Senate
1 March 1950

19th Parliament · 1st Session

  1. Senate
  2. 19th Parliament
  3. 1950

The Presiden t (Senator the Hon. Gordon Brown) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 165

QUESTION

SUGAR,

SenatorCRITCHLEY. - Is the Minister for Trade and Customs aware of the serious difficulties that householders and retail storekeepers in the northern parts of South Australia, particularly in the Peterborough district, are encountering because of a continual shortage of refined sugar? Will the Minister cause inquiries to be made regarding the reason for this shortage and, if possible, have the present state of affairs remedied as soon as practicable?

Senator O’SULLIVAN:
Minister for Trade and Customs · QUEENSLAND · LP

– Details of the subject-matter mentioned by the honorable senator have not been brought specifically under my notice, but if the honorable senator will place his question on the notice-paper I shall be very happy to see what relief may be afforded in the circumstances.

page 166

QUESTION

ZINC

Senator SANDFORD:
VICTORIA

– I preface a question to the Minister for Trade and Customs by stating that I have received information to the effect that, about two months ago in Burnie, Tasmania, and more recently in Melbourne, certain merchants endeavoured to export zinc dross and zinc ingots. I understand that zinc dross is worth £30 or £40 a ton and that zinc ingots are worth from £80 to £100 a ton, and also that the export of zinc ingots is prohibited. Will the Minister take steps to have the names of the individuals concerned and details of specific cases, if such details are available to him, as well as the names of other offending merchants,made public so as to protect honest firms on whom suspicion might otherwise rest in connexion with those offences?

Senator O’SULLIVAN:
LP

– Personally, I know nothing about the matter to which the honorable senator has referred, but I assure the Senate that the Government will afford no protection whatever to law-breakers. If the honorable senator will place his question upon the notice-paper I shall supply him with a full answer later.

page 166

QUESTION

COMMUNISM

Senator FRASER:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– In view of the declaration by the Government of its policy to ban the Communistparty, and in view of the fact that members of the Government when in Opposition made repeated attacks upon the Chifley Government on the ground that Communists were employed in government departments, particularly in the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, the Postmaster-General’s Department and other departments as well as in connexion with the guided weapons testing range, I ask the Minister for Trade and Customs what action has the Government taken to ascertain the truth, or otherwise, of those allegations? Has any investigation been made, or any reports called for, with regard to this matter If bo, when? If no investigation has been made, why has the Government failed to investigate the serious allegations that its supporters made when in Opposition? How many men, or women, have been relieved of their positions in the Public Service on the ground that they were Communists or “ fellow travellers “ ?

Senator O’SULLIVAN:
LP

– As the honorable senator is aware, it is not the practice to deal with Government policy in answers to questions. However, I assure him that the Government will take such action against all law-breakers that the law-abiding people of Australia will not have any ground whatever for complaint in that respect.

Senator FRASER:

– As the Minister has refused, to answer a question on the banning of communism because it is Government policy, will he state whether the Government has called for, or intends to call for, any reports in regard to government departments that were previously stated to contain Communists or “ fellow-travellers “ ? In his policy speechthe Prime Minister said that communism would be banned. I ask the Minister if it is not right to start at home in government departments which were under critical examination by the Opposition in the last Parliament?

Senator O’SULLIVAN:

– I repeat that the action taken by the Government will be made manifest in due course, and at the proper time.

page 166

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH CONTRACTS

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

Senator GEORGE RANKIN:
VICTORIA · CP

– For some time past a case has been before the High Court involving a man named

Fitzpatrick whose activities were investigated and reported upon by the War Expenditure Committee. The case has been adjourned on several occasions. Can the Attorney-General say what stage the proceedings have reached, and what further action the Government proposes to take?

Senator SPICER:
Attorney-General · VICTORIA · LP

– The position in that case, as I understand it, is that an order for discovery of documents was made by the Chief Justice in December last. The case is set down for hearing at the next sittings of the High Court in Sydney which will commence at the end of this month, and I understand that the Chief Justice expects that it will proceed at those sittings.

page 167

QUESTION

COAL

Senator O’FLAHERTY:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Can the Minister for Shipping and Fuel inform i 1,0 Senate of what he has done in respect of what he himself termed a real effort to obtain a greater production of coal? What action has been taken in this direction additional to the action that was taken by the previous Government?

Senator McLEAY:
Minister for Shipping and Fuel · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

– I have already interviewed the representatives of the employees and of the employers in the coal-mining industry and placed before them, the alarming fact that 1949 was the worst year for the production of coal for many years past despite the fact that a considerable amount of money had been expended upon mechanization in the mines. The Governor-General’s Speech indicated the action that the Government proposes to take to deal with those elements that are causing most of the trouble and I trust that, with the honorable senator’s help, that will be one of the first as well as one of the best things to do in order to step up the production of coal in 1950.

Senator MATTNER:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Will the Minister state whether it is correct that no person, even a competent miner from Great Britain, can work on the coal-face in Australian mines unless he has had at least three years’ service above ground on Australian coal-fields?

Senator McLEAY:

– I am not sure of the answer to that question. I will look into the matter, and inform the honorable senator later.

Senator O’FLAHERTY:

– Does the Minister mean that nothing has yet been done to increase coal production and that he is relying on my support alone to get the coal?

Senator McLEAY:

– The answer is “ No “.

Senator ARNOLD:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Minister say whether the statement reported in the press to the effect that the Government intends to import 1,000,000 tons of coal from India is true? If so, can he inform the .Senate when the coal is likely to arrive and also what the cost will be a ton in Australia ?

Senator McLEAY:

– It is stated quite plainly in the Standing Orders that Ministers are not expected to give replies to questions of policy.

Senator FINLAY:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– What investigation has the Government made in respect of -the claims of the State of Queensland that there is an abundance’ of coal waiting to be won in that State, and that that coal is of a bituminous nature and can be used by all States of the Commonwealth for the purpose of producing gas?

Senator McLEAY:

– That matter is under consideration at the present time.

page 167

QUESTION

SUBSIDIES

Senator ARMSTRONG:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the report that last week Cabinet discussed the re-introduction of subsidies as a means of checking the rapidly rising cost of living, can the Minister for Trade and Customs say when the Senate may expect a statement of the Government’s intentions in this connexion?

Senator O’SULLIVAN:
LP

– The honorable senator knows quite well that it is not customary to state Government policy in reply to questions. The Government policy on the matter that he has mentioned will be announced in due course.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– I am not seeking a statement of Government policy at this stage. What I asked was when a statement would be made to the Senate, if ever.

Senator O’SULLIVAN:

– I thank the honorable senator for his assurance that he does, not expect a debate on Government policy to arise from his question. I repeat that the Government’s policy on this matter will be revealed in due course.

page 168

QUESTION

PETROL

Senator McLEAY:
LP

– by leave - I have received from my department answers to questions about petrol by several honorable senators last Thursday. Senator Aylett asked whether I would inform the Senate of the quantity of petrol that had been allocated to Tasmania prior to the lifting of petrol rationing, and the quantity that had been supplied to that State since rationing ended.

During rationing, the Government did not control the quantity of petrol that was sent to Tasmania. The oil companies marketing petrol in Tasmania landed petrol in that State at times, and in quantities that were convenient to themselves. Government control was exercised when motor spirit was withdrawn from customs bond, and the Controller of Liquid Fuel authorized the withdrawal, from time to time, of the quantities necessary to meet the demand on a rationed basis. The quantity authorized for withdrawal from bond in Tasmania in January, 1950, was 1,202,378 gallons. Control of withdrawals from bond lapsed, with the rcpen.1 of the Liquid Fuel (Rationing) Regulations on the 8th February, 1950.

Senator O’flaherty:

asked whether I would investigate the possibility of providing a better grade of petrol for Australian motorists and withdrawing from the market the fuel that is sold to-day as petrol. My department has advised me that the octane rating of refined motor spirit may be raised by adding predetermined quantities of tetra-ethyl of lead. There is, however, a limit to the benefits that may be obtained by the use of this chemical. The octane rating depends always on the quality of the base spirit. A higher grade base spirit can be obtained in the refining process, but in achieving this the quantity of petrol that can be obtained from a given quantity of crude oil is reduced. The quality of motor spirit marketed in Australia is at least equal to that sold in New Zealand, and is superior to that sold in the United Kingdom, South Africa, France and the “Western zone of Germany.

Senator Murray:

asked whether the Government would consider building a number of tankers sufficient to ensure that we shall receive an adequate supply of the petroleum products in Dutch New Guinea that are now available. The crude oil that is being imported into Australia from the oil-fields in Dutch New Guinea is low in motor spirit content. The quantity of it that can be refined in Australia is very small in comparison with our total consumption of oil. The oil-field is owned by the Netherlands New Guinea Petroleum Company. Refining companies that draw supplies from that source make their own tanker arrangements, and the Australian Government has no authority to direct oil companies to use any particular tankers in this trade. Accordingly, if tankers were built in Australia to carry New Guinea crude oil they would have to compete on the tanker market for a share of the trade. The volume of oil that is being shipped to Australia from New Guinea at present does not justify’ the building of special tankers for this purpose.

Senator Ashley:

asked whether I would make available to the Senate information regarding the reserve stock of petrol for defence purposes on the 10th December, 1949, and on the 10th February of this year.

Senator Ashley:

– I thought the honorable senator said that that information could not be made public.

Senator McLEAY:

– In view of theappeals that have been made, I have decided to make it public. On the 10th December, 1949, the defence reserve stock of petrol was 50,000,000 gallons. It was also 50,000,000 gallons on the 10th February of this year. Returns that have been submitted by the oil companies show that the net seaboard ownership stock held in the aggregate on the 30th November, 1949, was 64,000,000 gallons and that on the 31st January of this year it was 76,000,000 gallons, plus, in each instance, inland stocks estimated at between 16,000,000 and 20,000,000 gallons. There has been an increase of 12,000,000 gallons, despite the fact that in January 5,000,000 gallons were lost as a result of the New South Wales refinery strike.

Senator ASHLEY:

– As the entry of petrol into Australia is controlled by the Department of Trade and Customs will the Minister for Shipping and Fuel make available to the Senate particulars of quantities and dates of arrival of tankers in this country during the months of November and December, 1949, and January and February, 1950?

Senator McLEAY:

– I wish to avoid imposing unnecessary work on the departmental officers. However, I shall look into this matter, and if it appears to me that to furnish the information sought would not entail too much research a detailed answer will be prepared.

Senator NASH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– On what authority does the Minister make the statement that petrol sold in Australia is of better quality than petrol sold in the United Kingdom and other portions of the British Empire ?

Senator McLEAY:

– On the advice of technical officers in the department.

Senator FRASER:

– I ask the Minister whether it is a fact that a consultation has taken place between the Premier of Victoria and the Commonwealth Government about making available to Victoria additional petrol for emergency transport? Such a step might mean, although I hope that it will not, that the quota of petrol available to other States may be depleted, unless the additional petrol is taken from defence stocks.

Senator McLEAY:

– No.

Senator AMOUR:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Shipping and Fuel, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the Ampol fuel company lias incurred a loss on petrol imported from France?
  2. if so, has the Government made, or does it intend making, any payment by way of subsidy to this company with a view to assisting it in retrieving the loss so incurred?
Senator McLEAY:

– The answers to the honorable senator’s questions are as follows : -

Thu Government has not made a payment of subsidy to Ampol nor has it any knowledge of the financial arrangements of Ampol Petroleum Limited in connexion with petrol imported from France or whether a profit or loss resulted from such imports.

Senator O’BYRNE:
through Senator Nash

asked the Minister for Shipping and Fuel, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that there is a war on between the various petrol distributing organizations on the octane rating of the various brands of petrol!
  2. What is the octane rating of Shell, Vacuum, Caltex and C.O.K. petrols at the present time compared with that obtaining in 1940?
  3. Will he make available the comparative figures of the various brands mentioned relating to the octane rating in 1945, 1940, 1947, 1048. 1949 and 1950?
Senator McLEAY:

– The answers to the honorable senator’s questions are as follows : -

  1. The Government has no knowledge of a w ar between the various distributing organizations on the octane rating of the various brands of petrol.
  2. The octane rating of motor spirit being marketed at present as compared with that marketed in 1940 is as follows: -

The octane ratings shown for 1940 are those applying after the 1st May, 1940. Before that date, each company marketed super grades of motor spirit.

  1. During the years 1945 and 1946, the identity of each company was absorbed in Pool Petroleum Proprietary Limited which operated during the war as the only marketing company. During the war period the octane rating was generally maintained at 70. The octane rating has remained constant during the years 1947 to 1950.

page 169

QUESTION

REPATRIATION

Senator CRITCHLEY:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Will the Minister for Repatriation inform the Senate whether any action has been taken or is contemplated by the Government to have all ex-service personnel who are suffering from war neurosis and are at present accommodated in mental hospitals removed from those institutions and accommodated in quarters that will be more conducive to their personal comfort and, therefore, to their prospects of responding to treatment?

Senator COOPER:
Minister for Repatriation · QUEENSLAND · CP

– There are a num’ber of ex-service personnel who are suffering from war neurosis. Their care and treatment is the responsibility of the Repatriation Department, which has been able to obtain the services of Dr. Stoller, a psychiatrist of world renown. He lias been able to train a number of psychiatrists in Australia. One of the difficulties that the department encountered in the past was the lack of medical men to treat patients. It is the intention of the department that ex-service personnel suffering from war neurosis and who need institutional care shall be accommodated in institutions other than mental hospitals. Those patients are divided into two classes, outpatients and in-patients. The outpatients attend for treatment at clinics in the capital cities in the various States. Considerable improvement has been made in the treatment of those patients. Honorable senators will realize that it is necessary to establish specific institutions for the treatment of in-patients. Up to the present it has not been possible to establish all of those institutions that are required. In Queensland a separate institution was opened two years ago at Wacol. It is expected that institutions to be established throughout Australia will be of similar standard to that institution. In Sydney the in-patients receive treatment by the Repatriation Department in a separate section at the Callan Park Mental Hospital. Their quarters are entirely separate from those of the mental patients. In Victoria they are treated at Bundoora, and in South Australia atParkside. In Western Australia and Tasmania in-patients are treated in State, hospitals that have been established to provide treatment for that type of ailment. Plans have been prepared by the Repatriation Department for separate institutions for these unfortunate cases, and as soon as men and materials are available those plans will be implemented. Patients will then be treated in an institution of their own, and will receive psychiatric treatment according to the latest methods. Dr. Stoller has been responsible for the introduction of improved methods of treatment of these cases.

Senator Hendrickson:

– Who appointed him ?

Senator COOPER:

- Dr. Stoller was appointed by the previous Government. However, I understood that we were dealing with this matter in a broad-minded manner, rather than from a political point of view. His was a good appointment and he is obtaining remarkably good results. It is hoped that when additional institutions have been established throughout Australia the number of recoveries from this ailment will be much greater than in the past.

page 170

QUESTION

RICE

Senator COOKE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Can the Minister representing the Prime Minister inform me whether the Government will take action to have more rice made available for general consumption in Australia, and, if necessary, have the export of rice from Australia regulated until adequate rice is available to meet the demands of Australian consumers?

Senator O’SULLIVAN:
LP

– The honorable senator can rest assured that if there is anything that can reasonably be done in connexion with the matter that he has mentioned, the Government will be very happy to do it; but I should like to have more specific information that may be of assistance in dealing with the matter. I ask the honorable senator to put his question on the notice-paper.

page 170

QUESTION

RABBIT DESTRUCTION

Senator GEORGE RANKIN:
VICTORIA · CP

– Will the Minister for Trade and Customs inform the Senate whether the Government proposes to make further import licences available for the importation of both cyanogas fumigants and ammunition for the destruction of the rabbit pest, which has assumed plague proportions in many parts of Australia ?

Senator O’SULLIVAN:
LP

– The matter Isas not been specifically investigated in these terms, but if representations are made on the subject they will .be given a very sympathetic consideration.

page 170

QUESTION

MEAT

Senator FRASER:

– In view of the Government’s decision to shelve the scheme for the standardization of railway gauges laid down by the previous Government, will the Minister for Trade and Customs say what the policy of the present Government is in connexion with the plan made by the previous Government for the expansion of the meat industry in the Kimberleys region of Western Australia?

Senator O’SULLIVAN:
LP

– The honorable senator seems to be better informed on some matters than I am. I repeat that it is not the practice to discuss matters of Government policy by way of question and answer. The honorable senator’s question refers specifically to the policy of the Government.

page 171

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS BROADCASTING COMMITTEE

Message received from the House of Representatives intimating that the following members had been appointed members of the Parliamentary Proceedings Broadcasting Committee : - Mr. Speaker, Mr. Bate, Mr. Davidson, Mr. Eraser, Mr. Gullett and Mr. Rosevear.

page 171

QUESTION

NATIONAL HEALTH AND MEDICAL SCHEME

With what non-governmental bodies has the present Minister for Health conferred regarding the provision of pharmaceutical benefits, medical benefits and national health services, or any of those subject-matters?

When and where was each such conference held?

What was the duration of each such conference?

By whom was the Commonwealth represented at each such conference?

Was a verbatim record taken of the proceedings at any such conference; if so, at what such conference? fi. If any such record was taken, will the Minister make available to the Senate a copy of it?

If such record was not taken at any such conference (a) why was it not taken, and (6) at whose request or desire was it not taken ?

Senator COOPER:
CP

– The Minister for Health has supplied the following answers to the honorable senator’s questions : -

Conferences were held in Melbourne on 17th and 18th January with representatives of the British Medical Association, the Pharmaceutical Guild and the friendly societies, and subsequent conferences have been held with representatives of these bodies. The Senate will be fully informed of the results of deliberations when finality has been reached.

page 171

QUESTION

BASIC WAGE

Senator AMOUR:

asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Has he or his officers examined the position of the effect upon the basic wage of the proposed legislation to endow the first child by making a os. weekly payment?
  2. If so, what waa the result of the investigation y
  3. What effect would a 10s. per week endowment, to bring it into line with the existing endowment, have on the basic wage?
  4. If the investigation disclosed that it would not affect the basic wage in any “way, why has the Government not proposed to pay a 10s. per week endowment for the first or only child?
Senator SPICER:
LP

– As stated by the Prime Minister in another place, matterswhich arise in relation to the proposed^ extension of child endowment may bemost satisfactorily debated when the legislation foreshadowed in the GovernorGeneral’s Speech comes before the Parliament, rather than by way of question and! answer in advance. I commend that view to the honorable senator.

Senator TANGNEY:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice -

What steps have been taken to ensure, consequent upon the invalidity of the National Security Regulations re female rates of pay, that women workers are not exploited at low rates of pay but receive just and reasonable remuneration for the job done without discrimination based on sex only?

Senator SPICER:

– Section eight of the Defence (Transitional Provisions) Act 1949, which came into operation on the 1st January, 1950, provides that all awards in force or existing immediately prior to that date under the National Security (Female Minimum Rates) Regulations shall remain in force or subsisting until revoked by a competent authority. The general question of women’s remuneration is at present before the Commonwealth Arbitration Court in the Basic Wage case.

page 171

QUESTION

TAXATION

Senator TANGNEY:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

Will the Treasurer consider the removal of sales tax from refrigerators to be used for domestic purposes in the far northern parts of Australia where they are such an urgent necessity to make life bearable in these tropical areas?

Senator SPOONER:
Minister for Social Services · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– The Treasurer will consider this request, in conjunction with other requests which have been made for exemption of various classes of goods, in connexion with the taxation review which is about to be undertaken.

page 172

QUESTION

CHINA

Senator WILLESEE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for External Affairs, upon notice -

  1. Does the Government intend to recognize Communist China?
  2. If so, why has it delayed in making the announcement?
Senator SPICER:
LP

– The matter will be dealt with by the Minister for External Affairs in his statement to the House of Representatives.

page 172

QUESTION

INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION

Senator AYLETT:
through Senator Sandford

asked the Attorney-General, upon notice -

Will he give consideration to the appointment of a full-time inspector in Tasmania to police all federal awards?

Senator SPICER:
LP

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

Consideration has already been given to this matter but, having regard to the responsibilities in industrial matters now vested in the Minister for Labour and National Service - as stated in the Governor-General’s Speech - I shall now refer the honorable senator’s question to my colleague, and furnish a reply as early as possible.

page 172

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

Message received from the House of Representatives intimating that the following members had ‘been appointed members of the Public Works Committee: - Mr. Bowden, Mr. Cramer, Mr. McDonald, Mr. O’Connor, Mr. E. H. D. Russell and Mr. Watkins.

page 172

QUESTION

GOVERNOR-GENERAL’S SPEECH

Address-in-Reply.

Debate resumed from the 23rd February (vide page 44), on motion by Senator McCallum -

That the following Address-in-Reply be agreed to : -

May it please Your Excellency:

We, the Senate of the Commonwealth of Australia, in Parliament assembled, desire to express our loyalty to our Most Gracious

Sovereign, and to thank Your Excellency for the Speech which you have been pleased to address to Parliament.

Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia

– I wish to refer principally to two of the subjects mentioned in the Governor-General’s Speech. The first is the statement that the Government will make a declaration at an early date with regard to its foreign policy. It has already been said in this debate that Australia, as a young nation, is groping forward in the sphere of international affairs in its endeavour to evolve its own foreign policy. For many years prior to the last decade governments in this country, regardless of party political affiliations, and the Australian people generally resolutely refused to reach forward in any manner at all in an endeavour to evolve a distinctly Australian foreign policy. Therefore, in view of the statement in the GovernorGeneral’s Speech many Australians will await events to see whether we shall go forward in the international sphere to the degree that we have progressed during the last ten years when Australia’s name won an honoured place in the councils of the world, or whether we shall merely slip back to the position we occupied prior to that period. However, I believe that whether- the Government accepts full responsibility for its foreign policy as governments have done in the past ten years, or whether it establishes the allparty committee on foreign affairs foreshadowed in the Governor-General’s Speech, Australia’s foreign policy, in view of our geographical position, must be dictated by the four following basic factors’: First, we are a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations ; secondly, we are a member of the United Nations; thirdly, the rise of Asiatic -nationalism; and, fourthly, the future attitude of the United States of America in respect of the Far East, or, as we can more aptly say, our near north. Regardless of the wishes of the Government, its policy on foreign affairs must inevitably be dictated by those basic factors. However, as the Government has intimated’ that it will present to the Parliament a statement upon foreign affairs at an early date, I shall not discuss that subject further at this stage.

The second matter to which I wish to refer is the inflationary trend that is evident throughout the community. As was stated in the Governor-General’s Speech, the high cost of living is a threat to the welfare of the people of Australia. There is an unhealthy tendency in the community for certain groups of individuals to endeavour to relate economic trends to political events. Propaganda machines have been established and, like the press of this country, certain political parties are giving false leads to the Australian people. I remind the Senate, however, that if all politicians were wiped from the face of the earth to-morrow - please God that will not happen, to honorable senators on this side of the chamber at least - certain economic and social problems would remain in the community. These have no true relation to politics, although an endeavour is being made to-day, merely for party gain, to give them political significance. For instance, there is under consideration at present an increase of the basic wage, and certain individuals in this country are attempting, either by direct statement or by inference, to associate that move with present day inflationary trends. They say that, on the one hand, wages and salaries are being increased thus swelling the demand for goods, and on the other, workers are producing less and so further reducing available supplies. Implied in this argument, of course, is the admission that there are in the community, under our present economic system, people who take advantage of the scarcity of commodities by holding the nation to ransom.

Let us make an objective analysis of the situation to ascertain whether or not Australian workmen are producing less. I contend that that is an economic lie devised for political considerations. If this Government does not carry out its promise to cope with the galloping inflation in our economic system it -will stand condemned. It must examine our economy, frankly and fearlessly, and determine just how this problem can be tackled. I submit that, first, the high export prices that are being received for our goods on overseas markets, secondly, the system of extending credits to Great Britain, and, thirdly. the exchange rate between the United Kingdom and Australia contribute far more to inflation in this country than do wage increases. Between 1945 and 1949, wages have not quite doubled, but the export prices of two of our primary products, wool and wheat - admittedly they are our two most important primary products - have increased by more than 5£ times. The position is, therefore, that whereas wages have increased by approximately SO per cent., our wool and wheat cheques have increased by approximately 550 per cent, in that period. I remind honorable senators, too, that although wage-pegging operated in this country for a number of years, the cost of living increased in that period. It is unfortunate that, for purely political reasons, certain people in the community are endeavouring to gainsay or distort economic facts. Our London funds to-day amount to approximately £450,000,000. In other words, for £450,000,000 worth of goods that we have shipped to the United Kingdom, there has been no return of British commodities to the Australian market. In addition, for every 16s. that is paid for Australian goods by British importers, the Australian exporters receive £1 from the Commonwealth Bank, thus swelling further the demand upon the Australian market.

So far, I have dealt with demand.. Let us have a look at the supply side, because continually we are being told that Australian workmen are producing less and less and, therefore, further widening the gulf between supply and demand. I promise not to become a chronic quoter of statistics, confusing myself as well as everyone else, but I propose to-day to refer to the production of three commodities which are of great importance to the community. In 1939, production of portland cement amounted to approximately S6S,000 tons ; last year it was 1,0S3,000 tons. In the same period, the production of fibrous plaster increased from 7,605,000 square yards to 13,471,000 square yards, and the output of tiles rose from 39,700,000 to 74,800,000, an increase of almost 100 per cent. After examining the effects of the much maligned 40-hour week, the Australian Tariff Board, which surely must he regarded as completely free of political bias, reported that efficiency in industry had increased. Dr. S. P. Stevens, who made an inquiry on a wider basis, reached the same conclusion. Professor Copland, who cannot be accused of sitting on this side of the political fence, has said that individual output in Australia has increased by 12£ per cent. I have cited production figures to illustrate economic trends objectively, and free from political bias that so frequently tinges newspaper reports.

When people claim that the reason for the diminishing supply of goods on the market is reduced output, they forget the salient fact that Australia consumes more to-day than it produces. In other words, Australia is an importing country. The needs of the Austraiian people are supplied partly by locally produced commodities and partly by imported goods. In 1938, we imported £4,170,624 worth of goods from Germany ; in 1948, we were able to import only £639,158 worth. Imports from Japan declined from £5,349,987 worth in 1938 to £1,433,127 worth in 1948. From Great Britain we have imported £450,000,000 worth of goods less than we have exported to that country. Dollar problems have meant that we have been unable to import normal quantities of goods from dollar countries. Further, because of the political shadow that has been cast over countries inside the “ Iron Curtain “, we have been unable to secure from them the commodities that we would like to import. I suggest, therefore, that the Government could assist itself by abandoning the political bias which makes an objective analysis of the situation impossible. The freezing of portion of our wheat and wool cheques might at first appear to be an easy solution of our problem. Some people I know are already advocating the pegging of wages. To be consistent, those who believe in such measures would also have to consider the wisdom of curtailing company profits which, in the last few years have increased by 50 per cent. It is both unfair and unwise to argue that the whole of the inflationary trend in Australia can be attributed to the activities of persons with fixed incomes who are endeavouring to obtain more money. It can fairly be said that the increase of wages is not the cause of the inflation that is at present occurring. The increase is itself caused by inflation, and it is a natural and very necessary trend. It must be remembered that wage increases are distributed over many people in the community and that they are necessary for the maintenance of the life and health of the community.

I believe that it would be inequitable to freeze profits, but when the Government makes this survey I suggest that it should give consideration to the subsidies that are from time to time paid to the farming community. In 1948, the farmers received £15,000,000 directly from the Commonwealth, in addition to the amounts that they received from the State governments and the almost traditional aids such as cheap railway freight rates and so on. If there is to be a whittling down at any stage, I suggest that that is where it might be done. It would be preferable to taking the inequitable step of freezing profits or pegging wages. The Australian Government and the State governments have, quite rightly, done much for the farming community, but I suggest that the time has arrived when primary production should stand upon its own feet. The Government would be wise if it examined this facet of the inflationary trend.

The question of the relationship of the Australian £1 to the £1 sterling is a very controversial one. The depreciation of the Australian £1 in 1930 was the beginning of the “ road back “ for this country. At the present time there is an inflationary trend of 25 per cent., and it is probable that the wheat and wool growers of Australia are well able to withstand the shock of a depreciation of the Australian £1 to parity with the £1 sterling, but I am not so sure whether the gold producers, particularly in Western Australia, would be able to withstand an appreciation of 25 per cent, or even less.

There is another very important section of the community that should be the subject of investigation in a survey such as this. I refer to our manufacturing industries, particularly in the capital cities. They have the advantage of a triple protection in the form of a tariff wall, the exchange differential and the distance from Australia of their competitors, but, despite that, the president of the Victorian Chamber of Manufactures has expressed great concern at the rising tide of imports into Australia. If those industries, with those protections, cannot compete with comparable industries in other countries, what would be the position if one of the protections were removed? There is another aspect of the problem to which I think the Government should give consideration. Some persons may ask why these industries should continue to exist if they are so inefficient that, despite a triple protection, they are unable to compete in the Australian market with overseas organizations. Does the free competition of which we have heard so much mean free competition for the whole of the world? If it does, the triple protection to which I have referred cannot be continued. The Government must make a very important decision. It must decide whether the Australian people should any longer be held to ransom by inefficient industries, and in considering that question it must decide whether the people are indirectly deriving some advantage from being held to ransom. The Government will lose much if, in dealing with the vital problem of galloping inflation in Australia, it allows considerations of political expediency to cloud the issues. The Government is faced with a tremendous task and, as His Excellency pointed out in his Speech, it intends to collaborate with the State government and all sections of the community in an attempt to bring it to a successful conclusion. The vast body of wage and salary earners that the Labour party traditionally represents could, by a turn of the economic wheel, be placed in a very sad position, because there is not very much difference between taking away a person’s wages and forcing prices up to such a degree that his wages are no longer adequate.

I have already spoken long enough, and probably for too long. I thank the Senate for the patient hearing that it has given me. I hope that my submissions will be commented upon by other speakers in this debate. I believe that inflation is public enemy No. 1. If the Government, in collaboration with the State govern ments and all sections of the community, can arrest the present inflationary trend, it will have justified the faith that the people reposed in it on the 10th December of last year. I trust that my submissions will be of some assistance to the Government and to the nation.

Senator KENDALL:
Queensland

, - May I first of all associate myself with those expressions of loyalty to our King and Queen, which were made by the honorable senators who moved and seconded the motion for the adoption of the Address-in-Reply, in connexion with the proposed visit of Their Majesties to Australia of which we were informedby His Excellency’s address.

As a newcomer to the Parliament, I was interested in every part of the Speech, and I hope that I always shall be. I have decided to deal with a subject about which I believe other senators will not wish to speak. Reference was made to it by His Excellency when he dealt with the development of this vital area of the Pacific. As a former resident of New Guinea and one who for the last four and a half years has viewed with regret and a certain amount of apprehension the gradual process . of the isolation of Australia from our kinsmen and friends overseas, I feel that this is a subject which is of great importance. Recently, as a private individual, I made an extensive tour of the territories of Papua and New Guinea in order to acquaint myself with present conditions there and with the changes that have taken place since the end of the war. Prior to the war, our administration of the territories of Papua and New Guinea was recognized throughout the world as an example of good administration. It was believed that the humane treatment of the people of the territories was tending slowly but surely to bring them to the stage of self-determination. New Guinea was entirely self-supporting, and Papua called upon the Australian purse for approximately only £40,000 a year. The present position in the territories is deplorable, and they are costing the Australian taxpayers over £0 000.000 a year. Why have those changes occurred? When I was there recently, I talked to 84 persons, quite a number of whom were natives.

As far as I could ascertain, when the civil administration took over from the Australian New Guinea Administration Unit, the natives of the territories, realizing that the war had caused dislocation and disruption, were waiting for us to begin the work of reconstruction. They could see three or four years’ hard work ahead of them, but they were looking forward to going back to what they called then and what they still call the “ good fellow time before “ ; in other words, the times before the war, when they were happy, and which they enjoyed. During the German occupation of New Guinea there was a considerable amount of exploitation of the natives and even after the first war there was a certain amount by the Europeans who went there from Australia. By 1934 or 1935, however, very excellent schemes for the training of the natives and the gradual raising of them to what we term our civilized state, had been inaugurated. The termination of World War II. would have been an appropriate time for us to make a fresh start there and do away completely with the old indenture system of which we hear so much to-day. However, the indenture system was retained in its original form, except that the period of contract was filtered from three years to one year. After a native comes in from the bush a period of six months elapses before he is medically fit, clear of sores, able to speak pidgin-English, and prepared to start to learn something of what we are supposed to teach him. Under the system of one-year contracts, very often the native performs only three or four months’ actual work for his employer. Whilst I appreciate the fact that our primary responsibility in these territories is the raising of the standard of the natives, surely there must be some semblance of fairness to the Europeans who are willing to go to the territory and assist to improve the conditions of the natives. Without the assistance of those people we could not hope to make any progress in this matter. That could not be accomplished by the administration officials alone, unless we were prepared to spend a considerable amount of money out of the Australian purse, which I do not think the Australian taxpayers would favour. Following the reintroduction of the indenture system the Government paid out war-damage compensation. I point out that it is extremely difficult to determine with accuracy when a native is entitled to such compensation. In many instances the natives cannot remember what they lost during the war period. Instead of the Government of the day putting that money into school trusts or other trusts, looking after it, and utilizing it for the benefit of the natives, over £1,000,000 was paid out to the natives in hard cash, and about another £1,000,000 will be so paid out. That is analogous to giving £20 to a boy six years of age and saying, “ Spend this money in whatever way you wish “. Within a short time most of the £1,000,000 paid out found its way into the pockets of the Chinese storekeepers in the territory. Frequently the native would pay £1 for a little piece of cloth to make a lap-lap. In the majority of cases the natives did not understand the value of the money; in fact they had no interest in it apart from what they could buy with it. Frequently they would pay Chinese or other storekeepers one, two, three, four, or five “ leaves “ for an article of only nominal value. I should like to explain to the Senate that “ leaf “ is the native pidgin for an Australian £1 note. As a result the storekeepers, particularly the Chinese in and around Rabaul, and in various parts of the territory, are now very rich men. Whilst the police in the territory have not, so far, been able to pin down the sale of spirits and beer, there is no doubt that the natives are getting them. Not only is that detrimental to native administration generally, but it also constitutes a danger to the Europeans, particularly women. It is obvious that if a native has consumed a quantity of whisky he may attempt to do anything.

I shall now refer to the removal of what was known as the head tax, because the United Nations said that it was no good. There was no earthly reason why the Government of the day could not have introduced a sick benefit tax, such as is imposed in many parts of the world. Such a tax would tend to make the natives feel that they were paying for something. They get medical attention free. An annual charge of £1 or 30s. a head could have been made for this service in order to arrest a perpetual drain on public funds. No attempt has been made to make these territories selfsupporting. A number of things could have been done immediately following the war in order to bring about that result. The general reaction of the natives in the territory during the past three years has been : “ Why should we work? This is a fine Government; we just sit back and get pennies from Heaven. This is our ideal state’. We do not have to work”. The work is not being done, and the territory is getting into a worse and worse state. The supply of labour is getting shorter and shorter. We are getting to the stage of a builder trying to build the second story of a house before he has completed the foundations. Although we are telling the natives that they should run the country, we are not teaching them how to run it.

Most of the old-time patrols have been abolished. During my time in the territory patrols were carried out hy district patrol officers. In 1937, Major-General “ Pompey “ Elliott’s son was killed while carrying out such a patrol. On an average we lost one patrol officer each year. Furthermore, medical patrols used to visit every village within their districts. There were also agricultural patrols. Officers of the Department of Agriculture used to walk around their district, inquire of the native growers how they were getting on, and advise them generally. Altogether they did a grand job. To-day, however, the average patrol finishes where the jeep stops. Of course, the Administration denies that this is so, and calls attention to . a patrol ‘ done recently by Patrol Officer Timperley, to whom I would give full marks, but the general position is as I have outlined it. I have it on the best evidence, not from people living in Port Moresby or Rabaul, but from people who live out in the bush and know the natives, that the patrols are not operating nowadays. We are not doing our job. It is indeed regrettable that the old-time Legislative Council was not re-instituted following the war. At the present time there are nine heads of departments of the local administration in Port Moresby who, headed by the

Administrator, comprise the Executive Council. In pre-war days, however, in addition to those nine there were another nine people representing the traders, planters, missions, natives, and other groups. The Administrator exercised a casting vote. The proceedings were conducted in an orderly fashion and, an efficient Hansard report was prepared. Proper publicity was given to the proceedings. All that has faded away and we have, in effect, a small soviet system in its place. If the people there chose to be dictators, they could easily do so. I am not suggesting for a moment that they are dictators, but that is the general system up there at present. Labour costs have gone up by from 500 to 600 per cent. I have not the exact percentage but before the war a labourer was paid roughly £13 a year. These figures will probably seem ridiculous in Australia, but they are not so in those territories where the natives need very little actual cash. To-day, it costs Europeans 10s. a day for every “ boy “ they employ, in addition to the difficulty they have to get them and keep them. The introduction of our Works and Housing Department up there was not a very happy move. When I was in Rabaul I inquired into this matter because a deputation from the Works and Housing Section asked to see me. I did not ask to see them. I was a private individual, and they approached me. Those men, who were paid from £17 to £20 a week and were kept for 16s. a week, came to me with a tirade of complaints that they asked me to bring before the Minister concerned. They complained of such things as no Australian beer, no proper sanitary arrangements, no club house, and no married quarters. People who are sent up there on works and housing projects should be properly screened because we do not want that type of person to pioneer the country. Their wages and conditions were good. If I were offered £20 a week and were kept for 16s. a week I would jump at the chance, as would many others. On the European side there is also what is known as the Production Control Board which controls the buying and selling of all the copra and rubber in the territory. The planters and the Europeans generally are quite happy about that, but they would like to get some information about what is going on. They have not had any profit and loss accounts since the board started. The same also applies to their stabilization fund. They have been trying for three and a half years to find out what is in the “ kitty “ and what is to be done with it, but so far they have met with a blank refusal from the administration. They asked me to bring the matter forward. I have already mentioned it to the Minister concerned.

One of the most important factors holding the territory back is the shipping position. At present no privately-owned ships are allowed to trade unless they are carrying their owner’s cargo. In other words, they can carry copra from their own plantations to a shipiping port, or can take their own cargo to their plantations. It is not economic and it is ridiculous to ask each plantation manager to own a ship. Consequently, the Government owns 23 ships and has a virtual monopoly, and does not seem to care much what it does about it. The thing is so tied up with “ red tape “ that they get nowhere. I shall quote an example. The European personnel running the Government ships are engaged by the Australian Shipping Board in Australia. The ships are owned by the Department of External Territories. The native crews and the maintenance, , that is to say, the supply of victuals and fuel, are provided by one of the three big private companies acting as agents. The Production Control Board buys the copra, the Directorate of Shipping tells the captain of the ship where he is to go, the customs authorities have charge of the discharge of the ships, and the Production Control Board hires the labour from the administration to discharge the ships. The administration, the customs authorities and the Production Control Board all start work at different times, and knock off at different times, and there is complete chaos. Although the Government owns 23 ships there are never more than about fourteen actually working. The rest are laid up for repairs. The shipping position is worse than serious because on the 24th

January, when I was in Rahaul, there was a backlag of 64,200 bags of copra waiting for ships to pick them up. That copra is owned by people who went back and tried to rehabilitate themselves in their country. Most are ex-servicemen, and some were employed in that most dangerous service behind the Japanese lines. To-day, they have copra valued at, £275,000 lying in their backyards or on the beaches, because they have not sufficient space to store it. That copra is rotting because there are no ships to pick it up. I notice in the recent report of the Auditor-General a reprimand of the shipping companies for not having given proper returns for 1948-49. He stated that he had withheld his certificate because he was waiting for proper returns. I maintain that it is almost impossible to keep returns under the conditions prevailing. Now look at the otherside of the ledger. The Australian Shipping Board was running a cargo service there in 1946, 1947, and 1948. A number of claims were made for short-landed cargo during that period by the bigger European-owned companies. They were disallowed by the Australian Shipping Board because the companies were told that they should have taken delivery of their cargo from the ship’s slings. The customs regulations inNew Guinea prohibit that being done, so they could not. possibly obey the law. But in addition to not being able to get their claims paid, they had to pay customs duty there on the goods lost because the Australian Shipping Board in turn would not give ft clearance to say that the goods had been lost. So when the Auditor-General says that the private companies are falling down on their job I remind the Senate that the administration is doing so as well and making it almost impossible for private companies to carry on. Four years ago the wharf at Kavieng, in New Ireland, was surveyed and plans were made to repair it, so that Kavieng could be used as a port thus lightening the shipping congestion at Rabaul. At present Babaul caters for all shipping to Bougainville, Buka, all the islands east of New Ireland, and the Gazelle Peninsula, and right down the New Britain coast to Rabaul and is being absolutely snowed under. The fact that the port of Kavieng has not been opened has made much difference to that port and has caused still more shipping delays. That brings me to Rabaul itself. When we went back after the last war, Rabaul was absolutely flat. That would have been an excellent time for the Government to make a decision about what was to be done regarding Rabaul. Honorable senators may remember that in 1937, when we had a large eruption in the territory, and Rabaul was practically smothered with mud and mullock, a decision was sought about whether we were to resettle the place or go elsewhere. After a commission, under, I think, Major-General Griffith, was appointed, and after Mr. W. M. Hughes had had a look at the position, it was decided that we were to settle in Lae. But nothing was done about it. It is all very well to make a decision, but nobody implemented that one and at the beginning of the last war we were still at Rabaul. At the end of the war Rabaul, as I have said, was absolutely flat. Only two or three cement walls were left standing. Had the Government then made a decision to move the inhabitants elsewhere - I do not care where - and not to rebuild Rabaul, everything would have been all right. Instead of that, however, it said, “Do not build anything permanent. Just build temporary houses and other temporary structures everywhere “. That was four and a half years ago. To-day, those temporary paper houses with their two-by-three stumps are starting to fall down, and we are still awaiting a decision on what is to be done about Rabaul. I realize quite well that no government would give a definite decision to resettle that place, because it is rightinside the Caldera line of eruption and may go up at any time. No government would say, “ Go back “, but if the Government would only say, “ Leave the place”, we might get somewhere. I inquired about this matter from the appropriate department recently and was told that a decision was made to go to Koko.po. Nobody up there knows about that decision. There is no building going on in Kokopo, but there is still building going on in Rabaul. To a more limited extent the same thing is happening in Lae, but I shall not duplicate what I have already said in relation to Rabaul. The trouble is due to lack of decision.

I turn now to the matter of timber. At the present time nobody is getting any advantage out of the wonderful stands of timber in the territory. While Australia itself is shrieking for timber and is unable to obtain a sufficient quantity of it, within 5 miles of the Wau aerodrome there is some 20,000,000 super, feet of perfectly good pine. Farther down there is about 190,000,000 super, feet of timber in the Bulolo Valley. Probably enough is known of Bulolo timber to make it unnecessary for me to speak of it.

Senator Grant:

– Leave it to Hancock and Gore Limited.

Senator KENDALL:

– In New Britain there is some 250,000,000 super, feet of kumerere and other fine timbers. The Government will not allow that timber to be cut, and will not allow any one to take up leases. When I visited the Wide Bay region of New Britain recently, I noticed that there was probably some 300,000 feet of timber lying in log form just as it had been cut. It was lying there rotting because the natives had cut it down to build their gardens. That was absolute waste. The general idea of the Forestry Department that the timber in that area is being kept for posterity seems rather strange. I have a feeling that we are “ posterity “ in this matter. There is no possible hope of reafforestation there, because the forests are already full. Yet we cannot cut and export that timber, and in consequence we are losing a considerable amount in actual royalties that would be paid on timber if it were exported. At the present time Australia is buying logs from Borneo and, in addition to that, I mention that 250,000 super, feet of New Zealand timber was imported into Port Moresby recently at a price of 149s. for 100 super, feet, or twice the cost of local timber. All these things seem unnecessary to me, as an old resident, and suggest waste.

I refer now to the matter of European children in the territory. People say that any one who does not want to go to a pioneer country should not go there, but the facts are that people do go up there and do have children, and so I have something to say about the malnutrition up there caused by the prices of commodities. Tea costs 7s. 4d. per lb.; loaves of bread cost 2s. 2d. each; flour costs 21s. 9d. per 25-lb. bag; butter is os. 2d. per lb. ; rice, which used to cost 10 guineas a ton, is now £56 a ton. Copra sacks, which used to cost £12 a ton, now cost £64 a ton. In consequence of these prices the majority of people up there on their comparatively small salaries cannot make ends meet, in spite of the fact that they pay no income tax. That is partly due to the export tax on goods leaving this country for the territory. For the past four years we have treated the people of New Guinea and Papua as foreigners. They pay the same tax on goods from Australia as is levied on goods that Australia exports to foreign countries.

I do not propose to deal with the tragedy of Manus Island now, but I shall bring that matter up during the debate on external affairs, because I inquired very closely into it and am very interested in it from the defence aspect.

I have given a brief but factual dissertation on the condition of the Territory of Papua-New Guinea as I found it very recently. I have given it, as far as possible, without personal or political bias, because I feel that honorable senators on both sides of the chamber should be able to work together on this important matter in an endeavour to end the maladministration that has taken, and is taking, place. If that maladministration is allowed to continue, we shall merit the condemnation of the whole world.

Senator RYAN:
South Australia

– This being my initial speech in this chamber, I approach it with a certain amount of trepidation and trust that honorable senators will accord me forbearance. I join with the Government and other honorable senators who have said that they look forward to the visit of Their Majesties the King and Queen in 1952, as forecast by the Governor-General in his Speech. I can assure Their Majesties that no greater reception will be forthcoming than that which will emanate from the adherents of the great Australian Labour party, because we stand four-square for the retention of our democratic way of life, with all its institutions, which is inherent in the British Constitution. I make nu apology for that attitude. I do not propose to deal at any great length with the items in the Government’s programme that was submitted to this Parliament in the Governor-General’s Speech. The programme is comprehensive and I propose only to deal with some aspects of it. The Government contemplates gigantic works in connexion with development and industry and other phases of the national life of Australia. Its programme, in my opinion, is based on hope. “While planning a great developmental programme it has also made provision for the reintroduction of universal military service. It appears to me to be rather illogical that the Government proposes to exploit the man-power resources of Australia simultaneously with stepping up Australia’s defences. References were made in the Governor-General’s Speech to the three armed services and to compulsory military training. Some mismanagement or lack of encouragement must account for the fact that our country’s defence cannot be adequately provided for under the existing voluntary recruiting system. However, that is another story that may merit consideration at an appropriate time. The point that I am stressing is that the full utilization of Australia’s man-power resources generally for developmental work in all its phases will mean an all-time job. Honorable senators opposite may submit logical arguments in answer to my contention. They may say that it is necessary to have appropriate defences in order to preserve Australia’s safety. I grant that there is some logic in such an argument, but I also draw the attention of honorable senators to the fact that during the preliminary stages of the last war, when the defences of Australia were in a much more deplorable condition than they are now, the operative circumstances were also different from the present circumstances. The increase of Australia’s defences during the last war was planned, developed, and brought to fruition under a Labour regime. Australia’s war-time effort was unequalled, on a proportionate basis, by that of any other nation. Support for that statement has come from General Douglas MacArthur. In similar circumstances we would be capable of developing our resources to the fullest possible degree in order to meet possible aggression in the future. From our experience at that time it is evident that after adequate provision has been made for defence, the manpower available in this country to-day is not nearly sufficient to enable the Government to proceed with the gigantic works propounded in the present Prime Minister’s policy speech at the last general election: First, we must do our utmost to develop the industrial resources of this country. It will then be time enough for the Government to give attention to the more ambitious aspects of its programme.

In his policy speech at the last general election the present Prime Minister promised that if he were returned to power his Government would provide endowment at the rate of 5s. a week for the first or only child under sixteen in each family. I regard that proposal as a deliberate attempt to interfere with the formula upon which the basic wage is fixed. All honorable senators know that in the fixation of the basic wage provision is made in respect of the first child in a family. That election promise savoured of contempt of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court because at the time the Prime Minister announced it the court was hearing an application from the combined trade unions for an increase of the basic wage and as the result of that announcement the court immediately adjourned those proceedings indefinitely and did not resume the hearing of the application until approximately four months later. Yet the Government wonders why there is industrial unrest and why the workers are restive because of the delays to which they are subjected in the presentation and hearing of their claims. Even after the result of the last election became known the matter was still left in abeyance, and the court did not resume its hearing of the unions’ claim until the 16th February. In view of that fact, is it any wonder that the trade union congress now being held in Melbourne, at which moderate as well as radical organizations are represented, has decided to take appropriate action in the interest of the workers generally?

Sitting suspended from Jf.,50 to 8 p.m.

Senator RYAN:

– I have referred to the Government’s proposal to pay child endowment in respect of the first child in each family and to the effect of this proposal upon the basic wage case now before the Commonwealth Arbitration Court. I believe that the Government’s scheme will upset the equilibrium of the formula by which the basic wage is determined. Relatively few members of the community will enjoy the benefits of the added child endowment payments, but a new formula for determining the basic wage will affect the majority of workers. In other words, a small section of the community will receive an increased remuneration to the detriment of the people as a whole. Such a proposition cannot fail to have serious repercussions, one of which will be a further fall in the value of the £1 to which the Government parties have promised to restore full value. As I have said, the action of the present Government parties in making increased child endowments payments a feature of their policy, caused the suspension of the hearing of the basic wage claim. My view is that to compensate for this undue delay, the court’s ultimate award should be made retrospective to cover the period of four months during which the hearing was suspended due to the political propaganda of the antiLabour parties. The duty of a government is to govern in the interests of al] sections of the community, yet here we find subtle manipulation which cannot fail to affect detrimentally a vast majority of the people of the Commonwealth.

The Government, through the Governor-General’s Speech, has expressed concern at employer-employee relations. It is the Government’s desire, we are informed, to promote a better understanding in industry, for the benefit of the people as a whole. One cannot but admire such aspirations, but their practical application will require more than mere words. We have already had evidence of the Government’s alleged concern for the welfare of the workers.

Almost immediately it was elected to office, it issued an order that nonunionists in the Public Service were to enjoy the same working conditions and rates of pay as union members. I cannot find words strong enough to express adequately my condemnation of this move to extend the benefits that have accrued to workers from the work of the trade union movement over the years, to people who contribute nothing to this progress. I earnestly appeal to the Government to start off on the right foundation. If honorable senators opposite really want a spirit of co-operation and conciliation to permeate industry, they must get down to a humane basis of co-operation and reciprocity. The Government has announced its intention to amend the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act. As one who has been a trade union official for the past twenty years, I speak with some knowledge of trade union matters, and I say definitely that the trade union movement will not tolerate any interference with its internal management. It will be the controller of its own destiny. To me, outside interference in trade union matters is analogous to outside interference with the internal organization of the Liberal party or kindred organizations. In both instances, internal administration should be sacrosanct. Interference is undemocratic, because we all believe in the principles that we have established at such cost. The members of any organization must have the right to determine all matters affecting the inner working of that organization. The Government proposes to introduce legislation compelling the holding of secret ballots on certain matters within the trade unions. I remind the Senate that already provision is_ made in the rules of some trade unions for such ballots. I speak with conviction when I say that any vital or contentious matter affecting the welfare of members of an organization arouses the immediate interest of, and, if necessary, action by members of that organization. The bakers’ organization of South Australia with which I am associated, has had only two strikes in the 60 years of its history. My personal opinion is that strikes occur when members of an organization feel compelled to give vent to their pent-up feelings, realizing that no pleading can have any material effect upon the persons against whom the strike is directed. There are many obstacles to the holding of compulsory secret ballots on trade union matters. One is the time factor. For instance, the metropolitan members of an Australia-wide trade union might be anxious to strike, but if the opinion of country members had to be sought, in the interim, considerable damage might havebeen done to the union’s case. I suggest, therefore, that the Government should leave well alone. A strike that has begun can be settled, but our endeavours should be devoted to the prevention rather than the settlement of industrial disputes. Weshould tackle the problem at its roots. There should be some machinery by which a threatened strike could be prevented from developing into an industrial conflagration that would affect not only the members of the trade union concerned but also the community as a whole. Strikes have an adverse effect upon the cost of living, and thus penalize the general public. I would welcome the introduction of legislation providing that if an industrial dispute develops, conciliation commissioners should proceed immediately to hear evidence and determine the matter. It would be much better to do that than to allow the dispute to develop. Court proceedings and prosecutions give rise only to antagonism. The maintenance of industrial pf.ace and of good relations between employers and employees should occupy the earnest endeavours of the Government for the benefit of the country as a whole. I appeal to the Government to proceed warily with legislation that might impinge upon the rights of the trade unions of this country. The trade unions have rendered yeoman service to Australia. I speak from practical experience when I say that trade unionists generally do not welcome industrial unheavals but strike only when they have what they consider to be a grievance. I trust that the Government will not needlessly antagonize them, because the tremendous task of development that lies ahead of us can be completed only if there is unity among all sections of the community.

I assure the Government that the other legislation that was foreshadowed in the

Governor-General’s Speech will receive careful, consideration when it is debated in this chamber. The measures that are brought forward will be judged entirely upon their merits, and honorable senators om this side of the chamber will be glad to support any that are designed to increase-‘ the welfare of our people.

Senator REID:
New South Wales

– In common with all the other people of Australia, I was very disappointed when I learned that Their Majesties could not visit Australia last year, and I shared their regret that the reason for the cancellation of the tour was the state of His Majesty’s health. I am sure that the Australian people were very pleased to learn from His Excellency that we may see Their Majesties in Australia in 1952. I believe that I speak for the whole of the people of this country when I say that the hearty and loyal welcome that they will receive will demonstrate to them that we in Australia stand steadfast as a unit of the British Empire.

I am pleased to know that it is the intention of the Government to establish a Parliamentary .Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs. When that is done we shall at all times be kept in touch with international developments. We are living in troubled and difficult days, and. we all desire that the foreign policy of Australia should be conducted along lines that will ensure, if possible, that this and the other countries of the world enjoy peace for many years to come.

I turn now to the proposal of the Government to establish a Ministry of National Development. The establishment of such a ministry is long overdue.. In every part of Australia there is a great need to develop all the resources that are available. I do not know the requirements of all the States, and therefore, I propose to deal very briefly with this matter as it affects New South Wales. However I desire to make it clear that X shall not speak entirely on behalf of that State, because I believe that, through the Department o£ National Development, each State should be developed in accordance with its requirements and possibilities. A considerable amount of developmental work has already been done in New South Wales, ‘but considerably more work requires to be done. My opinion is that New South Wales should, in common with other States, develop water conservation schemes that will ensure a continuity of work and employment. The work, should proceed in such, a way as to enable us to make the greatest possible use of available water at the earliest moment. Plans for the utilization, of the waters of all the streams of this country should be prepared. Those streams are far too few, and their waters had been; running to waste for far too long. Plans should be prepared for the construction of dams in all major streams. They should provide that when the construction of a dam has reached a certain stage,, the building of diversion weirs and the digging, of distribution channell should be commenced, so that when the dam has reached a certain height it will be possible immediately to utilize the stored water.

A water conservation plan for New South Wales was prepared in 1938. It covered all of the streams on the western side of the Great Dividing Range. The eastern side Was not considered at that stage because it was felt that the dry arid west should be dealt with first. It was envisaged that it would take approximately fifteen years- to implement the plan and that at the end of that time all of the water in that area suitable for conservation would be stored and available for use, with the result that primary production; in every part of the State to which the waters were diverted could be increased. That plan should be reconsidered in the light of the developments that have occurred during the last few years. The Department of National Development should prepare a water conservation plan covering the whole of Australia. The procedure that was followed in regard to water conservation in the past appears to have been that some authority suddenly conceived the idea that a. certain area of the country was entitled to water conservation and that a. dam was then built. In a number of instances after the dam was constructed, no use was made of the water for years’. On completion of a dam the plant that had been assembled over the’ years for the construction of the works was immediately disposed of and the staff disbanded. If the Government decided later that a similar scheme was required in another part of the State it then had to re-assemble both plant and staff for the new work. Under the plan that I advocate work on -water conservation projects throughout Australia would be continuous. There could be used continuously the different classes of labour required for the various sections of water conservation schemes. When a certain stage was reached in connexion with the construction of a dam a particular team of workers could be moved to another dam under construction. That principle would apply to each section of the work. Parliament should make sure that the proposal to establish a Department of National Development should proceed along lines that will enable us to get the greatest advantage from proposed developmental works. I believe that the Government intends to make available £26,000,000 to implement such -works. A considerable portion of that money could be applied very usefully in connexion with water conservation projects, which are most necessary in this country. I should say that the next step should be the provision of electrical power throughout this country. Complementary to the construction of water conservation projects provision should be made for the installation of hydro-electric plants to provide power for the decentralization of industry. It would also enable the provision of electricity for power and lighting for people in many of the outback areas of Australia. Surely the people living in those areas are entitled to the modern amenities that electricity supply makes possible. I contend that if we neglect to make electricity available for those people, in many instances when the opportunity offers, they will move to the cities.

A considerable proportion of the money should be expended on the construction and maintenance of roads throughout this country. It would be useless for us to develop water conservation and hydroelectric power schemes and neglect to make provision for lines of communication by means of good roads so that the produce of the outback areas could be conveyed expeditiously to the nearest market. Of course a considerable amount of money has already been expended on the construction of roads in this country.; I disagree entirely with the method of” paying money to the States for road construction and maintenance that has operated since 1947. In my opinion the arrangement that existed previously whereby the Federal Aid Roads Board recommended what allocations should bemade to the States was better. Under that system the local-governing bodies decided which of the roads in their areasmost urgently needed maintenance workUnder the present system the localgoverning bodies have to approach the State, which, in turn, must go cap im hand to the Commonwealth and say, in effect, “ Please, can we have some of the money that we are justly entitled to as a result of the proceeds of the petrol tax to carry out work in our State ? “ I contend that the States and the localgoverning bodies should be assured of definite allocations of the petrol tax.

Senator Sheehan:

– They have that assurance.

Senator REID:

– They know when they apply for it. The old system was much better, because the States did not then have to ask the Commonwealth what would be their allocations for the current year. The roads of this country are deteriorating rapidly. I admit, readily, that that state of affairs has arisen partly because of the impossibility of maintaining the roads adequately during the war years. Because of rising prices localgoverning bodies are experiencing difficulty in maintaining essential roads in a good state of repair.

I shall refer now to the manner in which the primary produce of this country has been handled. Over the years the principle seems to have developed that those products no longer belong to the primary producers. With that principle I disagree entirely.

Senator Sheehan:

– What would the primary producers do when they could not sell their produce?

Senator REID:

– Immediately the crops are harvested they are taken from the primary producers, and the government of the day then becomes the master and decides what the primary producers shall receive for their produce, irrespective of its value.

Senator Sheehan:

– They have received good prices.

Senator REID:

– There should be a reversion to the system under which the primary producers had a say in the disposal of their produce. Despite the references that have been made to producercontrol, I contend that the primary producers have no say in the matter to-day, because the Minister may veto every decision that is made by a primary producers’ board. Surely the primary producers are entitled to a say about the manner of the disposal of their produce. Tn years gone by the price of wheat was. very low.

Senator Sheehan:

– Yes, ls. 6d. a “bushel.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order ! I point out to honorable senators that it is a tradition of this chamber that when an “honorable senator is ma.king his maiden speech he 9hall be heard in absolute silence. I ask honorable senators to extend that courtesy to Senator Reid, who is making his maiden speech.

Senator REID:

– Surely nobody would have the audacity to suggest that he has been responsible, either individually or collectively as a member of the Government, for the rise of the price of wheat from about 2s. 9d. a bushel in 1939 to approximately 15s. 8d. to-day. The high prices now ruling for primary products are attributable to the shortage of those commodities, and the problem of feeding the starving peoples of the world. The primary producers are entitled to a say in the marketing of their produce. It is true that between 1937 and 1939 assistance was extended to them. An honorable senator has claimed that £15.000.000 was expended by the Government for that purpose. I point out that that amount was only as a drop in the ocean compared with the cost1? borne hy the producers, and compared, also, with the protection that was given to other industries at the expense of the primary producers, who were asked to huy on the home market and sell at export parity. Let us consider the position that has developed with relation to wheat. Since the previous Government took over wheat stocks by means of pools, not only have the primary producers been asked to help to finance other sections of the community, but also, by a ministerial direction, wheat has been sold at a low price for home consumption, and even to fulfil government contracts. Why should the wheat producers be asked to subsidize every other section of the community? Although the wheat producers of this country do not object to playing a fair part they consider that it was grossly unfair of the Government to ask them to subsidize other sections of the community and government contracts to the tune of £98,000,000. We should revert to the principle that the man who produces a commodity is entitled to the proceeds. What would be the position if the principle now applied to wheat were applied to other sections of the community ? If the manufacturers were told that a certain percentage of their products must be sold on the market at a certain price-

Senator Armstrong:

– They are.

Senator REID:

– The fact remains that the wheat producers, over a period of years, have been required to subsidize the community to the amount of £98,000,000.

I was pleased to note the reference in His Excellency’s Speech to the Government’s proposal to deal with subversive organizations. Although the proposal is not popular in some quarters I point out that prior to the general election the people of this country were informed of the intention of the antiLabour parties in this connexion if returned to office. In no uncertain voice the people gave the Government a mandate to introduce legislation to deal with subversive elements in the community. Logically, every section of the community not associated with those subversive elements should be prepared to assist the Government in this matter. Undoubtedly the subversive elements to which I refer have been disloyal, not only to Australia, but also to the British Empire as a whole.

I listened very attentively to His Excellency the Governor-General on the question of immigration and the proposal that we should step up migration to 200,000 a year and then maintain that rate over a period of years. I should prefer that we had no limit, so long as we introduced to this country migrants who would be of value in assisting us to defend and develop the nation. “We should do nothing in our migration policy that would endanger that British spirit. Our migration policy should be such that we should make the greatest use of it in bringing about development. I hope that as members of the Senate we shall be of assistance to the community in general in the consideration that will be given to every measure placed before us.

Senator KATZ:
Victoria

.- In common with other honorable senators, I agree entirely with the spirit in which the Governor-General delivered the Speech containing the policy of the present Government. Various statements have been made regarding the United Nations organization. If it is possible to organize the peoples of the world it should he possible to organize the Australian people on the same lines. But in Australia, as in other countries, there is a struggle going on in regard to the standard of living enjoyed by the people. On page 3, His Excellency said -

My Government views with grave concern the increase which has been taking place in recent years in the cost of living. It is realized that the solution of this problem is not easy and calls for the closest co-operation not only ns between the Commonwealth and State Governments but also between all sections of the community. An intensive review is at present being made by my Government of the causes of present price trends with a view to determining the most effective measures which can be taken to remedy the current inflationary situation.

Although it may be possible for the government of the day to criticize the outgoing Government, the fact remains that the previous Government viewed the situation equally as seriously as the present Government has indicated in the enunciation of its policy. Not only did the Labour Government realize the seriousness of the situation, but it also took action in the matter. That Government saw the possibility of an inflationary spiral affecting the people of Australia. What did it do? It did not stand idly by. It knew perfectly well that the Commonwealth would have to lose the power it. held as the result of war-time regulations. The Government lost that power but it did not waste time. It immediately submitted to the people of Australia a referendum asking for the power to deal with rising prices. But the strangepoint is that the very parties which control the Commonwealth at present opposed the Labour Government when it attempted to secure power to deal with prices. Let us glance for a moment at the position in Victoria. Prices are going up by leaps and bounds and I remind honorable senators that there is no question that the great discontent manifestingitself throughout Australia is due in the main to the huge increase of the cost of living. Mention has been madeto subversive elements, but what propaganda is more acceptable to those who might use subversive methods than constant references to the ever-increasing prices of commodities ? One honorablesenator said to-night that certain primary producers had no say asto what they will get for their produce. That has been determined by certain boards. I well recollect thetime when the Australian consuming: public paid about 25 per cent, more than world parity prices so that primary producers of this country could benefit. In Victoria at present there is an Egg BoardThe chairman of that hoard is the ‘proprietor of the largest poultry establishment in the southern hemisphere. Hefixes the price of eggs! About ten days ago the Victorian Government decided to allow the Egg Board to do what it liked. At midnight the regulations ceased to have effect. By six o’clock the following morning every housewife in Victoria knew that she had to pay 5d. a dozen more for eggs. So honorable senators can see why the workers are dissatisfied with the increases taking place in the price of luxuries, fares and even amenities such as cigarettes. Who determines the priceof cigarettes ? It is certainly not the consumer. The tobacco combine determines the price. I quote from the MelbourneA rgus of the 4th February -

Retail prices in Australia are now rising more rapidly than in any other Englishspeaking country. They are moving upward by about 10 per cent, a year whereas in Great Britain, New Zealand, Canada and the United States retail prices are virtually steady.

The Melbourne Herald of the same date stated - in a Collins-street shop which stocks better quality fruit oranges are 4d. to 7d. each. Gravenstein apples are 6d. each or ls. Od. a lb.; peaches, ls. Od. a lb.; pears, ls. a lb. for three; bananas, lOd. a lb. or 2d. each.

Honorable senators on the opposite side must know that during the last month 20 per cent, of the banana crop was confiscated in order to keep up the price. Do they stand for that? The workers of Australia are not blind to the manipulation that is going on. Therefore all this talk of the workers being satisfied is useless. How could the workers be satisfied ? One cannot buy a woman’s costume of ordinary medium quality cloth for under £30. In Melbourne a slop suit costs £29 10s. Honorable senators opposite do not trouble about these things. The Government says that in order to try to over.come prices it intends to give the people some relief. Since 1907 the basic wage of Australia has increased by only 4s. a week. The Government does not want to see wages increased, so it says it will give child, endowment of 5s. a week for the first child in every family. As a result, of that promise to the electors 1,2S5,000 people in this country are to gain. The number of children receiving endowment will rise from 1,115,000 to 2,400,000. One can realize the effect that promise would have on the minds of the electors. In the circumstances, it is remarkable that the Labour party received the great vote it did, because the ordinary elector was not capable of understanding what the 5s. child endowment meant. I shall show what child endowment means to the workers of Australia. Ten years ago when there was a case similar to the present one before the Arbitration Court the then Liberal Government of the Commonwealth said that something would have to be done. “Why did it say so? The reason was that at that time judges of the Arbitration Court were going to increase the basic wage. At that stage the government of the day agreed to introduce child endowment of 5s. a week for the first child. That then became the law of the land. Ten years later - a few months ago - another case came before the court. A similar thing happened. The present Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) gave an election pledge that he would give the people 5s. a week for the first child. The 5s. increase will be deducted from the federal basic wage, and so it will be found that the workers, particularly single men, single women, married people with no children and those whose children are over sixteen years of age, will suffer by having their basic wage lowered to offset the 5s. child endowment payment. I shall show honorable senators how the Government parties talk with their tongues in their cheeks. The Attorneys-General or other legal representatives of the Liberal governments of Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia have placed arguments before the Commonwealth Arbitration Court in connexion with the present hearing of the basic wage case. They have told the court straight out that the judges must take child endowment into consideration in their fixation of the basic wage. Their applications to the court were upon identical lines with those submitted by the Employers Federation and the ‘Chambers of Manufactures throughout Australia. If they -succeed, it will mean, in effect, that the workers will have to recoup the authorities for the amount paid out in child endowment. It is stated that that amount will be paid in taxes. Let us examine another significant statement that appears on page 5 of the printed copy of the GovernorGeneral’s Speech, which says -

Of vital importance to the general wellbeing of the people is the question of industrial relations between employer and employee. My government is convinced that a rapid development of the Commonwealth depends largely on higher levels of production and, with them, higher standards of living, on freedom from industrial disturbances, and on the fullest cooperation of both sides of industry. The Government’s responsibility will be to create, not only an atmosphere for the friendly and co-operative enterprise of management and labour, but to continue and develop the research and investigations being made into methods of improving the working environment and problems of human relations in industry.

That statement is cleverly worded. Some of the legal geniuses now in the Cabinet are no doubt responsible for the wording. The Government wants the fullest cooperation! With whom? Has it said anything about co-operation with the trade unions ? Not on your life ! The trade unions are not mentioned. The Government wants the old relationship between employer and employee. Mention of the trade unions was deliberately left out of the Speech. I say so because of the fact that in the portion of the Speech dealing with immigration the words “ the co-operation of trade unions “ are deliberately inserted. The Government wants the co-operation of trade unions in connexion with immigration because it knows perfectly well that unless it can succeed in gaining that co-operation in relation to migrants the whole immigration scheme must be an absolute failure. But when it comes to co-operating in industry between the employers and the employees the Government has no desire to recognize the trade unions. This Government, and in fact all governments, should be taking into consideration a policy of full employment. World organizations to-day have recognized the necessity of full employment to ensure the country’s prosperity. The present Government has not one word to say regarding full employment. This Government stands for private enterprise, but the term “ private enterprise “ is not considered fashionable by the Government. It uses the term “ free enterprise “. The prosperity of this country to-day is due, in the main, to the fact that during the last eight years Labour governments had the co-operation of the trade union movement. When I mentioned full employment a moment ago I had in mind something which was alleged to have been said, or was said, by Professor Hytten, regarding a reservoir of unemployed. Here is a report which appeared in the Melbourne Herald of a statement by an American who was in Australia recently. Tt reads -

America’s current unemployment level of six per cent, was “ just about ideal, because it keeps the 94 per cent, on their toes “, former American Military Attach^ Colonel Karl F. Baldwin told Rotarians at lunch to-day.

That statement was made in Melbourne about three months ago. This Government stands, not for full employment, but, I maintain, for that reservoir of unemployed. In the long run, we shall find that the Government desires to have that percentage of unemployment in Australia. To-day we have the spectacle of men and women being able to choose their own jobs. The Labour party, despitesuch election propaganda as that concerning child endowment, received a wonderful vote. Nowadays we hear nomore of the “ John Henry Austral “ broadcasts. “ John Henry Austral “ isdead. The parties opposite have nofurther use for him. Despite election propaganda from the parties opposite,, the Labour party received 1,941,752 votesat the general election.

Senator O’Sullivan:

– Not enough.

Senator KATZ:

– The Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O’sullivan) says that that was not enough, but I shall; give him something to think about. TheLiberal party received 1,659,405 votes,, which was a smaller number than theLabour party received, yet Liberal candidates won 55 seats while Labour candidates won only 47 seats.

Senator O’sullivan:

– The Government supported by the honorable senator,, and not this Government arranged theredistribution of the electorates.

Senator KATZ:

– The Labour party can look forward to the next two or three years with every degree of confidence.

Senator O’Sullivan:

– It will still bein opposition.

Senator KATZ:

– We can do so because we are satisfied that .after the Government parties’ promises about petrol and child endowment and a lowering of the cost of living - which was rising by leaps and bounds while the promises were still being made - the Labour party before long will once again have a majority of representatives in this Parliament almost equal to what it had before.

Senator WORDSWORTH:
Tasmania

– The Governor-General’s Speech drew our attention to many important problems that have been discussed in this chamber to-night. Their relative importance is a matter of personal opinion, but I should say that defence is one of our main problems, for the reason that the other problems would not exist if we lost our country. In view both of the present state of the world and of our defences, I consider that our system of defence has been a failure. I am pleased to learn that the Government’s policy on defence is that we shall accept our full share in Empire defence, and that we shall have close co-operation with the United States of America. Our defence forces have certainly been allowed to dwindle since the last war ended. Perhaps that was a wise policy, because it is usual to have an era of peace after a war. The situation at the present moment can be compared with the situation in the 1920’s. I consider that World War II. was brought about by the fact that the British Empire did not remain as strong as it should have remained. I also believe that the danger of a third world war exists for the same reason. Russia and its satellites now occupy the place that was occupied by Greater Germany before World War II. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and its satellites is a powerful federation of nations which is far stronger than any single nation in the world to-day. The only group of nations able to oppose the federation consists of the nations that signed the North . Atlantic Pact. Australia is not one of those nations, but we are a very important community in the British Commonwealth of Nations, and Great Britain did sign the pact. In my opinion the only way to prevent war is to prepare for it and to remain strong.

Senator Grant:

– History does not support that contention.

Senator WORDSWORTH:

– I do not believe that we shall have a war so long as the nations which signed the North Atlantic Pact stick together and do not weaken. Let us examine the present world situation, and compare it with the situation before the last war. In 1939, the danger zone was situated on the German frontier. That was a very long way away from us. We were isolated, but isolation was our strength. To-day, the danger zone has shifted considerably. Russian influence has spread into China and is rapidly coming down through China to SouthEast Asia. It is threatening Indo-China, Malaya, Burma, Pakistan and India, and is many thousands of miles closer to us. Isolation is now our danger. We face the danger of isolation from our friends. In addition to that the improvement of modern weapons has increased our danger. The long-range projectile which has been developed to so great a degree since the end of the recent war has brought the danger of aggression very much closer to us. Whereas in the past time was our friend and the threat of invasion was a matter of months, or, perhaps, years, to-day Australia could be invaded within a matter of hours. In the interim, the rate of military movement has increased considerably. Prior to World War II. it was the speed of ships and of motor lorries that determined how fast an enemy could move whereas to-day it is the speed of the aeroplane. Thus, we could now be invaded or bombed either from the air or with long-range projectiles a few hours after the declaration of war. Indeed, it might well be that we could be bombed before any actual declaration of war.

Therefore, modern warfare is most complex. It calls for men thoroughly trained in the use of intricate machines. Such training cannot be accomplished within a short period but must be pursued according to plans worked out over many years. We must evolve such plans and thus prepare an effective framework of defence while we have the opportunity to do so. It is obvious that our present voluntary system of military training will not meet our needs. That fact is evident when we glance at the results achieved under that system. According to the Year-Booh, our target for the regular army to be achieved during the five-year period 1947-52 was 19,000 men, but the actual strength of the regular army to-day is only 14,838 nien, or 22 per cent, under strength. For the same period our target for the citizen forces was 50,000 men, but the actual strength of those forces is only 16,600 men, or 66 per cent, under strength. Those figures prove conclusively that the voluntary system has failed. Prior to federation 27,000 men were in the armed forces in. this country, whereas to-day the total strength of our defence forces is only 31,000. After 50 years, the strength of those forces has been increased by only 4,000 men, whereas it is quite obvious that during that period our dangers have increased to a far greater degree.

The main argument advanced against the principle of compulsory military training which is the alternative to the present voluntary system is that it would upset the economy of the country. Great Britain did not take that view. It considered that its dangers were such that it had to retain its system of compulsory military training even after the recent war ended. It did not let up to the degree that we have, although all honorable senators will agree that the position of the Mother Country from an economic point of view is hot so strong as ours. New Zealand has not been afraid of upsetting its economy. That country, in view of the risks that it deemed to exist, introduced compulsory military training. However, let us broadly examine whether universal military training can be re-introduced without upsetting our economy. I have no doubt about the matter. At present, a system of cadet training is carried out at the schools. If that training were made compulsory we would be able to do what might be termed the donkey work associated with military training at the schools and would achieve what we achieved through the medium of the Saturday afternoon army under the system of compulsory training in operation many years ago. The school system would provide training in elementary principles. It would teach our youth discipline and, consequently, would contribute to the building up of the morale of the nation. However, at present when the cadets leave school they are completely lost to the military effort. They just disappear because no record is kept of their whereabouts or of their avocations. I suggest that at the very least a register of school cadets should be kept so that should the need arise they would be available to form a skeleton army. The defence authorities would thus be enabled to get in touch with them and make use of them within the shortest possible period.

I suggest also that military training should be carried out at technical colleges and night schools. Military training for modern warfare can be made extremely interesting from a technical point of view, because the modern army needs men who are skilled in many trades. I mention, for example, motor mechanics and wireless telegraphists. Specialists of that kind could easily be trained at technical colleges and night schools. In addition, arrangements could he made to train officers and non-commissioned officers at universities. Leaders are the most difficult classes of men to obtain in wartime. The young men who fought in the recent war also offer a large potential reserve of military man-power. At present, however, they are lost to the military effort because no record is kept of their whereabouts. If they were registered they would be available for service at the shortest possible notice should any emergency arise. Such a record in itself would greatly strengthen our potential forces for defence. Another source of military man-power exists among young migrants of British stock, many of whom fought in the British forces during the recent war or underwent military training in Great Britain before coming to this country. As they will be sharing our national assets as settlers in this country, they will be only too pleased to accept the responsibility of contributing to its defence. A large number of men could be obtained from that source.

It is quite apparent that the Government does not intend to call up large numbers of men to undergo long periods of military training. That idea is out of date. What is required is short, sharp courses of training designed to build up large reserves, because reserves are most important in modern warfare. We do not require a large number of men actually under arms. Despite what many people say, the next war will not be a “ pushbutton” war. Ultimately, armed forces must be landed in any country before it can be conquered. There is not the slightest doubt about that. The next war will not be won simply by the use of atomic .bombs. Therefore, we must at all times have trained men at our disposal as a fudamental element of a skeleton defence plan. That is most essential.

I was pleased to learn that the Government proposes to strengthen the Air Force. We desperately need to do so because the Air Force is our first line of defence. We must rely upon it to resist any possible invasion from the air. Without a strong Air Force we would be open to bombing from the air within a matter of hours. The target set for the Royal Australian Air Force for the period 1947-52 was 12,000 men, but the actual strength of the Air Force is only 8,582, or 28 per cent, under strength. However, a more startling fact is that the Air Force has a reserve of only 116 men. We have heard a great deal about the i.i e: d to maintain large stocks of petrol for defence purposes. It would seem that we could increase our reserves of petrol one hundred fold before we could double the strength of the Air Force reserve. Whilst it would be quite easy to replace defence stocks of petrol, it is most difficult to strengthen that reserve. Nevertheless, the people generally, and particularly the youth of the country, could be stimulated by the encouragement of a citizen air force. The work of the Air Force has a natural appeal to youth. Flying operations and the maintenance of aircraft is most absorbing work to which the average youth can easily be attracted. I have not the slightest doubt that our youth would respond readily to recruitment for an air force reserve. I was gratified to hear that the Government intends to re-establish the Women’s Auxiliary Air Force. Such an organization is essential if we are to expand our defence forces without upsetting our economy. We must m’ake full use of our woman power which played a marvellous part in the recent war. I am certain that if called upon the young women of this country would respond to any appeal to train themselves to take an effective part should the necessity arise in any future emergency.

I also derived great satisfaction from the Government’s announcement that it proposes to take action against communism. The time has come when we must either accept communism or fight it. The danger of a “fifth column” in this country in the event of war is very great. For that reason alone, we must fight communism; but there is another reason. Communism is contrary to our way of life and to our ideals. Difference of opinion can exist only on the manner in which we fight it. There are many ways. We can educate the people generally on the dangers of communism. We can raise our standards of living. That is essential. Public opinion generally can be directed into the right channels; but all those methods of fighting communism are indirect and negative. They need time. I feel, therefore, that something positive must be done, and, in my opinion positive action can mean only the banning of the Communist party. What would be the result of banning the Communists? Their propaganda would be controlled, whereas at present, they are at liberty to spread their propaganda throughout the community. Banning would also provide a measure of control over the funds of the Communist party. The Communists undoubtedly would still get funds, but they would have greater difficulty in doing so. The movements of the Communists, too, would be controlled. There would not be these continual trips by Australian Communists to conferences in foreign countries, from which they return to Australia with orders and fresh ideas. Banning would also prevent open meetings of members of the Communist party, and would check the growth of the party. There is not the slightest doubt that banning would make life far more difficult for the Communists. It would help us to dig them from underground. Probably the commonest argument against banning the Communists is that they would be driven underground, but my experience of communism - and I have had a lot of it - indicates that even now, 90 per cent, of them are underground. What we see on the surface is not the danger. The confessed Communists are mere “ stooges “ who take their orders from others. They are not the dangerous ones, and could be ignored, hut the underground Communists cannot be tackled at present. If the Communist party were banned, the Government’s difficulty would be not that the Communists would be driven underground ; it would be in digging them up from underground. To-day we must fight or capitulate, and no one can dream of capitulating to communism. We must fight for our self preservation, and for that reason I whole-heartedly support the proposal to ban the Communist party.

Senator ARMSTRONG:
New South Wales

– I congratulate those members of the Senate who, in rather difficult circumstances, have delivered their maiden speeches in this chamber. Particularly do I congratulate Senator Willesee, who, in my opinion, may be added to the number of brilliant young Western Australians who have been elected to this Parliament in the last few years. Senator Ryan’s speech is worthy of close study, and was a welcome addition to the fund of knowledge that is available to honorable senators.

Throughout the Speech of the Governor-General, I listened in vain for a clear-cut statement on what was to happen to the Australian £1 in relation to the £1 sterling. However, there were two passages in the Speech which the Government might regard as its authority to revalue our currency. First, His Excellency said -

An intensive review is at present being made by my Government of the causes of present price trends with a view to determining the most effective measures which can be taken to remedy the current inflationary situation.

Later he said - lt believes moreover, that the application of its financial and economic policy will result in improvement in the purchasing power of the currency, so that pensioners, as well as other fixed income groups will benefit.

Why widows were left out I do not know, because for many years the needs of pensioners and widows have been the excuse for various anti-Labour governments to do things which, ultimately, have operated directly against the interests of those people. Whether the passages that I have read are regarded by the Government as some encouragement to appreciate our currency I do not know, but I read recently in the press a statement by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) that Federal Cabinet had not considered the revaluation of the Australian £1. To-night I am trying to bring the matter to such a stage that the Government will have to consider quickly what it intends to do. I urge upon honorable senators the importance of weighing minutely newspaper reports on the subject of devaluation. All the circumstances point to the possibility of a secret alliance between the Australian press and the Government. I hope sincerely that I am wrong. Throughout the recent general election campaign the standard of our newspapers was, with very few exceptions, the lowest that I have ever known in any political fight. Newspapers refused even to contradict wrong statements that they had published. The sole object was to secure, by means of a campaign of fear, the defeat of the Labour Government. The newspapers had almost unlimite’d supplies of money available to them. I am wondering whether the policy of the press will now become the policy of this Government. I shall quote to honorable senators a leading article which appeared in the Sunday Sun, a publication of. Associated News-papers Limited. Apparently preparing the path for revaluation, this article, published on the 20th November, under the headline “ This is a Woman’s Election “, stated -

The Australian woman voter being intelligent realizes that there’s a reason for dearer sheets and shirts and other clothing. At a time when Australia is getting the highest prices in her history for her exports the Chifley Government insisted on maintaining a devalued Australian pound - keeping it 25 per cent, below the pound sterling.

Who will gain most by an appreciation of the Australian £1? They can be counted on the fingers of one hand. They are the importers - consisting of two groups, the importers in genera] and the importers of newsprint - and the “ hot money “ men who stand to gain fortunes if this Government interferes with the exchange rate. Associated Newspapers Limited, in its balancesheet issued in December of last year, stated that newsprint consumed during the year by that organization cost £732,000. So if Associated Newspapers Limited can, by hook or by crook, secure an appreciation of the Australian £1 to parity with sterling, the company will save approximately one-fifth of that expenditure, or £150,000 a year. That is a substantial prize to be racing for, and it is little wonder that the Government is under terrific pressure from those interests. Let us take the Adelaide Advertiser, a relatively small newspaper, which probably is hardly known outside its own State. The latest annual report of that journal states that expenditure last year on newsprint was, £340,000. Therefore, the prize that the Adelaide Advertiser seeks through its representative, Sir Keith Murdoch, who has fought Labour with every means in his power, is at least £60,000 or £70,000 annually. Unfortunately, I have not been able to obtain at short notice the newsprint consumption figures for the Murdoch group of newspapers, but if the Adelaide Advertiser and Associated Newspapers Limited can be taken as a guide, it is clear that the saving to the Sydney Morning Herald group, and the Melbourne Herald, group, by the revaluation of our currency would be enormous. During the financial year 1948-49, £4,000,000 worth of newsprint was imported into Australia. For the six months from July to December, 1949, imports totalled £3,000,000 worth. Therefore, I advise honorable senators to be careful before accepting newspaper statements about the alleged advantages’ of an appreciation of our currency. As I have said, three groups in the community would stand to gain substantially by revaluation. They are the newspapers which import newsprint, the importers generally, and the “hot money” speculators who transfer their funds from one country to another hoping to increase their capital by anticipating government moves to alter existing exchange rates. An appreciation of the Australian £1 to parity with sterling would provide a profit of 25 per cent, to these people. Returning to the newspapers, I remind the Senate that the money expended on newsprint is by no means a loss. We all know that the prices of most newspapers have been increased substantially. The Sydney Sun of the Associated Newspapers Limited group is now 3d. instead of 2d. Allowing for a circulation drop of 10,000, that increase represents an ‘additional £220,000 a year to that newspaper, excluding higher advertising charges. The ‘ experience that I have gained as a member of this chamber for some years and my personal experiences during the last general election lead me to fear that the newspaper proprietors might well request the Government to appreciate the Australian £1 as a reward for the services that they have so ably rendered to it. If the Australian £1 were appreciated, the newsprint users of this country would make a profit of £1,000,000.

Senator O’sullivan:

– The honorable senator does not really believe that.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– I think that the Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O’sullivan) believes it. The time has come when the Government should consider this matter, and, having done so, state firmly that it will put a stop to the flood of money that is coming into this country. The entry of that money into Australia has a great inflationary tendency. It is doing a grave disservice not only to Australia but also to the United Kingdom. Despite the extreme degree of devaluation to which sterling was recently subjected, already the English pound being sold under the official market price in the free money markets of the world. A few years ago we used to laugh at the fact that although the official rate of exchange of the French franc was fixed at a certain figure, the unofficial rate was much less. That is what is happening now in relation to sterling. One of the main reasons for it is the flight of sterling to countries such as Australia, in which speculators hope to make fortunes by currency manipulation. Almost every day the stock exchange publications contain references to money being sent from the United Kingdom, other European countries and Singapore and invested in stocks and shares here. We read that London is supporting the shares of the Bank of New South Wales at £49 10s. a share, although for the last ten years the average price of the shares has been approximately £30. That is one of the ways in which speculators transfer their money from the United Kingdom to Australia. That is being done on every day of the week. It is conservatively estimated that “ hot “ money to the value of approximately £100,000,000 sterling has been sent to Australia. If the speculators have guessed correctly and the Australian £1 is later appreciated, that money will be withdrawn from Australia plus 25 per cent. The withdrawal of so large a sum from the Australian market would cause shares to go down and result in a loss of confidence. The most vital factor in the economy of any country is confidence. We must fight to ensure that confidence in the Australian market will not be shaken, but it could be shaken by the sudden withdrawal of the money that is now pouring into Australia. That action would adversely affect our economy and very seriously damage that of the United Kingdom. In those circumstances, I say that the Government should make a firm statement upon this matter very soon.

I have read deeply upon this subject in an endeavour to ascertain what advantages would accrue to Australia from an appreciation of the Australian £1, but I have not been able to discover that it would be advantageous except to the importers, the newsprint users and the money manipulators. Is it considered that the “ C “ aeries index, upon which the basic wage is calculated, would be affected if the Australian £1 were appreciated? Very few of the items that appear in the index are imported, and consequently the appreciation of the Australian £1 would not seriously affect the basic wage. It is often argued that the main cause of Inflation is the increased wages that are being paid to producers, but an appreciation of the Australian £1 would not affect those wages. Reuters, the well-known news agency, has referred to the fact that Canada and Sweden devalued their currencies but later reversed their decisions. It has been pointed out that the movement of the foreign exchange reserves of New Zealand is in sad contrast with the movements of those of Australia. Canada, Sweden and New Zealand have discovered that the appreciation of their currencies gave rise to unexpected difficulties. The editor of the Sunday Herald has stated that New Zealand has discovered that the cost of living in that country was not reduced as a result of the devaluation of the New Zealand £1. New Zealand is a nation that is very close to us, and it is possible to make a useful comparison of conditions there and in this country. If there be any evidence that the appreciation of New Zealand currency has been beneficial to New Zealand, that will be an argument in favour of the appreciation of Australian currency, but if the experience of New Zealand proves that the appreciation of the New Zealand £1 has not led to the advantages that the newspapers suggested would be gained by it, we should be wise to think very carefully before we appreciate our currency.

In order to illustrate what has happened in New Zealand since the New Zealand £1 was appreciated, I propose to compare the retail prices of basic foodstuffs in that country and in Australia. In Australia, bread is a halfpenny a loaf dearer than in New Zealand. Flour is also a little dearer here. Tea is substantially cheaper here than in N ew Zealand, but it is subsidized in this country and not in New Zealand. Sugar is substantially cheaper in this country than in New Zealand, while butter is a little dearer here. Cheese is substantially cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand, and so is tinned fruit. It is interesting to learn that beef and mutton , are substantially cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand. The effect of the appreciation of the New Zealand £1 has been a great disappointment to the New Zealand Government. All that appreciation did was to hold rising costs for a very short time.

Senator Spicer:

– Will the honorable senator inform the Senate of the date to which his comparison refers ?

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– December, 1949. The effect of the revaluation of the New Zealand £1 was that the position was held for only a short time. Between the first and fourth quarters of last year the cost-of-living index in New Zealand rose by fourteen points. New Zealand statistics establish the important fact that an appreciation of currency does not lead automatically to a reduction of the cost of imported goods. The .reason for that is the operation of the law of supply and demand. Strangely enough, the cost of some articles that are now being imported into New Zealand is greater than the cost of similar articles that are being brought into Australia. That is because the price of a commodity is determined by what the consumers will pay. Anybody who believes that, if we appreciate our. £1 by 20. per cent., the cost of imported goods will automatically be decreased by a similar percentage is labouring under a delusion. The facts do not support such a supposition. The Prime Minister of New Zealand has told the world of the inflationary spiral that is in progress in that country It is apparent that the appreciation of the New Zealand £1 has not helped to arrest it. The New Zealand farmers are displeased because their income from exports has been reduced by 20 per cent, repre- seating a loss of about £30,000,000. The people of New Zealand realize that they made a grave mistake in revaluing their currency. We must not make a similar mistake. What happened to the price of petrol when sterling was devalued? As the result of an international arrangement, the price was increased and the effect of devaluation was nullified. After the devaluation of sterling the United Kingdom was not able to huy wheat from us at a lower price than before devaluation because, following another international arrangement, the price was increased from 13s. to 19s. a bushel. Gold is one of our best dollar-earners. How many companies operating marginal gold mines could continue to operate if their income were reduced by 20 per cent, overnight ?

Great pressure can be brought to bear upon governments when great prizes are at stake. A man named Hawkes, who described himself as the chairman of the Joint Committee for Tariff Revision, stated in the press recently that it would be a good thing for Australia if we appreciated the value of the Australian £1 to parity with sterling. The title of the committee led one to assume that it might be a government committee, but, having made inquiries, I have discovered that it is an organization that is concerned with the presentation to the Tariff Board of facts and evidence relating to subjects with which the board is dealing. Obviously, the title of the committee was chosen with a view to leading people to suppose that it had something to do with the Government, but it is merely an offshoot of the Chamber of Commerce and is ready to move in an attempt to break down the protection that Australian industry now enjoys and, by and large, to do all that it can to secure a flood of imports to this country.

The United States of America, that land of free enterprise, has based its economy almost completely upon the principle of protection for its industries. No political party in America will publicly say a word in opposition to that principle. Even when the Congress of the United States of America enacts legislation to reduce the tariff upon some articles that are imported from abroad, the men on the customs barriers are so imbued with the idea that they must make the importation of those articles as difficult as possible that they search through their regulations to find justification for imposing the harshest duties possible. Some of the troubles that the British Commonwealth is now experiencing are largely due to the fact that it cannot sell to the dollar countries sufficient goods to enable a reasonable balance of trade to be maintained with them. One of the principal reasons for that is the American customs barrier. We know of the heavy duties that we must pay before we can get our wool and other products into the United States of America. America, the greatest nation in the world to-day, has insisted upon the protection of its industries. We stand where the United States of America stood 60 years ago. At this stage it would be suicidal to reduce the protection that Australian industries now enjoy. Our country is growing rapidly. In view of the number of migrants that are being brought to Australia we must expand and protect our secondary industries. No man need apologize for the fact that we need protection for Australian industries.

Let us consider the type of competition that we face. Some people contend that Australian industry is not efficient. However, I know that the quality of many things we produce is unequalled in many parts of the world. We need protection because of the type of competition that can so easily and freely move in amongst us. Of course we provide an export market for Great Britain. If we had not devalued our currency, overnight the Australian manufacturer would have suffered a 20 per cent, reduction of the protection given to his products. Australian secondary industries could not stand that. According to the financial columns of the daily press during the last few days, Lanray Industries Limited lost almost £38,000 during the year ended the 30th June, 1949. The issued capital of that company is £140,000. The finances of Stirling Henry Limited, textile manufacturers, are at their lowest level for many years, whilst Impression Textiles Limited is in a very serious position. According to a review prepared by the Division of Industrial Development the Australian market for domestic electrical appliances is becoming highly competitive. If, in addition to their rates dropping by 20 per cent., European and British goods beat them on the already glutted Australian market, that industry would have no chance of surviving. As a Minister in the last Government I learned of the type of assistance that the Government of the United Kingdom gave to the British textile industry. To my mind that assistance was unfair, because manufacturers in Great Britain were enabled to buy their basic materials in England at prices 30 per cent, cheaper than manufacturers in this country were able to buy the same basic commodity. That material was made into the finished product in England and sold in Australia for 30 per cent, less than it would cost us to produce the finished article. “We could not compete with this type of competition in Australia. Textiles were flooding into this country last year until certain action was taken by the Chifley Government. Every country uses every means in its power to break into the export market at the expense . of other countries.

Before the war Japan used its currency to break into British and German markets throughout the world. “We have a lead because of devaluation. It would be suicidal to lose that advantage. We have just started to develop an export trade and it is essential to us, if we are to become a successful nation, that we should expand that trade. To-day one of every three wage and salary earners in this country is employed in secondary industries. We must not interfere with the future security of a large number of men and women in this country and break down the present solidarity and confidence in Australian industries. In the four years from the end of the war to June, 1949, no less than £173,000,000 was invested in Australian industries, £63,000,000 being from overseas. There are now 38,000 factories in this country, approximately 11,000 more than in 1938-39. The amount of capital invested in secondary industry in Australia is £425,000,000, compared with £275,000,000 in 1938-39. About 850,000 persons are now employed in our factories. They receive £286,000,000 a year in salaries and wages compared with £107,000,000 in 1938-39. The national income, which is now over £1,600,000,000, is double what it was ten years ago. Of this amount, primary production contributed about £250,000,000, and net factory production £489,000,000. That is evidence of the size of the colossal secondary industry edifice that has been established in this country. If we interfere with it, the price that we would have to pay might shock us. Primary industry last year exported a total of over £542.000,000 worth of commodities. Everyone engaged in primary industry knows if the Australian £1 were appreciated, £100,000,000 of income would be lost to this country. I am one who would not agree with the argument that if high prices were paid for Australian primary products inflation would follow automatically. That seems to me to be a policy of despair. After a period when low prices were received for our primary products there was a depression when hundreds of thousands of men and women were out of work in this counrty and the farmers were in the hands of the banks. Many of them lost their properties. I want to see high prices for our primary produce. I do not care how long they last. This country will handle the problem of production adequately in due course. The man on the land is handling his own property and improving it with his own money. Instead of going to the banks he is establishing a credit for himself. He can plan for his son’s future confidently. He can now settle him on the land instead of allowing him to drift to the cities. Now his lad has a chance to obtain a property and pay for it in reasonably quick time. We are building a bulwark against the first serious winds of depression. In the past the primary producers have been left cold and unprotected. Now, because of high prices, the banks cannot break the man on the land and therefore cannot break the secondary industries in the cities. Why should £110,000,000 be taken from the primary producers in a year because somebody wants, as a’ matter of pride, to appreciate the Australian £1, or because somebody wants, as a matter of personal greed, to appreciate the Australian £1 for his own purposes? Why should we listen to those people, to the detriment of our own decent people in Australia? I want the Government to consider this matter as quickly as possible, and to stop the flow of “ hot “ money into Australia. I want to silence the newspapers that are spreading the story that inflation will be prevented only if the Australian £1 is appreciated.

Last week there was circulated in this chamber a statement by Sir Walter Massy-Greene, who was once a member of the Senate. Previously he had been ear-marked by the then United Australia party to be its Prime Minister. It is possible that he may have proved to be a good choice, because he is a great man for the development of Australian industry. He is a man of great standing in this country. He wanted to say something against the appreciation of the Australian £1, and my information is that he had the utmost difficulty in getting his story into the Australian press, particularly in New .South Wales. The concluding paragraph of his statement sums up many of the thoughts that I have in my mind -

It is difficult to forecast the full deflationary effects of an upward adjustment of the Australian £1, hut it can be definitely asserted that were it to be followed by a break in world prices or a drought, it might bring this country face to face with a deep depression. Is it worth running that risk? Until such time as its exchange can be freed from all restriction, I believe the Australian £1 should be left where it is.

That is also the opinion of the Australian Labour party. I do not mean to be offensive by what I shall advance. History shows that it is true. Strangely enough, but factually, anti-Labour governments have always been associated with unemployment in this country. I do not consider that any supporter of the Government in the Senate would want to see any man unemployed in this country. I believe that all honorable senators are possessed of human instincts, and that they would rather see men working than starving. However, a situation can sometimes overtake governments. I believe that a Liberal government is more vulnerable in this respect than is a Labour government. In the present situation I can see that if the wrong action is taken by the government there will develop the first step of a condition that has always characterized non-Labour governments in this country. That step leads, inevitably, to unemployment, and finally to a deep depression. Therefore I appeal to the Ministers in this chamber to see that tha Cabinet, at the earliest opportunity, discusses the question of the appreciation of the Australian £1, with a view toannouncing that there shall he no alteration of its present value. It may hecontended that the importers desire theAustralian £1 to be appreciated. I point out that importers will never make a nation great. The only people who will make a nation great are the producers and manufacturers. Although many imports may be basic materials, scarcely a thing that we need could not be produced in this country by proper development of our secondary industries. It is only by developing those industries that we will he able to absorb the population that this country must carry if it is to he saved from the threats of the Near East and the Far East. It is a dastardly thing if we are to be told by the newspaper proprietors of this land, because there is £1,000,000 profit in it for them, that the Australian £1 must be appreciated. The Government must fight the issue with everything in its power. If the Australian £1 is appreciated the Australian people will consider that the newspaper proprietors, not the Menzies Government, constitute the government of this country. If the Australian £1 is appreciated the primary producers will automatically lose 20 per cent, of their income, our £461,000,000 credit in Great Britain will be reduced overnight by approximately £115,000.000 and Australian workers will become less secure in their jobs, and their future vulnerable. Once men lose their employment the rock of confidence on which this country rests will bc rapidly destroyed. Instead of the security that we now know there would develop rapidly a depression the like of which may easily make the great depression of 1931 seem mild. On behalf of the men and women of this country I appeal to the Government to fight against a possible depression by not appreciating the Australian £1.

Senator PIESSE:
Western Australia

– As a new senator, I was naturally very interested in the Governor-General’s Speech. Like other honorable senators, I was delighted to hear that His Majesty’s health had so improved that we may look forward to a Boya] visit in 1952. I, too, hope that His Majesty’s health will so improve that he will be able to make the trip then, in which event he will be given the welcome that he would have received had he been able to keep the previous engagement. One or two matters in His Excellency’s Speech interested me very much.

Having lived all my life in rural areas I was pleased to hear that the Government would “pay attention to the importance of achieving a well-balanced pattern of decentralization “. Those who have lived in country areas have looked forward for a long time to the implementation of a proper policy of decentralization. In recent years the people of the country areas have seen the population moving to the city, and it has not been hard to find the reason. Old people who have retired from their farms have found it better to go to the cities where more amenities of life exist rather than stay in the country areas where they cannot get them. Young people growing up have seen the light. City life is easier for them. Country people have had to go without many amenities for the simple reason that large expenditure on a national scale is required to provide them. A senator referred earlier to water supply. It is difficult for country areas to go ahead without water. For example, it is impossible to have sewerage without water. Those things are provided in the cities, and the same applies to power and light. People who have gone to the country to make their homes in the towns and on the farms have done so knowing full well at the start that they have to accept what is there. With a proper system of decentralization and the provision of amenities the people will be inclined, when they retire, to stay in the country towns among the people they know and have lived with instead of going to the cities, the young people will be encouraged to stay in the country and the nation as a whole will benefit. I notice also the Government’s policy of national development. This is most important to all the States. I have no desire to see this development carried out in one State at the expense of the others. Properly planned national development must be of tremendous value to Australia. Many schemes have already been planned and many more could be planned. Western Australia, the largest State, is particularly at a disadvantage in regard to water supplies because it has not the natural advantages of some of the other States. A new water scheme is at present in hand. I take it that that is only one of the many undertakings to which we can look forward under a system providing for the proper planning of such national works. I understand that the administrative bodies are to work with the State, and Commonwealth governments. I am sure the Ministry of National Development, when fully working, will benefit all States, but we cannot expect it to grow overnight and deal with a prospective expenditure of £250,000,000. The northwestern portion of Western Australia is an enormous area with its own particular difficulties. I understand that many plans have been formulated for that part of the State. In the south-west great schemes are going ahead. I am sure they could be worked in conjunction with the Ministry of National Development to the benefit of the Commonwealth. Western Australia, in addition to being the largest State of the Commonwealth, is the least developed, and the furthest from the National Capital. Although that State has no direct representative in the Government, I feel sure that Ministers will realize that they should visit Western Australia to learn at first-hand that ‘ State’s difficulties. I can assure them when they do visit Western Australia that they will be given all the help and information that can be provided. I am pleased to see that a Western Australian member has been appointed a Parliamentary Under-Secretary, and I am sure that he will further the interest of the State he represents.

I was pleased to notice also in His Excellency’s Speech that there is to be a comprehensive review of the taxation laws. I am sure that simpler and more consolidated taxation forms would be appreciated by the people of Australia. The average person realizes that taxation must be paid, but many people cannot fill in a taxation form. They would like to be able to do so, and to work out approximately the amount of tax to be paid by them. If a comprehensive review of taxation laws takes place and that is brought about it will be of great help to taxpayers generally. A review of sales tax laws is also needed.

A matter of importance to all States is the rabbit plague. Every effort must be made by the Commonwealth and State Governments and the individuals concerned to get this pest under control. I know the difficulties confronting farmers without rabbit-proof netting, which has been practically unobtainable for some years. By the proper use of wire netting, properties can be kept free of rabbits, but, in addition, we must look to other things and seek the help of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization in exterminating the pest. There are places in Australia where there are no fences, and rabbits can roam as conditions suit them. I believe that it is not beyond the powers of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization to discover something that will help to get rid of the rabbits. Science is playing a bigger part than ever in farming, and every penny spent on veterinary and agricultural colleges and other means of educating those connected with farming will be money well invested. During the last few years we have seen the difference that certain elements will make to light soils, and I believe that we are only at the beginning of this work.

People in Western Australia look forward to the Ministry of National Development adopting a policy of decentralization by the greater use of outports.

Large sums of money are being spent on the ports of Albany and Bunbury. I look forward to interstate shipping using those ports more than it does now, because by that means there will be better handling of the produce of Western Australia. I was pleased to hear that a conference was held in London recently regarding the handling of wool. I look forward with interest to seeing the report of that conference when it is made. Experience over the last few years has shown that the wool-growers of Australia have been satisfied with the system under which their wool has been sold. Naturally, the wool buyers in London hope that wool will return to the free market, but I am sure that I am voicing the thoughts of many when I say that in the light of the experience of the last few years I look forward to wool being handled as it has been during that period.

I thank you, Mr. President, and honorable senators generally for the help given to me since I arrived in Canberra. As a new senator I have appreciated that help, and so long as I remain a member of the Senate I hope that I shall be able to think nationally and to act accordingly.

Senator TANGNEY:
Western Australia

– Before addressing myself to the Governor-General’s Speech, I should like to add my personal congratulations to the new senators who have taken their place in this chamber. I should like particularly to welcome my two new women colleagues. The presence of four women in the Senate indicates not only a growing consciousness in women of the part they can play in the national life of this country, but also the willingness of Australians to trust their womenfolk with their national problems. I trust that the stay of my two colleagues in this chamber will be as happy as mine has been, and I know that they will receive the assistance and support of other honorable senators as I have done in the six and a half years; that I have been a senator. The new senators have given this chamber a changed aspect from that which it had during the last three years because not only has the Senate been considerably enlarged, but also, as a result of the new methods of election, it is more representative of both the majority and the minority vote.

Turning to the Governor-General’s Speech, I was rather amazed to find that in five of the six and a half printed pages that it covers there is a tribute paid, perhaps unconsciously at times, to the work of the Labour governments that have held office over the last eight years. On the first page of the Speech appears a reference to the defence policy of the new Government, which shows that policy to be of the very pattern of the policy that was initiated by the . late John Curtin when he was Prime Minister, and that was carried out by successive Labour Governments. For its adoption of that policy I commend the present Government. We are told that our defence policy will be based on the acceptance by Australia of its full share in the co-ordinated British Commonwealth defence scheme and on the closest co-operation with the United States of America. How very odd it is to-day to hear expressed the -principle of close co-operation with the United States of America, when we recall the sentiments expressed in 1942 by the press of this country, after John Curtin had appealed to the United States of America to help us to keep this bastion of the British Empire safe. It was said that he was “ cutting, the painter “. Time has now vindicated his judgment. I am pleased to know that the new Government is willing to rely on that policy. The Speech also contained a complimentary reference to the long-range weapons project in South Australia, which has been very highly commended in the United Kingdom and elsewhere as being of primary importance among our defence projects. This work will be continued by the present Government, as will also be the work in connexion with the Snowy Mountains scheme. I was very interested to hear honorable senators discuss water conservation because I have returned recently from a long trip through a sadly neglected part of the Australian continent, which is strategically important but the importance of which, now that the war is over, has apparently been forgotten. I refer to the north-west of Western Australia. I went from Gerald- ton to Darwin during the hottest part of the year, travelling in great discomfort because of the climatic conditions, and I wondered how in the world the women of that area have managed to keep going at all. We are often told about the great services rendered by the pioneers of this country and of the debt we owe to the primary producers, but we have only to look at this vast portion of the country to realize how sadly neglected they have been by both Federal and State Governments. I hope that in the Government’s new plan for water conservation due recognition will be given to the claims of the north-west of Western Australia.

When I visited the town of Onslow the temperature was 110 degrees and there was no reticulated water at the jetty. Onslow was a fuelling base for the Air Force and for submarines during the war, and yet there is no adequate water supply there now. There is a river about fourteen or fifteen miles away, and surely it should not be too great an undertaking to harness its waters in order to give Onslow a water supply to enable it to remain an important town as far as defence is concerned, as well as to increase the comfort of the residents. I found that water was also a major problem further up the coast. Right through the Kimberleys region people have to pay ten shillings for every 1,000 gallons of water that they use. The roads boards at Wyndham and Broome were in great financial difficulty because of their water problems, some of which had been accentuated because Wyndham and Broome were frontier towns during the war, the whole of their civilian populations had to be evacuated to the south, and the public utilities were used foi” defence purposes. For that reason I claim that the work of reconstructing this very important town is a job for the Australian Government in co-operation with the State Government of Western Australia. I have discussed the matter with the Premier of Western Australia, who was kind enough to give me a great deal of his time and attention, but as Senator Piesse has just said, Western Australia is a very large State which covers a third of the area of Australia, although it has a population amounting to only one-third of the population of the city of Sydney in New South Wales. That comparison may explain to honorable senators why the north-west of the State cannot possibly ‘be developed entirely by the State Government. It is a very important part of Australia because it is only a few hours’ flying time from South-East Asia. We have heard a great deal about our foreign policy and about Australia’s place in the SouthWest Pacific and in relation to SouthEast Asia, but I consider that it is much more important for us to do the jobs that are near home and to ensure that those parts of Australia that have important potentialities shall be developed to the very utmost of our resources, not only for the purposes of war but also for the purposes of peace, which is much more important.

The Governor-General’s Speech mentioned the projected health services to be provided in this country. Anything that this Government or any government can do for the Flying Doctor service would not be too much.

Senator O’Sullivan:

– Hear, hear!

Senator TANGNEY:

– Those services are not only Flying Doctor services ; they also provide a real life line throughout the whole outback. There are isolated parts of Australia which have some kind of hospital or medical service. At Onslow there is quite a good hospital, but it has no proper accommodation for the nurses, who have to live in the maternity section of the hospital. After confinement, mothers have to go back into the general ward. I found that the native portion of the hospital consisted only of two galvanized iron rooms on ground level, which are not conducive to either cleanliness or adequate attention. I found that there was hardly a shutter in the hospital that had two hinges, because the hinges had rusted away and there was nobody to see that they were kept in good repair. The hospital at Wyndham had only one trained nurse in attendance, with a girl of seventeen or eighteen years of age to help her. That hospital has at least three wards, which means that the trained nurse must be on call 24 bourse a day for seven days a week. That is a very great strain on any woman, particularly on one who has in her hands the power of life or death and is so far away from medical advice. Those are just a few of the problems of the north-western area. I saw one very heartening picture in the north which I consider I should repeat to the Senate in view of an article that appeared in one of last Sunday’s newspapers. I refer to what I saw at the leprosarium at Derby where, during my visit, the temperature was 107 degrees. I went out to see the lepers and found that that leprosarium was the one bright spot on the whole of the north-western coast. That may sound a strange statement, but I assure the Senate that there I found Christian charity and real Christianity at work much more effectively than I have encountered in any other part of this country or in any other country. I found that the State Government had established the leprosarium, but had been unable to obtain civilian nurses. Four sisters of Saint John of God had undertaken the nursing of the 281 lepers. Last year the Commonwealth Grants Commission visited the smaller States which advanced cases for increased aid for hospitals. In Western Australia the figures quoted for the upkeep of a patient in a public hospital was between £18 and £20 a week. At Derby the lepers are clothed, fed, housed and given medical treatment for a cost to the State Government of less than 27s. 6d. a week each. These figures will make honorable senators realize how much selfsacrifice is being applied to the task of nursing these lepers by these valiant women. I found also that in addition to nursing the lepers and generally looking after their welfare the reverend mother in her spare time, such as it was, had taught 60 of the patients music, and I heard there a symphony concert almost as good as one that I heard in Canberra recently. It was an inspiring experience to find aboriginal lepers, who are regarded elsewhere as outcasts, playing classical and light music on violins, flutes, violas and other musical instruments that they had been patiently trained to play. That is an answer to the materialism that we see in the world about us. Such a job could be done only by people having a very high mission and a high conception of their duty towards their fellow humans. I ask the Leader of the Senate (Senator

O’sullivan) to put to the Government the case for the north-west of Western Australia that I have tried to convey to the .Senate to-night. That area of the Commonwealth is of as much importance to Australia as are Sydney, Melbourne and other cities. During the war it was the one part of Australia whose soil was desecrated by a foreign foe and where people saw their homes wrecked. The people in Darwin were the only people in Australia who saw their loved ones killed on their own soil. Seven years have passed since that day of holocaust in Darwin and Broome, and we find the north-western area neglected. In view of the fact that, acording to the Governor-General’s Speech, we are quite well off financially, some of our national finances should be spent to develop that very important part of our country.

Another important statement in the Governor-General’s Speech relates to the suppression of subversive . elements, particularly communism. I have, been fighting the Communists for the last fourteen years. On one occasion I had the distinction of being referred to in a Communist paper as “ A Fascist moll and a female Jesuit “. But apart from such pleasantries, I have had battling to do against the Communists in Western Australia. Therefore, it cannot be said that I am a supporter of communism in any way. I hate it, but, at the same time, I do not think that the Government will succeed in wiping it out by suppressing it. By dealing with communism in that way the Government will simply be turning back the pages of history of the last ten years in this country. Honorable senators will remember that when there were not more than 6,000 Communists in Australia they were driven underground, but when they were allowed to come to the surface again they were 20,000 strong. While they were suppressed they continued to circulate their newspapers. At that time when a person was liable to be gaoled if found in possession of a Communist newspaper, one of those newspapers was sent to me. I immediately handed it over to the security authorities, who informed me that they had been advised anonymously that 1 had that newspaper in my possession. That fact shows how determined the Communists were to “ get “ me at that time; but they did not succeed. Despite those fact3 and all that I have tried to do against communism, not only as an individual but also as a member of the Labour party, which has always done its utmost to combat communism - because no person can become, or remain, a member of the Labour party without signing a pledge that he, or she, does not belong to the Communist party, I do not believe that we shall overcome communism merely by suppressing it. That is not sufficient.

Communism is an evil. We can destroy it only by destroying the conditions that give it birth. I have seen at first hand the growth of communism in Ceylon because of the conditions of ignorance and squalor among the native people of that country. I have seen how those people, after placing all their trust in the communists and electing them to their parliament, have been absolutely disillusioned when nothing was done for them. We must give our people such conditions, of life that they will not need to have recourse to other ideologies. We have proceeded a long way along that path, but something more should be done. I do not like the Communists, but I do not blame them. If every man and woman had convictions as deeply rooted in his, or her, heart and was willing to make some sacrifice for them as the Communists are willing to do, we would get somewhere in dealing with this evil. Perhaps, every honorable senator has had the experience of attending an ordinary meeting at which Communists might be in a minority. But they are in a minority for only a. while. In hot weather most people will not bother to go to meetings, whilst in winter they prefer to stay at home beside the fire. However, the Communists attend all meetings and although they may be in a minority they are able by their tactics to gain control of various organizations including trade unions. The real test is whether the people of Australia mean what they say when they accuse the Communists. We adopt the coward’s way by merely putting the onus upon the Government to do something against Communism that we know will not succeed. The responsibility rests upon each member of the community to do his, or her, share in combating this evil by taking part in civic and public affairs and the affairs of various organizations, including trade unions, in which Communists like to rear their ugly heads. We cannot destroy communism merely by ^suppression. That is merely a negative attitude towards the problem. Communism is a deadly menace in the community. Communists are not strong enough numerically, but they acquire strength because they are given undue publicity. A Communist has only to walk backwards across the street to receive a column of publicity in the daily press. The Communists gain by the publicity that is given to any minor event in which they take part. That is how 1 feel about communism. I have been doing my best during the last fourteen years to put something better in its place, and I regret that the Government should pursue a policy of negation in dealing with this evil.

I am surprised to find that the Government intends to provide a very limited formulary under its proposed national health scheme. During the. last five, or six, years important discussions took place between the previous Government and the British Medical Association relating to free medicine, and the Association’s main line of attack upon Labour’s proposals was that the formulary proposed was not sufficiently comprehensive because it comprised only SO per cent, of the drugs in common use. Because of its opposition to Labour’s proposals, the British Medical Association poured out much of its money to fight the previous Government at the recent general election, and many of its members, including doctors who are friends of mine, campaigned against it on the ground that its health scheme would permit medical practitioners to prescribe for their patients only 90 per cent, of the medicines which they considered to be necessary to enable them to carry on their practices properly. Now,0 despite the fact that this Government has the power to provide health benefits and has a mandate from the people to do so, and although we are told that it has the support of the British Medical Association, we find that the formulary suggested in the Governor-General’s Speech is limited to only a few prescriptions. I believe that the people of this country are entitled to those limited benefits. T should not be happy to know that any person suffering from diabetes was prevented from obtaining insulin or that any person was prevented from obtaining sulpha tablets for the alleviation of certain complaints. At the same time, I cannot reconcile the attitude that supporters of the Government now adopt with the attitude they adopted when they were in Opposition. Their main criticism of the Labour Government’s scheme for the provision of free medicine was that it did not go far enough because it did not provide for a full formulary.

Reverting to the subject of subversive organizations, I point out that whilst mention has been made of the Communist party a number of mushroom organizations have come- into existence in this country during the last few years. In Western Australia a great deal of publicity, including press notices, has been given to an organization known as the “ C.R.A.” That body appears to have unbounded wealth at its disposal because it has sponsored full-page advertisements in the daily newspapers. I have been unable to ascertain whether it is a limited liability company or whether it holds an annual meeting. I trust that the Government, when it is investigating subversive organizations, will also investigate big organizations of that kind in order to ascertain their origin, the source of their revenue and whether they produce balance-sheets, so that when people see ominous advertisements of the kind sponsored by the C.R.A. they will know whether they are subversive. I recall that a few years ago a body known as the Council for Civil Liberties was in existence. I do not know whether the C.R.A. has anything to do with ‘ that organization. If it has, its operations are worthy of investigation by the Government.

In view of the lateness of the hour I shall not deal at length with the Government’s proposal to provide endowment at the rate of 5s. a week for the first child in each family. Every supporter of the Labour party will welcome every real benefit that can be provided for families. However, I remind the Government that in 1941 when the present Minister for Immigration (Mr. Holt), who was then Minister for Labour and National Service, introduced legislation providing for child endowment he advanced numerous reasons why the Government of the day could not provide endowment for the first child. If that was true in 1941 it is just as true in 1950. Last year, when these election promises were being made, the court hearing of the basic wage case was adjourned until after the election. That clearly showed that the findings of the court would be affected by the result of the election which would show whether those promises would have to be made good or not.

If it is possible to give 5e. child endowment for the first child in a family without altering the basic wage, I am in favour of giving that 5s., but I am much more in favour of making it 10s. I am without the personal experience of many other honorable senators in this field, but I understand that the first child is the most expensive to keep. If it would not interfere with the basic wage we could make the payment 10s. or 15s. Any mother deserves a lot more than she gets.

I felt disappointed at the lack of any mention of education in the GovernorGeneral’s Speech. I know that education is a State matter at the present time, although for the first time since federation the Chifley Labour Government gave huge grants for education, but only for education at university level or for preschool children. Valuable assistance was given to university students. During the life of the last Parliament provision was made, by means of scholarships, for children in primary schools to receive secondary education. I do not think any other federal government did as much for education as did the Chifley Government. I hope that the present Government will continue the educational work carried out by the Labour Government. I should liketo see more assistance given, not just to the 3 per cent, of the population that go to the universities and the limited number of children of pre-school age who go to our Lady Gowrie centres, but to general education throughout Australia.

We have a different education system for each State of the Commonwealth.. There is not a definite standard of education for the whole of Australia. That remark applies not only to schools and universities but also to the professions. I have previously mentioned a dentist who was practising in Perth and could extract my teeth in Perth if I went to him for the purpose but not in Queensland. He enlisted in the Army and was moved from Western Australia to Queensland where he could pull out the teeth of Queensland soldiers but not the teeth of Queensland civilians. When the war ended he could not practise in Queensland until he had undergone training in that .State as a dentist. That is an extreme case, but it indicates the lack of uniformity in education which exists throughout the professions. I hope that more regard will be paid by the Government to this important subject of education, because if there is an educated democracy a great number of the other ills that beset communities simply fade away. Where there is no ignorance, there is no squalor and no poverty, and where squalor and poverty are unknown there is less ill health. Therefore, among the social services of any government education should occupy a prominent position. I hope that something will be done in this respect by this Government. The machinery is already there, and the work begun by the Chifley Government has only to be continued. 1 feel that this Government will not fail in that respect.

I am sorry to have kept the Senate so late but the things I have spoken about are dear to my heart. We are here as partners in the one big job of trying to bring good government to the people of this Commonwealth. Membership of the highest Parliament in the Commonwealth is an honour which also has its obligations. I trust that the Government which has received a mandate from the people to carry on the job of government will give some “attention to the matters which I have raised and which are in the interests, not only of Western Australia, but of Australia as a whole.

Senator GORTON:
Victoria

.- Some remarks made earlier this afternoon by Senator Ryan were no doubt made in all sincerity, but I should not like them to pass without comment. He suggested that because during the last war we were able to mobilize our defence potential before real . danger threatened this country, and were able to recruit our forces in time to make them effective, we would be safe to follow the same course should a future war break upon this country. That is an extremely dangerous attitude to adopt. Having served in the last war, I say that we cannot be sure that the conditions which obtained then would be repeated in the event of another war. It may well be that the ominous shadow which is now -creeping down through China, threatening Malaya and Indonesia and coming closer to the near north of this country, will reach us without warning and that we shall not have those months of preparation which last time were bought for us by the suffering and sacrifice of our kinsfolk in Britain.

It has been said to-night that our defence potential and our defence forces were built up under a Labour government. As that statement went over the air, I feel it is only right that I should point out that the Australian Imperial Force was completely enlisted by a nonLabour government with the violent antagonism of the then Labour Opposition. The British Empire air training scheme, in which I had the honour to serve, was also formulated by a nonLabour government despite the bitter opposition of the Labour party, For what happened after the Labour Government came into office let us give it credit; but let us not withhold the credit that is due to the non-Labour government that was’ in power when the war broke out for recruiting the forces of this country and for preparing the blueprints and setting up the plans under which the war effort of this country was eventually carried out. I ask leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 205

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Australian Wool Board - Thirteenth Annual Report, for. year 1948-49.

Commonwealth Public Service Act - Appointments - Department - ‘

Interior - L. R. Adler, M. Harrison, N. W. Larsson, R. M. Markey.

Labour and National Service - M. Schwarz.

Postmaster-General’s Department - S. R. Ayling, E. A. Brettingham-Moore, H. K. Buchan, J. Chambers, J. K. distance, A. A. Dawes, H. W. F. Edwards, R. P. Froom, E. G. Goymer, J. Green, A. G. Harvey, R. B. Head, W. Herbst, A. G. Hilliard, H. D. HyamBon, L. Jewell, R. Larnach, M. N. Leveridge, C. F. MeGrane, K. A. McKibbin, E. W. Mansfield, H. W. Millson, A. E. Perriman, T. F. Reed, J. D. Robertson, C. M. Sapsford, J. Tomlinson, R. V. Verrall.

Social Services - B. M. C. Gordon.

Commonwealth Railways Act- Report on Commonwealth Railways operations for year 1948-49.

Defence (Transitional Provisions) Act - National Security (Prices) Regulations - Orders- Nos. 3444-3447.

National Security (Rationing) Regulations - Orders - Nos. 165-167.

Order - Control of tinplate (Revocation).

Lands Acquisition Act-Land acquired for the Department of Supply and Development purposes - Hobart, Tasmania.

Liquid. Fuel (Rationing) Act -

Liquid Fuel (Rationing) Regulations - Orders- Nos. 1-3.

Regulations - Statutory Rules 1950, No. 5. River Murray Waters Act - River Murray Commission - Report for year 1948-49.

Sugar - International Agreements- Protocol, dated 31st August, 1949, signed in London.

Senate adjourned at 11.5 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 1 March 1950, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1950/19500301_senate_19_206/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant