,, 29,000 hopeless men believe that there is work for them under the defence scheme of the Government, whereas the fact is that for the thr.ee months ended the 27th February the munitions factory employed about 600 workers, including 74 women. The Government should make some pronouncement on this subject, so that men will not be encouraged to believe that work awaits them at Maribyrnong, and waste money in seeking it. A great proportion of the £63,00.0,000 will, for obvious, reasons, ultimately find its way overseas.

Senator Abbott referred to the unfortunate happenings at Port Kembla. I wholeheartedly concur in all that he said. If the honorable senator feels as strongly on the application of the Transport Workers Act to the waterside workers there as I do, he should approach the Government which he supports with a view to the repeal: of that legislation,, by which- 11,000 trade unionists are told that,, because they put up a fight for award conditions, they are for all time to accept conditions whereby men who are not trade unionists, but, in the vernacular of the unionist, “ scabs “, are given first preference in obtaining employment. Senator Abbott knows that the Transport Workers Act has outlived its usefulness. I go further, and say that it should never have- been placed on the statute-book. Its enactment is evidence of the brutality of the government responsible for it. Men- ti on has been made of the action of men who’ refused to load iron ore for J apan, believing that it would be used for the manufacture- of munitions. I give to the present Prime Minister credit for doing a good job at Port Kembla in his capacity as Attorney-General in the Lyons Government. I believe that if any Prime- Minister, other than a Labour man, is likely to repeal that legislation it is the leader of the present

Government. I know that Senator Allan MacDonald is inquiring, into the subject on his. behalf, and I believe that some satisfactory decision is. likely to be arrived at.

The speeches to-day have been of a high order. There is no difference of opinion among honorable senators as to the- desirableness of avoiding war if that be possible. Ali are agreed, that Australia must make contact with the peoples of other countries, and must strive, to understand them. We should know more of what the. peoples of other countries are thinking and doing. If there is. one sentiment more: than another to which I subscribe, it is, “ On earth peace, goodwill towards men”.

Senator CAMERON:
Victoria

– At the outset, I wish to- protest against the attempt to ignore the Senate in connexion with the discussion of international affairs. Sightly or wrongly, I believe that the object of the Government is to sabotage the Senate, and pave the way for the establishment of an institution similar to certain institutions overseas. There are economic reasons for that being done-. As industry is being centralized in fewer hands, a state’ of affairs is created- in which democratic institutions become obstacles; The political superstructures erected in their place are institutions controlled by only a few men.

I listened attentively to the statement read by the Leader of the Senate (Senator McLeay) ; it was interesting, but I cannot say that it was either informative or convincing. To me it appeared to be a statement which had been .prepared for public consumption - something to placate the people and cause them to think favorably of the Government. It may be that the Government thought that it would be dangerous to tell the people the truth. I have had a different experience in this world from that of Senator Darcey, who- graduated in one of our universities. My university was the oldest in the world - the university of adversity, where the fees are. high and the lessons are never forgotten. I have had1- some experience of the conditions which prevail when nations are at war. International conflicts are the outcome of economic warfare which is constantly taking place between groups of capitalists’.

When opportunities for profitable investment are lacking the capitalists- must either hold their money at a loss or look for investments that will show a profit. They then have to use their influence to get countries to engage in war. Capital is accumulating in Australia, and I cannot imagine those holding it investing it in the wheat industry, because that would be unprofitable. In Australia wheat cannot he produced , at a profit. I cannot imagine Australian capitalists investing their money in Australian boot factories. Almost every one requires boots or shoes, but there are already more than sufficient hoot factories in Australia to meet the demand. Australian capitalists will not invest their money in housing or in factories used for the manufacture of clothing, because there is no profit in those undertakings. Such a position has arisen in Germany and Japan and in other countries which have taken up an aggressive attitude towards other nations. There must be an outlet for capital. ‘Capital must be used cither to raise the living standards of the people within a country or to appropriate other people’s territory and thus obtain the right to exploit the working people. In Germany there is a driving force of capital controlled by unscrupulous persons who are responsible for the aggressive attitude that is now being taken up.

Senator E B Johnston:

– Do they not stand to lose it all?

Senator CAMERON:

– The element of risk cannot bc eliminated. Investors realize that there is a chance to make enormous profits should their country be victorious. If the capital held for investment were appropriated by the Government and used to raise the living standards of the people, and in that way make them more socially disposed towards one another, there would be no profit to be gained. Thus the risk involved in war by those who possess enormous amounts of capital for investment is regarded as the less of the two evils. The next thing investors have to do is to provide the way for successful investment. That is done by the henchmen of the capitalists through the medium of radio broadcasting referred to by Senator Abbott, and through the capitalist press mentioned by Senator Keane. It is said, with tedious repetition for the benefit of the people, that this country is being robbed and is being dealt with unfairly by other countries. We are told that Australia should live up to its high traditions and remember the great deeds performed by Australians. In this way noble statements are used for ignoble purposes. I can imagine that being done in Germany and Japan, as well as in Australia. When we know these things, not altogether from what we read, but by experience, we become sceptical, as I am to-day. We do not accept at their face value statements made in the name of the Government. I do not wish to misrepresent Ministers, or to attribute ulterior motives to any person, but I can conceive of many persons in responsible positions making misleading statements quite unknowingly, and mainly because of ignorance.

During the debate on this subject the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings) and other honorable senators referred to the profits that will be made by the manufacturers of arms and munitions. That is an aspect of defence in which I am particularly interested. We are told that profits will be regulated by law, and that those engaged in the manufacture of arms and munitions will not bc permitted to make profits in excess of 4 per cent. On the surface, that sounds satisfactory, and by the entirely unsophisticated will be regarded as a reasonable proposition ; but I am certain that nothing of the kind will be done. The Government cannot regulate profits in the way it proposes. It can protect wealthy taxpayers against armament contractors, but the profits are made all the same. Profits represent the return over wages and other charges incidental to manufacture. While wages are a diminishing factor in industry, due mainly to machinery and to improved methods of manufacture, profits will accumulate to a greater degree than before. Whatever legislation the Government may introduce will not really limit profits, although it may have the effect of distributing profits more evenly. The only way in which the Government can reduce profits in industries engaged in the manufacture of armaments is by raising the wages of the workers engaged, reducing working hours, and extending and improving social services. Until that be done, profits will not be reduced, and it is so much political eye-wash for any Minister to tell any intelligent person that the Government is going to establish a precedent by providing that the profits now being made shall not be as large as in the past.

Senator McBride:

– Do not the prices charged for commodities affect profits?

Senator CAMERON:

– Prices enter into the whole business. As in the past, enormous sums will be paid in interest which is a profit on investments. I stated in this chamber last year that, according to figures supplied from an official source, profits made in Australia out of the Great War, in the form of interest, amounted to at least £33,000,000 in excess of all other charges. The total cost of that war to us, speaking from memory, was, I believe, £565,000,000. Notwithstanding this huge expenditure, which was supposed to have been incurred for the protection of Australia and in the interests of those men who made sacrifices, many of those who returned to Australia have been denied a pension or the right to earn a decent livelihood. Some have been reduced to the level of paupers. The only way in which the Government can check profits is by progressively, constantly, and consistently improving the standard of living, particularly of those who will have to defend this country. In Australia we have hundreds of thousands of virile young men who are denied the opportunity to earn a decent livelihood. Senator Keane referred to the position at the munitions works at Maribyrnong. A good deal more could be said on that subject. Senator Sheehan and I have been interviewed by a continuous stream of young men anxious to get a job at Maribyrnong works or some of the other undertakings controlled by the Government, but it is impossible to get work for them. The pressure of the unemployed at Maribyrnong is so great that an armed guard is required to keep off many good young Australians. All that they want is the right to earn a living.

If we are to defend this country, the money obtained from excess profits should be used to give these men a chance. Those engaged in military training should be paid the basic wage, and others engaged in various trades should be paid a wage sufficient to enable them to become an asset, rather than a liability, to the country.

I listened with interest to the remarks of Senator Abbott this afternoon. While the honorable gentleman was speaking, inspired, jio doubt by noble sentiments, could not help thinking of other people who spoke in similar vein during the Great War. On other occasions, I have referred to these people as fighting pacifists - people who, in theory, are ultra altruistic, but in practice are just as savage as the most militant warmonger. During the war they were to be found offering up prayers for peace, and, almost in the same breath, blessing the arms of those who were sent out to slaughter their fellow-men-. But I do not suggest that Senator Abbott is a fighting pacifist. While he was speaking I was rude enough to interject a question as to what was meant by the term “ internal justice “, as used by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies), who has declared that the Government stands for internal justice and external security. To me, that is only a figure of speech. I cannot think otherwise when I recall the gross injustice that is done to thousands of men and women in this country. There can be no such thing as internal justice in Australia so long as the Government permits to be done what has been done in Germany, namely, denying to the manhood and womanhood of this country the right to earn a decent livelihood. Let any honorable senator imagine what would be his reaction to this declaration of policy if, for one or two years or longer, he had been without employment and, therefore, was able to offer his wife and dependants nothing better than could be obtained from the dole or sustenance wages. I should be very surprised if, in those circumstances, he did not reach the conclusion that any Minister who spoke of internal justice, did so with his tongue in his cheek. John Burns has reminded us that most men are slaves to shibboleths and prisoners of phrases. Such phrases as “ internal justice,” “ external justice “ and “ international justice “ are delivered as though they were apocalyptic. Actually there is not behind them an understanding of the real position. I cannot conceive of any honorable senator declaring that he stands for internal justice and then, in the next breath, attempting to justify all those features of Government policy which are responsible for so much internal injustice in Australia.

Reference was made by Senator Abbott to the action of the waterside workers at Port Kembla some months ago, when they refused to load pig iron for shipment to Japan. Again I say that to understand the position of these men it is necessary for honorable senators to get their point of view. If they could place themselves in the position of the waterside workers at Port Kembla, who later had applied to them the obnoxious provisions of the Transport Workers Act, colloquially designated the “ dog collar act “, they would, I feel sure, have done exactly what the waterside workers did ; and they would have had some doubt about the sincerity of a Government which prohibited the export of iron ore from Yampi Sound, but permitted the export of pig iron to Japan. In this matter the Government was playing with a double-headed penny. From the outset its sincerity was suspect. Senator Abbott would have us pin our faith absolutely and entirely to the sincerity and capacity of this Government. That, I suggest, is expecting something which it is absolutely impossible to get from the average intelligent citizen of Australia. The honorable gentleman also told us that peace must be made in the hearts of men.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– There is nothing wrong with that.

Senator CAMERON:

– There will be no peace in the hearts of men until there is substantial improvement of the conditions under which they have to work and live. There can be no peace in the hearts of nien while willing workers in the community have to grovel on their -knees, and intrigue and scheme to secure the interest of this or that politician in order to get a job. While this state of affairs is allowed to continue there will be resentment, rebellion and industrial warfare.

Approaching the subject before the Senate in this sceptical frame of mind, I cannot subscribe to all that the Government has said. I believe that there has been gross exaggeration of the position that existed in international relations last September and even in that which exists today. With Senator Keane, I hold that the press has been as culpable as public men in responsible positions who should have known better.

Senator McLeay:

– On what facts does the honorable senator base that statement ?

Senator CAMERON:

– On the facts as I know them in relation to published statements made about the international crisis last September, and the Ministerial statement made this afternoon. I am submitting the facts from my point of view; they may not be accepted as facts by the Minister, i believe that an attempt was made in September last to work up a form of war hysteria. I have seen that sort of thing before. Similar tactics were resorted to in 1914 and on other occasions, sometimes by people who did not know better .and at other times by people who did know better but fomented that hysteria for a definite purpose.. By instilling in the minds of people a fear that something terrible is going to happen almost immediately, it becomes comparatively easy to control them and pass coercive legislation. By playing upon their fears, the capital, to which I referred earlier, can be invested at a profit with a minimum of risk.

Senator McLeay:

– Acceptance of the honorable senator’s view would mean that there is no need for war preparations.

Senator CAMERON:

– I admit that there is need for war preparations; but there is no justification for gross exaggeration of the danger that may exist. This is. the point which I have been trying to make. It would be better for everybody if unvarnished facts were given to this chamber and to the House of Representatives. I say this because, according to press reports, several people committed suicide as a result of the wave of hysteria that swept over the world in September last. Some of the victims were returned soldiers, who accepted the press statements at their face value and were under the impression that war would be declared almost the next day. They had gone through the horror of 1914-1918, and some of them could not face another such ordeal. When the physical resistance of a person is lowered, mental resistance is weakened, and one can easily understand these acts of self-destruction taking place. I know very well that if war does come again, and if the press is let loose as it was in the last war, we shall experience precisely what we experienced from 1914 to 1918. Every section of the Labour-controlled press will be censored. I well remember an incident that took place when a number of Maltese arrived at Fremantle in a French mail-boat during the last war. At that time I was a member of the Fremantle Lumpers Union, and I set to work to broadcast the news that shiploads of Maltese were to be brought to Australia to replace Australians who had gone to the war. As soon as that was discovered, the censor set to work, and every newspaper in the Commonwealth received an instruction that no references whatever should be made to the arrival of the Maltese. As one who had had experience of that sort of thing, I was not in the least afraid of the censor, and immediately had typed copies of the censor’s note distributed throughout Australia. I believe that in this way I was originally responsible for tlie dissemination of that information about the introduction of Maltese to the Commonwealth. Later, when I was associated with a group conducting a newspaper in Melbourne, slabs of our writings were censored. We were telling the truth about how the war was being financed and the misrepresentations that were being indulged in by responsible people, and were challenging such persons to test the truth of our statements before any tribunal. All that was censored. We then tried another experiment. We turned the “ slugs “ in our newspaper upside down and distributed the copies in order that our readers would understand the extent to which our columns had been censored. There was official objection to even that attempt to let the people know what was ‘being done. The only thing that can prevent another war is a stronger stand on the part, of the workers in every country. The power of a Hitler, a Mussolini, or even of the banks, to which Senator Darcey referred this evening, is relative; it is not absolute. Supreme power lies with the people, who could take the initiative in the event of an act of aggression and make a successful stand against any Mussolini, or Hitler, or even a democratic government that menaces peace. Armed conflict between the nations will not take place if opportunities for profitable investment in war are lacking. When boots and clothing, or any other goods, cannot be made at a profit, the capitalists who have money to invest will turn to war with the object of gaining a profit unless the people prevent war from occurring. I am here as a member of the Labour party this evening because I have faith in the power of the people, notwithstanding the extent to which they have been misled in the past into unnecessary wars. They have been slaughtered by millions for the purpose of building up the profits of bankers and investors. But, when they fully appreciate the position, they will determine to have no more wars. That fact inspires me to suggest that the Government has not told the whole of the truth, and that, if it did so, both the Government and the people would be the better for it. - Senator CUNNINGHAM (Western Australia) [9.33]. - I bring under notice the fact that honorable senators are at a disadvantage in not having copies of the ministerial statement presented to this chamber. The Leader of the Senate (Senator McLeay) certainly read his speech, and honorable senators who followed him in the debate have had to deal with a statement that had not been presented to them in printed form. That may have been in accordance with the custom of ‘ the Senate in the past, but I hope that on future occasions we shall receive typewritten or printed copies of such statements. I am strongly of the opinion that the Government should make a pronouncement of Australia’s peaceful intentions towards other nations. I commend the Government upon its expressed intention to establish legations in the United States of America and Japan, for I believe that good results will come from the appointment of qualified representatives in those countries to keep us informed regarding events there. We have also been told that the Government intends, as announced by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) in Sydney on Monday last, that before Australia becomes involved in an overseas war this Parliament shall be consulted, and that the decision shall rest with the people of this country. It is highly desirable that other nations should know exactly where Australia stands in regard to world affairs. Remarkable as it may seem to honorable senators opposite, the policy indicated by the Prime Minister coincides with that of the Labour party in regard to international relations. Therefore, this nation is united in regard to the most important features of our foreign policy.

Whilst Australia, as one of the selfgoverning dominions of the British Commonwealth of Nations, is desirous of creating a peaceful atmosphere, I bring under notice the desirability of evolving a policy for internal peace. Previous speakers have pointed out that considerable numbers of our own people are out of employment. We have been told repeatedly that industries are not expanding as they should, because money is urgently needed for the purposes of defence. Yet, I claim that, side by side with preparations for defence, industries generally should be speeded up and expanded.

Senator McBride:

– They are expanding now.

Senator CUNNINGHAM:

– But not so rapidly as is necessary for the purpose of absorbing the young people and many others who are now without work. It is of no use to make provision for defence unless those for whom that insurance is to be provided are also given employment. I admit that earnest efforts are now being made to provide for the adequate defence of this country. On all sides parliamentarians are doing their utmost to influence public opinion, with a view to the achievement of the desired objective, at the same time making it known to the people of the world at large that we are merely preparing to defend ourselves against foreign aggression. Owing to the hysteria created by press announcements, attention has been focused by those in authority solely upon the importance of defence expenditure, but we should take a broader view, and should realize that it would be a mistake to neglect the development of those industries whose expansion is urgently required for the absorption of the unemployed. It is false economy, and also dangerous, to have large numbers of our people out of work. There is no surer way to provoke industrial unrest than to allow the growth of a huge army of workless men. The army of idle rich is not so dangerous to the community as the army of idle workers. When they realize that they will ‘be called upon to play their part in the defence of this country, men who are out of work ask themselves whether they are ‘being fairly treated. Honorable senators generally know that sufficient occupations are not available at present to absorb all of our employable people. In such circumstances it should be the internal policy of this Government to encourage the rapid expansion of our secondary industries, primarily “for the purpose of providing employment for those thousands of our unemployed men who will >be called upon to defend this country should Australia become embroiled in war.

Senator ARTHUR:
New South Wales

– Honorable senators who have already participated in this debate have tended to deal with only one subject, namely, war and defence. However, there are other matters, almost as important, which come under the heading of international relations, such as trade, mercantile marine and industrial conventions of the International Labour Office, none of which has been touched upon in this debate. An unexpected sequel to the depression was that by the end of 1936 not only had the 48-hour week become much more universal and much more rigid in its application, .but also a new standard for the future had been set by the introduction of a 40-hour week in a number of countries, some of which are of great industrial importance. In 1933, the 40-hour week was applied to industry throughout the United States of America, and in 1934 to all industries in Italy. In France an act was passed in 1936 establishing the 40-hour week in industry and commercial undertakings, and various decrees extended the enactment until it covered 3,500,000 workers. In 1936, in New Zealand, an act was passed restricting the week’s work in factories to 40 hours, and the Arbitration Court was required to render the 40-hour week mandatory in all industries subject to its awards, except where the count was satisfied that the industry could not be efficiently carried on with a shorter working week. It was estimated that by 1937 two-thirds of the factory workers in New Zealand were enjoying the 40-hour week.’ These movements were accompanied hy similar developments in, the Union of Social Soviet Republics and, finally, in Belgium, an act was passed in July, 1936, applying the 40-hour week to industries, or parts of industries, in which workers are employed under unhealthy, dangerous or trying conditions. This act becomes operative only when applied by special regulations. Some reasons might be given for this growing tendency to reduce hours. In regard to the distribution of employment, I point out that the application of science to industrial management and the progress of various experiments have proved the belief that longer hours are economic to be fallacious. It has been shown in innumerable cases that, so far from increasing output, longer .hours often have the contrary effect, particularly over long periods. It has been the experience of countries which have suffered the effects of depression that, in order that increased “productivity should not be followed by unemployment and the paradox of over-production, some means of bringing about a more equal distribution of the fruits of mechanization is necessary. A shortening of hours is now universally recognized as one of the chief means of bringing this about.

The Washington Hours Convention of 1919 paved the way for a recognition of the international standard of working, hours, and eventually led to the 48-hour week being regarded as a normal limit of human effort in industry. However, as I have already shown, this was followed by a. further reduction of working hours in many countries. Here again the adoption of international standards is playing a large part. The International Labour Organization has affirmed the general principle of the 40-hour week, and has gone further by applying it in separate conventions to glass bottle workers, textile workers and persons employed on public works, financed or subsidized by governments. The general principle was confirmed by the International Labour Organization in 1935, and, at the same session, the convention with regard to hours of work for glass bottle workers was adopted. In 1936 the convention relating to public works, and in 1937 that for the reduction of hours of work in the textile industry, -were adopted.

I shall now examine the situation in this country in order to see whether similar reasons exist here for the progressive reduction of hours of work as in the case of other countries. It is obvious, that we have an unemployment problem, and experience has shown that at least a contribution to the solution of this problem lies in the more equitable sharing of the fruits of production by a reduction of hours of work, and a corresponding increase of the number of persons engaged in production. With regard to international standards, Australia is a member of the International Labour Organization, and has been a party to conventions which have affirmed the principle of the 40-hour week. Apart from alleged legal difficulties to which I shall refer later, there was an obligation on the Commonwealth Government to support and carry out the decisions of the International Labour Organization. These obligations are based upon the fact that the work of the International Labour Organization depends for its success on the support of the member nations. Nations which refuse, or fail, to ratify conventions are undermining and weakening the strength of the organization, which has tremendous power, in fact, the only real power left to the League of Nations, to bring about such international conditions as will maintain world peace. I am fast coming to the opinion that Australia is remiss in this direction. There i3 a further reason for Australia’s support of the International Labour Organization. In his report on the 29th session of the International Labour

Organization in 1937, the director, on page 39, makes the following observa-tion : - “Moreover, the need for international agreement becomes more imperative as the number of countries applying the 40-hour week extends. Failing such an agreement, it is not improbable that countries which have already adopted the new regime will be tempted, if not compelled, to defend it by the imposition nf tariffs, quotas or other barriers to international trade against competing countries which aru still working longer hours. The erection of trade barriers on social grounds would be a particularly serious matter at a time when a reaction is setting in against restrictions on international trade. A new problem is thus being, created which may give the organization much food for thought and discussion during the next few years.

Another general reason for a progressive reduction of hours of work, is that it is now advocated universally on the broad grounds of social policy. The director of the International Labour Organization, in the report to which I have already referred states, on page 39 -

It is pointed out that the worner has not received his full share of the fruits of mechanical progress. Although in most industries hu productivity has been considerably enhanced, although the pace of operations has been greatly accelerated, the worker as a rule has not received compensation for his additional output , in the form of either increased wages or of increased leisure.

This question of increased “ leisure is not so minor a matter as some people seem to think; it is daily gaining more and more support and recognition in other countries. At the same time the fact is being more generally realized that it is not something which is desirable but difficult to achieve, but something which is easy of achievement, and becomes increasingly so, with every advance in the application of science to industry.

Turning to the legal aspect of this matter, I point out that every attempt which has been made to bring pressure to bear on the Government to ratify and give effect to conventions of the International Labour Organization with regard to hours’ has been met by the assertion that constitutional . obstacles make this impossible. It has been assumed that as the Commonwealth Parliament is not specifically given power to regulate hours of work in industry, it has no power to implement the provisions of conventions of this nature. Many people have taken this for granted, but authorities, which I shall not quote in detail, but which are increasing in number daily, shed a very different light on this question. First, let me deal with the question of the power to legislate for the purpose of giving effect to conventions relating to hours. It is very “ strongly suggested by very em.minent authorities that the power to implement international labour treaties and conventions is contained in the external affairs power conferred by the Constitution on the Commonwealth. It would be fruitless to cite these authorities and to argue in detail on their contention. I shall content myself with saying that at least strong authority exists for the view that the Commonwealth Parliament, under the external affairs power, has power to legislate to give effect to conventions even though that legislation would ordinarily be outside the scope of the Commonwealth’s powers. The effect of this view is that if Australia is a party to a convention, by which it was agreed to reduce hours of work in any particular industry, or industries, the Commonwealth Parliament has power to do what is necessary to fulfill its obligations under that convention.

The second question to be considered i9 that of ratification. The Government has always interpreted article 19 (405) of the constitution of the International Labour Organization to mean that the existence of prior legislation is necessary for ratification, but on this point Mr. A. Taylor, the executive secretary of the National Committee for the International Labour Organization, in a book entitled Federal States and Labor Treaties, pages 97 and 98, remarks -

While this is commendable action, as it assures the passage of legislation before ratification, it is not necessary, inasmuch as paragraph 7 of article 19 permits a State to ratify and then make effective the provisions of the conventions.

Article 19 provides that member States will-

Communicate the formal ratification ot um convention to the Secretary-General, and will take such action as may be necessary to make effective the provisions of such convention.

Paragraph 7 of article 19 reads -

Iti the case of a draft convention, the member will, if it obtains the consent of the authority or authorities within whose competence the matter lies, communicate tlie formal ratification of the convention to the Secretary-General and will take such action as may be necessary to make effective the provisions of such- convention.

From what has just been said, it follows that although apparently, serious arguments may be raised as to the possibility of legislating for the purpose of implementing Conventions of the International Labour Organization with regard to hours, no such difficulty lies in the way of formal ratification by the Commonwealth Government. It may seem that ratification is a merely formal matter, and of no importance, but it is of great practical importance to the organization that those States which have taken part in its deliberations shall give fair recognition to the principles which they have helped .to formulate. If that be not done, the International Labour Organization will fast become a body noted for fine speeches and beautiful sentiments, but having no real influence in the adoption of inter-‘ national standards of living, and it will quickly cease to be a great power for eradicating those differences between nations which are due to unrivalled competition and are such a fruitful cause of war.

Although Australia is spending large sums of money on defence, it not only is failing to give effect to a 40-hour week, but also is not insisting on award rates being paid to employees engaged in the erection of defence buildings. I direct the attention of the Senate to the position which obtains in respect of a building now being constructed under contract by the firm of Cody & Willis, of Glebe Point, Sydney. The building comprises officers’ barracks, a large hall, and administrative offices in the vicinity of Victoria Barracks. A portion of the work has been sub-let to a Mr. Sid Banbury, who has under-paid a number of carpenters employed by him. Over a period of three weeks, James Thompson was paid £3 6s. 4d. less than he should have received. Two others-r-Jack Day and L. Thompson - were similarly under-paid, whilst L. Hewitt and Jack

Hedley were each paid £4 6s. 4d. short. The total short payments for the three weeks amounted to £18 lis. 8d. When I mentioned these short payments to the contractor, he said that it was no concern of his. This is a matter to which the Government should give its attention, because of its international obligations. It should insist that certain conditions be complied with in the expenditure of defence moneys.

Senator ARMSTRONG (New South

Wales) [10.5]. - Now that the events of last September can be reviewed calmly, we have the opportunity to discuss the international situation as it really exists rather than as it has been presented to us from time to time. When we reflect on the situation- in Europe to-day, it is pleasing to observe that there appears to be less cause for uneasiness than was the case twelve months ago. Whether the position then was as serious as we were told I do not know. We certainly were led to believe that we were on the threshold of a war which would ruin civilization. In the light of that belief, the Government of the day launched a policy for the arming of Australia in preparation for the war which it thought was imminent. If has been stated by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies), and by past holders of that high office, that information in the possession of the Imperial Government is conveyed immediately to the Commonwealth Government, which from day to day and from week to week is in a position to know what is proposed, and what is likely to take place. To me it is extraordinary that the Government, which often has pointed the finger of scorn at the Labour party and its defence policy, should have made no effort to defend Australia until about twelve months ago, notwithstanding that it has had control of both Houses pf the Parliament since 1932. In 1938, however, with the greatest press campaign that I have ever witnessed, it launched its policy for the arming of Australia. When the Labour party, both in this chamber and in the House of Representatives, said that it considered that the last Australian expeditionary force had left these shores, it was instantly attacked by both the Government and the press, and accused of adopting a policy of isolation. Its members were called isolationists. But as time passed the Government assimilated the policy of ‘the Labour party, as it has often done, and adopted it as its own. Recently I listened to an address by the Prime Minister - who was AttorneyGeneral in the Lyons Government when the Labour partes view to which I have referred was expressed - in which he said that, in ibis opinion, no expeditionary f orce would again leave Australia. His view was concurred in last week by the Minister for External Affairs (Sir Henry Gullett). The Labour party said then, as it says now, that should the time come - and I hope it never will come - when the Australian nation will be asked to defend these shores, there will be no need for conscription, because every man able to bear arms will willingly do so. That has always been the belief of the Labour party. I do not like to impute motives to supporters of the Government, but their charge that the Labour party has adopted an isolationist policy is so in keeping with what has happened on other occasions, that I am forced to the conclusion that they do not always say what is in their minds. It must be evident to all that the Labour party is no more isolationist than are the Prime Minister and the Minister for External Affairs. I believe that the Government has done its best, but, even so, it is a poor best. The people have done wonderfully, but the results of the efforts of Ministers and government officials is poor indeed. The men of Australia were asked to double the then existing militia force. The result was a surprise to the Government.

Senator Dein:

– It was a surprise to the Labour party.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– No ; we said then that we had no fear of the result, for we knew where the people of Australia stood, and still stand, in relation to the defence of their country. Once again we were proved to be right. But what is the result of the splendid response to the call for men ? There is bungling on every hand. I hope that Australia will never become involved in war. Should war come, it may happen again that the British nation will lose every battle but the last. If the general public could listen’ to the promises of the Government in this Parliament and compare those promises with its actions, they would realize how little reliance can be placed on such undertakings. As I have said, the Government was surprised at the result of the appeal for recruits, and because it was surprised it was not ready,, with the result that there is chaos on every hand. When the then Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Hughes) was given the task of gaining recruits, he applied himself to it with his old-time vigour, and before long there was no doubt of the ultimate success of. the drive. The results achieved were due, not so much uo the energy displayed by the Minister, as to the willingness of the men to train for the defence of their country. Now that the objective of 70,000 men has been reached, the Government is in a dilemma, because of its inability to provide the men with uniforms and proper means of train* ing. It is useless f or the Minister to say that uniforms were provided tor the men who went to camp at Enoggera, because what happened there, as related by Senator Collings, has happened also at Liverpool. Almost every Friday night I see transports belonging to McMahon, the railway carrier, taking batches of men to the weekly camps. Looking at the clothing of the men, one would think that they were going to a circus. Some of the men were in full uniform and others partly in military and partly in civilian clothing. The Government has definitely fallen down on its job, and I do not think that there is one of its supporters who would have the brazen effrontery to say that it has made a good job of equipping’ trainees. Before launching a campaign for additional recruits, it should have ensured that sufficient uniforms would be available for those who enlisted. Action was not taken until the required number of trainees was obtained and the men were being drafted into camp. The so-called military experts are also working on obsolete text books.

Senator Gibson:

– There are not any up-to-date ones available.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– In some centres no text books of any description can be obtained, and in others those that are available are out of date.

Senator Gibson:

– They will be available in a week.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– It is the same old story. Always when such positions arise we are told that something will be done within a few days or within a few weeks. Although some men have been undergoing training for a comparatively long period, no text books have been available to instructors. Eight or nine months ago I asked the then Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Perkins) what steps were being taken to encourage the building in Australian yards of ships for the Australian trade, and I was informed that legislation would be introduced within a few days to compel those, engaged in the Australian shipping trade to have their vessels constructed in Australia. That definite statement was made nine or ten months ago, but nothing has yet been done. We should have a government which is sufficiently capable or courageous to introduce a more extensive shipbuilding policy. I believe that Ministers are endeavouring to do their ‘best, but due to either their incapacity or to the policy under which they operate, effect has not been given to promises made. We are frequently told, in answer to questions, that something is to be done within a few days, but nothing happens. We are informed that a new government is in office, but we are confronted with the same faces. Senator Johnston, who was formerly submerged by the composite government, now represents the Country party in this chamber, but that honorable senator and Senator Cooper, who is also a member of the Country party, do not vote with honorable senators on this side of the chamber. We have no more support from those honorable senators now than when they were supporters of the composite government.

Senator HERBERT Hays:

– They have not been invited.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– A standing invitation is open to them. Every one knows the platform of the Australian Labour party.

Senator E B Johnston:

– Is that the Lang party or the Heffron party?

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– I am referring to the Australian Labour party, which is vastly preferable to either the

United Australia party or the Country party. During the last twelve months we have been informed that Australia needs a definite defence policy. The members of the Labour party have always said that provision should be made for the adequate defence of Australia, but until the crisis occurred in September last, the Government did not realize the seriousness of the situation. If a survey were made by the Government of the military resources which Australia possesses and those which it needs, it would be confronted with a disturbing situation. The fuel oil supplies in Australia, referred to yesterday by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings), should cause the Australian people considerable concern. Fuel oil is the first essential in war. On a conservative estimate we -have only three months’ supply of this essential commodity. If the Government cannot tap supplies of flow oil, it should at least see that there are adequate stocks in this country to meet our requirements for at least twelve months. I ask leave to continue my remarks at a later date.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 406

SPECIAL ANNUITIES BILL” 1939

Bill’ received from the House ‘ of Representatives.

Standing and Sessional Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator McLeat) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Commerce · South Australia · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this measure is to grant annuities to the widow and children of the former Prime Minister, the Right Honorable J. A. Lyons. The reasons for the introduction of the bill are, no doubt, well known to honorable senators. The late Mr. Lyons devoted the greater part of his life to the public service of Australia. Prior to entering politics he had been a member of the Tasmanian teaching service. For thirty years he played a prominent part in the political life of this country, and for the last seven years he occupied the highest position ‘which his country could offer. His death occurred at the age of 59. Unfortunately, his public service not only hastened his untimely end but also failed to yield to him the wherewithal to provide for those whom he has left to mourn his loss. The emoluments of the office of Prime Minister are not particularly high, and it was only last year that this Parliament, with almost unanimous voice, agreed to the payment of a special allowance of £1,500 a year to the Prime Minister. It is pertinent to ask how the Prime Minister was able to meet the responsibilities of his office prior to the granting of a special allowance. Probably the whole of his parliamentary and ministerial salary and allowances was absorbed in meeting the obligations expected of the occupant of the office of Prime Minister with the result that little was left from which to make provision for his family in the event of his early demise. The unexpected happened and the position to-day is that comparatively little remains . for his widow and large family. It therefore behoves the nation, through its elected representatives, to be generous in coming to the aid of the dependants of one who spent himself in the public service of his country and died while still its chief citizen. The bill provides in the first place for the grant of an annuity of £500 to Dame Enid Lyons - the annuity to terminate in the event of her re-marriage. A further annuity of £500 per annum is to be payable to the children of the late Prime Minister for a period of ten years. This annuity will be paid to Dame Enid as trustee, and the bill provides that it shall be utilized for the maintenance, education, benefit, and advancement of the children. I commend the bill to honorable senators and confidently ask them to give to it their generous and wholehearted support.

Debate (on motion by Senator Collings) adjourned.

page 407

HOUR OF MEETING

Motion (by Senator McLeay) agreed to-

Th at the. Senate, at its rising, adjourn till 11 a.m. to-morrow.

page 407

ADJOURNMENT

Midland Junction Railway Workshops - Defence Annexes - OIL From Coal - Employment at Munitions Works - Commonwealth Bank : Subscriptions to Loans - Mr. S. M. Bruce: Visit to Australia.

Motion (by Senator McLeay) proposed -

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Senator FRASER:
Western Australia

– I am not satisfied with the answer I received to a question submitted to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence (Senator Foll) concerning an agreement which, it was said, was to be entered into between the Commonwealth Government and the Government of Western Australia in connexion with defence annexes to the Midland Junction Railway Workshops. Last year when I raised the subject of unemployment in Western Australia I was assured by the Minister representing the Minister for Defence that the expenditure on defence in that State would absorb hundreds of unemployed men. I understood that annexes would be erected at the Midland Junction workshops. Yesterday I asked the Minister -

  1. Has any agreement been arrived at with the State Government of Western Australia for annexes to the Midland . Junction Railway Workshops ?
  2. If so, will the Minister make a statement on the question, as has been done in connexion with annexes in other States of the Commonwealth ?
  3. If not, on what grounds has Western Australia been excluded?

To the first question the answer was No, and to the second the answer was “ See reply to No. 1.” The reply to the third questionwas as follows: -

Raw material for the production of ammunition is at present produced only in the eastern States of the Commonwealth, and the filling of shell with high explosive and assembly of ammunition is carried out in Victoria. It would, therefore, be uneconomical to pay heavy freight charges incurred in the transport of raw materials to Western Australia and the return transfer of finished shell to the filling factory in Victoria.

I did not ask anything about the assembly of ammunition or the filling of shells with high explosive. In Western Australia, there are many firms with the necessary equipment for the manufacture of munitions, and their Services should be utilized. But I am concerned at the moment with annexes to the Midland Junction Workshops and the Minister’s reply to my question. Gun carriages now being used in Western Australia were manufactured in the eastern States and transported to Western Australia. In view of the known facts, I am not satisfied with the answers given by the Minister this afternoon. Annexes have been set up in the railway workshops in South Australia at a cost of £22,000, which, I understand, will be for the purpose of manufacturing tools and gauges. If ever there was an isolationist government in the Commonwealth, it is the present Government. We were told last year that it would take steps to bring about decentralization in connexion with defence expenditure, and that each State would receive a fair allocation of the amounts to be provided; but having regard to what has happened, I am not quite sure that there is not a good deal of truth in the statements made by Senators Cameron and Darcey this afternoon, about the relationship of high finance to Government policy. Details of the provision made for annexes in private manufacturing establishments in the various States, show that New South Wales has received £359.000, Victoria, £241,000 and South Australia, £27,000, making a total of £637,000 in the three States. No similar expenditure has been provided for in Queensland, Tasmania or Western Australia. In at least four cases, the Commonwealth will be responsible for the entire cost of the additional buildings required. The amount set down for annexes in railway workshops are as follows: New South Wales, £32,000; Victoria, £40,000; and South Australia, £22,000. Again there has been no provision for Tasmania, Queensland or Western Australia. If it is considered advisable to erect additional buildings for that purpose, should that not have been done at the various railway workshops which are an instrumentality of the people, and could then have been used for other purposes, or for the manufacture of other equipment in time of need. It is reasonable to expect the Government to make adequate provision for annexes in the railway workshops of the various

States. The geographical position of Western Australia is an excuse rather than a reason for its neglect by the Government in this respect, and I get back to my earlier contention that vested interests are laying the foundation for the making of profits from the manufacture of munitions.

Senator McLeay:

– The honorable gentleman’s statement is merely so much political crooning.

Senator Dein:

– (Munitions have never been manufactured by private enterprise in Australia.

Senator FRASER:

– The Minister is entitled to his opinion. I agree with Senator Darcey that so potent is the influence of banks and other financial institutions in this and other countries that some men occupying seats in the parliaments dare not raise their voices against vested interests. I defy any non-Labour member of the Commonwealth or State Parliaments to criticize in Parliament to any extent the activities of the banking institutions of this country. I have in mind particularly those unfortunate politicians who may be in the unhappy position of having overdrafts at their banks. They dare not risk their financial stability or seats in Parliament by adversely critizing these institutions.

Senator Dein:

– Nonsense !

Senator FRASER:

– Senator Dein knows that what I am saying has been proved to be true.

Senator Dein:

– By whom?

Senator FRASER:

– It has been proved in South Australia.

Senator McLeay:

– The honorable senator should speak for himself ; not for other members.

Senator FRASER:

– I speak for myself also, and I may add that my references to the influence of the financial interests in connexion with government policies, represent the views of the party of which I am a member.

Let us see how far the defence works programme has been advanced and to what extent there has been decentralization as promised. For the year 1937-38, the allocation for defence works was as follows:- New South Wales, £225,502; Victoria, £243,126; Queensland, £11,000; South Australia, £14,127; Western Aus- tralia, £180,272; and Tasmania,. £7,784. As regards the expenditure in Western Australia, I suggest that if the Minister obtained a return showing the amount expended on materials manufactured in the eastern States for defence works and on equipment, and compared it. with the defence vote for Western Australia, he would get a shock. It should be noted, also, that the three States which have been overlooked in the Government’s programme of defence works arc under Labour rule. We are entitled to expect a more satisfactory statement from the Minister at an early date. He should be able to advance some reason, instead of an excuse, for the virtual exclusion of Western Australia from the programme for expenditure on annexes, because we have in that .State one of the finest railway workshops in the Commonwealth. It is capable of manufacturing many kinds of defence equipment, and its undoubted resources should be made available to the Commonwealth.

Senator FOLL:
Minister for the Interior · Queensland · UAP

– I shall be glad to bring under the notice of the Minister for Defence (Mr. Street) the request by Senator Fraser for further information in connexion with the construction of annexes for the manufacture of munitions. It is easy for that honorable senator and others to suggest that these annexes are being built in certain States because of the political colour of the State governments, or because certain Ministers hail from those States. I assure him that such criticism cannot justly be applied to the policy of the Government in this regard.

Senator E B Johnston:

– Western Australia is left out, irrespective of the political colour of the State Government.

Senator FOLL:

– That is not so. I have been administering for a comparatively few days the affairs of the Works Department, which deals with the various tenders approved by other departments. The tenders are opened by the Tender Board, and, apart from exceptional cases, the lowest tenders arc invariably accepted. As far as I can gather, the great bulk of the work to be done at Darwin has been given to firms in Western Australia or Queensland. When Senator Fraser saw me recently, in company with one of the leading’ contractors in his own State, the latter pointed out that a large percentage of the contracts let in Darwin had gone to Western. Australian contractors, because they had been able to compete on more favorable terms than contractors from the eastern States. In the last few days 1 have seen tenders accepted for the construction’ of certain oil tanks in Darwin by a Queensland firm, because it was able to submit the lowest and best tender. Only yesterday another Brisbane contractor had a tender accepted for the reticulation scheme in Darwin, and there, again, his success was due to the fact that his tender was the lowest. These facts are not mentioned, hut honorable senators select for criticism the annexes for the manufacture of munitions. Actually, these annexes will not prove profitable to the firms to whose works they are attached.

Senator Leckie:

– They will be detrimental.

Senator FOLL:

– They are additional workshops erected by the Commonwealth Government alongside existing private plants. The annexes and the machinery which they will contain will be owned by the Commonwealth, and will never become the property of the private firms, although they will be operated in conjunction with, the main factories. That is a convenient way to do the work instead of establishing new government workshops which might be closed for the greater part of the year, or even shut down altogether, if no munitions were required. Trial orders will be given to these firms, to be executed in the annexes. The work will be done on the basis of ,a small percentage above cost price, so that no question of profiteering can arise. In many instances where trial orders have been given for such materials as fuse caps, an accounting system has been adopted which will allow the manufacturer the not excessive profit of only 4 per cent. As Senator Leckie has remarked, many of these firms have gone to the trouble of erecting these annexes, not for the purpose of making a profit, but merely from patriotic motives. On numerous occasions, the explanation has been made in this chamber and in the House of Representatives that the annexes are required merely for the manufacture of munitions, when necessary, at a small margin above the actual cost. When a new Department of Supply is created, a panel of honorary accountants will be appointed so that a complete check may be made to prevent profiteering in regard to supplies of munitions to the Defence Department. Therefore, the Government is doing exactly what Senator Fraser suggests should be done.

Senator Fraser:

– I suggested that the additions should he made to the State government railway workshops, and not to private establishments.

Senator FOLL:

– In some States the annexes have been provided at railway workshops. I personally was disappointed that an annexe was not established at the railway workshops in Queensland, which will play an important part in the manufacture of parts for aeroplanes. Negotiations are in progress between the Commonwealth Government and the Government of Queensland for the manufacture of aeroplane parts, but I would not suggest that because no annexe will be erected at the Queensland railway workshops, political discrimination has been shown. The Commonwealth Government did not determine the location of these annexes without seeking expert advice on the subject. It has the advantage of the services’ of the Defence Council and advisory panels of men who are able to give it the best guidance. The InspectorGeneral of the Military Forces has had a world-wide experience of military organization. This Government naturally follows the advice of experts, and if the party opposite were in power it would act similarly.

State boundaries are entirely disregarded in this matter, irrespective of political repercussions. The Government believes in formulating a defence policy in the interests of the nation as a whole. In organizing the various military districts, it has ignored State boundaries. Part of the northern rivers district of New South Wales has been attached to the Queensland military district, and the Riverina portion of New South Wales has been attached to Victoria for military administrative purposes. A similar policy has been adopted by the Government in regard to its defence preparations throughout Australia. I point out to Senator Fraser that the Government is anxious to do the best it can to provide for the defence of Australia as a whole. Any suggestion of political patronage is entirely unwarranted. I do not know that the Country party Government of Victoria is more favorable to the Commonwealth Government than is the Labour Government of Queensland.

Senator E B Johnston:

– All State governments are co-operating with the Commonwealth Government in regard to defence.

Senator FOLL:

– I thank the honorable senator for that reminder. When the Commonwealth Government recently met representatives of the governments of the States in conference, all agreed to cooperate actively in regard to the defence programme.

Senator Fraser:

– Was not the loan allocation to Western Australia reduced on account of promises made that certain money would be expended in that State on defence works?

Senator FOLL:

– That has nothing to do with my argument that this Government has shown as much consideration for the defence requirements of Western Australia as for those of any other State. I hope - it seems, to he ;only a pious hope - that the day will come when honorable senators opposite, like honorable senators on this side, will view the defence of this country from a national, and not from a State, point of view. I assure Senator Fraser that any representations which he may make from time to time will be placed before the Government, but his allegation that Western Australia, or any other States, are being ignored so far as defence expenditure is concerned, is unfounded. It is entirely out of keeping with the policy of this Government.

Senator ASHLEY:
New South Wales

– I draw attention to the unsatisfactory answer given by the Minister representing the Minister for Defence (Senator Foll) to a question which I asked on notice to-day. I wish to .be generous to the Minister concerned ; perhaps he did not understand my question. When I read it, honorable senators will notice that the second part of the question is contingent upon the first. The first part was as follows: -

Will hu investigate the claims of the Phoenix Oil Extractors Proprietary Company, that it has perfected a machine for the extraction of oil from coal, which product can be put on the market at 5d. a gallon?

To that the answer given was “ Yes “. The second part of the question was -

In view of the importance of this development to the defence of Australia will lie have immediate inquiries made into the process of the extraction of oil from coal and make the information obtained available to this House.

In reply to that question, the Minister referred me to certain reports dealing with the extraction of oil from coal. I am not concerned with those reports; I probably know as much as, and, perhaps, more than, the Minister about those reports. I am concerned about the process perfected ‘by the Phoenix Oil Extractors Proprietary Company, and, in asking this question, I was really seeking information concerning the experiments conducted by that company in Sydney last week. The Senate should secure such information, because any claim by a company that it can produce oil at a cost of 5d. a gallon is important not only to defence, but also to the commercial life of Australia. With great respect, I say that the answer given to the second part of my question was very evasive, as have been the replies to many other questions asked by honorable senators on this side. Answers of this kind are probably the cause of the unpleasant, and almost unprecedented, incident which occurred in this chamber at the commencement of today’s sittings. I hope that the Minister will endeavour to supply honorable senators on this side with information which they seek. After all, we ask our questions in all sincerity, and we expect reasonable answers. I have no desire to waste the time of honorable senators at this late hour, and I should not have raised this matter now but for its great importance.

Senator KEANE:
Victoria

.- In reply to a question which I asked this afternoon, I was told that 29,000 men are registered for employment in the Government’s munitions factories. The Government should make some announcement on this matter, in order that unfortunate people will not be led to believe that they can secure employment in this direction. Daily, honorable senators are interviewed by six or eight applicants who are applying for work in these establishments, because they hear a wild story that the Government is putting on men. In these circumstances it would be in the interests of the unemployed generally if the Government would announce that no employment is available at the munitions works.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:
Western Australia

– I should not have risen to speak at this late hour but for certain remarks made by Senator Foll as the Minister representing the Minister for Defence in reply to a speech by Senator Fraser which, to some extent, I support. I unhesitatingly accept the assurance of the Minister that it is the desire of the Defence Department to distribute its expenditure fairly and squarely throughout the Commonwealth. The Minister has correctly stated the ideals of the department, but ideals are not always realized, and I remind him that, so far, .the expenditure on defence has been practically confined to the eastern States. The Government should bear in mind the needs of Western Australia, which comprises one-third of the Commonwealth, and is, for defence purposes, . practically isolated. “ Out of sight, out of mind “, seems to be an apt adage to apply in this instance. At any rate, newspapers in Western Australia are full of justifiable complaints in regard to this matter.

Senator Collings:

– It is the same in Queensland.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

– The claims of secondary industries in Western Australia, and the defence requirements of that State, seem to be overlooked. When the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) visited Sydney a few days ago, he made more than a passing remark to the effect that certain activities might be expected in Sydney as the result of the Government’s proposed expenditure on defence. That was quite a proper remark, but I cannot imagine any Minister visiting Western Australia making a similar remark, because the defence expenditure now being undertaken in that State is very small indeed. Senator Fraser referred to the Midland Junction workshops. These works are most up to date, and are capable of making locomotives, as well as all classes of railway rolling stock. Particularly as .the Government’s very small defence stores in Western Australia arc situated in that locality, I cannot see why an annexe cannot be constructed at .those workshops. I note with pleasure that on many’ occasions Senator Allan MacDonald, and the Minister in charge of War Service Homes (Senator Collett), whom I congratulate upon his inclusion in the Ministry, have made representations that the manufacture of munitions should be commenced in Western Australia. However, in reply to questions asked by me, no information has been given as to whether the Government proposes to take action in this direction. Only recently the Premier of Western Australia, like the Premiers of all other States, irrespective of party politics, unhesitatingly assured the Commonwealth Government of the fullest co-operation of his Government in regard to defence matters. At the same time he asked that the defence programme should be utilized to assist the expansion of secondary industries in Western Australia. As a matter of fact, the Government of that State is so concerned to establish secondary industries there that one’ of its members is now in Sydney collecting information on that point. The Commonwealth Government should assist Western Australia in that worthy endeavour. When Senator Eraser brought the question up to-day, however, the Minister simply replied that Western Australia was doing alright, and had nothing to complain about in that regard, because the Commonwealth Government has let a couple of contracts to Western Australian contractors in the Northern Territory. I do not know who those contractors are, but I am very glad that they will* thus be enabled to find employment for their staffs. I should have been very much more pleased if the Minister had said that the Government intended to let further contracts in Western Australia. I am glad that this discussion has taken place. The Minister has assured us that Western Australia is to get a fair deal. I accept the statement that that is the intention of the Government, but .actions speak louder than .words, and I sincerely hope that the complaint made by Senator Fraser, which 1 endorse, will .be seriously considered.

Senator CAMERON:
Victoria

– I direct attention to an answer supplied to a question which I asked yesterday. The question was -

What was the amount subscribed by tlie Commonwealth Bank to the last three internal loans, including the conversion loan?

The reply was -

It has been the invariable practice of the Treasury to publish subscriptions to loans only where the subscriber has given consent to the publication. This question was accordingly referred to the Commonwealth Bank which has advised that the Bank Board does not consider it to be in the public interest to disclose the .amount of its subscriptions to individual loans except when, in its opinion, special circumstances make it desirable to do so.

In that reply we have an admission by the Minister that for all practical purposes the Government is dominated by .the Commonwealth Bank. If the bank does not consider that the public should receive any information, the Government very obligingly, and very conveniently, acquiesces. Apparently, from the point of view of both the bank and the Government, honorable senators have no right to ask for information that might be helpful to them. It is common knowledge that the Commonwealth bank has contributed towards Government loans. According to press reports, it subscribed between £10,000,000 and £11,000,000 to the conversion loans of November of last year and February of this year. I asked for the information so that I could discuss this subject in the light of facts, rather than on press reports or my own estimates, but the facts were not contained in the answers which were given to me. If the Minister is not disposed to answer questions because the Commonwealth bank does not want the information to be divulged, I am justified in assuming that there is. something which either the Government or the Bank Board does not want the public to know. The facts as I know them suggest that persons with capital are beginning to suspect the Government, and that, because its attempts to raise loans have failed, it is resorting to inflation, now euphemistically known as credit expansion. It is a corrupt and fraudulent practice - a process by which the people are taxed without the authority of the Parliament. It is, moreover, a process by which wages and pensions are being reduced, because of the increased prices which are being charged for commodities.

Senator McBride:

– Did the honorable senator hear what his colleague Senator Darcey had to say on this subject?

Senator CAMERON:

– My colleague pointed out that when new money is created and put into circulation without prices being controlled, costs increase. That is what is happening to-day; the cost of living is rising, and the people who are hit hardest are the poorest sections of the community, not those who, like honorable senators, draw something above the minimum wage. The Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) has asked for the co-operation of all sections of the community, and to he given a chance; he does not wish to be condemned unheard. Yet to-day, in answer to a legitimate - question, I was practically told that the people whom I represent should mind their own business. The Prime Minister said in Sydney that he would like six business men to control the affairs of the nation. If he had his way, the people would soon have no rights whatever. A former Prime Minister, Mr. Bruce, spoke in similar terms in 1928, but when he tried to put his ideas into operation in 1929, he failed ignominiously. This is a serious matter, and I enter my emphatic protest against what has been done. 1 tell the Government now that, whenever I have the opportunity to express my views on this subject, I shall tell the people that, through the medium of the Commonwealth Bank, the Government is obtaining money by inflating the currency without authority, to the detriment of the people generally. Bather than impose a levy on capital, or increase taxes on land and persons with big incomes, the Government resorts to this underhand method of raising money, at the expense of the poorer sections of the people. The Prime Minister asks the people to trust him, and he promises that they will not regret it if they do. As I have said, I am entitled to expect my questions to be answered; and since I have been re fused, an answer, I shall not accept either Mr.Menzies or any of his Ministers, or his Government as a whole, at its facevalue. If I am given reliable information in reply to questions, I am prepared to discuss on their merits the subjects to which they relate; hut if answers are not supplied to me, 1 am entitled to place my own construction on the attitude of the Government, and to tell the- people that, although the Government would have it appear that it is actuated by altruistic motives, it is, in fact, resorting to one of the most despicable means possible for’ raising money, in that by its methods the poor are made poorer and the rich are made richer.

Senator CLOTHIER:
Western Australia

.- The Minister for the Interior (Senator Poll) denied that Western Australia was being ignored . by the Commonwealth Government. I remind him that recently, the High Commissioner for Australia, Mr. S. M. Bruce, delivered a number of addresses on international affairs, to parliamentarians in different capital cities, but no such address was delivered by him in Western Australia. It is true that arrangements for such- a lecture were made, but later the people of that State were advised that Mr. Bruce could not visit them.

I congratulate the Leader of the Senate (Senator McLeay), the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Collings), and Senator Abbott on their speeches on international affairs to-day. These addresses were well worth travelling many miles to hear. I was informed by a visitor who listened to to-day’s debate that the speeches were of a high order. I have made special reference to those three honorable senators because their remarks appealed to every one of us. I hope that the discussions in this chamber will continue to be on the same high plane.

Senator McLEAY:
South AustraliaMinister for Commerce · UAP

– in reply - The points raised by various honorable senators will be considered by the Ministers concerned.

Honorable senators have listened with interest to the remarks of Senator1! Cameron and Darcey.

Senator McBride:

– They were rather conflicting.

Senator McLEAY:

– Senator Cameron told us that he had proof beyond doubt that the Government is dominated by the Common-wealth Bank board. In my opinion, it is a good thing for this country that neither the Commonwealth Government nor the bank is dominated by men like himself or Senator Darcey, who hold theories on finance which would soon bring ruin to Australia.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 414

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Commonwealth Public Service Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1939, No. 30.

Commonwealth Public Works Committee Act - Seventeenth General Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works.

Defence Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1939, No. 35.

Northern Territory - Report on tlie Administration of the Northern Territory for the year ended 30th June, 1938.

Commonwealth Public Service Act - Appointment - Department of the Treasury - C. G. Craig

The Senate adjourned at 11.24 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 17 May 1939, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1939/19390517_senate_15_159/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant