19th Parliament · 1st Session
The President (Senator the Hon. Gordon Brown) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.
page 539
SenatorFTNLAY. - I preface my question to the Minister for Repatriation by reminding the honorable gentleman that the present legislation relating to ex-servicemen’s pensions and war gratuity is based upon recommendations that were made by an all-party parliamentary committee, and that during his period of office as Leader of the Opposition in this chamber he expressed the opinion that any further proposed legislation relating to those matters should be referred to such a committee. Will the Minister inform the Senate why the present review of repatriation benefits is being undertaken by a Cabinet sub-committee and not by an all-party parliamentary committee?
– It is true that in the past I have expressed- the opinion that proposed amendments of the legislation in relation to repatriation should be referred to an all-party parliamentary committee consisting of ex-service men and women. The previous Government would not agree to do so. Mr. Menzies stated in the policy speech thathe delivered on behalf of the present Go vernment parties that therate of, pensionspaid to ex-servicemen and anomalies to which the repatriation legislation has given rise would be investigated immediately if those parties were returned to power. The present Cabinet discussed that matter at- its earliestmeetings. The promise that Mr. Menzies . made in his policy speech . was honoured. The Cabinet sub-committee has met on a number of occasions.It has not yet made final decisions, but it is well ahead with its, work. If the Government had decided to establish an allparty parliamentary committee, the committee could nothave been formed and could not have commenced . its deliberations . until the Parliament assembled. That would have entailed some delay. in the preparation of recommendations. , I believe that, as a member of the Cabinet, I have acted correctly in following the policy that was outlined by Mr. Menzies in his policy speech. The six members of the Cabinet sub-committee are all ex-servicemen. I hope that the recommendations of the committee will be incorporated in legislation that will be introduced before the end of this session.
– Will the Minister Bay whether it is a fact, as reported in the press, that the Cabinet sub-committee that isconsidering repatriation benefits andex-servicemen’s pensions proposes to visit country districts and- cities in all. States in order to collect the information that it requires to prepare its recommendations? If so, will he inform the Senate when it is expected that those inquiries will be completed ? Is it true that during the life of the last Parliament the Minister often said in this chamber that he had at his disposal all the information that was required to enable the Government to increase pensions and extend repatriation benefits?
– It is notthe intention of the Cabinet sub-committee to travel to all States. I do not think that I or anybody else could have been possessed of all relevant information concerning the amendments that may be required to remove anomalies from the repatriation legislation. As I have already stated ‘ in answer to another question, that matter, is being considered by the Cabinet sub-committee, all members of which are ex-servicemen. The result of the deliberations of that subcommittee will be placed before the Parliament in due course.
– Will the Minister inform the Senate whether the Cabinet sub-committee that is investigating ex-service pensions, &c, has given consideration to the cases of ex-service personnel who have developed ailments since their discharge from the forces? If so, will it consider them on the basis that such ailments shall be recognized as a result of war service unless medical evidence is to the contrary?
– The Cabinet subcommittee has investigated that matter, and I should say that at the present time any ailment that can be shown to be due to the effects of war service is treated as if it was actually sustained or contracted during war service, so that an exserviceman who puts his case before a Expatriation Board and it is shown that- his ailment is due to the effects of war service will have it classified as so due, and will receive the requisite pension for the particular type of case.
– I ask the Minister for Repatriation whether the Repatriation Commission has instructed all deputy commissioners that, ‘ without written authority from the commission, no deputy commissioner or officer under his direction is to take any action to gather evidence, that could be used under section 43 of the Australian Soldiers’ Repatriation Act, in an investigation of whether or not a pension payable to a war widow should be terminated ? Has the Repatriation Commission instructed all deputy commissioners that any unsought information brought to their notice that could be used, under section 43 of the act, in an investigation of whether or not a pension payable to a war widow should be terminated, must not be referred to a State board, but must he referred direct to the commission, and that no investigation is to be instituted or pursued oh such evidence, or additional evidence sought, without written direction from the commission? Has .any such written direction either for the gathering of evidence or for an investiga tion of unsought evidence, been issued by the commission in the last nine months?
– The honorable senator has asked rather a lengthy question on the subject that he has raised. I’ point out’ that section 43 of the Australian Soldiers’ Repatriation Act provides -
A Board may reject a claim for a pension by a dependant of a member of the Forces, or may terminate any pension granted to such a dependant, if the Board is satisfied that the grant for continuance of the pension is undesirable.
Towards .the end of last week I made a statement to the press upon this subject, and I can only reaffirm what I then said. Section 43 of the act admits of a very wide interpretation. A “ board “ means h Repatriation Board in any State. The Repatriation Commission itself investigated this matter exhaustively about twelve months ago and a decision was made at that time that investigations of the kind that the honorable senator has mentioned can be authorized only by the commission itself. . That, in effect, means that the authority of the Minister must he obtained for such investigations. At that time, authority to make such investigations was taken away from deputy commissioners in the States. During the last, nine months the commission, which has its head-quarters in Melbourne, has not authorized any investigation of the kind that the honorable senator has mentioned. During that period, so far as the commission is concerned, there has been no interference whatsoever in the private lives of any citizen. If details of any instances of such interference are brought to my notice I shall be very pleased to refer such complaints to the commission to be fully investigated.
page 540
– I preface my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture by pointing out that the Minister controlling prices in New South Wales has fixed the price of Tasmanian potatoes on the Sydney market at £20 15s. a ton, which is alleged to be below the landed cost. As the costs of harvesting potatoes have increased considerably, this may result in a decline of acreage in Tasmania, with consequential reduced production. As New South Wales relies on Tasmania to a large degree for supplies of potatoes, will the Minister endeavour to have this matter considered at the next meeting of the Australian Agricultural Council?
– I shall be pleased to bring this matter to the notice of the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture. The chairman of the Potato Marketing Board in Tasmania has already approached me about it. As I thought that he presented a good case, I referred the matter to the New South Wales Minister, who, I understand, is considering raising the price of potatoes on the Sydney market. I should be pleased if the honorable senator would place his question on the notice-paper so thatI can refer it to my colleague.
page 541
– Will the Minister for Social Services inform the Senate whether extra staff will be required by his department consequent upon the endowment of the first child in every family? If so, from what source will the additional staff be recruited ?
– Extra staff will be required to administer the extension of child endowment to the first child. That is not surprising, of course, because the number of beneficiaries will be doubled. The number of children in respect of whom endowment will be paid will be increased from 1,100,000 to 2,200,000. I have already conferred with the permanent head of my department about this matter, and I am convinced that no more staff than necessary will ho. obtained, consistent with efficiency. Arrangements are being made by the Public Service Board to supply the additional staff.
page 541
Will the Minister for Trade and Customs indicate to the Senate the probable effect on the housing position of the Government’s decision to admit to Australia at reduced rates of duty building timbers, structural steel and prefabricated houses and buildings, together with other components? When making its decision did the Government pay due regard to the necessity to ensure that the interests of Australian builders and manufacturers would be adequately safeguarded?
– It is confidently hoped that the recent decision of the Government in this connexion will have the effect not only of accelerating home-building but also of reducing the costs of homes. For instance, previously a prefabricated home costing £1,000 f.o.b. at an English port would attract £275 duty, whilst a similar unit from a foreign port would attract £575 duty. At the time that the Government made its decision the likely effect on Australian industry was fully considered. The effect of the implementation of this decision on Australian industry will be the subject of continuous observation. It should be borne in mind, however, that this is only an emergency measure to meet the situation that has been brought about by the acute shortage of homes. I point out, also, that this decision applies only to commodities not available in quantity from Australian sources.
page 541
– Will the Minister representing the Prime Minister inform the Senate, whether it is true that the Australian Government has approved of the importation into Western Australia of twelve tractors from dollar sources for the use of the Western Australian Government? If so, are these tractors additional to the twelve tractors said to have been allocated to the Western Australian Government out of 97 tractors to be imported from dollar sources under a scheme propounded by the Minister for Supply and Development? Can the Minister furnish the Senate with specifications of the tractors, including their horse-power? Is he able to say whether tractors of similar specification and horse-power are obtainable either in Australia or from soft currency areas? When are the imported tractors likely to arrive in Australia?
– I am unable from memory to furnish the Senate with all of the details sought by the honorable senator. However, I am happy to state that, as an expression of confidence in the solidarity and progress of our country, the International Harvester Company has made available to Australia, free of any dollar expenditure, a substantial number of tractors. The details sought are readily available, and if. the honorable senator will place his question on the notice-paper I shall see that an answer Ls supplied to him promptly.
page 542
– My question relates to the Government’s promise to review the field of war pensions and entitlements. Many ex-servicemen who are studying under the Commonwealth Reconstruction Training Scheme are finding it practically impossible to exist on the present living allowance owing to the spiralling cost of living. Will the Ministar representing the Minister for Labour and National Service inform the Senate whether early consideration will be given to a substantial increase of the living allowance payable to all classes of fulltime Commonwealth Reconstruction Training Scheme students and trainees?
– Obviously this matter does not come within the province of my department. I assure the honorable senator and the people of Australia that Cabinet, the majority of members of which are ex-servicemen, will so resolve this subject that exservicemen in this country will have no reason to complain of the treatment that will be afforded them by this Government.
page 542
– Will the Minister for Social Services inform the Senate whether it is a fact that a married couple, both age pensioners, with a joint weekly income of .-£7 5s., £4 os. of which is represented by the age pension, are not required to pay any tax or social services contributions? Is it also a fact that if the joint weekly income of £7 5s. is derived solely from superannuation payments or from investments of savings, they are required to pay social services contribution of £11 a year? If so, will the Minister investigate this anomaly to see whether such income can be exempted from social services contribution to the same degree, as is income derived by way of the age pension ?
– A man who receives £7 os. a week from superannuation is liable for taxation upon that amount. It is income in the same way as returns from investments are income. The couple referred to by the honorable senator who receive £7 5s. a week would receive it in these circumstances : The husband and wife would1 each receive a pension of £2 2s. 6da week and between them they could earn an additional £3 a week. If that additional £3 a week was earned by the husband or by the wife, it would be liable to income tax in the same way as the £7 5s. a week superannuation payment, but if the £3 a week was earned in equal proportions by the husband and wife, neither of them would have income which reached the taxable amount. I understand that the honorable senator asks, in effect, what we are going to do about that situation. It is one of those sets of circumstances which are unavoidable while there is a means test applicable to pensions. The present Prime Minister said in his policy .speech that he would pay particular attention to those anomalies which followed the disallowance of social services benefits derived from superannuation payments because disallowance in those circumstances was a discouragement of thrift. I am trying to get together all these anomalies to ascertain what can be evolved to improve the position of those who receive pensions so that particular hardships will not bear so heavily on them. . I am sure each honorable senator knows of some anomaly which bears hardly on a pensioner. I am trying to get these anomalies together in order to see what can be done pending working out a national insurance scheme, which I think everybody accepts as the only final solution or the only real escape from anomalies and hardships in these circumstances.
– Is it not a fact that no income tax is paid by anybody on income from personal exertion until he earns over £500 a year? Is it not a fact also that no income tax will be paid from income from property unci! the taxpayer earns £350 per year? Further, is it not a fact that a small social services contribution - not an income tax levy - is demanded from anybody earning £7 5s. a week including the amount received, as superannuation? Is it not a social services contribution rather than a tax on income?
– If I used’ the term income tax in my rather involved reply, I am sorry. That is incorrect. It is social services contribution. It is true that a rose by any other name sometimes smells as sweet. It is not easy to keep the figures always in mind but I think income tax starts at about £500 a year. Then there is the further complication whether the person concerned is a single man, a married man without children, or a man with a family. But speaking by and large income tax commences at about £500 a year and social services contribution at about £100 a year.
page 543
– I wish to ask the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service whether it would be possible to expedite the decision of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court on the basic wage so that it will be known prior to the Parliament discussing what additional payment will be made for child endowment.
– The conduct of the basic wage case is entirely under the control of the Arbitration Court. I understand that the proceedings are going ahead without interruption. What time they will take I cannot possibly estimate. It will be for the judges to determine when they will sit and what evidence they will hear. I think it is fair to say that, to the best of my recollection, the greater part of the time occupied in the “hearing of the case so far has been taken up in hearing the case for the employees. It was only just before Christmas that the court began to hear the case that was being put on behalf of certain State governments and I think it is now engaged in hearing the portion of the case being put by the employers. How long that will take I am quite unable to say.
page 543
– Will the Minister for Shipping and Fuel inform the Senate of the principal cause of so many of the coal stoppages that lay a large number of mines idle and automatically restrict the production of urgent materials Cor the essentia] use of the community? Has the Government taken any action to bring about a continuity of coal supplies?
– Personally, I consider that the main cause of the numerous stoppages on the coal-fields is the action of certain fanatics known as “ rolling strikers “. The Government has the matter under consideration and considers that the action that it proposes to take will be satisfactory.
– In addressing a question to the Minister for Shipping and Fuel, I point out by way of explanation that I should like the Minister to answer the question himself and not give the answer that he has generally given to the effect that, with the assistance of this side of the chamber, some relief can be given to certain industries. It has been brought to my notice that a statement has ;been made by the president of the Metal Trades Employers Association, Mr. Ferrier, that his industry is still short of basic steel and iron despite the importation of highpriced steel. He also states that that position is due to a shortage of supplies of New South Wales black coal. He adds that any further reduction of steel and iron supplies will have a serious effect on the ability of the metal trades industry to produce articles and goods now in short supply, which include power house equipment, railway and transport equipment, building and housing equipment and housing materials. He also gives a warning to the Government that unless more coal is made available from the northern coal-fields, the employment of men in the iron industries will be seriously affected. Will the Minister inform the Senate whether he and his colleagues intend to carry out their election promises and make the necessary coal available to this and other industries that are suffering because of the shortage of coal?
– Yes.
11 OSPIT AL ACCOMMODATION.
– I understand that the Minister for Repatriation now has available an answer to a question that I asked him on the 2nd March in relation to whether unoccupied beds at Caulfield Military Hospital could be made available for the relief of the aged and infirm.
– On the 2nd March, the honorable senator addressed the following question to me: - . ask the Minister for Repatriation whether approximately 400 beds in Caulfield Military Hospital are unoccupied? If they are, will the Government, even us a temporary measure, permit the Victorian Government to use that accommodation for the relief of the aged and the infirm?
I have now completed my inquiries and have found that at the Repatriation General Hospital, Caulfield, there are six wards in which are available 201 beds in use by the Repatriation Commission. The number of beds occupied is 140, leaving a balance of 61 beds for normal and emergency admissions. The honorable senator may be interested to know that on the 5th August, 1948, the Acting Premier of Victoria accepted the Prime Minister’s offer of the loan, for such period as they are not required for Commonwealth purposes, of five wards at the Repatriation General Hospital, Caulfield, for use as a benevolent asylum for the aged and infirm.
page 544
– I ask the Minister for Shipping and Fuel whether it is true that Commonwealth-owned ships are to be transferred to the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited on charter? If so, what is the objection to the Government’s acquiring additional vessels so that freight services between Tasmania and the mainland can be improved and freight rates reduced ?
– The Government is doing all in its power to build, or otherwise obtain, ships. If it could only obtain the assistance of the waterside workers to help turn ships round more rapidly, it would be nearer to solving the problem.
– I should like to make mother attempt to obtain an answer to my question. I again ask the Minister whether it is a fact that Commonwealthowned ships are to be transferred to the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited on charter. That question is quite simple.
– I have already answered it.
– The Minister has not done so.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration, upon notice -
In view of the very limited number of berths available on ships travelling to the United Kingdom, will the Minister arrange for ships under contract to the Government for immigration purposes to be prepared for the purpose of taking passengers on the return trip to the United Kingdom?
– The Minister for Immigration has supplied the following answer to the honorable senator’s question : -
Commercial shipping available for people from Australia wishing to travel to the United Kingdom ie now back to pre-war strength, and during most of thu year berths can be readily secured. In the seasonal period, that is from February to June, which are the most favoured months for travel from Australia, it may be more difficult to obtain berths. When arrangements were made by my predecessor in office with the British Ministry of Transport for the allocation of certain vessels solely for migrant carrying it was agreed that these vessels would not enter into competition with the regular shipping lines plying between the United Kingdom and Australia for normal passenger traffic on the homeward voyage. On occasions when more passengers have been offering than the regular lines could take arrangements have been made for certain of tile migrant ships to return with passengers from Australia.. It is uneconomic, of course, to carry only a limited number of passengers because of the high incidence of Suez Canal dues. Insofar as the general use of migrant ships for passenger carrying is concerned, it should be remembered that these ships were procured to bring people to Australia and not to take thom away.
page 544
– In view of the great concern existing among age and invalid pensioners that they will probably I) ave to wait for relief in meeting the high post of living until the Government honours ite promise to “put value back into the £1 “, will the Minister representing the Minister for Health give the assurance that the Government will afford them practical relief as soon as possible? I point out that, as the result of the rising co3t of living, the basic wage has been increased on at least three occasions since the present rate of age and invalid pensions was determined.
– I should think that age and invalid pensioners might fairly acquit the present Government of responsibility for the difficulties with which they have to contend, seeing that the Labour party had previously been in office for eight years and its maladministration is, therefore, responsible for the present spiralling of the cost of living. This Government will give the most sympathetic consideration to the claims of pensioners of all classes and will do what it. can to extricate them from the difficult position in which they find themselves as the result of maladministration by its predecessors.
page 545
– The previous Government relied upon the Oil Advisory Committee to assist it in respect of problems relating to petrol supplies. I ask the Minister for Shipping and Fuel whether this Government has disbanded that committee? If not, how many times has that committee met since the present Government assumed office?
– When we assumed office we thought that it was not advisable to follow the lines that the previous Government took in dealing with petrol. So far, I have not consulted the committee to which the honorable senator has referred. Nevertheless, this Government has already succeeded in abolishing petrol rationing.
asked the Minister for Shipping and Fuel, upon notice -
– The answers to the honorable senator’s questions are as follows: -
asked the Minister for Shipping and Fuel, upon notice -
– The answers to the honorable senator’s questions are as follows : -
Controller of Liquid Fuel were promulgated on the 27th October, 1949, and the first returns in accordance therewith were made by the companies in respect of the month of November, 1949. Returns in respect of the months of November and December, 1949, and January, 1950, reveal that a stock of 50,000,000 gallons of motor spirit was maintained. The oil companies’ figures tor the month of February, 1950, are not yet available.
page 546
– In view of the fact that more than 30 questions appear on the notice-paper and remain unanswered, will the Minister for Trade and Customs see that a special effort is made to supply replies to them before the Parliament adjourns for the Easter recess ? Many of those questions are of great public importance and of interest to many people besides those honorable senators in whose names they stand.
– At a glance, I find that at least five out of the first eight questions appearing on the notice-paper are directed to Ministers in another place, and that many of the other questions also do not relate to departments that are being administered by Ministers in the Senate. I assure the honorable senator that Ministers are just as anxious as he is that replies be furnished to those questions as soon as possible, and every step will be taken to do so.
page 546
asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -
– The Minister for the Interior has supplied the following answers to the honorable senator’s questions : -
asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -
– The Minister for the Interior has supplied’ the following answers to the honorable senator’s questions : -
page 546
asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -
– The Treasurer has supplied the following answers to the honorable senator’s questions : -
page 546
Address-in-Reply.
Debate resumed from the 8th March (vide page 483), on motion by Senator McCallum -
That the following Address-in-Reply be agreed to: -
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.
– Last night, I paid a tribute to the work of three members of the Chifley Government - Senator Ashley, Senator Courtice and Senator Cameron. To-day, I wish to speak first of Senator Armstrong, who, as Minister for Supply and Development, rendered splendid service to the people of this country. Senator Armstrong was selected by the Chifley Government for the important task of making arrangements for the projected royal tour of Australia. Unfortunately, due to the illness of the King, the visit had to >he postponed, but I am gratified to learn that should the present improvement of His Majesty’s health continue, we may look forward to a royal visit, perhaps in 1952.
Senator McKenna’s work as Minister for Health and Minister for Social Services in the Chifley Government was continually hampered by the attitude of the British Medical Association to the proposed national health and medical scheme. There is much talk of what the Communists are doing in the coalmining industry and other industries, but the British Medical Association is worse than the Communist party. I believe that if a ballot of members of the British Medical Association had been taken when the Chifley Government was in office and the doctors had been asked to decide whether they were willing to co-operate with the Government in the administration of the national health scheme and the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, the doctors would have decided to co-operate. However, the doctors are governed by a small section of the medical profession. Recently I travelled in a train with some doctors who were attending a conference in Western Australia. They told me that although they were perfectly satisfied with the Government’s scheme, they had to obey their organization. At one time T was of the opinion that the ‘barristers’ professional organization was the strictest organization in Australia, but I have discovered that the British Medical Association stands supreme in that respect. I prophesy that eventually it will be bowled middle stump.
Senator Robertson referred to the provision of free milk for children attending State schools. That is a matter for the
State governments, not for the Commonwealth. I say, however, that if the Commonwealth had authority to supply milk to children free of charge, and, in fact, did so, honorable senators opposite would raise the cry of socialism. I agree with SenatorRobertson that education should be theresponsibility of the Commonwealth, because at present there is no uniformity among State education departments. If a young student in the sixth class of a school in Adelaide goes with his parentsto live in Western Australia, he may be put in the 7th class in the school that heattends in that State,, whereas if his parents had moved to a State other than Western Australia he might have been put in the fourth class of the school- that, he attended there. If education were a Commonwealth responsibility, some uniformity could be achieved, and that -would be most desirable.
I turn now to immigration. No one can deny that the efforts of Mr. Calwell in the field of immigration have been most successful. Indeed, he has been praised by the Minister for Immigration (Mr. Holt), and other members of thi* present Administration. He has been of great service to Australia by bringing from overseas men and women who have since worked well in this country. There are, of course, some immigrants who have not been satisfactory, but that is true also of some Australians. I believe that the best immigrants that we can have are British immigrants. I agree that children from overseas make very desirable immigrants, and we have several institutions in this country that care for children who are brought here. On one occasion when I was speaking in this chamber I said that the best immigrants that we could obtain were Britons, Danes and Germans. Of course, British immigrants are to he preferred to immigrants from other countries. I mentioned Danes and Germans because I believe that they make good citizens. At one time I was employed in a Queensland factory of which Senator Collings was one of theheads. There were some Danes and Germans working there and they were excellent tradesmen. Honorable senators from Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia know that the Germans who- settled in those States in the past proved to be excellent citizens. They married Australians and during the last war their sons fought in the Australian . armed forces.
I believe that the primary producers of this country were never better treated than under a Labour government. The men who work on the land deserve every consideration, but they must be fair. At the present time they are receiving wonderful returns for their efforts. A farmer told me a month ago that the primary producers were never better off in their lives than they are now. When I remarked to him that he had a very nice truck, he told me that he thanked the Government for it. Nevertheless, some farmers complain that they are having a bad spin. I cannot believe that, because I know what the position is. Beans are sent from Brisbane to Sydney to be sold at ls. 9d. per lb. The price of wheat is high now, but when I was growing wheat in Western Australia I received ls. 6d. or ls. 9d. a bushel for it. One indication of the prosperity of the farmers is that a. storekeeper in a country town in Western Australia, who at one time had 72 bad debts on his books, now has only three. The farmers must thank the Labour party for their present prosperity, because when anti-Labour governments were in power they lived a handtomouth existence. The Liberal party and the Australian Country party made many promises to primary producers, but they did not implement them when they were in power. The Labour party, on the other hand, told the farmers what it proposed to do to help them, and when it was returned to power it honoured its promises. The operations of the Apple and Pear Board have ensured that fruit-growers shall receive a reasonable return for their products, but at one time some relatives of mine who were growing apples in Western Australia were pleased to receive r>g. a case for them rather than allow them to rot. What I could never understand was why the apples that were rotting under the trees could not be used by charitable organizations and schools. Some apples wei-e offered free of charge to such institutions by growers at Mount Barker in Western Australia, but the only organization that took advantage of the offer was the Salvation Army. A subsidy is paid on superphosphate that is used by farmers. They do not complain about superphosphate now, but in the past it was always the subject of complaint. The only criticism that is heard now is that the farmers sometimes cannot get superphosphate when they want it.
I was interested to hear the plea that Senator Collings made for world peace. I echo his sentiments. We must rid ourselves of greed and selfishness. We hear much said of the necessity to send food to the United Kingdom and other nations, but the capitalists and those who believe in the capitalistic system raise an outcry if they do not receive £1 a bushel for wheat and 8s. or 10s. per lb. for wool that is needed by those countries. Such conduct is not consistent with the teachings of Christianity. Despite the “ sob stuff “ that is published in the press, many persons want to have the best of both worlds, whether they be capitalists or not. So much for the primary producers. At one time I was .i primary producer myself, so I know what I am talking about in that connexion. Between 1914 and 1915 there was a severe drought in Western Australia and, with other farmers, I abandoned farming, and was very pleased to be able to do so.
A great deal has been said in this chamber upon the subject of the pensions that are paid to the widows of exservicemen. I propose to make a plea on behalf of the widows of civilians. During the last war there were many young men and middle-aged men who were not allowed to enlist, although they were anxious to do so. Some of them have died since then, but the pensions that are paid to their widows are not comparable with those that are paid to the widows of exservicemen. I say that that is wrong. Those men were not allowed to enlist in the fighting services and were compelled to remain in this country to manufacture munitions for the men who had enlisted. In those circumstances it is proper that their widows should be granted the same privileges as those that are granted to the widows of ex-servicemen. Not only are the pensions of the widows of civilians less than those of the widows of exservicemen but widows of ex-servicemen are permitted to earn £6, £7, or £8 a week before their pensions are affected, while the widows of civilians are not permitted to earn more than 30s. a week. Both classes should he treated in the same way. I have fought tooth and nail to ensure that these women shall be treated fairly, and now I raise the matter again in the hope that this Government will do something for them.
I am very interested in railway gauge standardization, not only from the standpoint of the transport of human beings “but also from the standpoint of the transport of animals. If a drought occurs and graziers wish to take their stock to areas where water is available, they cannot do so economically at present, because the cost of transport, owing to breaks of gauge, is very high. If railway gauges in Australia were standardized, graziers would be able to move their stock from South Australia to Western Australia or vice versa and thus save the lives of many valuable animals that would otherwise perish during periods of drought. A pastoralist told me that during a drought he bad to drive his stock to the railway at Kalgoorlie and then transport it by train from Kalgoorlie to Perth. He said that in driving the stock to the train he lost many animals. If trucks were available to transport stock from droughtstricken areas to areas where food and water is available, the lives of valuable animals would be saved.
I conclude by saying that the firstconcern of the ex-Prime Minister, Mr. Chifley, has always been the maintenance of the economic stability of Australia for the benefit of all the people of Australia. He has proved that by his actions. He has said that it is the duty of Australia to stand by the United Kingdom, and he has done his utmost to ensure that we shall do so.
– I associate myself most sincerely with the expressions of loyalty to our King that have been voiced by other honorable senators. We are very pleased to hear the good news that His Majesty is so much .better in health that he will ike able to visit us before very long with Her Majesty, and, we trust, Princess Margaret also. It was a great disappointment to all of us to learn that His Majesty was unable to visit Australia last year. Surely it will be a wonderful occasion for us in this country when our King and Queen receive from us the homage and loyalty that we are most eager to pay to them in person when they are here. I take this opportunity of welcoming the new senators, and especially the lady senators, who have come to join our ranks here.
In addressing myself to the motion for the adoption of the AddressinReply to the Speech of the GovernorGeneral, I desire to direct the attention of the Ministry, the Parliament, and, through the Parliament, the people of Australia, to one or two matters that I consider to be of the utmost importance. First, I shall discuss the manner in which 1 believe it is fitting that we should celebrate Australia Day. As many new Australians are arriving in this country we should make some change in the manner of our celebration of this day. By our present rather casual acceptance of Australia Day, with perhaps just a mere token of recognition of its historical significance, we are doing little to foster within those new citizens a real pride in our country, which they want to be their country as well. Living in the security of our own surroundings we may find it rather difficult to understand what it meant to those people to be faced with the sudden abandonment of all that was familiar to them. It must have struck at the very roots of their security, and filled them with bewilderment. Only those of us who, as children, can remember being left alone in strange places can appreciate the profound feeling of strangeness and loss that must for a time overwhelm these new Australians in this country. Possibly that feeling is most acute in those who have come from European countries. Given a reasonable chance, human adaptability will, in due course, smooth their paths. Meanwhile, however, we must do all that we can to speed the day when they will be able warmly and confidently to call this country home. It is not enough for us to cater only for their physical well-being. Home and jobs and food, although very important, are not all in the life of man. Even though these people who come to our shores find that many things are better in this country than in any other country in which they have lived, they experience a void that they are most anxious to fill. What are we giving them in place of the loyalties, allegiances and prides that were once theirs in their native land? These people who have come to live among us have had, and are having, sadly disrupted - lives. They anxiously seek assurances of security, and we should not expect them to live without some sense of pride, loyalty and allegiance to this country. We Australians, for all the casUalness, do not live by bread alone and should not expect it of them. We must show them what Australia means to us as a part of the great British Empire, and give them something to which they can devote their loyalties and ambitions. We must not forget that many of them have come from European countries with long histories of war, and that they have bred in them fierce loyalties and fierce prides, perhaps in some instances more fierce than has the average Australian. Love of country is important to them, and they are desperately seeking new channels into which to divert these feelings. Although I do not suggest for a moment that we should indulge in any kind of jingoism, I consider that our national day, Australia Day, should be made a day of far greater significance than it is at present. This one day should be’ given great importance, because it is becoming more and more important to us. If we do not make something worth while of it, the people who have come to live amongst us may feel that we are not evincing as much pride in our country and Empire as we should. It is a cause for celebration. By encouraging these new Australians to appreciate the Australian way of life and the part that we are playing in the great British Empire we can build Australia Day into a day as significant to this country as is Independence Day to th>> United States of America. We must all concede that for a long time that country has been an outstanding example of how to absorb people of 100 nationalities and weld them into one in the shortest possible time. Australia Day must be made a truly national day. I suggest that its observance ought to be taken over and planned by
Sena tor Annabelle Rankin. the Commonwealth instead of being treated cursorily and independently by the States. It must be planned and organized with vigour and enthusiasm to bring vividly before the minds of Australians, old and new, our culture, our freedoms, and all the things that our Australian way of life stands for, and what it means to be a member of the great British Empire. We should make them realize how very fortunate they are to be able to come to live in this country. We want to make them glad that they have come to live here. The term Australia Day must cease to be merely a convenient means of distinguishing one Monday public holiday from another. It must be a mirror in which we can see what we are, where we are going, and what we hope to be. It must be an incentive, a guide, and an inspiration, not only to native-born Australians, but also to thousands of immigrants that have come here to make their homes and to be part of the life of this country. We must make them feel intensely and sincerely that their new country is worthy of all their loyalties and pride.
I shall now refer to the language problem. Over and over again I have heard references to language difficulties that they experience. Although much has been done in this connexion, many migrants still experience difficulty with our language. I have heard of instances of their having great difficulty in this respect after having gone into employment. This difficulty is causing them distress and loneliness because it prevents their mixing with others. Although great work has already been done in connexion with this matter of language by the departmental officers, much remains to be done. The language problem is causing the migrants a great deal of worry in connexion with their occupations. It is causing people who want to become part of our life to keep to their own little groups. That is contrary to our desire to absorb them into our national life. Upon all of .us there is a responsibility to assist bodies that are trying to help these people with their problems. I should like to remind theSenate of the fine work that has been done in this field by women’s voluntary organizations such as the Young Women’s:
Christian Association, the Girl Guides, new settlers leagues, church organizations, and other bodies, but I do urge that greater consideration be given to this matter and still more clone to overcome this difficulty.
His Excellency referred to the necessity to develop this country. In a country whose wealth and progress and international significance lie in its natural resources, the development of North Australia poses a problem that challenges this nation, because this vast country with its many natural resources is as poor in planning as it is rich in potentialities. In the main, administration is centred in the thickly populated areas in the south. The position can be likened to a broadcasting station whose signals grow weaker and weaker, becoming very weak indeed by the time they reach the north of the continent. In the matter of defence alone the position is most serious. In most parts of our country nearest to restless and teeming Asia, less is being done to build up strength in man-power, and to develop resources and adequate transport facilities than elsewhere. It is a truism that we must develop and settle the north as quickly as possible. The rapid development of the north is imperative. Indeed, already the absurd situation is approaching that in this sparsely populated land there may soon not be produced enough food to meet the needs of our people and leave a substantial surplus available for export. That is a very serious state of affairs. Already this is becoming evident in connexion with the production of beef. Reliable authorities have contended publicly that there will be little or no surplus beef available for export in fifteen years time. Yet the same experts have declared that great areas of north Australia are capable of great development which would result in increased beef production. Although in the past there have been all sorts of discussions and arguments between departments whether this or that plan of development should be adopted, we still wait for development to take place.
As honorable senators are aware, a sugar agreement was recently negotiated with Great Britain. In time that will lead to greatly increased sugar produc tion and an increase of the population of north Queensland. Yet, the north is not being prepared by planning to cope with the increase of the population. During the war north Queensland suffered very much from shortages, but the war has been over for nearly five years and that part of the continent is still suffering acute shortages. I have mentioned this before and I want to ‘ refer now to the shortage of that most necessary commodity, powdered milk. I quote from aletter received from Mount Isa -
Mount Isa is probably without parallel for its population in Queensland in that there is no local delivery of fresh milk and the entire township is dependent on tinned milk supplies. A small quantity of pasteurised milk comes in twice a week, but the quantity (200 gallons weekly) is neglible when population figures are taken into account. The popula tion figures supplied by the local C.P.S. are aa follows: End of 194fi (ap proximately), 4,500: end of 1949, 0,500. The majority of these increases are young married couples with small young children. This is illustrated by the figures supplied by the mine company. At the Christmas tree in 1948, the number of children under eleven totalled approximately 700. For the last Christmas tree 1,214 children under eleven were given gifts. These are children in the entire area and are not confined to mine employees only. Over the last six months (certainly all through the very line summer weather) the stores have been out of tinned milk a fortnight or so each month. Milk anywhere is an essential part of children’s diet, but in a climate such as the far north-west it, together with fresh fruit and vegetables, constitutes the main item of diet. Fresh [fruit And vegetables are in very short supply *and are very expensive, and the recurrent shortage of milk therefore presents a major nutritional problem for these western mothers. It seems extraordinarily unfair that a quota of milk should be. imposed on western towns while it is possible in the cities to go from store to store and buy unlimited quantities of tinned and fresh milk.
Amenities and tha distribution of essential goods are chronically inadequate to meet the needs of the existing population. How then can provision be made for the increased population without immediate planning? I hope that the plans that this Government is making through its new Department of National Development will be the answer to many of these problems. I draw attention to the importance to Queensland of the enterprise at Mount Isa. Its value is shown by an extract from the Brisbane Courier Mail of the 4th March, 1950, which refers to exports of lead and zinc. It states -
During this month about 10,000 tons of zinc concentrates will be exported through Townsville, and early in April about 7,000 tons of lead will have been loaded for the Continent. Last year 27,011 tons of concentrates and 23,596 tons of lead were shipped through Townsville from the Mount Isa mines.
Recently the chairman of Consolidated Zinc Corporation Limited, Mr. W. S. Robinson, a noted mining authority who is well known to honorable senators on both sides of this House, made a statement which indicates the importance of this country in mineral development. Mr. Robinson said -
Given pence, the next decade or two will see the certain discovery in Australian territory of new major base metal ore deposits, new major gold mines and major additions to or repetitions of existing productive formations and new sources of supply of the rarer elements. I am not of course suggesting - though I do not entirely rule out the possibility - that another Broken Hill, Mount Isa, Mount Morgan, or Mount Lyell will be located overnight. I am certain, however, that collectively the discoveries of economic minerals over the next ten to twenty years will be of no less importance than those of the ‘eighties and ‘nineties of last century. So far we have done little more than utilize visible outcrops. There are still great prizes to be won in Australian mining. I am more than confident that oil and gas in commercial quantities will be discovered in Australian territory. But this prediction is never likely to be fulfilled unless geophysical investigations and exploration are greatly speeded up and carried on continuously - not with spasmodic bursts only as have been common in the past.
These quotations indicate the great importance of mineral development to this great country. I remind the Senate that the population of Mount Isa has passed 6.500 and that last year the port of Townsville handled 50,000 tons of metal for export. The contribution made by the Mount Isa enterprise to the prosperity of the country and the statements I have quoted are clear indications of the developments that could follow other great discoveries that should result from the geophysical exploration advocated by Mr. Robinson. Under this Government’s proposals I look forward to this development which will place Australia on the verge of its greatest era of progress. Such progress is contingent to a great degree on the development, of the north. I commend to this Parliament the project of planning rapid development of the north, the quickening of the tempo of settlement, the utilization of known water resources, the investigation of new agricultural projects and new crops and the exploration of mineral resources. I should like to see these proposals co-ordinated with a nu.ster plan for the development of access roads and transport facilities. The people of the north must be given supplies and amenities. The land must be settled and made productive and the north must be made the tropical garden of Australia.
– When an important speech is beingdelivered or an important document has to be. examined, two questions always enter my mind. The first is : “ What are the realities behind the ideas which are being expressed ? “ and the second : “ To what extent are noble sentiments being used in an effort to justify ignoble or infamous practices?” In this chamber at the beginning of each session we hear the Lord’s Prayer recited. Included in the very noble sentiments are the words, “ Thy will be. done on earth as it is in Heaven “. Yet we find almost in every instance quite the reverse is the case. I could not imagine for one moment that there is in Ha ven sustained poverty, the misery of war, lying and deceit in business and politics and hypocrisy. Yet it is said very piously and reverently “ Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven “. I mention that before drawing particular attention to a number of points made in the Governor-General’s Speech. One paragraph reads -
My advisers are making preliminary preparations for the introduction of a sensible system of universal training designed to meet the military requirements of Australia with a minimum interference with our great urgent civil production.
My mind goes back to my reading of history. Compulsory military service was associated very brutally and indiscriminately with the press gang in England from 1798 to 1S15. In those days the officers of the navy particularly went into the industrial centres and pressed men into service without any concern whether homes or hearts were broken. In the service, the men were treated in a most brutal and inhumane manner. I can imagine how in those days an endeavour was made to justify the brutality that took place by a recitation of the Lord’s Prayer. Subsequently as a result of the antagonism of the people whenever they met these officers, conscription was introduced about 1800. There again the mostnoble sentiments were expressed to justify the most infamous practices. In 1813 Prussia introduced what is now known as a sensible system of compulsory training to meet military requirements. Subsequently it was introduced in England and a very fine distinction was made without there being any difference whatever. Training meant compulsory service, and ultimately it resulted in two of the bloodiest wars in the history of the world. So much for systematic conscription under the name of sensible universal training. In those two wars millions of men were slaughtered and millions were maimed. When one sees pictures of the war graveyards, visits the repatriation hospitals and recalls the mental hospitals one gains an understanding of the ghastly aftermath of those wars. These are the monuments of man’s savagery in this so-called civilized age. Again, the noblest of sentiments are used to justify the most ignoble and infamous practices. The same remarks apply to countries overseas. Let us see, however, what happened in Australia, where we had the universal training system. That system led to Senators Pearce and Millen during the two and a half years between the 1st January, 1912 and the 30th June, 1914, instituting 27,749 prosecutions, leading to fines in many cases, but in no less than 5,732 cases involving imprisonment of hoys and youths in forts and other military establishments, or in civil prisons. Many of those boys were under the age of twelve years. And now the GovernorGeneral’s Speech intimates that the Government has decided to continue forcing upon us the “ sensible system of universal training”, blessed or sanctified by this Parliament. The Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O’Sullivan), the Minister for Social Services (Senator Spooner) and the Attorney-General (Senator Spicer) have emphasized their view again and again in these word9: “We have a mandate from the people”. I give them the lie direct when they say that. They have no mandate from the boys proposed to be conscripted. Those are our great statesmen who intend to take this action at the expense of helpless boys, just on the threshold of life, who cannot defend themselves. I know of nothing more cowardly and contemptible. I am glad that we have some women senators now in this chamber. I ask them to examine very critically and seriously the bills to be presented to this Parliament to give effect ,to the policies outlined in the Governor-General’^ Speech, and to think of their own sons, or of the sons of other mothers, and ask themselves whether they would like those boys to be treated as the sons of other women were treated in the past. I commend to their perusal, before the bill to institute universal military training is dealt with by -the Parliament, a book entitled Conscription Under Camouflage. Compulsory Military Training in Australasia., by John Percy Fletcher and John Francis Hills. That book give? individual instances of the brutality and the callousness to which, under “sensibleuniversal training” young boys were subjected here in this glorious free Australia. Shall we allow such conditions to be repeated under cover of the sentiments expressed so eloquently and recently by Senator Annabelle Rankin in the name of free Australia? I say to honorable senators opposite who speak so glibly about having a mandate from the people. “ You have no mandate from boys. It is cowardly and contemptible to force boys to do what yon possibly would not do yourself “.
I am not surprised in the least that, we are to have legislation that dates as far back as 1813 re-enacted in Australia. I suggest that, the minds of those responsible for it can be classified as “ fascist “. Listen to these remarks made by Mr. Churchill in January, 1927, referring to Mussolini, who was one of the world’s bloodiest murderers. I quote from a newspaper report as follows : -
Mr. Churchill, British Chancellor of the. Exchequer, in an interview with international journalists, paid a tribute to the work of the Fascist regime in Italy, though he was careful to point out that the political issue cannot be judged apart from environment. “if I had been an Italian,” said Mr. Churchill, I am sure that I would have been wholeheartedly Fascist, but England has not yet had to face the bestial appetites and passions’ cf Leninism in the same deadly form. England has her own way of doing things, but she will choke the life out of communism.
Most capitalists advocate the same policy. The report continues -
Italy has shown that there is a way of fighting subversive forces which can really mass the people to defend the honour and stability of civilized society.
To defend the honour and the stability of civilized society ! The report continues -
Hereafter no great nation need be without ultimate protection against the cancerous growth. I am charmed with Signor Mussolini’s gen tle, simple bearing, and calm, detached poise.
Thai was Mr. Churchill’s opinion of Benito Mussolini. More than ten years later we had our present Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) who had visited Germany and had seen how this “sensible system of universal training” worked in that country, saying on the 24th October, 1938, according to the Sydney Morning Herald -
Australians should realize that democracies have much to learn from other systems of Government. Democracies cannot maintain their place in the world unless they are provided with leadership as inspiring as that of dictator countries.
The universal training system in Germany had appealed to the present Prime Minister, who is one of our great erudite and loquacious statesmen. I suppose at that time he made a reservation in the words, “ I shall inspire them ! “ He went on to say, according to the report -
Why was Hitler able to tear up the treaty of Versailles, absorb Austria and the Sudetenland without firing a shot? The dominating reason why he was able to do it all is that he gives the German people a leadership to which they render unquestioning obedience. If you and 1 were Germans sitting beside our own fires in Berlin, we would not be critical of the leadership that has produced such results.
There you have two most eulogistic tributes to dictators, the first by Mr. Churchill and the second by Mr. Menzies, who now offers to translate the ideas that lie absorbed in Germany into action in Australia at the expense of say, 50,000 boys per annum, who have never had a vote or a say in the matter. This is the great democrat, the man who is going to show us how this country should be governed, yet the first thing lie proposes to do is to conscript boys who will be treated just as brutally as boys were treated in every other country of the world under the same system.. The Government may say that conditionswill be different to-day. No! If anything, men are more brutal to-day than, before, because war has the effect of reducing them to the primitive. Women have always had a greater respect for human personality and human life than, men have had. I know no age in my time when human life was treated with so much contempt as it is treated in thevery age in which we live.
– Especially in Russia.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Nicholls). - Order ! Senator Cameron has the floor, and I suggest that honorablesenators allow him to make his speech in his own way.
– Honorable senators last night heard the eloquent address delivered by my esteemed colleague, Senator Collings. He spoke of preparations for war. I was waiting for him to make a certain statement, but he did not do so, and I now make good the omission. That statement is, that all preparations for war constitute a challenge to war. It is solely a question of when and where the war is to begin, and all this talk about preparing for peace and preparing to defend the fatherland is all so much political eye-wash, again with the noblest of sentiments being used to try to justify the most ignoble and iniquitous practices. The bill to give effect to the Government’s compulsory military training policy will come forward in due course, and I hope to be able then to supplement what I have said to-day, and to augment it by facts and figures that, I believe, should convince the most sceptical person that the bill presented should be regarded as cowardly and contemptible from every point of view. When I said a little while ago that to-day human life is held in contempt, Senator McCallum interjected, “Especially in Russia”. That contempt is evident in every country. I recall that when the liner Queen Mary was being constructed, the Duke of Windsor, who was then King Edward VIII., asked why the millions of pounds being expended in the construction of that luxury vessel could not be used to provide relief for the poor in Great Britain. Although his protest was more or less explained away, the House of Commons subsequently set up a committee to inquire into the black areas in England and, in 1938, that committee reported that it considered that conditions in the black areas in Great Britain were as bad as those in the worst slums in any Eastern country. Senator McCallum may obtain that report in the parliamentary Library. When he refers to conditions in Russia, I remind him that in England when millions of pounds were being expended on the construction of a luxury liner, many people in that country were reduced .to the lowest level of poverty, with the result that thousands died from tuberculosis when they were as young as from 18 to 21 years. Life in. England was held cheaply, and it is held cheaply in every country to-day.
The Governor - General’s Speech states -
In all developmental plans my advisers will pay attention to the importance of achieving a. well-balanced pattern of decentralization. Capital expenditure, both public and private, will be required on a scale very much greater than in the past. My Government has under preparation a great loan scheme for this purpose.
It has been proved beyond all doubt that it is possible in practical politics to finance all developmental works without borrowing one penny. For example, the trans-Australia railway was financed from the profits of the Commonwealth Bank, with the result that the people of this country have never been under any obligation to pay any interest in respect of the capital expenditure incurred on that project. However, a different story must be told about State railways. In Victoria about two-thirds of the revenue of the railways is required to pay interest on loans that were borrowed for the purpose of financing their construction. Although nearly double the capital expenditure incurred in the construction of railways has already been paid in interest, the principal still remains unpaid. Similar observations can be made about railway finance in the other States. The borrowing of money for the purpose of carrying out developmental works in- Australia is a colossal racket in the interests of private banks, financial institutions and certain people who invest their money in such ventures and are thus enabled to live in luxury at the expense of the workers. That system really establishes a form of indirect private ownership of public property. For instance, the policy of those who control the State railways is determined mainly by their financial obligations. To the degree that they have to pay as much as two-thirds of their revenue in interest they are prevented from expending money on extending or improving the railway system. Therefore, is it any wonder our railway systems have been starved? During the war we found that they were inadequate to handle the traffic. Indeed, any one who carefully examines them will find that they are in such a state of disrepair as to be almost dangerous. Traffic equipment, workshops and machinery are practically obsolete, and so long as we finance State or national undertakings as we have financed railways, we cannot hope to be able to keep them up to date. The result is that the expenditure so incurred represents a permanent tax upon the workers who are thereby denied the opportunities to enjoy a decent standard of living.
Dealing with communism, the GovernorGeneral’s Speech states- -
My advisers intend taking strong measures to protect the community against the activities of subversive organizations and individuals, and in particular they have in mind the Communist party and its members. A bill will be introduced early in the Parliament to deal with this matter.
It has been said ad nauseam that Communists are mainly responsible for all our industrial disturbances. It has been claimed that the present tram strike in Victoria has been inspired by Communists. Those allegations are entirely unfounded. Proof of the degree to which members of the Communist party exercise influence among the workers is provided by the number of votes cast for Communist party candidates at the general elections held recently in ‘both this country and Great Britain. Those figures show that the Communists are a negligible force and do not cut any ice at all. Honorable senators who have had long years of industrial experience are aware of that fact. To-day, however, the opponents of the Labour party are endeavouring, for party political purposes, to establish in the minds of the workers a sort of political hysteria for the purpose of diverting their attention from the main issues that confront them. The object of our opponents is merely to engage in a heresy hunt. It has been said that the workers cultivate an extra sensory preception which renders them incapable of realizing the degree to which they are fooled, ruled and robbed from the cradle- to the grave, and that they are influenced more by their feelings in that connexion than by their knowledge of the techniques that are used to delude them.
For instance, from time to time the workers are allegedly granted an increase of their wages, but that is merely makebelieve. All that is done is that the nominal basic wage is increased in order to make up a deficiency. When we examine the technique of wage fixation we find that there has npt been any real increase of the basic wage since 1907, but merely an increase of the inflated monetary wage. An answer that was supplied to me to a question that I asked upon notice to-day proves that statement beyond all doubt. I asked my question because I desired to obtain evidence of that .fact from the Treasury itself. In 1910 I was employed as a plumber in the permanent ways and works branch of the Western Australian Railways Department and my wage at that time was £3 12s. for a working week of 48 hours. I was paid that wage in sovereigns. According to the reply that was furnished to my question, the sovereign to-day is worth £3 12s. On the basis of the present value of money compared with that of the sovereign, the wage that I received in 1910 would now be nearly four times greater. That is the trick that has been put over the worker ever since 1907. That fact is unanswerable. Purchasing power is determined in terms of gold, purchasable commodities, and the labour time required to do the job. As labour time is a diminishing factor in production to-day, it follows that the purchasing power of the average worker is decreasing, although it may be increasing slightly in the caseof workers who are indispensable. The average worker has not in reality received one penny more compared with the basic wage that was paid in 1907. I believe that the workers are aware of that fact.. Purchasing power has been, depreciated in relation to the price of gold. The workers are strengtheningtheir resentment of and resistance to that injustice. They are shackled to a wage that is awarded by the arbitration court, and that wage represents no real increaseof the basic wage since 1907. The interests which are represented in theParliament by honorable senators opposite enjoy a free hand to control the purchasing power of wages in this way. Whenever costs are increased the purchasing power of the £1 is decreased to a corresponding degree. Those interests are a law unto themselves. Is it any wonder that we should experience industrial’ unrest under those conditions ?
Practically every strike has its original unnecessarily provocative, or stupidly incompetent management. I speak a* one who first participated in a strike as far back as 1896. I was then employed as a junior machinist in the Coolgardie Miner office. The men struck then, as they are striking now, against the increasing cost of living. They were paying 5s. a gallon for water, and other exorbitant charges. As a machinist I regained my job subsequently because machinists were indispensable and could not be readily replaced. Had we not been indispensable, or had the strike occurred in the cities where ample substitute labour could have been obtained, we should have been starved into submission. When I referred to management, I was using the word in its widest sense. There is, for instance, political management, industrial management, and trade union management. I repeat that most strikes are the result of unnecessarily provocative or stupidly incompetent management. I cannot imagine any person more incompetent or stupid than the present Premier of Victoria. Had his knowledge of human character, and social rights been equal to his knowledge of law, he could, without loss of dignity or prestige, have made an approach that would have prevented the present tram strike in that State. The same may be said of some conciliation commissioners, and of various hoards of management and their subordinate officers. Men rightly demand to be treated as men and not as inferiors or as mere numbers. Glib and loquacious Government supporters in this chamber and in the House of Representatives seek, by trying to cause political hysteria over communism, to side-track the real issues. They are making a great mistake, because what they are attempting to do cannot be done. The real reason for the emphasis that is laid on communism by anti-Labour forces is that they hope to obscure the real issues now confronting the workers. There is being carried out to-day a scalp-hunting campaign. A few Communists have been put in gaol, and legislation, ostensibly to suppress communism, is to be introduced to check the growth and power of the trade unions. Such tactics cannot possibly succeed. Persons such as my humble and insignificant self, did not come down in the last shower. That should be obvious from my appearance. Most honorable senators on this side of the chamber have been educated in the oldest university in the world, the university of adversity, in which the fees are the highest, and the lessons never forgotten. The people of this country will not be deluded by any hysterical anti-Communist campaign that the Government may undertake. The only “ ism “ that interests the Labour party is humanism. After all, what is the purpose of life? The purpose of life is living and a part of that purpose is to make our lives more liveable, more congenial, and more pleasurable. Let us picture conditions on the coal-fields. Honorable senators opposite should visit the coal-fields and see some of the miserable hovels that the miners live in at Minmi, Cessnock and other places. Their capital cost has been recovered many times over, yet wages, in terms of housing, have not been increased by even a fraction since the houses were built. Any one who understands the technique of the wage system will realize that a wageearner can only recover his cost once. That is to say, he works for a week, and is paid for that week’s work. He never thinks of asking that he be paid for that week’s work over and over again. A landlord, however, can recover his capital cost many times, over a period of 50, 60 or even 100 years. Moreover, he can collect, through rents, capital costs that actually were never incurred. Clearly, that is obtaining money under false pretences. The landlord’s philosophy may be described in the letters R.I.P. - not a tribute to some one’s memory, but “ rent, interest and profit “. Land, and to some degree machinery, may be placed in the same category as houses. That is one reason for the socalled high cost of living. Actual costs can be divided into two categories and should be so divided. First, there is the economic cost, that is, the cost in terms of labour time. Then there is the cost in terms of commodities. The exorbitant rents and prices that people pay to-day include capital cost, overhead cost, and goodwill cost, although actually not one penny has been expended on such costs. Again it is a matter of obtaining money under false pretences from unfortunate workers who do not understand the technique. During the recent election campaign, the people of the Commonwealth were told that the anti-Labour parties stood for free enterprise, and that Labour’s aim was to rob the people; but consider for a moment the colossal profits that are made by private enterprise. Profits can be obtained in only two ways. First, they can be obtained by underpaying labour, and, secondly, they can be obtained by over-charging for the commodities that labour produces. Everything in excess of a price based on true costs constitutes profit, which in turn becomes the capital that is invested to create further profits. So it goes on until a highly inflationary period such as we are now experiencing is reached. The present inflationary trends, of course, are utterly confusing to honorable senators opposite,- who do not know whether Australia should revalue or devalue its currency. Unless I am a very poor judge, the Government will decide upon what I have termed automatic revaluation which i3 achieved in this way: Markets are glutted, then factory doors are closed, forcing workers out into the street. Prices fall, and debtors, particularly those who bought stocks of goods on credit at high prices, become insolvent, thus producing, as it did in the early 1930’s, a veritable harvest for creditors and a consequent -depression of prices and wages. That is how, in a broad and general way, the -whole scheme operates.
Senator Collings stated that, in the election campaign, Labour had the churches against it. Of course, we also had the newspapers and the radio against us. In addition, bank clerks were active political organizers against the Labour party. We did not appear to have a -chance, but, due to that extra-sensory perception of which I have already .spoken, there was a strengthening among workers of the feeling that they were being fooled and robbed from the cradle to the grave, with the result that Labour still has a majority in this chamber. Ear from being influenced by “the abstract reasoning, academic shadowsparring,, verbal trimmings, and exaggerations of honorable senators opposite, the workers realized that the anti-Labour propaganda with which they were being fed was, metaphorically speaking, all eye-wash. To-day, the workers know that they are not getting an honest deal, and they are expressing their resentment by striking. It is well that the Government should realize the necessity not to let that resentment be expressed by anything worse than strikes, otherwise there will arise in this country a situation :similar to that now existing in France and Italy, and, in an even more tragic measure, in the Eastern countries. Honorable senators opposite cry constantly for more production, and the nitwits who listen to them add their “ hear, hears “. Consider the economic state of the United States of America with its «,000,000 unemployed and 2,000,000 partially unemployed. Side by side with that substantial and increasing unemployment, is an increasing accumulation of foodstuffs of all kinds, including dried fruits and milk. Foodstuffs worth many millions of dollars are rotting while millions of American people are living under semi-starvation conditions. That is how the economic system sponsored by anti-Labour governments works out in practice. That is how it worked out in this country in the 1930’s, and that is how it will work out again unless organized labour in Australia takes an even more vigorous stand than it is adopting to-day. This beneficent Government of ours speaks glibly about freedom in Australia and about a shortage of dollars. There is not a real shortage of dollars. There are millions of dollars in the United States of America, but the Americans who are unemployed are short of dollars, because their labour power is mrt required. If the dollar imperialists of America were as anxious to buy Australian products as we are to buy American petrol, there would not be a shortage of dollars here. There was not a shortage of dollars during the war, when our services and goods were required, and when the American imperialists were1 receiving at least two units for one, but, now they drive a hard bargain because we are paying three or four times more for petrol than we should be paying and there is still a shortage of dollars. The shortage is an organized one. There is an organized conspiracy to rok not only the working class of this country, but also the working class of America. Honorable senators opposite cannot, by any process of reasoning that is in conformity with the noble sentiments that they express, justify the state of affairs that has developed in America. Europe and England. The underlying cause of the tory fight in England is the efforts of sterling imperialists to make common cause with dollar imperialists and to establish a system under which they can work more or less on a quota basis internationally and cause Great Britain ultimately to become a vassal state of America or of the dollar imperialists. If Mr. Churchill and his followers still entertain the ideas that they entertained in 1927 and during the war, that will occur. The imperialists of England want to see the working class of England reduced to the same level as prevailed in the 1930’s if it is physically possible to do so. There is no doubt about that. I personally have no illusions about the matter, and I do not think that any of my colleagues have either. In my opinion, it is fit and proper that attention should be directed to these matters, in order that honorable senators opposite may hu ve them in mind when the proposed contentious legislation is being discussed.
I turn now to the Communists and the efforts that are being made to work up in this country what I call political hysteria. Part and parcel of the technique is to use agents provocateur such as the Sharkeys of Australia, the Earl Browders of America and others who take the lead in manoeuvring the workers, whenever possible, into difficult positions as a result of which they are discredited or starved into submission. That is done in the name of communism, and when it has been done the Sharkeys and the Earl Browders are rewarded by their paymasters, the banks and the newspaper proprietors. In Australia Sharkey has been paid more money than he had ever dreamed he would have as the reward for his treachery, and in America Earl Browder probably has been rewarded likewise. There is nothing new in that. There have been traitors in every radical movement. We have had them in the Labour movement. I do not propose to mention names, but there was one member of this Parliament who played a leading part in the scheme to which I have referred. Dozens of persons have been expelled from the Labour party because of their treachery.. They were all paid by the moneyed interests to “ry to discredit the Labour movement. Despite that, we have lived and succeeded. We were called upon to guide this country through the most difficult period of its existence. We took office because the members of the previous government lacked team spirit, initiative and, in many instances, courage also. We saw the country through the difficult period, and at the end of it the exchequer was filled to overflowing, unemployment had ceased to exist, and additional social legislation was on the statute-hook. Honorable senators opposite should not think that, because the Labour party has suffered a temporary reverse, the parties to which they belong will ultimately be supreme in both Houses of the Parliament. That could’ happen only if the present Government parties changed their policy. If they did so, they could increase their numbers in the Parliament, but they cannot change their policy unless they adopt the policy that has been pursued by the Labour movement.
What does the Government propose to do in relation to the revaluation of the £1? It must, be remembered that there is now approximately £725,000,000 in the saving banks of Australia. If the Australian £1 . were brought to parity with sterling, the purchasing power of the money deposited in the savings banks would be increased by 25 per cent. I cannot imagine that the Government will do that. On the other hand, if there is a continuation of the present process of devaluation of the currency owing to increased prices, there will be more strikes. The coal-miners will not produce the coal that we need, and it will be of no avail- to import sweated coal or sweated steel. If the present process of devaluation continues, the waterside workers will react vigorously, and the women of Australia will. take a strong stand against it. I urge honorable senators to examine this question closely before they allow themselves to be committed to a course of action by some of the legal gentlemen who are so expert in the art of expressing the noblest of sentiments with the object of attempting to justify the most infamous of practices. The Government cannot revalue or devalue the £1 without involving itself in more trouble than it can cope with. The problem can be solved if it is approached in an intelligent manner. When all is said and done, almost everything depends upon management. Where there is competent, well informed and sympathetic management there are no strikes or industrial trouble, but where there is dictatorial or incompetent management difficulties arise. When a minor dispute occurred in Victoria, the Minister for Shipping and Fuel (Senator McLeay) stated to the press, “I shall fight them to the death “. I can almost visualize the honorable senator, wearing kilts and waving a wooden sword, trying to do that! All this dramatization and these appeals to prejudices of the people get us nowhere. If, however, the Government were to make ‘ a balanced approach to the problem and institute the controls that are necessary to regulate re-valuation or de-valuation, as thecase may be, scientifically and sympathetically, its chances of remaining in> office would be enhanced, but if it runs true to form and allows the McLeays to lead it, wearing their kilts and sporrans and shouting their war cries, it will suffer the fate that the present Government parties suffered during the war. That is the position as I see it. I have been appalled at times to see legislators taking their duties lightly and apparently believing that they were in the Parliament only to advance their careers. I have made a career for myself in the hard and difficult way. In my calm and contemplative moods I did not dream for a moment that I should be a Minister of the Crown for so long as I have been. I thought that the logophobia that is so pronounced in this country would drive me from office, as it has driven other men from office, but I was comforted by the thought that the strongest bond of unity between man and man is common danger. Where there is a common danger, there is unity, comradeship and good fellowship. It is in times of so-called peace, when the external pressure has been relaxed, that we revive the warring groups that existed previously. It is all done in the name of peace and freedom. There is no peace in this world except in the cemetery, and we are all trying to keep out of that. The political fight must be kept on the highest level. It must be an intellectual duel, where the ideas of one side are set against the ideas of the other. When the Labour party can propound the best ideas and the best schemes, the Government parties should, if they are wise, admit it, and thus help Australia to progress to the stage at which this country will be, sociologically and in every other way, the brightest gem of the British Empire.
– I am sure that all honorable senators are in accord with the expressions of loyalty that have been heard from both sides of the chamber. We were all very happy to learn from His Excellency’s Speech that Their Majesties the King and Queen contemplate visiting Australia in 1952. However, actions speak louder than words, and for that reason I claim that the manifestations of loyalty that emanated from this side of the chamber were more sincere than those of honorable senators opposite. I shall deal with that aspect of the matter fully at a later stage of my address. I congratulate Senator McCallum on the manner in which he moved the motion for the adoption of the Address-in-RepIy. Had I been adjudicating I should have given him very high marks for saying nothing very well. He claimed in relation to knowledge and education that he travels farthest who travels lightest.
– That is not what I said.
– In view of Senator McCallum’s contribution it is obvious that he has travelled a very long way indeed, because his memory is not now so good as when hr was a member of the Australian Labour party. He suggested that adequate legal measures would be taken in relation to subversive institutions. I shall deal with that matter, also, at a later stage. All of the addresses that have been delivered from the Government side of the chamber have contained appeals to the Opposition for co-operation. Honorable senators opposite realize that they only gained control of the treasury bench in the Parliament by despicable means, by resorting to all sorts of things that should not have been done. That is the reason that they are now making efforts to obtain the co-operation of the Opposition in this chamber.
Senator Maher expressed satisfaction with the prompt abolition of petrol rationing by the Government, and praised the Treasurer (Mr. Fadden) for his analysis of the petrol position. I shall deal fully with that matter also at a later stage. After the honorable senator had spoken for some time he discarded his senatorial attire in favour of overalls and descended into the Blair Athol coal-mines in order to hew coal for th, whole of Australia. Many honorable senators opposite claim that the Government has a mandate. I suppose that Mr. Playford, the Liberal Premier of South Australia, also claims that he has a mandate from the people. However, I point out that in the recent election in South Australia, Labour polled over 100,000 votes and obtained twelve seats. The
Liberal-Country league polled an aggregate of 93,000 votes and obtained 27 seats. Yet honorable senators opposite claim that that is democracy at work.
I take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister for Social Services (Senator Spooner) upon his elevation to the Ministry. During his contribution to this debate he appealed to the Opposition for co-operation. Of course, speaking politically, the honorable senator is a “ Spooner “ by nature as well as by name. His appeal was couched in the most courteous terms.. However, we must be very careful because, as I have already said, honorable senators opposite arc in office only because of the misrepresentations, falsehoods, and propaganda made available to them by the banks and other institutions that they represent. There is no unity amongst Government senators. The Minister for Shipping and Fuel (Senator McLeay) could be dubbed the “Minister for No Replies “. The word “ Yes “ is not in his vocabulary. In answer to questions he invariably says “ No “, or “ Put the question on the notice-paper “. Of course, it is obvious that the Minister for Shipping and Fuel and the Attorney-General (Senator Spicer) are not happy because they have to play second fiddle to the Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O’Sullivan). The Minister for Repatriation (Senator Cooper), who was Leader of the Opposition in the previous Parliament, has been relegated to a relatively minor ministerial position. Apparently the reason for that is that the Liberal party realizes that it must watch its Australian Country party playmates.
Sitting suspended from 6.51 to 8 p.m.
– Before the suspension of the sitting I said among other things that the expressions of loyalty from this side of the Senate are more sincere than those from the other side.
– I rise to order. I ask that that remark be withdrawn as it is offensive to me and other honorable senators on this side of the chamber.
– As the remark is offensive to Senator Gorton I ask Senator Sandford to withdraw it.
HO]
– In deference to you, Mr. President, I withdraw the remark. However, the honorable senator is a little impetuous, because I did not finish what I was going to say. It may be remembered that earlier in my speech I said that I would have more to say about that matter later. Loyalty does not mean only loyalty to His Majesty the King. I bow to nobody in my loyalty to His Majesty and the British Commonwealth of Nations, but loyalty must be practical. The Government is in office now by false pretences, but even when it was in Opposition its manifestations of loyalty were purely and simply lip-service. In his policy speech, the present Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) promised the people <that he would abolish petrol rationing if elected to office. He was prepared to do that against the advice and the wishes of the British Government and the British people even to the degree of robbing the British dollar pool of dollars urgently needed to buy food from hard currency areas. The Minister for Shipping and Fuel has resolutely refused to answer any questions on this subject. He has been dodging the issue and could be dubbed the “ Minister for No Answers ‘” There are only one or two ways by which extra petrol can be obtained. The Treasurer stumped through Australia for months before the election telling the people that there were adequate supplies of sterling petrol. That is not correct. Every drop of petrol obtained by this country has a dollar content either immediately or ultimately. But to save its political face the Government is prepared to rob the British dollar pool of dollars urgently needed by the British people for foodstuffs.
– “What about digging for gold?
– The honorable ‘ senator would not know what he was digging for. There is another way to get dollars and I should not be surprised to see the Government resort to it. That is by borrowing overseas and pawning this country to overseas interests as it did when in office before 1941. As proof that this is in the minds of the Government I quote an extract from the Melbourne Herald of the 12th January, 1950, under the heading “ More Talk of Canberra Dollar Loan “ -
The possibility of seeking a further dollar loan to meet the cost of essential imports from America is being canvassed, at least informally, among some members of the Federal Cabinet. “We know from bitter experience what it is to be in debt to overseas financial interests. Only a comparatively few year ago a delegation representing those interests visited Australia. It. included men with ‘ such high-sounding British names as Professor Guggenheim Gregory and Sir Otto Niemeyer. They came here at the request of high finance and told the Government and the people of Australia to pull in their belts. They dictated financial policy to the Government of this country.
– Mr. Scullin had something to do with that. He was in power.
– Mr. Scullin was like the present Government. He was in office, but not in power. I would say that to-day we have a temporary government in Australia. I go farther and say it can accurately be classed as a “ bitser “ government. There is not much unity in it. As I said earlier, the Minister for Shipping and Fuel and the Attorney-General do not like playing second fiddle to the Minister for Trade and Customs. There is hostility in another place, too, because certain honorable members were not included in the Ministry.
I can give honorable senators some idea of the unity in the Liberal party in the federal sphere and in the Liberal party in Victoria, which belongs to the same organization. In Victoria some of the Liberal members were expelled by the Liberal organization led by the Victorian Premier, Mr. Hollway, who incidentally is the most pathetic Premier we have had. He will not be there long. . Mr. Lechte, the Liberal member for Oakleigh, was too outspoken for the Liberal Government in Victoria. I quote an extract from the Melbourne Age of the 18th February, 1950, to give some idea of the unity in Liberal ranks. It states “ Confidence in Mr. Lechte by Oakleigh “.
Mr. Lechte said Mr. Hollway had a domineering and dictatorial attitude to the rank and file.
And Mr. Lechte said of Mr. Warner, Victorian Liberal Minister for Housing -
He is more noted for crushing smaller businesses out of existence and incorporating them in his own than he is for the number of houses he has built.
Now listen to this -
When a deputation of bakers waited on Mr. Warner and complained that a piece of legislation would drive smaller bakers out of business, Mr. Warner’s only reply was, “ So what”. “
That is how much concern the Liberal party shows for smaller business men. Further reference to Mr. Lechte, who still had the confidence of Oakleigh electors, was as follows: -
He had drawn attention to the fact that building materials had been diverted to luxury building. This caused dissension in the party room and Mr. Hollway said one such permit was for a man who had contributed very generously to the Liberal party.
This is inside information and it is not often obtainable from the Liberal caucus. It caused dissension in the partyroom. Honorable senators opposite claim that they are representing the rank and file. These extracts show that a luxury permit issued by Mr. Warner had the approval of Mr. Hollway because hesaid it was for a person who contributed liberally to Liberal party funds. Here is another statement from Mr. Lechte -
The idea that a request for power is not uppermost in the minds of those responsible for making the laws will also scarcely survive the shock of hearing a senior member of the Cabinet privately express the opinion that men can only be controlled by fear and that to put fear into the hearts of men one must have power - and that money is power.
I could keep going for a long time, much longer than the honorable senators opposite would care for. But I want to confine my’ remarks to one or two items that I can cover in the limited time at my disposal. I will have a lot more to say about other things in later debates. But I will say that the Menzies Liberal Government climbed on to the treasury bench through misrepresentation and falsehoods and by whipping up a fear campaign. That the Liberal party people know that is shown by the statement of a senior Victorian Minister that men can be controlled only by fear, that to instil fear into people one must have power, and that money is power. Before the 10th December, the private banks poured out their money without any restraint. They instructed their employees to go on a canvassing tour, knocking at doors and frightening women. I know that many women who were interviewed were told that if the Labour Government was returned their homes would be nationalized. What stupidity! But we know it succeeded. Fortunately, we have the position to which the Attorneygeneral referred a while ago, but in reverse. He mentioned that the Scullin Government was in power when Sir Otto Niemeyer came here, but there was a hostile majority in the Senate. We still have as a member of this Senate a man who sat in this very chamber and recorded his vote against the provision of a few million pounds to feed starving men, women and children. I refer to the Minister for Repatriation (Senator Cooper) These are facte. Fortunately we are in a different position to-day from that of the early 1930’s. When the Scullin Government endeavoured to put men and women back to work so that they would be adequately fed, clothed and housed, the anti-Labour majority in this chamber voted against the Scullin Government’s legislation and, in effect, inflicted more starvation and misery on the people of this country. Honorable senators opposite cannot deny these facts.
– It was Labour disunion that brought the Scullin Government down.
– Now we are in the happy position that we do not intend to see the people of this country reduced to that stage again while we have a majority in this chamber. Another subterfuge used by the anti-Labour parties was a promise at the last general election to pay endowment on the first child in every family. Everybody knows there is a catch in that. That proposal is definitely and unmistakably a concealed attack on the basic wage, because the basic wage at the present time is computed’ on the needs of a family unit of man, wife and one child. The fact that the payment of endowment on the first child will be taken into consideration by the. Commonwealth Arbi tration Court when it is determining the basic wage is proved by the Commonwealth Arbitration Court’s decision, when the payment of endowment for the first child became a political issue, to adjourn the hearing of the basic wage case until after the general election. The Prime Minister, trying to play that curly one, said that if the court took the payment of 5s. endowment for the first child into consideration when computing the basic wage he would make the endowment 10s. instead of 5s. What difference would that make to the computation of the basic wage? Whether the endowment was 5s. or 10s. the court would take it into account when computing the wage.
– Would the honorable senator abolish child endowment altogether ?
– Yes, if the honorable senator were the child. Now I turn to the proposal of the Menzies Government to reconstitute the Commonwealth Bank Board. I could speak for hours on this subject, because it is very near to my heart. I remember the dictatorial and ruthless attitude of the Commonwealth Bank Board in pre-war years, prior to the passage by the Labour Government of the 1945 banking legislation. Nobody can deny that the Commonwealth Bank Board, acting for the private banks and financial institutions of this country, dictated government policy in Australia. If honorable senators desired proof of that I merely have to remind them of a statement made in 1932 by the then Prime Minister, the late Mr. J. A. Lyons, at a public meeting in Adelaide. The statement was -
It is only because the banks have confidence in my Government that we are able to carry on.
If anybody should know about such things, the man occupying the post of Prime Minister should know. Is not that clear and unmistakable evidence of financial dictation of policy ? But I do not ask honorable senators to take the word of the. late Mr. Lyons alone for what I say. Mr. B. S. B. Stevens, now Sir Bertram Stevens, when he was Premier of New South Wales in 1932, made a statement at Deniliquin on the 19th November of that year, that was reported in the Sydney press two days later. He said -
My Government is getting into the field of economic endeavour as courageously as the banks will allow.
Honorable senators who belong to antiLabour parties repeatedly talk of political interference in banking. We have had financial dictation of politics under antiLabour governments all along the line. The anti-Labour parties are running true to form, and according to the policy speech delivered by the present Prime Minister at the last election campaign, those parties again propose to sell out the people of Australia to the private banking and financial institutions.
– -That is how they intend to put value back into the £1.
– There is going to be strife over that. “ Artie “ Fadden is going to have something to say about it, do not worry! The Government parties are soft-pedalling all those things now, as they are doing with a number of other items mentioned in their leaders’ policy speech, for instance, communism. In no uncertain terms, while the Chifley Government was still in office, the antiLabour parties made it very clear that if the people elected them to office they would ban the Communist party. Now we are told that “ adequate steps “ are to be taken to control subversive activities. Mr. S. M. Bruce, now Lord Bruce, said the same thing in 1925, when he was an anti-Labour Prime Minister of Australia. He said, “ Elect my Government to power and we shall get rid of the Communists “. He was elected, but nothing was done about that promise. He repeated the same dose in the 1928 election. Would any sane human being suggest that, by passing an act of Parliament, it is possible to suppress thought, no matter what it is? The only way to defeat communism is to create conditions in Australia in which communism will not breed, because it breeds only in unrest and poverty.
– I suppose that is why the people elected a Liberal government.
– When the Menzies Government banned communism in 1940, what happened? Perhaps the memory of the honorable senator who just interjected does not go back as far as that; but, if he does not remember what happened, then I shall tell him. In Victoria, at least two of the most prominent Communists stood for Parliament as independent candidates. How could that be stopped? Be reasonable and sensible! The people have been fooled sufficiently to return a “ bitser government “ for a while, but those in charge of that “ bitser “ Government have realized already how stupid their proposals about communism are, because they have been considerably watered-down in the Governor-General’s Speech outlining the Government’s programme. The Government does not intend to ban the Communists because the Communists are too handy to the Government. The Minister for Shipping and Fuel, who should be called “ the Minister for No Answers “, admitted recently that he went down a mine in New South Wales with the president of the miners’ federation, Mr. Idris Williams. Probably Williams dictated the policy to be undertaken by the Government regarding the Communist party. In his policy speech, the present Prime Minister told the people of Australia that if the antiLabour parties were elected to office - and they have been elected partly in one chamber-
– Not a bad part.
– No, it is not bad. I do not want to leave it myself. With callous effrontery the Prime Minister said - and this is part of the payment by the Government to the banks for their financial and physical aid in winning the elections on the 10th December - that he intended, if elected, to hold a referendum to Obtain authority to prevent any government from nationalizing anything without first taking a referendum of the people on that specific question. If a government is prepared to go to the people with the idea of tightening the Constitution, it is time that the government was bundled out of office. This is not a party matter. Everybody who has any political sense at all, or who reasons along political lines, will appreciate the fact that before this National Parliament can be made national in fact as well as in name, the provisions of the Constitution must be greatly expanded. Yet here we have a Government that is prepared, at a price, to pay the private banks for the assistance that they gave it by further restricting the Constitution in respect of the powers of this Parliament. I consider that that is a damning indictment of any government. As I said earlier, however, the Government’s proposal is only in part payment for the colossal amount of funds poured out by the private banks of this country when they released their employees and paid them bonuses to go around knocking at doors and frightening women. I saw a letter from the banks to their employees instructing them to attend political meetings, and telling them what type of questions to ask at a Labour meeting and what type to ask at a Liberal meeting. They left the Australian Country party out. That is a party of nonentities, an appendage of the Liberal party. I have often described it as a half-brother to Liberal raced by the same stable. The letter instructed the employees to go to political meetings and to use the Communist technique of dispersing themselves among the audience so that they would not be recognized. As part payment for the great services rendered by the banks the Menzies-Fadden Government is prepared to endeavour further to restrict the Australian Constitution and thereby render more impotent than they are now this National Parliament and Government which could be national in fact as well as in name. If I had more time at my disposal I could tell the Senate other truths.
– Has the honorable senator told any truths yet ?
– The honorable senator would not know, because he is a stranger to truth. It would be no good telling him the truth because he would not recognize it. I shall make further remarks at a future date, and tell the Senate other truths about the present Government.
Debate (on motion by Senator Wright) adjourned.
page 565
– by leave - read a copy of the statement made in the House of Repre sentatives by the Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Spender) (vide page 621), and laid on thetable the following paper : -
Motion (by Senator O’Sullivan) put -
That Standing Order 14 he suspended in order to permit a motion for the printing of the paper - Foreign Affairs - Ministerial Statement, 9th March, 1950 - and debate thereon, before the adoption of the Address-in-Reply.
– There being an absolute majority of the whole number of senators present, and no dissentient voice, I declare the motion resolved; in the affirmative.
Motion (by Senator Spicer) proposed -
That the paper be printed.
Debate (on motion by Senator Ashley) adjourned.
page 565
Address-in-Reply.
Debate resumed.
– I approach my maiden speech with a sense of surprise that I have been elected a member of this Senate, realizing as I do that this chamber has a great constitutional position and very grand purposes. I believe that these purposes have not been expressed as appropriately as one would desire in the debate to which we have listened during the last three weeks. In making that statement I wish nevertheless to acknowledge the contributions that have been made in the speeches that we have heard during the course of the debate, particularly from this side of the chamber. I do not, of course, exclude the speech made by Senator Collings, an Opposition senator, last night. The tenor of his speech and the humanitarian views that he expressed in it, were such that, if maintained by all honorable senators, the level of debate in this chamber would be entirely satisfactory, and it was with regret therefore that I observed the absence of Senator Collings from the chamber to-night, “when, the Government presented a comprehensive statement on foreign affairs, a subject so germain to the substance of. his address. I have referred to the functions of this chamber and I should be sorry to be convinced that those functions were correctly indicated in the speeches of some honorable senators opposite. I believe that this chamber has very definite functions to fulfil in the federation that the people of Australia 50 years ago decided, in their wisdom, to constitute. I hope that in the next half century of this Senate’s existence it will recapture the leeway that it has lost, regain its original purpose and reconstitute itself the chamber established to protect State rights, because unless we realize that the States represent independent units of great importance in our federation, the federal character of this Commonwealth will be exposed to great danger .and the activities of the Australian Government severely handicapped. The framers of the Constitution, whose forethought the present generation should acclaim rather than disparage, made no idle arrangement when they provided that each State should have equal representation in the Senate, regardless of how disproportionate the population, or the wealth, of those States might be. The change that has been made in the relationship between the National Parliament and the Parliaments of the States during the last dismal decade of constitutional government in this country presents a challenge to the Senate as the protector of State rights, and we should address ourselves immediately to a review of that phase of government for the purpose of restoring complete financial autonomy to the States and thus relieving them of their present complete and utter dependence upon this Parliament for their financial needs. The financial revolution that was wrought in 1942, at the worst period of the recent war, when this Parliament assumed exclusive power to levy income tax has had tremendous effects. As the economic changes which must invariably take place in the future materialize, the incidence of that revolution will be felt to an increasing degree by the States. Before those economic changes bring about crises in the States, it behoves us to give immediate and earnest considera- tion to that problem not merely for the purpose of. restoring the status quo ante but in order to give to the States a financial status that will enable them to carry out the constitutional functions which are their responsibility within the federation.
Some of the remarks made by members of the Opposition in this debate have caused me a good deal of dismay. J_ refer first to their claims that the Government, of which I am intensely proud to be a supporter, secured office by indulging in contemptible misrepresentation at the recent general election. I regard ranting claims of that kind merely as evidence of the barrenness of thought of those who make them. Those honorable senators should ponder upon the implications of the great national decision that was made on the 10th December last. They should ask themselves whether the people’s verdict was not right after all and whether they cannot learn certain lessons from it, because they seem to believe that they themselves are quite incapable of making any wrong decisions. The disparaging remarks that have been made about tinPrime Minister (Mr. Menzies) by certain honorable senators in this debate impels me to say that it is one of the proudest privileges that I could ever expect to enjoy to be ranked even a mere back bencher in the Parliament behind a government led by that right honorable gentleman. His magnificent leadership in a great democratic Commonwealth induced the people to make a decision which, undoubtedly, will react tremendously to their benefit as it rescued them from control by a government which I believe was rapidly becoming destructive of all our democratic rights. We on this side of the chamber are proud of the lucid and simple way in which he expounded our party’s policy to the people; he presented it in such a way that it could not be misunderstood. And the people, after eight years of Labour rule, were so convinced that they returned this Government with an unchallengable majority. During this debate members of the Opposition have harked back to the dreadful mess that a Labour government created in this country from 1930 to 1932. The ghosts of that period still haunt them; they cannot rid themselves of the spectres which then were responsible for their ejection from office. I can only hope that as they look back upon that Gomorrah which they themselves created they will escape the fate of Lot’s wife. However, should such a fate befall them their silence would be of signal benefit to the Parliament.
I had hoped that as the result of the recent election honorable senators opposite would be wise enough to realize that socialism is not acceptable to the people of this country, and that the people have declared that that doctrine is not in the best interests of the nation. I trust that as this debate proceeds honorable senators opposite will display a little more candour about the programme which they support in that respect. .Senator O’flaherty said, by way of interjection, that his re-election was due to the fact that he had preached socialism from one end of South Australia to the other, and that there was only one brand of socialism. If that is the attitude of the Labour party, his colleagues certainly did not make that fact clear during the recent general election campaign. Indeed, they were singularly ambiguous as to whether, if the Chifley Government had been returned, they would have proceeded to implement their policy of socialization. There can be no doubt that the Chifley Government’s attempt to nationalize the private banks was the first thunderous stroke in the Labour party’s effort to implement a complete policy of socialization in this country. Having regard to the fact that the people rejected that policy at the recent general election, I should have expected that any one sensible of democratic rights would be prepared to accept that decision. I place little reliance upon the protests of honorable senators opposite that they are prepared to put that issue to a further test to the people. I thought that they would have regarded it as finally decided. But if honorable senators opposite are determined to re-submit it to the people in the near future they will be met by willing challenges from supporters of the Government on the hustings.
The only other subject mentioned in the Governor-General’s Speech to which
I wish to refer relates to industrial disorder. In our consideration of the matters that will be submitted to us in this chamber, every honorable senator will be well advised to be sensible of the day-to-day requirements of the home, business and farm life of the people who sent us here to represent them. The standard of living of the people has been considerably reduced as the result of several factors not the least important of which has been the recurrence of industrial disorder. None of us is satisfied with the present housing position in this country. In spite of the attempts that- various governments have made to grapple with that problem since it became acute, it still remains critical. It is obvious to any one who studies the subject that the absence of sufficient supplies of coal, which depresses the steel production of the nation to an alarming degree, is having a most adverse effect upon governmental efforts to provide adequate housing within the reach of the financial resources of the average citizen. Therefore, it is the duty of all honorable senators to address themselves to the factors that will play an important part in the solution of that problem. For nearly half a century we -have had established in Australia a system of industrial conciliation and arbitration for the purpose of ensuring that justice shall be done to those who are most concerned in industrial disputes. Every honorable senator is pledged to support and improve that system. Therefore we have the grave duty of determining its deficiencies, because it cannot be gainsaid that continuity of employment to all who are engaged in industry, whether as management or labour, is the beat guarantee of ensuring the continued prosperity of every section of industry. By improving our arbitration system, and by offering to the workers leadership that will give them that prosperity public men in this country can be of the greatest service to those whom they represent. I was sorry to hear from some honorable senators opposite utterances which seemed to imply that there is, on this side of the chamber, a sentiment adverse to the interests of those who work in industry. I challenge that proposition with all the earnestness of which I am capable, because there are amongst us men and women who owe their success in life to the hard work by which they have striven to maintain themselves and their families. Hard work breeds sympathy with men who, in the heat of the day, toil in the fields, on the wharfs and on the roads, or carry out arduous labour an industry. “We who have been privileged to enter this chamber as the representatives of those people, can best serve their interests not by urging, in the words of one honorable senator opposite, that the workers of this country should fight their employers viciously, but by passing legislation that will ensure to workers continuity of employment, and an opportunity to share the fruits of industry so that they and their families may enjoy the high standard of living that this country can offer to them. Surely there is no member of this chamber whose memory is so vacuous or 60 brief that he does not recall the tremendous damage that was done, not only on the coal-fields, but to every section of the community by the disastrous strike in the New South Wales coal-mines last year. Surely we are all conscious of the damage that is being done to our economy to-day by the rolling strikes that are spreading from port to port throughout the Commonwealth, and by the critical situation that has been created by the Melbourne tram strike. I believe that we, as legislators, are in duty bound to give dispassionate consideration to the problem of improving the legislation under which men work in industry. As an illustration of our attitude to this problem, I remind the Senate of the great benefits that Liberal governments in the Old Country have bestowed upon working people of the United Kingdom during the last century. So keen was the appreciation of the need for organization amongst the workers that, in 1906, the British Parliament passed a measure conferring upon industrial bodies immunities that were not available to other sections of the community so that they could carry on free from persecution their battle for improved working conditions. When the arbitration system was introduced into this country, provision was made for the registration with our arbitration courts of various industrial organizations so that they would be able corporately to represent the point of view of their members. However, it was confidently expected that, long before now, such a splendid arbitration system would have obviated recourse to strikes. A tradition of British justice in our courts of law, and in the field of industry, has been the preservation of liberty and order. The great advantages of which a system of arbitration is capable can be destroyed by bad leadership of industrial organizations. We copied our arbitration system from New Zealand; but, from the very inception of arbitration in that country, the principle that arbitration should outlaw strikes was established. One of the positive proposals that we make for the improvement of our arbitration system is that members of this Parliamnet should co-operate in passing legislation providing that no strike shall take place unless voted for by a majority of workers, exercising their industrial franchise by secret ballot. I challenge any honorable- senator to distinguish sensibly between a man’s political franchise and his industrial franchise. We should remember how zealously and arduously our forefathers fought for the right to a secret ballot when exercising their political franchise. Surely, in this modern age, the ordinary working man whose ambition is to continue in his job, should have the right not be be proscribed in that purpose unless a majority of his fellows, voting at a secret ballot, so decide. Some honorable senators may challenge my knowledge and therefore my authority to speak on such subjects. I do not claim any profound knowledge of, or experience in, the trade union movement, but I have before me the statement of one whose association with that movement cannot be challenged. I refer to Mr. McLagan, a member of the New Zealand Parliament who, speaking in that legislature in 1947, scorned contemptuously nearly every one of the arguments that I have heard from those who are opposed to the view that I am attempting to express to-night. Mr. McLagan said -
In my opinion, not only is it not antiworkingclass nor the first or any stop towards destruction, it is completely in accord with working-class principles, and is a means of strengthening trade-unionism. Trade-unionism and democracy go hand in hand together. Trade-unionism can only prosper fully when it is carried on in the completest spirit . of democracy. It has been said also that the secret ballot is all right, but that it should not bc made compulsory.
I now omit a. few words of the speech, and quote a subsequent passage of it - ‘
But unfortunately, although there is that provision in the rules, the ballot is sometimes not taken on a strike issue. The rules are not sufficient to ensure that the ballot is taken on all occasions when it should be taken.
The trade union movement of New Zealand owes a debt to that type of leadership which introduced in that dominion, ‘ not in its completest and strongest form but nevertheless in a form that was a considerable improvement, the right of the working man to decide by a secret ballot whether or not a strike should take place. I have chosen this subject for comment in my first speech in this chamber because I believe that a sense of community of purpose on the part of every true Australian should disabuse our opponents of this idea that we are here to enter into - to use the words of one honorable senator opposite - a conspiracy against the interest of Australian workmen. I have already referred to the speech made by Senator Collings last night. That honorable senator called upon u& to give sympathetic understanding to the cause of international peace. I say to him, and to those who support him, that we call for a sympathetic understanding of the considerations’ that will promote industrial peace which, I believe, is the definite aim of every honorable senator who sits on the Government side of this chamber. If, without rancour, and in a spirit of constructive criticism, any suggestion is forthcoming from the Opposition, I know that it will receive the most earnest consideration of the Government.
Senator Collings concluded with a reference to Abraham Lincoln. I am reminded of the misuse to which the memory of that great man was put at the last general election. Nevertheless, Abraham Lincoln’s memory can provide us with a theme upon which, I am sure, we can find common ground. I say that, with malice to none, but with goodwill to all, wo now have; through the election of this Government, an opportunity to bring about a re-birth of the industrial freedom which, I believe, would serve the interests of this country economically and politically, and would benefit every member of this community individually.
Debate (on motion by Senator Aylett) adjourned.
page 569
Motion (by Senator O’SULLIVAN) agreed to -
That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn to Wednesday next, at 3 p.m.
Senate adjourned at 10,31 p.m.
Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 9 March 1950, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1950/19500309_senate_19_206/>.