21st Parliament · 1st Session
The Deputy President (Senator the Hon. A. D. Reid) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.
page 39
– Is the Minister for Shipping and Transport aware that the Launceston Gas Company is desperately short of gas coal and that unless a special shipment is made in the immediate future, the company may be obliged to ration gas to its consumers? Has it also been brought to the Minister’s attention that gas coal is available at Newcastle, but shipping is not available to transport it to Launceston? Is the Minister able to give an assurance that suitable transport will be made available without delay?
– Inquiries were made, into the matter that has been mentioned by Senator Guy, and a ship was sent to pick up the coal, but unfortunately, owing to a strike, gas co;il was not available and the ship had to be diverted. I have been in touch with the manager of the Australian Shipping Board and he lias informed me that a ship will be made available. As soon as the name of the ship .is known, I shall inform Senator Guy.
– “Will the Minister for Shipping and Transport inform the Senate what steps have been taken by his department to overcome the serious lack of shipping to King Island in Bass Strait because of the removal of the ship Naracoopa from that trade by the Tas.manian Government? Has the department located a suitable vessel for the Trade?
– The Australian Shipping Board has not a suitable vessel for the King Island trade because of the shallow draft required. Now the Naracoopa has been taken to another area of service, the department is making inquiries in other parts of the world to ascertain whether a ship suitable for the trade, is available. I hope to receive a reply at any time, and I assure Senator Henty that every effort will ‘be made to provide facilities for transporting goods to and from King Island as soon as possible.
– I have a question for the Minister responsible for the matter to which I shall refer. I do not know whether he is in Grade 1 or Grade 2. I refer to the possible closing of the mine at Mount Isa because of lack of coal and the difficulty in treating concentrates. The position has been brought about by congestion on the wharves at the port that is used by the mining company. According to published reports, the industry will close down within three weeks unless coal and concentrates arc available.
– I was interested to note Senator Ashley’s reference to Grades 1 and 2. He is not in either grade. The meat, sugar and other trades in Queensland are working at their peak, and unfortunately, because of shortage of labour, it has not been possible to provide sufficient men to work all the ships at the port concerned. The representative of the Australian Stevedoring Industry Board at the port has assured us that every effort is being made to meet the situation.
– My question relates to representations that were made to the Minister for Shipping and Transport during his recent visit to Tasmania. Will the Minister say whether any arrangements have been made to provide a suitable and regular shipping service from the port of Ulverstone to mainland ports, especially Sydney, for the transport of potatoes and other produce?
– My department is making inquiries to ascertain whether a suitable vessel can be made available to provide Ulverstone with a regular shipping service. One of the E class boats operated by the Australian Shipping Board will be put on the run between Ulverstone and Melbourne, as a trial, at the end of August. I appreciate that Sydney is really the port to which the people want to despatch their produce from Ulverstone, and I assure the honorable senator that I shall do my best to meet their wishes.
page 40
– I preface a question to the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral by stating that during the recent election campaign, I visited the post office at Red Hill in South Australia. I was amazed at the lack of postal facilities. I found that members of the public were required to conduct all types of postal business through a small window on the street alignment. The customers had no privacy and were subjected to the vagaries of the weather at all times. Will the Minister investigate the matter and endeavour to provide modern-facilities for the conduct of postal business at Red Hill and. will he expedite the renovation of buildings and the provision of facilities that are found upon investigation to be necessary?
– I shall be pleased to bring the matter of post office facilities at Red Hill to the attention of the Postmaster-General and ask him to supply a full report as early as possible.
page 40
– Will the AttorneyGeneral at the conclusion of the proceedings relating to alleged Communist espionage in Australia, make available to members of this Parliament a copy of all the evidence submitted to the royal commission, including the evidence that is dealt with at secret sittings, and documents H and J?
– The evidence that has been taken before the Royal Commission on Espionage in Australia, apart from that which has been taken in secret session, the publication of which is prohibited by the commission itself,, has been made available to certain members of the public as soon as it was printed. I do not know whether members of the Parliament are on the list or not. I shall make inquiries upon that point. No evidence, publication of which is prohibited by the royal commission, can be published by any one under the law. Whether evidence that the commission has directed should not be published vill later be made available for publication is a matter for the commission itself.
Later :
– Mr. Deputy President, I wish to seek a ruling from you with regard to Standing Order 9S which states -
After Notices have been given, Questions may be put to Ministers of the Crown relating to public affairs; and to other Senators, relating to any Bill, Motion, or other public matter connected with the Business on the Notice Paper, of which such Senators may have charge
I am seeking a ruling hee.nn.~e an imputation has been cast on members of Parliament by the royal commission-
– I rise to order! The honorable senator has said enough to indicate that he proposes to enter into some discussion or raise some question about the proceedings of the Royal Commission on Espionage in Australia and the evidence that has been placed before it. I submit that such discussion is clearly sub judice or akin to sub judice and that it i.s most undesirable that the matter should be brought forward in this chamber for discussion.
– I wish to state-
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT. - Order ! I shall make ray position clear at the outset in connexion with, this matter. In that way I may obviate some difficulties that might arise while I am in the chair. I shall refuse to allow any question or discussion in the Senate that is in any way connected with the Royal Commission on Espionage in Australia and that might, in any way, influence the public regarding the conduct of the commission or any question that may come before it. The royal commission has been set up by an act of Parliament under the Royal Commissions Act and until that commission brings forward its report, it would be unfair to allow the Senate, which has given the commission certain duties to perform, to try in any way to influence the commission or public opinion in regard to it. I shall be quite definite and will not permit such discussion.
– I wish to make my position clear also.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT. - Order! The honorable senator is seeking information in connexion with certain statements that have been made by counsel assisting the royal commission. Those statements have been made public. So far as I am concerned, the matter will remain within the control of the royal commission until the commissioners see fit to act otherwise. I do not want to bear anything further upon that point.
– I do not consider that is fair.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT. - Order! Senator Ashley knows the position. I do not want him to indicate, byway of an explanation in the Senate, his desires in relation to the commission. For that reason I do not want any further debate on the matter.
– You have your riding orders.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT. - Order! I ask Senator Ashley to withdraw the statement that I have my riding orders. I have my right as Deputy President to give a ruling. If Senator Ashley does not agree with that ruling, he knows that there is a line of action that he can take.
– If my statement has offended you, Mr. Deputy President, I withdraw it. but I have certain rights in this chamber just as you have.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT. - The honorable senator will be given his rights.
– I want to know why an -imputation was oast: on members of this Parliament.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT. Order ! Senator Ashley will resume his seat. I have given my ruling and the reasons for it. If the honorable senator objects to the ruling, he can move a motion of dissent. Up to that point, T shall not allow any further discussion.
page 41
– References have been made recently to the fact that on the. 24th October, the twelfth anniversary of the battle of El Alamein, Field Marshal Lord Montgomery will unveil a cloister on. the northern side of tho battlefield cemetery. This will commemorate 12.000 Allied officers and. men who died in Middle East operations and have no known graves. As there are approximately 700 Australians to be so remembered, will the Minister representing the Prime Minister let me know what arrangements are contemplated to have the Australian nation suitably represented at such a moving ceremony?
– I have not noticed the reports to which the honorable senator has referred, but I am sure the sentiments implied in his question commend themselves to every honorable senator. If he will place the question on the notice-paper, I shall request that he be supplied with the information that he has sough f.
page 41
– I have received a communication from the Leonora Roads Board that kangaroos in that area, which is very dry, are increasing by thousands and constitute a serious menace. The board has convened a meeting of pastoralists in the area, to be held on the 10th September. The district is. so to speak, being eaten out by kangaroos. Will the Minister for the Army make some .303 ammunition available to rifle clubs in the area, to enable them at least to diminish the kangaroo menace? I ask him, further, whether anything can be done by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, to combat the rabbit menace in the area. I refer to myxomatosis. That might take sonic time, but I ask the Minister to endeavour to let me have a reply to my questions before the 10th September, so that 1 c.m forward it to the Leonora Roads Hoard.
– I shall convey the honorable senator’s requests to the Minister for the Army. In order that a reply may be given as quickly as possible, I shall ask the Minister to write directly to him.
page 41
– Reports have appeared in the press recently that arrangements have been made for tho American Government to use the guided weapons testing range at Woomera. I appreciate that it is necessary and desirable for us to maintain the closest cooperation with the United States of America in this matter but, if the reports are ‘ true, ‘ these arrangements have been made, not only without the consent, but also without the knowledge of the Australian Government. Will the Minister representing the Minister for Supply say whether there is any truth in the reports? Will the Government make a statement on this important matter?
– I shall be pleased to bring the honorable senator’s question to the notice of the Minister for Supply.
page 42
– Will the Minister for Trade and Customs inform the Senate whether it is a fact that no woman was engaged to assist in the work of the census recently taken in this conntry? If so, what was the reason for the exclusion of women from that work?
– If the circumstances were as alleged by the honorable senator, I think it was a great shame. Personally, I have no knowledge of the matter. I shall cause inquiries to be made of the department responsible and supply the honorable senator with an answer as soon as possible.
page 42
– Is the Minister for National Development aware of the grave concern that exists in the north-west of Western Australia in the manganesemining industry? Does he know that as recently as last week the carriers who are performing contract work for the industry threatened certain action unless steps were taken to alleviate the fears to which I have referred? A withdrawal of the carriers would seriously embarrass the industry, whose members would have difficulty in rehabilitating themselves. Can the Minister say whether the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited contract will be extended, and whether the Government proposes to grant export licences for manganese, so that production may be increased and the industry and those dependent on it thus assured of continuity of employment?
– When the Cabinet considered this matter some time ago it decided that the known deposits of manganese in Australia were insufficient to justify its export from Australia. Accordingly, the Government adopted the general policy that manganese should not be exported. Before the prohibition of the export of manganese was decided upon, some export licences had been granted. Manganese from Ragged Hills is being exported in accordance with a licence that was granted before the new policy came into operation. I ask the honorable senator to place on the notice-paper the portion of his question relating to the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited contract, hecause discissions are taking place in connexion with that matter.
page 42
– I should like to be informed whether the parlous conditio:: of the pig-meat industry in Western Australia has been brought to the notice of the Minister representing the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture. Can he inform the Senate whether the Government intends to take any action to afford relief to that industry?
– The matter to which the honorable senator has referred was raised at the recent conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers. I have since received a deputation from the pig interests of Australia, which strongly urged the granting of assistance in. connexion with stock-feed wheat. The matter is being fully investigated, and it will be considered by the Cabinet soon. I hope to be able to furnish the honorable senator with an answer to his question before long, because I know that he and other honorable senators are greatly concerned about the matter.
page 42
– Some time ago 1 - raised in this chamber the question of finance for the Medical School at the University of Western Australia. Sin ec then the universities in the eastern States have refused to enroll students from. Western Australia,- and many secondary school students in that State are apprehensive about their future training. In view of the increasing industrial development of “Western Australia, and the refusal of the universities of the eastern States to accept students from the University of Western Australia, will the Minister for Trade and Customs reconsider the decision not to give financial aid to the University of Western Australia for the establishment of a medical school at that university ?
– I understand that at the recent conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers some of the State Premiers were very jealous about the possibility of any intrusion by the Commonwealth into the realm of education, which the States, very properly, regard as their prerogative. I have no personal knowledge of the details of this particular matter. If the honorable senator will place the question on the notice-paper a full answer will be supplied to her.
page 43
– In pursuance of representations that were made recently by me, the Minister for Shipping and Transport agreed to equip all trains running between Kalgoorlie and Port Pirie with basinets and other facilities for the care of babies. Will the Minister state whether this innovation has been a success, and whether he intends to retain the facilities ?
– I know that the Commissioner for railways is most eager to make the service between Kalgoorlie and Port Pirie very efficient. I discussed this subject with him because of representations by Senator Vincent, and he assured me that certain passengers had taken advantage of the facilities provided. According to his latest report he has more basinets than babies but the facilities have been a great help to the people travelling on this railway and I understand that they will be continued.
page 43
– Will the Minister representing the Prime Minister inform the Senate of the position in regard to compensation payments to prisoners of war of the Japanese as laid down in the Japanese Peace Treaty ? At the time of the first payment of £32 from the realization of Japanese assets held in Australia it was announced that the International Red Cross would realize upon Japanese assets held in former enemy and neutral countries, and when this realization was complete, payment would be made to the Australian Government of the Australian share of these moneys. In view of the fact that two years have elapsed since the original payment in accordance with the terms of the treaty with Japan, I seek information related to the progress being made with the second payment.
– Honorable senators will be aware that some time ago the Government agreed to distribute the proceeds of the sale of Japanese assets in Australia equally among former prisoners of war of the Japanese. Funds for the distribution were advanced from Consolidated Revenue pending realization of the assets and the amount involved in the distribution was £32 for each former prisoner of war. Honorable senators will also be aware of the public announcement made by the Vice-President of the Executive Council to the effect that an amount of £75,396 sterling had been received in respect of the Australian share in the proceeds of the sale of the Burma-Siam Railway. Under Article 16 of the Japanese Peace Treaty, Japan undertook, as an expression of its desire to indemnify those members of the armed forces of the allied powers who suffered undue hardship whilst prisoner of war, to transfer the assets of those of its. nationals in countries which were neutral during the war or which were at war with any of the allied powers or, at its option, the equivalent of such assets, to the International Committee of the Red Cross which would liquidate the assets and distribute the resultant funds to former prisoners of war and their families. Negotiations concerning the release of this property to the International Committee of the Red Cross are still proceeding and at this stage it is not possible to give any indication when finality will be reached. The Australian Government is fully conscious of the inordinate delay which has occurred in the final settlement of Japanese obligations under this Article, and we have made vigorous representations to the Japanese Government for early finality. Unfortunately, the response of the Japanese authorities has not been entirely satisfactory to date.
page 44
– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Supply in a position to make a statement relating to the following matters which are currently of great interest to the employees of the Australian Aluminium Production Commission at Bell Bay and the general public of Tasmania? Is there any substance in the belief that the general manager of the establishment, Mr. Keast, has gone to England with a view to negotiating the sale of the project to overseas aluminium interests? Will the Minister endeavour to set up a parliamentary committee to call witnesses and examine documents relating to widespread discontent, dismissals of staff and alleged inefficiency in the administration of the project? Further, will he ascertain why the AuditorGeneral has not issued a certificate concerning the finances of the Australian Aluminium Production Commission for some considerable time?
– I shall be pleased to bring to the notice of my colleague, the Minister for Supply, the question which the honorable senator has asked. I shall ask the Minister to give me a considered reply as soon as possible.
page 44
– Some time ago in this chamber I asked a question of the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services concerning the tabling of a report by a committee of architects which investigated the construction of war service homes at East Payneham, South Australia. I received a copy of that report, but unfortunately there were certain omissions from it. Some paragraphs had been left out. Would it be possible for the Minister to supply me with a true copy of the report?
– I shall ask my colleague, the Minister for Social Services, whether he will supply a copy of the report, in response to the honorable senator’s request.
page 44
– As the Minister representing the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture is aware, certain moneys are held by the Australian Wool Realization Commission on account of profits from the sale of wool to private buyers during the war. Distribution of these moneys was delayed for a considerable period awaiting the decision of the High Court in the Fulton case. As that decision has been known for some time, can the Minister advise me when growers may expect to receive the money? Could he also let me know the amount of money held on account of these growers?
– I know that the Minister for Commerce and Agricultureis watching this position very closely because he has had numerous requests in connexion with the matter. I am not quite sure whether the case has reached finality, but I shall obtain the information from the Minister during the week and furnish a reply to the honorable senator.
page 44
– I lay on the table of the Senate the following papers : -
Australian National University Act - Australian National University - ‘Report of Council for 19n3 together with financial statements.
Honorable senators will recall that the Auditor-General did not certify the University’s statement of income and expenditure for the previous year, 1952, for reasons reported to the House in his Supplementary Report for 1953 tabled in October last. The financial statement now tabled covers the period to the 31st December, 1953. The figures in this statement are still subject to audit. The Council of the University has set itself to meet the objections raised by the AuditorGeneral in relation to the taking and reconciliation of stocks of plant, equipment and stores and has displayed the fullest co-operation. Stocktaking has proceeded over’ the very great range of items of plant, equipment and stores ; in a number of sections of the university this has been satisfactorily concluded, but other sectionsremain to be dealt with and reconciliations must be effected.
page 45
Motions (by Senator McKenna) agreed to -
That Senator Brown be granted two months’ leave of absence on account of ill health.
That Senator Aylett and Senator Grant be granted two months’ leave of absence on accountof absence overseas.
page 45
Motion (by SenatorO’Sullivan) agreed to -
That the days of meeting of the Senate, unless otherwise ordered, be Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of each week; and that the hour of meeting, unless otherwise ordered, be 3 p.m. in the afternoon of Tuesday and Wednesday, and 11 a.m. in the forenoon of Thursday.
page 45
Motion (by Senator O’Sullivan) agreed to -
That on all sitting days of the Senate during the present Session, unless otherwise ordered, Government business shall take precedence of all other business on the notice-paper, except questions and formal motions, and except that general business take precedence of Government business on Thursdays, after eight p.m.; and that, unless otherwise ordered, general orders of the day take precedence of general notices of motion on alternate Thursdays.
page 45
Motion (by Senator O’Sulltvan) agreed to -
That, during the present Session, unless otherwise ordered, the sittings of the Senate, or of a committee of the whole Senate,be suspended from 12.45 p.m. until 2.15 p.m. and from6 p.m. until 8 p.m.
page 45
Motion (by Senator O’Sullivan) agreed to -
That, during the present session, unless otherwise ordered, at 10.30 p.m. on days upon which proceedings of the Senate are not being broadcast, and at 1 1 p.m. on days when such proceedings are being broadcast, the President shall put the question - That the Senate do now adjourn - which question shall be open to debate; if the Senate be in committee at that hour, the Chairman shall in like manner put the question - That he do leave the chair and report to the Senate; and upon such report being made the President shall forthwith put the question - That the Senate do now adjourn - which question shall be open to debate: Provided that if the Senate or the committee be in division at the time mimed, the President or the Chairman shall not put the question referred to until the result of such division has been declared; and if the business under discussion shall not have been disposed of at such adjournment it shall appear on the noticepaper for the next sitting day.
page 45
Motion (by Senator O’Sullivan), by leave - agreed to -
That Senator Pearson be granted two months’ leave of absence on account of absence overseas.
page 45
Motions (by Senator O’Sullivan), by leave - agreed to -
That a Standing Orders Committee be appointed, to consist of the President, the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Chairman of Committees, and Senators Benn. Brown, Guy, Kendall, Nicholls and Vincent, with power to act during recess, and to confer with a similar committee of the House of Representatives.
That a Library Committee be appointed, to consist of the President and Senators Arnold. Cole, Kendall, McCallum,Robertson and Sheehan, with power to act during recess, and to confer or sit as a joint committee with a similar committee of the House of Representatives.
That a House Committee be appointed, to consist of the President and Senators Amour. Cooke, Critchley, George Rankin, Wedgwood and Wordsworth, with power to act during recess, and to confer or sit as a joint committee with a similar committee of the House of Representatives.
That a Printing Committee be appointed, to consist of Senators Benn, Gorton, Hannaford, Sandford, Scott, Seward and Toohey, with power to confer or sit as a joint committee with a similar committee of the House of Representatives.
page 46
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT. - I have received letters from the Leader of the Government in the Senate and from the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate nominating, in accordance with Standing Order 36a, Senators Guy, Seward, Vincent, Wood, Arnold, Byrne and Willesee as members of the Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances.
Motion (by Senator 0’Stjllivan) - by leave - agreed to -
That a Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances be appointed, to consist of Senators Arnold, Byrne, Guy, Seward, Vincent, Willesee and Wood, such senators having been duly nominated in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 36A
page 46
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT.- Pursuant to Standing Order 38, I hereby appoint the following senators to be the Committee of Disputed Returns and Qualifications : - .Senator K. M. Anderson, Senator D. C. Hannaford, Senator A. Hendrickson, Senator P. J. Kennelly, Senator A. R. Robertson, Senator C. W. Sandford and Senator R. H. Wordsworth.
page 46
Address-in-Reply.
Debate resumed from the 4th August (vide page 35), on motion by Senator Annabelle Rankin -
That the following Address-in-Reply to the Speech of His Excellency the GovernorGeneral be agreed to: -
May it please Youn Excellency:
We, the Senate of the Commonwealth of Aus-tralia, 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.
.- When this debate was adjourned last night, I had suggested that the Government had major problems with which to contend in the next three years, but I had expressed the hope that the urgency of those problems would not allow the Government to forget what I called the administrative adjustments that were necessary for the welfare of the Australian people as individuals. World affairs, including economic problems, are of great importance to us, but any government would be lacking in its duty if it did not stop to consider the welfare of individuals. I shall direct attention to’ what I consider to be the Government’s immediate responsibilities, at the beginning of its three-year term of office, in respect of the rights of the people. One of those is to reach a quick and satisfactory decision in respect of financial relations between the Commonwealth and the States. Uniform taxation, foisted on the States in time of war and maintained, I consider, by a greedy federal power since that time, has not worked in the interests of the people as a whole, and it is time this Government set about reaching a decision with the States so that they may know their financial responsibilities and, more important still, so that they will have to bear those responsibilities. The Commonwealth, too, will know its responsibilities and what is more important still, the States and the Australian people will know what are the responsibilities of the Commonwealth in regard to finance. Let me explain the position in a little more detail. At present, the federal Government has thrust upon it all the odium of tax collecting, and all the difficulties of loan raising. It receives all the adverse publicity when the Premiers come together on their annual snarl to decide how much they want and how much they can get. When I speak of the Commonwealth in this connexion I refer not to any particular government or to any particular party, but to the Commonwealth Parliament. In the minds of the people, that Parliament becomes the repository of all that is bad. Then the State Premiers, whatever their political complexion, go home growling at what they have received. However, when they start to spend the money, they take credit for everything that they build, repair or purchase. It is their money that is being spent. Unfortunately the States, which have no responsibility for raising money, spend it with wanton waste. I know something of what has been happening in Tasmania simply because that State does not have to raise the money that it spends. The waste is terrific. I hope, therefore, that in the interests of the people generally the Commonwealth will quickly reach the right decision on Commonwealth and State financial relations. This Government did a lot for the people when it improved the income tax assessment form. Under the new system, any wage or salary earner can fill in his return and, by a quick and easy method, work out whether he owes the Taxation Branch some money or whether a refund is due to him. That has helped, not only the people of Australia generally but also the Taxation Branch. I have it on first-rate authority that, because of the improved income tax return, the taxation authorities are worried much less now by inquiries from individuals in respect of income tax matters than they were previously. There are many other ways in which the Government, by making a minute and detailed examination of the taxation laws and machinery, could assist the people further. Any person who employs a domestic servant, a gardener or any other worker has to fill in a form and put stamps on it. He has to fill in another form before he can purchase the stamps. He has to prepare two copies of a return at the cud of each financial year. He has to write numerous signatures. All that has to be done so that the tax-gatherer can collect perhaps £4 or £5 in taxes. That is a stupid waste of time. Surely our Public Service could devise a better method !
The problem of the sales tax requires to be studied very closely by the Government. A lot of people say of the sales tax, as they say of other taxes, that it is pernicious. I do not agree with them. If a man can afford to buy something, probably he can afford to pay a little tax on it. I suggest the Government should treat the sales tax in the same way as it treats customs and excise duties. It should divorce the sales tax completely from any budgetary provision. If the Labour party, by some extraordinary misfortune, had been returned to office at the last federal elections, the furniture retailers in Australia would have been short of funds by now. The Leader of the Opposition (Dr. Evatt) said that if his party were returned it would remove the sales tax from furniture. If Labour had been successful on the 29th May, what per son would have bought furniture between then and the introduction of the budget some time in August ? Let us admit’ franki y that even now numerous people will not buy washing machines, motor cars or other things on which sales tax has to be paid because they hope, as a result of what they have read in the press, that the rates of sales tax will be reduced in this budget. I urge the Government to consider this important point ‘ and to legislate so that in future a government will be able, without warning, to reduce or increase rates of sales tax as from the close of business on any day. That is done with excise and customs duties. I challenge any honorable senator to give one reason why it should not be done also with the sales tax.
Going from one form of taxation to another, I come to the pay-roll tax. I believe every member of this Parliament has received a telegram from a suburban city council asking us to urge the abolition of the pay-roll tax in respect of municipal councils. A lot of people dislike the pay-roll tax. I hope that in due course this Government will abolish it, but while it is kept in operation, the Government should consider the people who have to- pay it. They have to fill in many forms. I believe that at the present time employers have to send in pay-roll tax returns monthly or quarterly. They have to fill in an annoying government form four or twelve times a year. Why should not a pay-roll tax return be rendered only once a year? It would be idle for any taxation officer to ‘say that if that were done employers might not render accurate returns. Everybody knows that if a man has to pay pay-roll tax, he will give the taxation ‘ authorities an accurate statement of the wages he has paid, because he is entitled to an income tax rebate in respect of them. Therefore, there would be no need to fear that taxpayers would try to fleece the Government with inaccurate pay-roll tax returns. That is perhaps a small matter to raise in the Federal Parliament, but I say it is time that the Government got down to considering such small matters in the interests of the people.
Another important question that the Government must consider very soon is the system of federal elections. At present, there is an election for the House of Representatives in one year, an election for the Senate twelve or eighteen months later, and another election for the House of Representatives not very long afterwards.
– That makes senators work.
– I do not need that sort of thing to make me work, but let Senator O’Flaherty speak for himself. The present system is a very poor one. I a in almost a believer in a five-year term for a parliament, as is the case in Great Britain. Let us be frank. A government comes into office. During the first year of office, it is finding its feet; during the second year, it is really doing its job; and during the third year, it is window dressing.
– Ah !
– That is what the Labour party did, but it did not dress itf windows correctly. With a Senate election bobbing up eighteen months or two years after an election for the House of Representatives, we find that what goes on is window dressing rather than the job of governing the country most effectively. In dealing with electoral reform, serious consideration must be given to the method of voting and the filling of vacancies that occur in the Senate. J. speak as one who was elected to a. Senate vacancy by both bouses of a State parliament. The present position is that, if a similar vacancy occurred in the near future - let rue say that I am not feeling ill - it would be filled by a person selected by the 4S members of the Tasmanian Parliament. The majority of the members of that Parliament, because the people of Tasmania .have so wished, are at least proLabour. If a Liberal senator from Tasmania caused a vacancy in the Senate by death or retirement, the members of the Tasmanian Parliament would be required to £11 tho vacancy. They could select a Labour man. I am not criticizing i hem. I say that is a possibility. The election of a Labour supporter under those circumstances would entail the loss <>i’ this Government’s majority in the Senate T shall not express an opinion whether that would lie good or bad, but
I point out that the present system of filling Senate vacancies could give to 48 of the 9,000,000 people in Australia the ability to change the balance of power in the Federal Parliament. In my opinion, that is not democratic.
– They are not 48 people. They constitute the parliament of a sovereign State.
– They arc 4S individuals who would vote as individuals. That is an important point which this Parliament should consider. We should alter the system of filling Senate vacancies. But some of my thunder has been stolen. I was about to speak rather critically of the people of Australia because of the number of informal votes that are cast at general elections. A return in connexion with the recent election for the House of Representatives shows that between 60,000 and 70,000 informal votes were cast. In effect, informal voters do not exercise their right to elect the men and women who shall represent them in the Parliament. However, I have read a report in yesterday’s press to the effect that two out of 88 members of the Australian Parliament had voted informally at an election conducted by the Labour caucus. So that, perhaps the people as a whole are not so bad after all ! Nevertheless, I believe that steps should be taken to educate the people to correctly fill in their ballotpapers. It is absurd that electors should be required to vote for every candidate whose name appears on a Senate ballotpaper. Why should this be necessary when only six of the thirteen or fourteen candidates will be elected?
Although I should not like my following remarks to be interpreted as a threat, I commend them to honorable senators. If, within a reasonable time, the Government does not show a lead in this matter, why should not this chamber which, after all, is the Upper House, the States House, the People’s House, forget party bickering and lead the Government into action? I hope that the points that I have raised will be heeded by the Government, and I shall conclude by supporting wholeheartedly the motion for the adoption of the Address-in-Reply to His Excellency’sSpeech.
– As usual, the Governor-General’s Speech was an eclectic statement covering a wide range of subjects, and based on pious affirmations rather than facts. In the light of recent events overseas, it is our duty to ascertain the facts. The relationships between Asia and the United States of America have a considerable bearing on Australia’s future. Nevertheless, it is true that although Great Britain recognizes the present Government of China, neither the United States of America nor Australia does so. Is it the policy of the present Australian Government to follow the lead of the United States of America? We have been left very much in the dark in this matter. In order to assess the position in true perspective, we must consider the historical background of China. Dealing with the exploitation of China by foreign imperialists, Clement Wood wrote in Outline of Man’s Knowledge, which was published in 1929, as follows: -
China, seeking to stop the opium trade, which was ruining its population, was forced by imperialist England in 1839 to allow this curse of civilization tn ravage the yellow land unimpeded.
The United States in 1S44 took advantage of China’s helplessness to demand special privileges . . . Japan, . . in a brief war, during 1S!>4 and 1895 defeated 1’hinn, and entered into a deadlock with grasping Russia over the division of despoiled China. Germany, in .181)7 . . . planted German civilization in the unlocked Chinese town of Kiaochow : Great Britain as a counter move, wrested Wei hai wei. between the German and
Russian acquisitions, from Chinn. tn 1900, China rose against the foreigners in the Boxer rebellion . Japan, Russia, Great Britain, the United States, France, and Germany, acting together, put down the uprising and exacted heavy indemnities from the abject Orientals . . ‘. In 1912 China became a, republic, its history since then has been a series of cloudy revolutions and uprisings, culminating in the vigorous 1927 antiforeign warfare.
Since 1927 there have been further antiforeign revolutions, and, from 1945 until 1949, a successful anti-fascist government revolution has made it possible for the establishing of the present People’s Republic of China. Like republics of other countries, it has come into being as such mainly as the result of wars of defence and revolutionary action. And its policy, from that point of view, like those of other republics, will be determined from time to time by China’s needs for selfpreservation either inside or outside it3 own borders. If China’s economy is, as isclaimed to be, based on the principle of ownership in common by its people of the land and the machinery of production, there will be no need for it to engage either in wars of aggression or revolutionary action. But, if not, its position will be similar to that of the imperialist powers in the Western world, where the economies are based on the principle of private monopoly ownership of the land and the machinery’ of production - the ‘ root cause of wars of aggression and revolutions.
The present Government of China came to power in a revolt against imperialist domination and it has fought for the establishment and maintenance of internal, democracy. That process was similar to. that which took place in America years ago. Why is recognition of the Chinese Government withheld by America although it has been granted by the Government of the United Kingdom? We should know the answers to these questions. Are we to be merely thedependants of the United States of America ? Are we to accept everything that the Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Casey) tells us? Should we not analyse the position for ourselves and understand it? If we do not do that,, tl.113 Parliament will become merely a rubber stamp for what is decided in Washington or London. In the circumstances, I think that recognition should be extended to China by the Australian Government.
In the course of his Speech the Governor-General said -
My Government is undertaking a re- organization of the defence programme to achieve Hie maximum security that the country can provide for a Ions period, having regard to the needs, not only of defence, but also of economic stability and the steady development of population and resources and high levels of production and employment.
What is meant by economic stability? Economics is the basis of all social science. Therefore, when a government speaks of economic stability it is necessary to know what it means. I can only assume that the Government claims that it can stabilize the present economy of Australia. But that economy cannot be stabilized because it is based on the principle of the maximum production of wealth for the owners of capital and the minimum of consumption, as represented by the basic wage, for the workers. Therefore, the nation’s economy must become more unstable as time goes on under existing conditions. Another economic crisis will come which will be similar to that of the 1930’s. It will be caused by over-production and underconsumption. That state of affairs is operating in Australia and overseas. How is the over-production of capital and consumer goods to be disposed of whilst the working classes are suffering from under-consumption ? The Government was merely speaking with its tongu-2 in its cheek or was hopelessly ignorant of the position when it inserted the reference to economic stability in the GovernorGeneral’s Speech. We have increasing surpluses of wheat, dried and canned fruits, butter, beef, wine and other products on the one hand, and we have an appalling shortage of food, clothing and bousing for workers on the other hand. That state of affairs exists to a far greater extent in America and in other countries of the world. But are we to allow Australian conditions to become similar to those in America, England and Asia ? Should we not try to organize our internal economy so that consumption will keep pace with production? We would then have a stabilized economy. But that is not intended by this Government.
We have only verbal effervescence or pious affirmations about stable economy from the Government. It was once said by the late John Burns that many people were either prisoners of phrases or slaves of shibboleths. That remark applies particularly to the members of the Government. The Government is the slave of certain shibboleths and the prisoner of certain phrases which it has put into a printed document for honorable senators to consider. I am not prepared to accept a mental soporofic It is the duty of the Government to abandon the orthodox presentation of its case and try to state the facts as they can be understood. How are we to get people to act intelligently and constructively unless they understand the position? I have already invited attention to increasing surpluses, particularly of consumer goods. On the 20th July the Melbourne Herald, under the caption “ What Are We Going To Do With Our Derelicts”, printed the following: -
What responsibility has a city got for its human derelicts - dead bents, methos sick, unemployed, and unemployables who sleep and sometimes die these bitterly cold nights on park benches, in doorways, on river banks and in rubbish tips? Bo we get enough? If not, what can be done and what should l>e done?
The Melbourne Herald., which is not a Labour paper, asked the question of a number of leading Melbourne gentlemen, whose names I do not propose to give. The effect of their answers was that We should provide additional relief in the form of food, second-hand clothing and barrack-type houses. No attempt was made by the newspaper or’ the gentlemen to whom I have referred to provide a worthwhile solution of the problem. These men and women are not derelicts, as they have been called. They arc casualties of our economic system. Their plight results from the ignorance of politicians and others, as much as from anything else. A similar position exists in other countries, but the Australian Government persists with an unstable economic system.
I wish to remind honorable senators of what happened here during the 1930’s in this connexion and what is likely to happen in the 1950’s. During the worldwide depression of the 1930’s the World Belief Committee reported that 2,400,000 human casualties had died of starvation, whilst 1,200,000 had committed suicide. At the same time, 1,000,000 freight car loads of grain, 267,000 car loads of coffee, 560,000 cwt. of sugar, 50,000 cwt. of rice, 50,000 cwt. of meat, and 150,000 milch cows had been destroyed. In addition, the production of tea had been restricted by 121.000,000 lb. The Production of sugar had been restricted similarly. Nine million five hundred thousand acres of wheat and 15,000,000 acres of cotton land were rendered idle. Millions of pigs were ordered to be destroyed, and huge stacks of wheat were used as fuel for engines, while the human casualties starved and died. That happened in our time. It was the aftermath of the 1914-18 war and the result of over-production and under-consumption. So that when this Government speaks about economic stability, we must look at the background of our economy. Having done so, I suggest that we have a right to expect something better from the Government than we have had in the past.
The Sydney Financial Review of the 22nd July last directed attention to the state of economic affairs in America. The New York staff correspondent of the publication stated -
With industrial production on the decline, and the United States admittedly in a “ recession “, the present level of the market for stocks has been a source of amazement to the public and to Wall-street analysts.
In other words, the enormously increased production by American workers has been a source of amazement. The Americans are now trying to overcome what they regard as an anomalous situation. Because of the capitalist system, which is based on the principle of maximum production and minimum consumption by the workers, the more they try to balance the economy the more anomalous the position becomes. The May issue of Fortune, which is America’s leading antiLabour publication, states that even if business activity picks up, unemployment can be worse a year hence and may approach. 6,000,000 casualties by next February. It points out that from 1948 until the outbreak of the Korean war, American production rose by 6 per cent. The publication also states that as many as 3,000,000 workers could be displaced should production spurt again this year.
Fortune, of course, has no solution to offer. In common with the other publications to which I have referred, it has merely emphasized the obvious. We know that war is a temporary solution. In 1939 there were approximately 460,000 Australian workers and their families living on the dole. War was declared and at once those human casualties became indispensable. My interpretation of the position, so far as America and China are concerned, is that the American imperialists want another war, in which Australia would be involved, to solve their problems, just as the 1914-18 war solved them. Indeed, they have said so. In 1933, one of the leading New York publications stated, in effect, “ We want another war to build up business “. I suggest that it is the responsibility of this Government to present to the Parliament a much clearer picture of the facts and the background of our economic position. Unless this is done, the Government will not be able to escape the consequences, because a government which does not deal with causes cannot avoid responsibility, for the effects. The population of the slums and the gaols is increasing. There is greater demand for hospital treatment yet nothing is being done by the Government. It is my duty to direct attention to this state of affairs and to do everything I can to remove the causes. There is a natural law of cause and effect which applies to humans as well as to the mechanical world. Unless the Government views these exigencies in the light of cause and effect, we shall continue to have empty statements repeated as though they were broadcast from an old record. The community is supposed to accept the position without question. If honorable senators on the Government side are not prepared to do something better, they must accept their share of responsibility for events.
I listened with interest to Senator Annabelle Rankin, but if I may say so without offence, she merely tried to coat the very bitter pill with sugar. It cannot be done. Our problems cannot be explained away. Unless the Government is prepared to take action, these troubles will continue. In his Speech the Governor-General said -
It is a fundamental part of the policy of my Government that the development of Australia should proceed at the highest possible practical rate. This requires an adequate supply of labour and materials; sound policies for encouraging private investment and an inflow of capital; close financial collaboration with the States, who are responsible for most public works; the encouragement of savings by monetary stability; and a carefully selected and vigorous’)’ executed programme in the Commonwealth’s own field.
To the unsophisticated that reads very well, but what does the Government mean when it speaks of close collaboration with the States, and what does it mean by the encouragement of savings by monetary stability? What are savings and what is the effect of savings? Savings are simply unliquidated costs. If a man is a wage-earner and spends portion of his wages and puts another portion into a savings bank, that constitutes unliquidated costs. Deposits in savings banks in Australia are reported to amount to £1,000,000,000. In Victoria, the State Electricity Commission has borrowed £10,000,000 from the State Savings Bank of Victoria to finance electrical projects. It is committed to pay 4f per cent, interest. The whole of that 4J per cent, is recovered from prices. The State Electricity Commission includes it in the prices it charges for light and power and the consumers pay the whole of the interest directly or indirectly. From the workers’ point of view they pay their own interest and the banks make a profit of 2^ per cent. That means that unliquidated costs are capitalized to that extent. As a result, future costs are increased. That is one of the reasons why costs are so high to-day. As far back as 1933 attention was directed to this fraudulent state of affairs by the Economic Crisis Committee of the Southampton Chamber of Commerce. In a foreword to its report, the committee states -
We were appointed by Chamber Minute dated the 5th January, 1933 to make a study of the root causes of the calamitous depression in national and international trade, especially focussing attention on the problem as now represented by unemployment, and to make a recommendation based on the findings, to the British Chambers of Commerce.
The comprehensive report was produced by men fully qualified by examination anl experience and they made the following comment about savings: -
Money saved and placed on deposit in the banks -
In the process of the distribution of this money, a set of costs was created, whether in respect of consumable goods or of capital goods is immaterial. Somewhere in the ledgers of the banks there are probably equivalent loans outstanding. Now it should be clear that over a period of time all costs have to be liquidated, and money saved in any cycle of production must result in a set of unliquidated costs. The employment of savings for investment -
From the foregoing illustration it will be seen that money saved leaves a set of unliquidated costs. If these savings are invested to enable further production to take place, two set= of costs will exist in respect of the savings, costs prior to the savings being effected, and costs created on the subsequent investment of the money in industry. Thu~ the process of saving results in a certain amount of money passing through the productive system several times, each time creating .: set of costs in respect of which the community receive no equivalent purchasing power in enable them to meet the costs involved.
In practice there is over-production and under-consumption because of the system of finance under which we are operating. Therefore, when the Government speaks of savings it is implying that it intends to go on just as it has done in the past and irrespective of the damage that will be done.
– Is the honorable senator opposed to savings?
– I am not opposed to savings, but to the way in which the savings are used. “When savings are recapitalized in the direction I have indicated, two sets of costs are included in the prices. In passing, I direct the attention of honorable senators to a report by the International Labour Organization of May, 1954, in which special attention has been directed to a world-wide survey of the shortage of houses. According to that report, 180,000,000 families in the world are without adequate housing. Some have no housing at all. That number includes 30,000,000 families in industrially advanced countries. The population in the cities is increasing and country population is falling. Meanwhile, people are crowding into all kinds of shacks. I am doubtful whether that report has been read by any supporter of the Australian Government or whether it will take any action to remedy the situation in Australia,
Reverting to savings, I direct attention to finance methods. In a brochure entitled “ Economic Tribulations “, published in 1939, a former Governor of the Bank of England, V. C. Vickers, stated that bank credit should not be lent into existence but should be spent into existence and recovered from charges. Mr. Vickers was Governor of the Bank of England from 1910 to 1919, when he resigned because he refused to be associated with the fraudulent process that was intended in reverting to the gold standard. “We are reaching a position in which the Government states that this or that cannot be done because there is a shortage of money. Millions of pounds are lying idle. The Government says there is no money, hut in truth there is plenty of money. Money is a manmade instrument of indirect exchange. Its use superseded direct bargaining. Therefore, in my opinion, the GovernorGeneral’s Speech has, in this respect, given an entirely false impression to the masses of the people who are entitled to something better. Governments are elected to control the affairs of the nation in the interests of the people. When a government proceeds to recapitalize savings it is not acting in the interests of the people. Therefore, this Administration has been remiss in its duty. It has condoned what I consider to be a fraudulent method of financing the country’s affairs.
The Governor-General said. -
Australian gold production adds considerably to this country’s earnings of overseas funds. This industry has been adversely affected by a relatively static price for gold and high local costs. My Government will, therefore, introduce, during this Session, legislation for the provision of financial assistance to the g-old-mining industry.
Let me describe the effect of such a policy. Mention is made of the static price of gold. Why is the price of gold static? One explanation was given in an article published in the Melbourne Herald on the 28th January, 1950. The writer, an American economist, stated -
America’s reluctance to raise the price of gold is not simply a matter of dogmatically refusing to depreciate the “almighty dollar”.
Her politicians and economists are acutely aware of the internal and external implications of such a move; it would give an enormous dollar windfall to the major gold producing and hoarding countries - Russia and Switzerland - and set off another dangerous bout of inflation at home.
That is not correct. If the price of gold were increased, certainly those who own gold would have more dollars, but the value of those dollars would be depreciated. In round figures, the price of gold in Australia to-day is £16 an ounce. A sovereign contains a quarter of an ounce of gold, so the purchasing power of a sovereign can be ascertained simply by dividing £16 by four. In other words, four £1 notes are required to-day to purchase what formerly could be bought with a sovereign. If the price of gold were increased to £20 an ounce, the purchasing power of the £1 note would be reduced to 4s. in terms of gold. That is, why the price of gold in America is static. An increase of the price of gold would mean a reduction of the purchasing power of the dollar. Thomas B. McCabe, chairman of the United States Federal Reserve Board, told a judicial committee of the American Congress that an increase of the price of gold would provide additional dollars to foreign countries without reference to the needs of the recipients.
There is another aspect of the gold situation that is not understood : it is not profitable for America to buy our gold. If it were, the gold would not be placed in the vaults at Fort Knox, and with the dollars that we received in exchange, we could buy commodities. So, America would not mate any profit at all by buying gold and that is another reason why the price remains static. Honorable senators may rest assured that if it were profitable to increase the price of gold, that would be done overnight. But it is not profitable and so it is not done. This Government proposes to subsidize the gold-mining industry by taxing the Australian people. What is the alternative? In March, 1939, twelve questions were posed by Senator Robert Wagner to the then secretary of the United States Treasury, the Honorable Henry Morganthau Jr. Some of them were rather lengthy, and I shall not read them all, but I direct attention particularly to question number 7 which was -
Of what use to us is this large stock of gold? Is there any likelihood that we will get so much of the world’s gold that we will “get stuck “ with it?
In the course of a lengthly explanation Mr. Morganthau said -
Gold has been used for this purpose from time immemorial, and modern governments have as yet found no satisfactory substitute : nor is there any sign that a satisfactory substitute will be found in the near future.
That was in 1939. War broke out soon afterwards and the substitute was provided immediately - lend-lease which was the exchange of goods and services for goods and services. That is how international finance should be conducted. However, upon the cessation of hostilities in 1945. lend-lease ended abruptly, and incalculable damage was done to many countries, particularly the United Kingdom. The United States of America did not suffer as Great Britain did during the war, but when the war was over, the substitute for gold that had worked satisfactorily throughout the war was abandoned. That showed America’s attitude to Great Britain. Then came the L946 loan. On that occasion, the Manchester Guardian said, in effect, that American financiers were financial gangsters. That had been said years earlier, of course, and it was true. Immediately after the loan was made to Great Britain, price control in the United States of America was abandoned, and prices increased by 30 per cent., which meant that the purchasing power of the loan was reduced by 30 per cent.
No benefit will accrue to the Australian people by the provision of financial assistance to the gold-mining industry. They will be taxed to keep the workers in the gold mines. It is financially and physically impossible to obtain gold without taxing the people to do it. That can be done by reducing costs. Reference is made in the Governor-General’s Speech to high local costs. Why are they high? They are high because they are fraudulently loaded by an inflated currency. If a rigid form of price control were applied, not only in the gold-mining districts of Western Australia, but also in goldrnining areas throughout the Commonwealth, millions and millions of pounds in capital costs which have never been incurred, would be disallowed. The removal of those charges from the cost structure would ensure continuity of gold production without taxing the Australian people further for this purpose. But the Government makes no such approach to the problem. It is travelling the same old road, committing the same old mistakes with the result that many people have been reduced to living in hostels, slums, and even gaols. So, when the Government says it will do something for the development of this country, that is not true. The Government has no constructive policy. Its policy is destructive.
We are told that efficiency must be increased and costs reduced. How are costs to be reduced ? The only method that has been thrust over and over again on the collective mind of the people is that the purchasing power of wages must be reduced. That is the only solution that the Government can offer. But a reduction of the purchasing power of wages would serve only to aggravate the position. The workers are not only producers ; they are also consumers. If their purchasing power is reduced they will buy less. In fact, the purchasing power of wages to-day is no more than it was before World War I. I paid £25 for the suit I am wearing now. If I were still working at my trade as a plumber, I should have to work for eight or nine days to earn £25. When I was working at my trade in Western Australia, I could buy a suit similar to this one and just as well made for £3 10s., which represented a week’s work. Although the purchasing power of wages, considered in terms of inflated currency, has apparently increased, in terms of commodities, the things we buy, it is at a lower level. That is another instance of the way in which, as I have said so often in this chamber, the unfortunate workers are fooled, ruled and robbed from the cradle to the grave. By a highly technical, ingenious and subtle process, that sort of thing is hammered into their heads by highly prestiged politicians, bankers, financiers, and the press. Worse than that, we are withholding from the children of working men facilities for their education, that would enable them to understand the position as it should be understood. Education to-day is based on training of the memory, training of the muscles, cultivation of social mannerisms and worship of highly prestiged persons. That is why the non-labour parties would rather spend millions of pounds on all kinds of sports than on educating the children as they should be educated.
In that respect, our technique has not improved since the days of bread and circuses in Rome, but we are living in a highly mechanized and monopolized age and the position to-day is much more dangerous than ever it was in the past. The people are being treated more barbarously to-day than in the past. In the old days, people killed with bows and arrows, but to-day we can kill millions with machine guns or hydrogen bombs. The barbarians of the past could never do damage to the extent that we can. We should’ not take unction to ourselves and say that people are better off now than they were. Millions of men, women and children were slaughtered during the last two world wars and recently in Korea. The barbarians of the past could never do that, but in this highly mechanized and monopolized age we allow all those things to happen in the name of justice, the free world and the free peoples. What a travesty for intelligent people and the poor unfortunate victims ! I feel impelled to say these things because of the endless repetition of superficial statements such as those made in the Governor-General’s Speech. The Governor-General spoke of his advisers. He repeated what his advisers had told him to say. He cannot be held personally responsible for those statements, but the advisers can be. The people in this Parliament who appoint the advisers can be held responsible too, much more so than can the people outside the Parliament.
I say we are passing through times that are absolutely unprecedented. We are on the eve of a decision whether the madmen or glamorized ignoramuses in charge now shall be allowed to destroy millions more lives oi’ whether we shall replace them by men who are more capable of reorganizing our internal economy and the international economy. Those are the alternatives. I trust that what I have said will receive at least some consideration. We cannot push these things aside. We have to face the effects of what is happening. In the past, the effects have been always revolutions and wars, and they are likely to be (50 again. I suppose I can say dogmatically that not one of us wants to see a bloody revolution or another war. We have to do our best, consistent with our ability and our opportunities, to create a better state of society. That, in my opinion, would be quite simple. The only difficulty is that the problem has never been viewed from that angle by most people.
Senator Annabelle Rankin referred to social services. By direct statement and by implica tion, she asked us to believe that this Government was rendering a wonder ful service to the people in that field. But the Government is making a virtue of necessity. There is no altruism or humanitarianism in its actions. It is all affectation. The Government is doing only what the pressure of circumstances compels it to do. We have an economic system that causes over-production and under-consumption. To the extent that labour time is a diminishing factor in production as a result of sustained technical development and the replacement of man-power by machine power, the relative and the aggregate wage has been reduced. When labour time is reduced, the wage is reduced also. Social services are being provided to offset that factor. Otherwise, production would be brought almost to a standstill. The Government has provided social services such as maternity bonuses, child endowment, pensions for widows and aged people and unemployment benefits. Those services act as a palliative, but we must not forget that we depend on the recipients as consumers. If it were not for those social services, they could not consume or buy the things they want. If they could not do so, the present position would be a great deal worse than it is. So I say the Government is making a virtue of a. necessity. What we call the welfare state comes into being almost automatically, a? it were, to the extent that the relative wage and the aggregate wage are reduced either automatically or arbitrarily. The wage is automatically reduced when machine power replaces man-power. It is arbitrarily reduced when the Commonwealth Arbitration Court, with the blessing of this Government, refuses to allow quarterly adjustments of the basic wage in accordance with fluctuations of the cost of living. The wage is reduced arbitrarily also when the court refuses to increase margins for skill. Social services are being provided as a palliative. They are something to keep the people quiet, to prevent them from thinking and acting, but, fortunately for the community, they do not keep everybody from thinking, or acting.
Similar considerations apply to the means test. Speaking from memory, 1 think the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) said he was horrified at our proposal to abolish the means test, and that the cost of abolition would be £370,000,000 a year. Then other great minds went into the matter and gave different estimates of the cost. But what does abolition of the means test mean? It means that thrifty people who have saved money or bought houses and land will not be deprived of pensions. Yet during the last general election the Government parties and the press tried to persuade the people that the country would be ruined if the means test were abolished. The abolition of. the means test would have a beneficial effect because now, when surpluses are piling up and there is more purchasing power in the community, it would help to keep things working and give the Government time to try to understand how it should re-organize our economy and do better in the future than it has done in the past. But we find that these colossal intellects, the university economists and others, are combining and conspiring to knock into the heads of the unfortunate people, through the mediums of the press, and the spoken word the idea that if the means test were abolished they would be ruined and the country would become insolvent. That is the old line of propaganda, the scare technique. In my opinion, the people voted very well, having regard to the way in which they are handicapped and the way in which their mental food is prepared.
Government senators interjecting,
– There are many people in this world who have hearts of oak and heads of reinforced concrete. The hardest task is to knock intelligent ideas into thick heads. The Governor-General said -
My Government will, therefore, provide on a Jil for fi basis money towards capital costs incurred by churches and recognized charitable bodies and institutions in building homes for the aged up to a total Commonwealth contribution of £1,500.000 a year.
What is to prevent the Government from meeting all the cost? Money collected by charities is money taken out of circulation that could be used more profitably than for this purpose, but money taken out of Consolidated Revenue for this purpose would be, for the most part, money paid in, not by the poor taxpayers, but by the wealthy taxpayers. The proposal, of the Government, in effect, is that thepoor taxpayers shall provide homes for the aged. There is no altruism in that. It is all affectation. Under that system, most of the aged will never get the houses to which they are entitled. They work all their lives for only a subsistence wage. When they reach an age when they are no longer able to work, or cannot perform work profitably for their employers, they must end their days the best way they can. It is deplorable that, in this Christian civilization and political democracy, they have to depend upon charity in their old age. It has been stated that the Government proposes to abolish the’ means test in respect of persons 70 years of age and older. Good heavens, most of them die before reaching 70 years of age.
As I said at the outset, the GovernorGeneral’s Speech referred to a very wide, range of subjects. I regret that the time allowed to me has not permitted of my dealing with the paragraphs of the Speech seriatim. However, I Iia ve endeavoured to deal with the matters that I considered to be the most important. His Excellency first referred to our foreign relationships. As I have pointed out, we have not been told of the Government’s intentions in that connexion. Reference was made to the accumulation of surpluses. Again, we have not been told how the Government proposes to liquidate those surpluses. I hope that, in the light of the difficulties of the period through which we are passing, having regard to the possibilities of great danger on the one band fmd the opportunities for doing good on the other hand, honorable senators will appreciate the position much more intelligently than did the advisers to the Governor-General. Only in that way can we hope to look after the interests of the people whom we represent. Self preservation is a fundamental law of nature. Wc must consider the preservation of our people and not allow them to be exploited and impoverished almost into the grave. Likewise, we should not allow them to be murdered on the field of battle. Have honorable senators paused, to consider that man is the only creature in the animal world that has organized for the mass exploitation, impoverishments and mass murder of his fellows? I commend that thought to honorable senators.
Senator LAUGHT (South Australia) f4.48. - I hope honorable senators will forgive me if I do not attempt to reply to Senator Cameron. It was very difficult indeed to understand most of his comments. The honorable senator attacked the Governor-General’s Speech, and referred to it as false. He also referred to the Government’s policy as fraudulent, and engaged, as usual, in a tirade against the United States of America. “With great respect, I submit that his contribution to the debate was unworthy of a member of this chamber. I believe that His Excellency’s Speech gave satisfaction to the people of this country. He expressed in simple and clear language the salient points of the Prime Minister’s (Mr. Menzies) policy speech during the recent general election, which was endorsed subsequently by the electors. I join with other honorable senators in expressing my very great appreciation of His Excellency’s visit to us to open the first session of the Twenty-first Parliament. Down the ages it has been traditional for the Sovereign, or the personal representative of the Sovereign, to attend personally in the Upper Chamber of the legislature to deliver a speech from the throne. I think that it is good to perpetuate practices which have meant so much to the British Empire in the past, and which now mean so much to the British Commonwealth. I support strongly the Governor-General’s observation that the visit of Her Majesty the Queen to Australia has strengthened our deep devotion to our Sovereign. We should pause awhile in our deliberations to think of the great sense of duty which prompted Her Majesty to visit us, and to give thanks that she returned safely to the United Kingdom from her strenuous journey. His Excellency stated -
My advisers regard their responsibilities during the life of this Parliament to be the strengthening of Australia’s security, the maintenance of a healthy economy, the development of oil r national resources, and the social welfare of the Australian people.
It would be inappropriate for me to foreshadow the contents of a momentous speech on Australia’s security that the Prime Minister will deliver in another place this evening, and I shall not do so.
Senator Anabelle Rankin addressed herself very capably to the problem of the social welfare of the Australian people and Senator Paltridge made a speech of great moment on the development of our national resources. Referring to the development of our industries, His Excellency stated -
It is a fundamental part of the policy of my Government that the development of Australia should proceed at the highest practicable rate. This requires an adequate supply of labour and materials: sound policies for encouraging private investment and an inflow of capital; close financial collaboration with the States, who are responsible for most public works; . . . and a carefully selected and vigorously executed programme in the Commonwealth’s own field. . . .
The manufacturing industries of Australia, it is hoped, will continue their development, so vital to the national strength. My Government will continue to accord adequate protection to efficient and economic Australian industries. In doing so, it will rely for advice on the Tariff Board.
I consider that the method of allowing depreciation as a deduction for taxation purposes should be reviewed urgently by the Government, in order to enable fulfilment to the maximum degree possible the hopes that were expressed by His Excellency. Interesting changes have taken place during the last two or three years in this connexion. In 1951 a state of economic emergency existed in this country, and our overseas balances had declined considerably. It became necessary to effect a general re-organization of our economy. Putting first things first, the Government realized that it would be necessary to stimulate and encourage our primary industries. Certain taxation measures that were introduced resulted in great benefit to those industries. Honorable senators will recall the introduction in 1952 of a “ New Look “ in connexion with the depreciation of assets that had been acquired in the production of income and improvements effected by primary producers. At that time they were permitted to claim, in each of five successive years, as an allowable deduction for income tax purposes, 20 per cent, of the cost of equipment purchased and improvements effected to their properties. This had an immense effect on the volume of agricultural production. As honorable senators know, the Australian Agricultural Council, which is comprised of the Minister for Commerce and Agriculture (Mr. McEwen) and the respective State
Ministers of Agriculture, met in Canberra recently. At the conference it was pointed out that the total volume of primary production was now about 22 per cent, above the pre-war level. In 1952, when the re-organization of our targets for agricultural production was undertaken, it was believed that a target of production 24 per cent, above the pre-war level, would be accomplished by 1957-58. However, as I have pointed out, our volume of production now is already 22 per cent, above the pre-war level. This is a very remarkable achievement indeed, and a tribute to the imaginative taxation measures that were brought down by this Government, particularly in relation to depreciation allowances. There is undoubtedly a vast field for research in this connexion, particularly in relation to our manufacturing industries. I shall endeavour to outline c method that I believe could, with advantage, be applied. I have read the proposals contained in the budget that was introduced in the British Parliament recently by Mr. B,. A. Butler, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The desirability of allowing an initial depreciation allowance of 20 per cent, on new plant was considered last year by the British Government. This year that Government went a step further and introduced what are known as investment allowances. The present depreciation system in Australia seems to- have been arrived at by taking the estimated life of an item of machinery as, say, tcn years, and writing off 10 per cent, of the value each year. But it is now realized that the replacement of machinery should take place long before it becomes useless. With modern techniques it is necessary to scrap old machinery much earlier than previously and new machinery often costs a good deal more than the old machinery although it may be of a similar kind. In the United Kingdom, the investment allowance operates in addition to and not in substitution for the normal write-off for depreciation. Under the system of investment allowances, the total amount written off exceeds the cost of the machines by the amount of the allowance. To give an illustration, say £1,000 was spent on an item of machinery. Under the old system, even after subtracting an initial depreciation of -20 per cent, and annual depreciation of 10 per cent., in the first year £300 would be written ofl and the written-down value of the machinery would be £700. But under the system of investment allowances, the original cost being £1,000, the investment allowance of 20 per cent, would raise that sum to £1,200. Then the annual depreciation of 10 per cent, applies to the amount of £1,000 and the written-down value is after the first year still as high as £900, whereas under the old system it would be only £700. So the annual depreciation for purposes of income tax deduction is higher under the investment allowance system than under the ordinary initial and annual allowance system of depreciation. The Government could very well consider this idea when it sets out to help the manufacturing industries of Australia.
The agricultural industries ]]ave definitely been given a “ shot in the arm “ by imaginative depreciation allowances. But 1 utter a word of warning to the Government; with regard to the system of depreciation that is applied to the agricultural industry. Should a taxpayer die or dispose of his assets, say in the fifth year of using them, under the present system of depreciation allowances, the whole value of the equipment is almost completely written off although it may not wear out for ten years. As I understand the law, in the year in which the asset is disposed of, the whole value received for the asset has to be brought into account in assessing that year’s income. I submit that the Government should do something about this matter because great hardship would result to people who have taken advantage of the special depreciation allowances, especially so should it happen in the year of their death that large notional incomes have to be brought into account in the assessment of their income tax.
I should like something to be done in connexion with pay-roll tax. The Government has done a great service to the community in increasing from £20 to £80 a week the amount of a pay-roll that may be exempted from pay-roll tax. The smaller industries have been helped enormously, but very great waste of time is still taking place in filling in for.ms relating to pay-roll tax. Pay-roll tax has no bearing on the profit .that ian industry earns. It is a flat rate of tax which penalizes the employer of wage-earners. I compliment the Government on its elimination of entertainments tax and land tax. Land tax caused a great waste of time and a great deal of worry and it was a very expensive tax to collect.
I noted with great approval that His Excellency mentioned territories in his Speech. He said -
In the territories of the Commonwealth, on the foundations laid in the past three years, further progress may he confidently expected both in the advancement of the welfare of the people and in the development of resources.
The Government administers two types of territories, those of the Commonwealth and those that come to us as trustees of the United Nations. It was my privilege last year to visit the Territory of Nauru as a member of a parliamentary delegation. There I was able to study some of the problems relating to territories. I think that the time has come for the Commonwealth to establish what might be regarded as a “ territory service “. Instead of picking a few people to send to Nauru, a few others to send to Norfolk Island, a few others for the Northern Territory and a few for New Guinea, the Government should establish one service for all the territories. For instance, a policeman sent to Nauru would then be part of a service in which, on being promoted, he could become Director of Police in Nauru and then go to the position of Director of Police in the Northern Territory and then, perhaps, to New Guinea. At present, the officers who are sent to a territory such as Nauru get the impressionthat they have been consigned to some sort of Siberia. There do not appear to be any noticeable gradings in the service of the territories which would enable officers to move from place to place. One of the great aspects of the British Empire has been its colonial service in which men are proud to serve and some very distinguished men have adorned the British Empire in that service. We should develop a territory service so that for example, when the Director of Police in Nauru goes on furlough his place may be filled by an officer of suitable grade from the Northern Territory or New Guinea instead of by a police man from Australia. Such a service would also be of great importance in connexion with education and the development of native industries and the defence of these territories. The natives of New Guinea and the other islands of the Pacific have great aptitudes in the handling of water craft. We should endeavour to have a naval patrol which would help in the defence of these islands. When Her Majesty was visiting Australia it was a great thrill to notice the display by natives from New Guinea at Yarralumla and in the precincts of this House.
Sitting suspended from 5.12 to 8 p.m.
– I ask for leave to continue my remarks when the debate is resumed.
Leave granted; debate adjourned.
page 59
– by leave - The following statement was made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) in the House of Representatives to-night: -
The cease-fire in Indo-China, on. terms negotiated between the French and the Vietminh, has been the subject of much discussion.In short, the terms of the Geneva settlement are -
The present States of Laos and Cambodia remain as independent and sovereign countries, while Viet Nam for the time being is divided into two by amilitary demarcation line running near the17th parallel with Communist administration in the north and a non-Communist government retaining administration in the south.
In Laos the Communists are to be regrouped into the north-eastern part of the coun try. No new military bases are to be established there, but the French forces may maintain two military bases anda specified number of military advisers and forces. Elections are to be held in 1955
In Cambodia all foreign forces including the French, are to be withdrawn within90 days, and elections are to be held in 1955.
In VietNam, which is the most difficult of the three, the Communist and nonCommunist forces are to be regrouped into the north and south respectively within a specified time. Both Hanoi and Haiphong are to be evacuated by the French. The settle- ment says that every one in VietNam must be allowed to decide freely in which zone he wishes tolive. General elections throughout the country are to be held in July, 1956, under the supervision of an international commission, and consultations on this subject will be held between competent representative authorities of the two zones from the 20th April, 1955, onwards.
The armistice is to be supervised by a commission consisting of India as chairman, Canada and Poland.
The events which preceded the truce were closely followed all round tho world. I do not propose to-night to examine the history of this matter. All I need say is that the Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Casey), who played a most active part, both here and abroad, in the presentation of the views of the Australian Government, will himself address the House with first-hand knowledge and uncommon authority.
I should like to say that wo did not assume a passive role. On the contrary, we throughout
Tillered suggestions and constructive criticism, particularly to the United Kingdom and tho United States of America, and we have reason to believe that our contributions were significant, lt will, of course, bc appreciated that neither the United Kingdom nor the United States of America, nor Australia, was a participant in the Indo-Ch in. 1 fighting; and that the direct task of negotiating a settlement, therefore, fell upon the French. T express the hope that whatever our views may be about the position which arises in consequence of the settlement, we shall not permit ourselves to be critical of our French friends, who have for years steadfastly curried a grievous burden in Indo-China and have sustained vast losses of both life and treasure in the course of the campaign. It will, therefore, not be my taskto criticize the terms of the settlement which were, no doubt, the best that could have been obtained in all the circumstances. But I will try to point out in a sensible and objective way the effects of these events upon Australia’s position and policy. Before I do that, however. I should direct attention to one feature of the settlement upon which I have sometimes felt that international thinking tends to bc a little unreal.
Living as we du in a country with the twin inheritances of the common law and parliamentary self-government, Ave are not necessarily well qualified to determine how far such instruments of government are understood or applicable in other countries, or how long a period of time should elapse before they become so. It is a simple enough matter to provide in a truce that there should be what we eni I a “free election-“ within some stipulated time. That is something we understand, but five minutes’ reflection will show us that even we have not yet completely mastered the techniques of democracy. Though it is the noblest system of government yet devised, and promotes, as no other system could, the significance and well-being of the individual, democracy is, at. the same time, complex. I say “complex”, because all honorable members know how much the successful working of democracy depends upon an educated intelligence, self-discipline, « community conception, and a capacity for selection and judgment. It is idle to suppose that we can take a. community with a high percentage of illiteracy, with primitive civic organization and with little, if any, popular acquaintance with the art and science of government, and convert it into a democracy in a year or two. 1 make these remarks not because 1 desire even to appear to resist the development of democracy in other communities; on the contrary, it is one of the great hopes of the world. My reason for saying what I have on this point is to emphasize that the probabilities in Viet Nam, both north and south of the line of division now established, are that the most organized groups will be the Communists themselves. We must, therefore, not overlook the possibility that a free election may be an election which establishes a Communist administration in the whole of “Viet Sam. We would do well, therefore, to consider the significance of lndo-China, not by assuming easily that the frontier of the Vietminh is on the 17th parallel, but by contemplating that before long we may be forced to regard the Communist frontier as lying on the southern shores of lndo-China, within a few hundred air miles of the Kia Isthmus. If this is thought to represent an unduly gloomy view, let nic say at once that t know that it can bc falsified if, during this breathing period, we are able not only to give economic and spiritual encouragement to the non-Communist elements in lndo-China but also to rally the weighty opinion cml influence of the great new democracies of South and South-East Asia. To their willing co-operation we in Australia attach very great importance.
We must have learned to our sorrow in the last few yours that when we are dealing with Communists we arc dealing with aggressors: aggressors who arc in no sense democratic : people who have surrendered themselves to the stern disciplines of Communist dictatorship. Not for a moment would I deny that it is possible, and indeed devoutly to be wished, that the democratic world should live peacefully alongside the Communist powers. But whilst this negatives any notion of the inevitability of war, it certainly docs not encourage the idea that we should accept Communist promises or pledges at their face value or forget the stern lessons that we must have learned from the history of the last twenty years. Hitler said that he had “ no further territorial ambitions” after he had absorbed Czechoslovakia. But before more than a few years had gone by he was astride Ku rope, and the whole fate of the free world was in the balance Mussolini had no ambitions outside the restoration of good administration in Italy; but before long he was in Albania and Abyssinia. Stalin was one of the great co-defenders of freedom in the war, and we were told he had no post-war ambitions except to preserve the security of Russia’s own territories. Yet, before long, he had seized great middle European countries, including two that had done as much to foster the tradition of freedom and self-government as any nation in Europe. We cannot, therefore, afford to be beguiled by fair words, or by much talk of peace when there i= no peace.
It is forthese reasons that the Government of Australia believes that our own problems of security, and those of other free nations, are by the events in Indo-China, rendered more visible and acute than before. Among these other free nations are several, on or off the mainland of Asia, which have gained their independence within the lost ten years. They are, save forNew Zealand, our closest neighbours. We have friendly relations with them. Our contacts with them are increasing. These nations are justly proud of their independence, and zealous to maintain their national character, traditions, and integrity. They certainly do not want to be submerged by communism or any other form of alien domination. We recognize, and indeed admire, these qualities; but we do not blind ourselves to the fact that these new nations-new in terms of self-government - bear the spiritual marks of their past struggles, and are apprehensive lest any new foreign association should become a new form of foreign influence. We sympathize with their desires, and at all times seek to understand their fears. We in Australia have never visualized any new international agreement calculatedto derogate from national sovereignty; on the contrary we seek, by concerted action, to maintain that sovereignty and the freedom which it guarantees.
I hope it will not be regarded as an impertinence ifI try to say something here, for Australia, which may merit consideration by our Asian friends. Communists, wherever they may be grouped, are confessed and clamant materialists. The conceptions of the rights aid spiritual dignity of man which inhere in the genuinely held religions of the world, and which feed those noble aspirations which have led to democracy and national freedom, have no meaning or reality in the Communist mind That is why Communist aggression uses cunning or bloodshed, fraud or fury, with callous indifference to all moral and spiritual considerations. The one objective is the enlargement of the boundaries of dictatorial and materialist power. All of us who live in free countries, lifted to noble issues by religious faith, will forget these grim truths at our peril.
It is therefore foolish, superficial, and dangerous to speak of the conflict in the world as a. contest between two economic systems, capitalism and communism.Nor can the cynics dispose of it as an old-fashioned struggle for military or physical power, with territory and resources as the prizes of victory. It is desperately important that the world should see this as a moral contest; a battle for the spirit of man. There can be no easy or enduring compromise between peoples who affirm the existence of a divine authority and the compulsion of a spiritual law and those others who sue nothing beyond an atheistic materialism. The issue, so stated, presents us, of the free world, with a dual problem; a problem both moral and military; a problem as real in Asia as in Australia. We must, by peaceful means, extend the frontiers of the human spirit, patiently, understandingly, tolerantly. The history of mankind shows that despotism at home defeats itself in the long run. liven behind the Iron Curtain the workers will find in truth that they must lose the chains fastened upon them by their Communist masters. That portion, at least of the Communist Manifesto, will some day destroy communism. But while this slow process of conversion proceeds, we must he alert to the second aspect of the dual problem. We must, by armed strength, defend the geographical frontiers of those nations whose selfgovernment is based upon the freedom of the spirit. While the moral revolution goes on, armed aggression must be met by armed defensive power: for this is something, and perhaps at present the only thing, that the materialist Communist dictators can and will understand. In Australia, in Great Britain, in the United States of America, for example, to go no further, joint agreement and arms for defence do not imply a loss of faith in our religious foundations; they are a realistic acceptance of the fact that armed aggression cannot be stopped by words or hopes alone.
The time has therefore come when we must present, so far as we humanly can, a common front backed by a common power. The free world cannot continue to negotiate from weakness or unpreparedness. With all the goodwill in the world and with the most heartfelt desire to make an end of war, we mustbe ready to meet it if it comes. Honorable members will have observed that preparations are now in hand for political conferences, in association with the necessary military planning, to establish a South -Eastern Asia defence organization. It does not yet exist, nor is its prospective membership defined. We hope sincerely that when it is seen that the creation of such an organization is designed to help preserve the national integrity of Asian countries as well as those which are not Asian, some, I should hope all, of these Asian countries will be willing to participate. I emphasize in plain terms that this is not a question of colour or race. It is a question of the maintenance of democratic freedom. But, so far as we are concerned in Australia, we must determineour own attitude and put it beyond doubt. We will become contributing parties. We will, in association with other nations acting similarly, accept military obligations in support of our membership.
In the past it has been one of the traditions of Australian government that commitments are not accepted in advance; that such matters are for the determination of the Government and Parliament if and when the event of war occurs. There are sound reasons to explain why this should have been the tradition. In the two great world wars, Australia had an opportunity to decide what it was going to do and enough time to assemble, train, equip and despatch armed forces. We cannot gamble upon this being our position any longer.If there is one thing that seems clear, it is that there will be no pause, no long period of stalemate, should the Communists determine to attack. All of the most dreadful instruments of war designed by man will be employable and employed. The first few months - indeed, the first few weeks - might do much to determine the issue.
It is for these reasons that we have decided that in any great defensive organization of the kind envisaged, we must accept military commitments. Honorable members will not need to be persuaded by me that for us, as a democratic nation vitally at risk in these seas, to expect our great friends to accept commitments while our own attitude remained tentative and conditional, would be utterly inconsistent with the intelligence, character and record of our country. ‘Hie nature of those commitments must be worked out in consultation with the other parties to the treaty. What they will involve in terms of military preparation nobody can as yet say, though as soon as negotiations have proceeded far enough we shall take the House and the country fully into our confidence. What effect any specific commitments will have upon the present shape of our defence programme or the methods which we now employ is a matter which I will not presume to judge in advance. All I want to say is that we shall not hesitate to make any changes which are necessary for the full performance pf our commitments. This does not mean that the defence expenditure will necessarily or suddenly mount to the skies, but it does mean that it must at all times- be adequate to ensure performance. As I have already indicated, there may be some who, rather wishfully, think that the IndoChinese “cease-fire” permanently reduces tension and that we may now spend less upon defence. So little do we agree with this view that our estimates for this financial year already disclose a substantially greater availability of funds. Last year, for a variety of reasons, actual defence expenditure was about £177,000,000, an amount of £12,000,000 in addition being placed out of the surplus to a defence equipment reserve. This year, we are providing a- defence vote of £200,000,000 in addition to such moneys as may be used from that reserve.
Therefore, the total amount available for all purposes will be £35,000,000 more than was spent last year. Whether we may have to come back to Parliament for any review of this financial programme will depend upon the matters which I have already described. The question of defence, however, is not answered by some financial vote. Our capacity to do our part in our defence, which we all hope will be sustained outside Australian shores and territories, will not depend upon sums of money, but on efficiently trained and adequate forces adequately equipped, and adequately supported by a strong national economy. Our policy will be to prepare such forces to the limits of our financial capacity. What do I’ mean by this expression? The answer is that unless we are to put the nation upon an actual war footing we must always1 have regard to the impact which the diversion of men, money and materials may have upon the general economy of the nation.
It is of real importance to the national security that we should have financial and economic stability, that we should maintain industrial activity and employment and that we should achieve that development of our resourcewhich is needed for a rapidly growing population. This means that we must balance our efforts, remembering always that it is a designed part of the Communist cold war technique to put such a strain upon the democracies that defence expenditure and social and economic stability will como into conflict, with advantages either way to the potential aggressor.
There is another aspect of these matters which needs clarification, lt is very important that we should, in our thinking about South-East Asia and the South-West Pacific, the safety of which is so directly and intimately vital for us, see the world problem in perspective. In particular, we need to understand the problems and points of view of the two most powerful defenders of freedom - Great Britain and the United States of America. Sometimes, for example, one hears it said, perhaps thoughtlessly, that Great Britain is pre-occupied with Europe and can, or will, do little in this part of the world. -To answer this, if an answer be needed in this British Parliament, I need only say, quite shortly, that at this very moment Great Britain is contributing much more military strength in the preservation of security in this area than we are. But I go further and remind the House that never in its long and brave and glorious history has our Mother Country accepted in time of peace military commitments abroad on such a scale or despite such economic difficulties. No other nation has armed forces in so many places, nor such a tremendous proportion of its total strength adventured abroad. The United Kingdom has, at this very moment, large forces engaged in part of our northern frontier in Malaya. No nation stands to take the first violent and devastating blow in a world war with such speed, and death, and destruction. Do not let us fall into the ungrateful and stupid error of under-estimating the generous impulse of the heart of our British Commonwealth. Nor must we allow ourselves to be affected by the mischief-making propaganda of the Communists and those who so readily follow the Communist line. Australia, they say, is trailing at the heels of imperialist America. All I need say is that Australia is British, and has a great and tried and common family allegiance under the Crown. But Australia knows, and so do the Communists, that the closest concert between the United States of America and the British Commonwealth is vital to the common defence. AVe will work incessantly ‘ to strengthen this great association, just as the Communist powers and their overseas friends will work incessantly to divide and destroy it. The policy of the Australian Government is to do all it can, by negotiation and persuasion, to remove causes of difference arid to secure community ‘of thought and ‘action. If co-operating with Great Britain and the United States of America in democracy’s defence is unpopular with the Communists, we can be sure that it will be unpopular with nobody else!
The truth about this modern democratic defence association is that we are learning to think and act internationally. Wherever we light we fight for each other. If, in a world war, the battle for Britain and the battle for America were lost, the battle for Australia would indeed bea forlorn one. Let us at all times remember that in this world of ours another great war would be a world war; and that whatever our proper concern about our own area, there must be world strategy and world preparedness and world co-operation if we are to be saved.
I make these observations which, I hope, are trite, because I want to make it clear that when we entered into the Anzus Treaty and when we decided that we would enter into a South-East Asia treaty we were neither isolationists nor purely regional in our outlook. We were simply saying that we would fit into the pattern of world defence in those places and respects which our geographical position and our limited resources rendered most swift and effective. It was for precisely similar reasons that Canada made itself a large and effective contributor to Nato. We are not contracting ourselves out of the old world; we just cannot do that. We are to put it much more accurately, about to contract ourselves into a regional defensive arrangement which will give strength not only here but in Eu rope itself.For if Communist imperialism goes on the march for world conquest the defence of freedom will be fought over most of the world; the decisive battle for Australia maybe fought far away, in Malaya, over the great oceans, over the cities and fields of England. In brief, these defence arrangements are no expression of disunity or narrow parochialism : they give force and strength and direction to a total world organization for peace and security. The achievement of Seato will do more than this for us. It will define our task ; it will give a clarified direction to our defence organization; it will mark out our zone of possible operations. We will know, not generally, but specifically, the nature and extent of the forces we need, the character of the equipment that we will require, and the material support which the nation must be capable of rendering.
I sum up our attitude on these great matters of policy in seven propositions. They are as follows: -
I conclude by saying that if, to some ears, this statement sounds unduly of war and preparations for war, the fault is elsewhere. We love peace. We have much to do, in our own land, which can be done only in peace and tranquillity. But the sacrifices of two wars have taught us grim but great lessons. The greatest of these is that we cannot live alone; that we stand or fall with our great associates in freedom; and that so long as we stand together in faith, in readiness and in action, we shall assuredly not fall.
I lay on the table the following paper : -
Foreign Affairs - Ministerial Statement, 5th August, 1954
Motion (by Senator O’SULLIVAN agreed to -
That Standing Order 14 he suspended to permit the moving of a motion for the printing of a paper, and the debate thereon, before the Adress-in-Reply is adopted.
Motion (by Senator 0’Suli.ivan) proposed -
That the paper be printed.
Debate (on motion by Senator MCKENNA) adjourned.
page 64
page 64
Debate resumed (vide page 59).
– In my remarks earlier to-day, I spoke of our territories, and I propose now to recapitulate briefly what I said before the debate was adjourned. I said I was hopeful that we would develop a territory service so that it would be possible for officers to move from one territory to another and in that way receive beneficial training in territory administration. I emphasize also the importance of our territories from the defence point of view. As we have just heard, preparations for the defence of Australia have become a matter of supreme importance. Only ten years ago, the islands to our north were the battlegrounds for Australia, and they may well be so again. Although emphasis has been laid on current affairs in the countries bordering the Indian Ocean, the territories of the Pacific are of great importance to us. Last year, I was a member of a parliamentary delegation that visited the trusteeship territory of Nauru. The ship in which we travelled passed some very interesting islands. Four days out from Nauru on our journey back to Australia, which lasted for about twelve or thirteen days, we passed by British territory. When we were a further four days on our way home, the ship passed by French territory. It may seem strange to many people to realize that those territories lie between us and the furthest Australian-controlled territory of Nauru. It occurs to me that, in co-ordinating our defence, we should pay some attention to the Solomon Islands which lie between the mainland of Australia and Nauru and to the south of the Manus Island, base. Portion of the Solomon Islands is in the New Guinea sphere, and the other part is a British colony, the administration of which is organized from London. It may well be time for this Commonwealth to enter into a closer relationship with the United Kingdom in respect of those very important strategic islands. We already control the northern Solomons, but the central and southern Solomons are still controlled by the United Kingdom. To control the whole of the Solomon Islands would be expensive for our Treasury, because I gather that the peoples of those territories are in a backward, state. Observing them as our ship weaved its way between the islands wo could see that the natives were primitive and possibly warlike. We saw them in great canoes each of which held about 20 or 30 men. The natives appeared to live in the open air, and there was very little indication of any degree of civilization. The cultivation of coco-nut palms seemed to be their main method of obtaining revenue. I understand that the Solomon Islands are unhealthy for white people. Apparently, malaria is rampant. Nevertheless, the Solomons are of great value in the co-ordination of the defence of Australia. Over the last few years the United Kingdom has indicated that it is prepared to relinquish its control of some of its possessions, and to grant self-government to the natives or to make some other arrangements for their administration. The thought that comes to my mind is that possibly we may be able to establish some sort of useful liaison with the United Kingdom in regard to its colony in the Solomons.
Moving nearer to Australia we come to the French colony of New Caledonia. I feel that we should have a closer understanding with our French friends in regard to New Caledonia, which is only a few hours flying time from the Commonwealth and can be reached in a day or two by sea. Our furthest territory, Nauru, is 2,200 miles from Melbourne. There is no need for me to stress the importance to us of both Nauru and Ocean Island, which is 140 miles from Nauru. From those two territories we obtain about 1,000,000 tons of rock phosphate a year. Our ability to provide our own food supplies and possibly those of other nations of South east Asia depend upon the security of Nauru and Ocean Island. In my remarks about the territories, I have spoken mainly about the importance of Nauru, but I stress also the great importance of our other spheres of influence in the Pacific.
Since the Parliament met last, I have read the excellent reports of the Public Accounts Committee. I direct the attention of the Senate to the report of the committee on the Repatriation Department. I shall refer particularly to paragraph 269, because it deals with a matter that affects a number of other Commonwealth departments. In that paragraph, the committee draws attention to the delay of the Repatriation Department in presenting its annual reports to the Parliament. The report for 1948-49 was not presented until the 18th May, 1950, about ten months after the financial year had ended. The report for 1949-50 was delayed for fifteen months after the end of the financial year. It was not presented until the 26th September, 1951. The report for 1950-51 was presented on the 21st May, 1952, about ten months after the end of the financial year. The report for 1951-52 was presented on the 9th September, 1953. There was a delay of about fifteen months in that case. I understand that the report for 1952-53 has not yet been presented to the Parliament, although about fourteen months has elapsed since the end of that financial year. It may have been presented to-day, but when I inquired this morning, I was told that it had not been presented then. The committee said also -
The Committee stresses the desirability of. the early presentation of annual reports to the Parliament and in this case urges the Repatriation Department to endeavour to present its annual report at an earlier date than it has done in tha past.
This is a matter to which I hope some attention will be given during the life of this Parliament. The executive has been directed by the Parliament to ensure that reports of government departments shall be available to the Parliament. I think fifteen months is far too long for reports of government departments to lie somewhere in government offices before they are presented to us. I invite the attention of the Minister for Repatriation (Senator Cooper) and other Ministers to the remarks of the Public Accounts Committee.
I should like. Cabinet to give some attention to the work of the Government Printer. Two years ago, the AuditorGeneral engaged the services of a private firm in Sydney to print his report so that he could get it before the Parliament quickly. On that occasion, his report was in the hands of the Senate within three days of the date on which it was completed.. That shows it is possible for reports to be in the hands of the Senate less than a week from the date of completion. The report of the AuditorGeneral is not a small document.
– Did the honorable senator find out how much it cost to print the report?
– I did not find out what the cost was. When we are considering a budget of £1,000,000,000, it is very important that the report of the Auditor-General shall be in the hands of the Senate as soon as possible.
Another matter to which I direct attention is the printing of the Income Tax Assessment Act. I asked a number of questions last year about delay in. printing the consolidated act. There are about 3,000,000 taxpayers in Australia. The act upon which the Commissioner of Taxation works mainly is the Income Tax Assessment Act, which contains about 300 sections. Possibly the most important measure considered by the Senate each year is the measure to amend the act. Great attention is paid to the amending legislation by the press, the public and members of the Parliament, but the printed consolidated act was not available to the public until about a fortnight ago. That is not an isolated case. The same thing happened last year. I believe the Commissioner of Taxation has the proofs of amendments of the act ready quite soon after the Parliament has dealt with them, but some inordinate delay in reading the proofs or in pr.inting occurs during the first part of the new year. I have been reliably informed that the consolidated Income Tax Assessment Act was not available until the end of last month. It will be out of date about a month from now. So thousands of public accountants, solicitors, registered tax agents and others have not been given a facility that this Parliament intended they should have. The charge for a copy of the consolidated act is 103. If it were available quickly, it would have a ready sale in the months of November and December, but in this instance it was not available to the public until a fortnight ago. Apart from inconvenience te the public, there must have been a considerable loss of revenue as the result of the delay There is a legal principle that ignorance of the law is no excuse for a breach of the law. Therefore, the Parliament should ensure that the taxpayers of Australia have ready access to our taxation laws.
I congratulate the Government on the magnificent Speech that was delivered by the Governor-General yesterday and on the great promise it held out for the future of Australia. I finish on the note, that the administrative matters about which I have spoken, and which appear to me to be of great importance, should be dealt with by the responsible authorities.
– I congratulate Senator Cameron on the speech that he delivered this afternoon.
– “What did he say?
– Probably Senator Scott would not have understood it if he had listened to it. Those of us who were privileged to listen to the speech were enlightened on the cause of the conditions that exist in the free world to-day. Senator Laught said he would not attempt to reply to Senator Cameron That was wise, because he could not dc so. Nobody can deny that Senator Cameron’s speech was correct in every aspect
I listened attentively to the GovernorGeneral’s Speech. I agree that it was delivered in an impressive manner, but it was the Speech, not of the Governor General, but of his advisers. It contained the old promises that this Government makes from year to year about what it will do for the people of Australia. Before I deal with one or two aspects of the Speech, I want to say that, having listened to the Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O’Sullivan) and Senator Laught, I am astonished to find that the Government has just realized that we have either -potential enemies or potential friends very close to our shores. The speech of the Minister revealed that the only solution the Government has for the international problem is a trigger war. These potential enemies have been close to our shores during the lifetime of each of us. The Government should have taken action long ago, in cooperation with the free countries, to prevent this crisis from occurring so close to our shores.
– So the honorable senator advocates sending troops overseas ?
– I supported the late Mr. Curtin in his decision to send Australian forces to places where they were sorely needed during the last war because the Government that was in power before 1940, led by the present Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies), had no defence policy. We agreed to send Australian troops to certain areas to which we had previously objected to their being sent.
– The honorable senator said that Australian troops should never leave Australia.
– Our policy has always been based on events, not only in Australia but also in other part3 of the world. One of the Government senators who spoke in this debate denied that the Government was returned at the last election as a result of its promises. Let me point out that this Government has had a vote of no confidence passed on it twice since 1949.
– It is still in office.
– That is so, but many people in Australia hare cast votes of no confidence in it. The majority of the people who voted at the last general election said that this Government should no longer occupy the treasury bench in this Parliament.
– The aggregate vote showed quite the reverse.
– I leave that question to the Commonwealth Electoral Office, which has published figures that prove conclusively that what I have said is correct. I know that Senator Maher has a habit of using figures to suit his own purposes. I am prepared to accept the official figures.
– The honorable senator has added the Labour votes and the Communist votes together, has he not?
– I remind Senator Marriott that at a by-election held in Geelong, the Liberal party candidate was successful only because he received more of the preferences of the Communist party candidate than did his Labour opponent. Check that up !
– “What matters is that we have the greatest number of seats in the Parliament.
– That is so. Senator Mattner stated that the Government had expended about £300,000,000 from the proceeds of direct taxation during the last financial year.
– I said more than £400,000,000.
– No country in the world with a population so small as the population of this country can expect to expend so much in a year out of revenue from direct taxation on national works, and continue to exist. Many schemes, including projects that would be invaluable to us in the event of another world war occurring, are held up not only through the lack; of foresight of this Government, but also because the Government cannot borrow sufficient money to proceed with them, as it has lost the confidence of the people of this country. I refer to projects in Victoria such as the Morwell gas and electricity scheme, and the Eildon weir project. Furthermore, although the soldier land settlement scheme in Victoria should be proceeded with as quickly as possible, in the in terests of defence, that scheme, also, has been halted because of lack of money.
– The States could not expend all of their loan allocations last year.
– That is incorrect. I know that at Morwell about £11,000,000 worth of electrical apparatus has been rusting for the last three years because money for its installation was not available.
– It was bought before money was provided for the purpose.
– Of course, Senator Henty does not know that when John Curtin became Prime Minister of this country he planned projects such as those at Morwell and Eildon to cater for the development of Australia after the war, just as thoroughly as he planned our war effort.
– What rot ! John Curtin had nothing to do with the planning of those projects.
– Despite Senator George Rankin’s interjection, I assure the Senate that John Curtin did plan those projects. He knew that after the war we would need greater supplies of electricity and gas.
– Why has not the Victorian Government completed them ?
– For some years past, due to the operation of the uniform taxation system, Victoria has not been able to collect its own taxes. Furthermore, there has been a number of changes of government in that State during the same period.
– Who suggested the projects to Mr. Curtin?
– They were proposed by conferences of representatives of the various States, in cooperation with the Commonwealth. I am astonished at Senator Maher’s persistent interjections, as a number of important projects in Queensland are at a standstill because of lack of money.
– They are all sound proposals, too.
– Queensland was never better off for loan money than it is to-day.
– I emphasize that such projects should not be financed by direct taxation. It should not fall on the shoulders of the present taxpayers to bear the whole burden of the cost of national projects the benefit from which will be enjoyed by posterity. Instead of money for that purpose being raised by direct taxation, the weight of which is crippling industry in this country to-day, they should be financed from loan moneys, or through the Commonwealth Bank.
– More inflation!
– The honorable senator did not say that during the recent general election campaign.
– On the contrary, I made similar statements from many political platforms in Victoria. Unlike Senator Henty and other honorable senators opposite, I express my views in the interests of this great nation rather than in the interests of political expediency. Supporters of the Government have been prepared to use the press, broadcasting facilities, and other things that money can buy in order to tell the people untruths and so retain control of the treasury-bench, and continue to direct the administration of this country. I repeat, that all projects such as those that I have mentioned, should be financed from loan moneys, or through the people’s bank.
– That is quite true.
– I shall now deal with the subject of margins. I believe that the margins issue should be considered by the Parliament. Prior to the last general election our leader stated that Labour, if returned to office, would intervene before the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, on behalf of the trade unions,- in the margins application. After that statement had been published by the press, supporters of the Government stated that Labour was defrauding the people. Since the election, however, the Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr. Holt) has stated that the Government will intervene before the court on behalf of the trade unions. We must guard against a repetition of the state of affairs that existed in this country in 1939. At the outbreak of World War
I am firmly convinced that the unif orm taxation system is best for this country, but finance for developmental works and defence projects should not be obtained by means of direct taxation. Unless money is provided for the rapid completion of many projects which are now held up through lack of finance, we may find ourselves - as we did in 1940 - in the position of trying to finish them when an enemy is almost on our shores.
– We have an inadequate labour force available to complete all of the public works that have been started.
– The reason for that state of affairs is that skilled tradesmen will not emigrate to this country until adequate provision is made for their housing upon arrival. The conditions under which many immigrants have been forced to live are a disgrace to Australia. I sympathize wholeheartedly with the approach of prospective immigrants to this subject. If I were a prospective immigrant, I should require to be assured of adequate housing on arrival in Australia.
– Is the honorable senator referring to charity?
– No worker looks for charity.
– I mean, in relation to himself.
– I am not looking for charity. If I were, I should probably die before it would be forthcoming from Senator Wood. If any honorable senator doubts my statement about the disgraceful living conditions of many immigrants to this country I can advise him of immigrant camps that he should inspect. Furthermore, many Australian ex-servicemen are living under deplorable conditions in Victoria.
– Because of the shortage of houses ?
– Yes, and because of the lack of money.
– This Government is not making available sufficient money for housing.
– That is right. If the Government hopes to attract more immigrants to this country it will have to make available more money for that purpose.
– At £350 a square?
– We should not be unmindful of the statement by the Minister for Trade and Customs (Senator O’sullivan) to-night that communism is not far around the corner, lt is, therefore, imperative that action should be taken immediately to alleviate the misery of many immigrants in Australia’ to-day.
Referring to the Snowy Mountains hydro-electric undertaking, His Excellency stated -
In particular, in discharge of its special responsibilities, my Government is pressing on energetically with the Snowy Mountains hydroelectric and irrigation scheme, which, in the provision of power and water, will contribute to great development both in primary and secondary industry in south-eastern Australia.
Have honorable senators opposite forgotten that in 1949 they boycotted the opening of that project? The Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) and other responsible Ministers refused to attend the opening of the Snowy Mountains scheme because they considered that it would be a waste of money. Does any honorable senator opposite deny that assertion? Yet, to-day, supporters of the Government are taking credit to themselves for the scheme. No credit is due to the Prime Minister because he boycotted the openinc of the scheme when M”. Lemmon was Minister for Works and Housing. The electors have now displayed their confidence in Mr. Lemmon again and I hope that he will, as Minister, be responsible for the completion of the Snowy Mountains scheme. When this scheme was proposed the responsible Ministers told the people of Australia about the potentialities of the scheme which was designed to provide electric power and to conserve water for irrigation. It was also explained that it would be of great assistance for national defence. The present Government is carrying on the policy of the Labour party, although not in its entirety, because their bosses will not allow that. But they are carrying on with much of the policy of the Labour party because the numbers on this side of the chamber have forced them to do so. The Snowy Mountains scheme is a good scheme and I agree wilh the Governor-General that we should press on with it.
In the course of his Speech the Governor-General referred to the subject of oil. The search for oil in Western Australia was partly sponsored by this Government and it is. a disgrace to the Government that the people of Australia have invested millions of pounds speculating in oil shares which are now almost worthless. The Victorian Parliament passed an act to prohibit the forming of spurious companies and those who attempt to form them are treated the same as any other criminal in the Commonwealth. The Australian Government should take similar action in the interests of the people.
In the course of his Speech the Governor-General said -
World economic changes have their effect on Australia’s export commodities. Though wool continues to be in a sound position and the prospects in the United Kingdom for quality meat are favorable, wheat is selling slowly, despite lower prices. Through the Australian Wheat Board all possible markets are being actively explored. For many other commodities the market circumstances point very strongly to the clear need for reducing our costs of production
The chickens have come home to roost. In his last policy speech, the late Mr. Chifley said that we must stabilize prices in Australia. The policy of the Government that followed him was in favour of free trade and the sale of produce at world parity prices. That Government allowed the economy of Australia to be governed by the market for wool which at that time had been stockpiled by overseas countries including America, Russia and England, which were fearing war. But overseas countries were starving for wheat because of the devastation of Europe and, therefore, wheat brought exorbitant prices. The Labour party said then that a day would follow when the countries that were stockpiling wool would grow their own wheat and that something should be done to establish a home-consumption price. But nothing was done. Now our wheat is almost unsaleable at the price at which we are trying to sell it. The Government has made £3,500,000 available for the purpose of building wheat silos whilst millions of people overseas are starving. In the United Kingdom, dried fruits can be bought from the United States of America for half the price that they can be bought from Australia. What will happen to our dried fruit industries ou the Murray River? The state of the dried fruits market is ruining settlers. This is due to the fact that we allowed our economy to chase wool and wheat prices. Now there is a call for another “ Premiers’ plan “ under which wages would be slashed before prices are slashed. The Governor-General’s Speech said that circumstances pointed strongly to the clear need for reducing our costs of production. The only way to reduce costs of production is to reduce wages.
– Not necessarily.
– I hope that when Senator Scott addresses the chamber he will explain how costs can be reduced without reducing wages. Opposition senators do not wish to oppose the Speech that was made by His Excellency, but they do wish to criticize it. The Speech contains many promises and I hope that those that would be beneficial to the Commonwealth will be carried out, but that others which would not be beneficial will not be carried out. I commend the Speech to the chamber.
– I rise to support the motion for the adoption of the Address-in-Reply, which was moved by Senator Annabelle Rankin and seconded by Senator Paltridge. It was a great honour and privilege for the people of the Commonwealth that Her Majesty should have visited our country within the last few months. This was the first occasion on which a reigning monarch had come to our shores. I noticed from the Governor-General’s Speech that when Her Majesty returned to England she said that she was well satisfied with her trip throughout the British Commonwealth and that she made particular reference to the welcome that she received in Australia. I believe that Her Majesty’s trip will consolidate feeling in the British Commonwealth so that we shall be in a. position to respond in the most suitable manner if attacked by any other nation.
Senator Hendrickson said that the Government had paid no attention whatever to the threat of war. I should like to ask him what action the Labour party took when the Government introduced a measure to secure peace in the Pacific by confirming its signing of the pact between the United States of America, New Zealand and Australia. That pact, known as the Anzus pact, meant virtually that if any one of those three nations was attacked the others would go to its help. What did the members of the Labour party do on that occasion? They voted against the measure.
– They did not vote against the measure.
– They spoke against it. The Labour party is sadly lacking in an external affairs policy that would protect this country. Senator Hendrickson accused the Liberal party and the Australian Country party of having made a lot of political promises. He said that, the only reason that the Government was in office was that it had made those promises. Let us cast our minds back a few weeks to the time of the general election when the Labour party promised everything to everybody. It made promises that it had no hope of honouring if elected. A prominent member of our organization said that it reminded him of the story of a man who, when asked by another man if he would like to join the latter’s cabinet, said, “Yes. What party do you belong to?” “When Dr. Evatt is asked to assist in connexion with plans for the defence of the Commonwealth he says, “Yes. What for?” Every person in Australia from twelve years of age to 70 was promised something by the Labour party provided that they voted for the Labour ticket.
– Were the people not en titled to what they were promised?
– A person is entitled to receive what the Government promises him, but it must be remembered that these promises are financed by the taxpayers of Australia. The people woke up to the Australian Labour party and said, in effect, “ We do not believe that this party could fulfil its promises “. Then, by an overwhelming majority, they rejected Dr. Evatt and the Australian Labour party. In my opinion, it will be many years before Labour rehabilitates itself sufficiently to stand a chance of being elected to office.
Yesterday in this chamber, we had the honour to listen to a speech delivered by His Excellency the Governor-General which enunciated the policy of this Government for the ensuing three years. I wish to refer to some of the points made in that speech, because I believe that they will be of considerable interest to all Australians in the next two or three years. For instance, His Excellency said -
My Government will closely examine the extent to which additional transport links, including rail links, are desirable for the development of beef production in North Queensland and the Northern Territory. ft is the responsibility of this Government, in the interests of national defence, to ensure that our sparsely populated areas in the north of the continent shall be able to protect themselves if attacked. Senator Cooke, in the course of a question which he asked in the Senate this afternoon, indicated that he, also, was eager to see. the population of the northern part of Australia increased. Since 1901, the population of that part of Western Australia which lies above the 26th parallel has not increased by more than 1 per cent. It is imperative for the Australian Government to encourage the development of that area. This Government is evidently of the opinion that in order to develop the northern parts of Australia it is necessary to spend large sums of money for the provision of transport facilities. For instance, the Government proposes to construct a railway line to connect Birdum, in the Northern Territory, with Queensland, and thus provide a link with the southern States. The cost of such an undertaking would be approximately £50,000,000, and I suggest that that capital outlay would never be recovered. It is possible that the white ants would eat away the sleepers before the railway had a chance to make even running expenses. Interest and sinking fund, charges probably would be between £4,000,000 and £5,000,000 a year.
Prior to the recent severe droughts, there were approximately 1,500,000 head of cattle in the Northern Territory and the north-western portion of Western Australia. Alice Springs is the railhead at which approximately 60,000 head of cattle are trucked each year, whilst 30,000 head are killed annually at Wyndham. An additional 100,000 or 120,000 head are brought down to the south-eastern parts of Australia by drovers. It seems to me that although it would be a courageous action for the Government to expend £50,000,000 on the construction of the railway line to which I have referred, it would be better off if it used the money to buy up all the cattle stations in those areas and retire their owners on suitable pensions. Although it is the duty of the Australian Parliament to do something about populating the northern part of Australia, it is necessary for us to learn to walk before we can hope to run. Before we spend vast sums of money on railways, which, I am sure, ultimately will result in failure, we should consider the possibilities of road and air transport. Thirty or 40 years ago the Western Australian Government constructed a railway line from Port Hedland to Marble Bar, a distance of 136 miles, in the hope that the line would develop that area. The cost of the undertaking was enormous. Yet, the Western Australian Parliament has since been forced to the conclusion that maintenance costs were too high and that it would be better to take up the railway line and construct a road. That has been done, much against the wishes of the residents of Marble Bar and the surrounding districts. However, since the road has been open, the people of Port Hedland and Marble Bar have a means of communication upon which they can rely. They are now pleased that the Government took the action it did.
The railway line from Darwin to Birdum, a distance of 316 miles, was commenced in 1S9S, or thereabouts, and was gradually extended until it was completed.
The total cost of construction was approximately £3,000,000. In pre-war years, the total losses incurred by the line were approximately £272,000, without allowing for interest, depreciation and sinking fund charges on the capital cost. The total cost of the line to date, including interest and sinking fund charges would amount to between £10,000,000 and £15,000,000. I therefore suggest to the Government that it should view proposals for the construction of railway lines in the northern part of Australia with a certain degree of caution. Road transport has come into its own only in the last few years. There are in Australia to-day, particularly in “Western Australia, people who are perfectly willing to compete against the railways, provided that they are allowed to carry a reasonable share of the commodities available for transport. In my opinion, if they were permitted to do so. they would eliminate rail transport. As I have .mid. the Government should view the construction of developmental railways with caution until it can be sure that such railways will prove more efficient than road transport. In the north-west of Western Australia the air beef scheme at Glenroy has made big advances. The abattoir is financed by MacRobertsonMiller Aviation Company Proprietary Limited and Australian National Airways Proprietary Limited and other organizations and they are transporting carcases of beef from Glenroy to Wyndham. In other circumstances that beef would not be used. It is transported by air without any waste. The cattle are killed one afternoon and are transported by air in the early morning next day. They are put directly into freezing chambers at Wyndham and are available for any purpose that the organization desires. That method of transport could he used to the same advantage in northern Queensland and the Northern Territory just as well as road, transport. In the future, the air lift of beef will play an important part in the development of outback areas. Would it not be better for the Australian Government to subsidize the transportation of beef by air to the extent of Id. or 2d. per lb. rather than lose £50,000,000 in a railway line that could never hope to pay running expenses, and would ultimately go out of existence? T know those areas well, because I ha ve spent much time in them and have transported numbers of stock.
– Did you provide your own road?
– Yes. My brother and I were the first persons in the Kimberleys to use road trains for our own benefit. We carted stock over roads that had never seen a grader. No manual labour had been expended on them. They were bush tracks. Yet we carted over them more cheaply than the railway systems can do in the southern parts of Western Australia. Therefore, I claim that I know something of road transport. 1 believe, however, that air transport can play an ever-increasing part in the development of those areas. To-day, it may be more expensive than other forms of transport, but it will develop just as road transport has done.
About 1920, when road trucks began to come into use, they were carrying 20 to 30 cwt. each. Now modern trucks can cart from 30 to 40 tons each. That development has taken place in less than 30 years. Who is to say that air transport will not develop similarly? To-day, a DC3 aircraft has a maximum carrying capacity of 11,000 lb. In the next ten years, aircraft may carry 20 to 30 times that quantity of cargo at the same cost. Would we not be embarrassed if we, as a parliament, authorized the expenditure of £50,000,000 or £60,000,000 for the development of railway lines in those areas, and had air transport take the freight away from the railway in ten years’ time? That could easily happen. We know from the Atomic Energy Commission that atomic power will be the power of the future. In England it is expected that within ten to fifteen years, commercial and passenger aircraft will be operated on atomic energy. I have read that a concentration of atomic power as big as a brick will drive a ship around the world several times.
Atomic power could easily take the place of road and rail transport. Already road transport has taken the place of rail transport, and it is evident that air transport will replace road transport. Therefore, I urge this Parliament to think twice before it commits itself to an expensive railway system to cater for the development of an area which has, at present, insufficient products for cartage. It would not be a payable proposition to spend £30,000,000 to £50,000,000 on a railway line to cart 100,000 tons of produce a year. The taxpayers of the southern areas would have to find money to keep the line operating and pay interest and depreciation. I am not opposed to the development of the northern areas of Australia. I am fully in favour of it, and will support any move by any government, provided it was along correct lines. I do not believe, however, that the building of railways at this juncture would be the proper course to adopt. A person who went to live in those areas, about 1,000 miles from a capital city, would want to take his motor car with, him, if he had one, when visiting other places. He could do so only by taking his car by rail.
– How far north does the bitumen road system extend from Perth?
– There are two bitumen roads. One goes to Geraldton, about 34-0 miles from Perth, and the other runs 160 miles north-east of Perth. At one time I was wholly in favour of bitumen roads in preference to a railway line, but I was disillusioned when I spoke to an engineer of the Main Roads Board in the north of Western Australia. Ho informed me that properly graded and surfaced gravel road.? would be adequate for the transport system in those areas for the ensuing fifteen to twenty yean. Some honorable senators believe that those roads would not stand up to the traffic, but I believe that it is possible to spend far too much on developmental roads. Provided people in those areas can have a surfaced >road they are satisfied. By that I mean a road that has been gravelled and graded. In th? north-west of Western Australia, road surfaces are being prepared and nothing more is being done to them although the Australian Government is making large sums of money available. I am thinking particularly of the road from Derby tr> Fitzroy Crossing, a distance of more than 200 miles. It has been gravelled at « cost of about £3,000 a mile. In the wet season, from 5 to 20 inches of rain falls in those areas and it scours out the roads so that no vehicle can go over them without severe jolting. Nothing is done to those roads for months after the rains. Recently the suppliers of the Broome meatworks carted cattle about 260 miles from Fitzroy Crossing to Broome on a road that had not been graded after it had received 12 inches of rain. Thy result was that the trucks were smashed and had to be completely overhauled and repaired before they went back for another trip. Gravel roads could be the answer to the problem if the government or the main roads board in each State provided sufficient implements for the maintenance of those roads. I know that the manager of the Broome meatworks would be quite satisfied to cart all the available cattle within 300 miles if he had some assurance from the main roads board or the local authorities in those areas that the roads would be graded at least once or twice a year, particularly after heavy rain. The roads need attention, but a railway line would require much more. The Commonwealth Parliament has a duty before deciding to expend large sums of money on the provision of rail links for the development of our northern areas to weigh the relative merits of rail and road transport. By incurring huge expenditure on railways we may be sticking our necks out and we may be very regretful later on. However, if the Parliament is eager to put a lot of money into railways, I see no reason why it should not look after the interests of the north-west of Western Australia as well as those of the Northern Territory and Queensland. The Governor-General said -
My Government will closely examine the extent to which additional transport links. including rail links are desirable for the development of beef production in North Queensland and the Northern Territory.
That is not quite what I want. If railways are to be built with Commonwealth funds in north Queensland and the Northern Territory, they should be built also in “Western Australia. In 1901, “Western Australia had almost twice as many cattle as the Northern Territory had, but now we have only half as many. I am not in favour of the expending of large sums on railways, but if money is to be squandered on such projects, Western Austrain should have its share.
I wish to speak now about the development of the beef industry in the northwest of Western Australia. I have spent a lot of time up there and t am gratified to know that at last governments appear to be taking an interest in the expansion of the beef industry There is, of course, an acute shortage of beef throughout the British Commonwealth, and attention is now being paid to areas where more beef can be produced economically. In the north-west of Western Australia there is an area far greater than Victoria which has a greater rainfall than Victoria has. I refer to the Kimberley region, which, if suitable encouragement were given, could provide an ever-increasing quantity of beef to meet the needs of the British Commonwealth. South of Broome we have large areas of plain country where buffalo grass grows in abundance. At the end of the wet season this country is capable of fattening a beast to a couple of acres. The only hold-up is a soil deficiency. Apparently certain minerals are absent or present in inadequate quantities, but provided those minerals are supplied to the beasts, they can be made as fat as required. The Western Australian Department of Agriculture, through Mr. Grant-Smith, is carrying out fattening experiments in those areas. He firmly believes that it will soon he possible to fatten cattle on lands which never before have been regarded as suitable for this purpose. Wherever one goes one finds that the application of science through the Department of Agriculture of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization is making available more country which in the past was considered useless.
Between Broome and Derby there is an area of 180,000 acres which to-day is largely uninhabited. It has a rainfall of 24 inches a year. That land could be developed for the fattening of cattle. Beasts could be bred inland and brought out to fatten. There is an abattoir at Broome and a jetty at Derby from which beef could be loaded for transport to the southern market. Areas such as this have great potential wealth. All that is required is some assistance in settlement. I believe that the Western Australian Government should undertake a war service land settlement scheme in the northwest of Western Australia. It could make available holdings of from 20,000 Co 30,000 acres which, with suitable development, could carry from 1,000 to 1,500 head of cattle, and provide for the owners a much better living than could bo obtained in any other part of the Commonwealth.
I turn now to the pearling industry, the affairs of which are shortly to come before the Court of International Justice. This Parliament has a responsibility to see that no effort is spared to develop this industry which is our most important dollar earner. It is true that I am interested in pearling, but I am merely expressing my own point of view. The Government has prohibited the Japanese from fishing in the waters of the Australian continental shelf. That is an excellent move. It is the duty of any government to protect the interests of an Australian industry and to prevent its exploitation. But no legislative action has been taken to assist the Australian pearling industry itself other than the granting of permission to bring in a number of Japanese divers and crews to work from Broome. Pearling is a complex industry. It is risky and it is a. gamble. Anything’ that any government can do to help it should be done immediately. In 1950, there was a special depreciation allowance of 40 per cent, on new pearling luggers. To-day, a lugger costs about £10,000 to build, but the depreciation allowance is only 7 per cent. If a pearler wishes to build a lugger to-day he requires to have a taxable income of over £22,000. The result is that the industry is stagnating. Very few boats are being built. The Government should, in my opinion. make the depreciation allowance sufficiently high to encourage the building of luggers. Prior to 1939, there were 250 luggers operating on the Australian coast. Now there are only about 100. When the Japanese entered the war many luggers were wrecked or destroyed. Those that were able to undertake long journeys set out for Perth. On the way they encountered a severe storm and some of them were wrecked. Consequently, when the war ended there wore few luggers available to go back into tho industry. If we are to continue to prevent the Japanese from exploiting the » pearl shell beds around the Australian coast, no effort must be spared to extend the operations of our own pearlers. So far no encouragement has been given in this direction. I have made repeated representations on behalf of shelters’ associations at Broome, Darwin and Thursday Island with a view to obtaining some relief for the pearling industry, but I have been unsuccessful. Thousands of tons of pearl shell are virtually rotting on the sea beds around our shores, and unless we are prepared as a nation to exploit those beds, we have no right to stop other nations from entering those waters to meet their own requirements, and if they so desire to sell on the world markets.
In conclusion, I congratulate Senator Annabelle Rankin on her excellent speech in moving the adoption of the AddressinReply yesterday. I also congratulate Senator Paltridge upon his able support. I have great pleasure in supporting the motion.
Senator ARMSTRONG (New South Wales) “10.14]. - The GovernorGeneral’s address to this Parliament recalled to my mind the memorable happenings of a few months ago when Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second of Australia, with her husband the Duke of Edinburgh’, paid a visit to these shores that none of us will forget. It was a very important time for the Commonwealth of Australia when it was host to the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, and it was indeed gratifying that so many Australian men and women and children were able to see our Royal visitors, and some of us to meet them. That was the first occasion on which a ruling monarch had visited Australia, and we appreciated the visit very much.
Senator Scott makes an independent approach to grave national problems. His statement that he hates railways but if we spend money on them he wants his share -of the benefits, reveals the malleable mind that is the hallmark of the great statesman. I agree with his criticism of the fact that the depreciation allowance on the pearling luggers in northwestern Australian is only 7 per cent. That raises a point about which I have spoken many times in this chamber. Before an Australian industry can become fully efficient and assist in the developmental work for which this country is crying out, it must be allowed an adequate depreciation allowance. As Senator Scott has said, our pearling luggers are exploiting vast beds of pearl-shell which other nations are eager to exploit also. There is a world-wide demand for pearlshell. But we have fewer than 100 luggers to exploit those beds now, compared with more than 250 before the war. One of the first things we should have done after the war was to re-build our pearling fleet as quickly as possible, but if the owners of luggers cannot depreciate them rapidly, the fleet will be re-built slowly. A survey should be made of the pearl-fishing industry. We should give every encouragement to people in the industry and also to those who want to come into it. In that way, we could reap a rich harvest for Australia.
I want to take Senator Scott to task for his lack of knowledge of the Anzus pact. He trenchantly attacked Senator Hendrickson. He wanted to know what the Labour party had done in the Pacific area. He said that we had opposed the Anzus pact.
– I said the Labour party spoke against it.
– The honorable senator said we opposed it.
– The Labour party opposed it by speaking against it.
– The honorable senator may put a thousand interpretations on his words, but I know only what he said.
– I am telling the honorable senator what I said.
– I know what Senator Scott said, but I do not know what he thought. He said that we opposed the Anzus pact. That was completely untrue. When the pact was discussed, we drew attention to a matter that went hand in hand with it and that constituted a great danger to Australia. I refer to the agreement for the rearmament of Japan. The criticism we made of the pact itself was that it had no teeth. It does not provide that if we are attacked the other parties to it will come instantly to our aid. All that is involved in the Anzus pact is that if we are attacked the other signatories to the pact will get together and have a talk about it. That is a pact without teeth.
– That is not quite true.
– It is as good a generalization as can be expressed in a few words. Senator Gorton, as chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, has devoted a great deal of his time to this matter. I know ho will agree with me that we should be a lot happier if there were more teeth in the Anzus pact. As a result of recent developments in the Pacific area, we shall get a pact which will have some teeth in it.
The influx of imports into this country has already had a serious effect on many important Australian industries. I urge the Government not to wait, as it did in 1952, until the damage has been done before it takes some action to protect our interests. I ask for leave to continue my remarks at a later stage.
Leave granted; debate adjourned.
page 76
The following papers were pre sented : -
Australian National University Act - Australian National University - Report of Council for 1953 together with financial statements.
Egg Export Charges Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1954, No. 85.
Lands Acquisition Act-Land, &c., acquired for-
Postal purposes -
Armidale, New South Wales.
Doneaster East, Victoria.
Mooball, New South Wales,
Naval Defence Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1954, No. 89.
Public Service Act -
Appointments - Department of Repatriation -
Crosthwaite, V. Feain, W.D.
Franks, M. M. Walsh.
Regulations - Statutory Rules. 1954, No. 86 (Parliamentary Officers).
Repatriation Act - Repatriation Commission - Report for year 1952-53.
Superannuation Act- Regulations. - Statutory Rules 1954, No. 87.
Wheat Marketing Act - Regulations - Statu tory Rules 1954, No. 84.
Wine Overseas Marketing Act - Regulations -Statutory Rules 1954, No. 88.
Senate adjourned at 10.22 p.m.
Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 5 August 1954, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1954/19540805_senate_21_s4/>.