Senate
11 November 1959

23rd Parliament · 1st Session



The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sir Alister McMullin) took the chair at 3 p.m.. and read prayers.

page 1341

QUESTION

REDFERN MAIL EXCHANGE

Senator ORMONDE:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I direct a question to the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Is it a fact that, because of action by the Commonwealth Government, 50 families now living in Redfern, Sydney, are facing almost immediate eviction from their homes? ls it also a fact that the Commonwealth is not prepared to do anything about finding homes for these people, as a private owner of the property would have to do under New South Wales fair rents legislation? Has the Minister any explanation to give to the Senate on this matter?

Senator SPOONER:
Minister for National Development · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

Senator Ormonde states the position from one point of view. Let me state it from another point of view. This is a project that has been under consideration for over a decade. Back in 1949, the late Mr. Chifley made overtures to the New South Wales Housing Commission for the provision of alternative accommodation when required. The property was acquired by the Commonwealth Government early in 1951, which is eight years ago. Since then, all of the tenants have been there on notice, that is, on a weekly tenancy basis only. The area was zoned as an industrial area early in 1952.

So, the tenants that are there have had long notice of the eventual use to which the property was to be put. This project is, of course, a major matter for the city of Sydney. A seven-story building, to cost over £4,000,000, is to be built. When it is erected, over 5,000 people in the postal service will be employed in it. It will make a very big contribution to employment in Sydney, both during the course of construction and after completion. In those circumstances, as both the New South Wales Government and the tenants have had such long notice of the Commonwealth’s intentions, and as the Commonwealth provides some £80,000,000 a year for housing throughout Australia in the various classifications, I do not think that the Commonwealth’s view is an unreasonable one.

The State Government, having had such long notice of the proposal, could reasonably be expected to meet the requirements of the tenants who are affected.

page 1341

QUESTION

BASE METALS

Senator SCOTT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I direct a question to the Minister for National Development. Is it a fact that there has been a substantial increase in the prices of zinc, lead and copper during the last month or so? Does this indicate that the world demand is increasing? If the demand is increasing, for how much longer will the self-imposed restrictions on Australian producers continue? Has any survey been conducted by the Government of world requirements for the next ten years? If it has not, could these requirements be ascertained so that producers and prospectors of these base metals would have a guide as to future world requirements?

Senator SPOONER:
LP

– It is difficult to answer a question of this kind without notice, but I shall do my best. The markets for zinc and copper have strengthened appreciably over recent months. My recollection is that the market for lead has strengthened, but not to the same degree. Whether that strengthening is attributable to the restrictions that producers of lead and zinc throughout the world have placed upon output is a matter of opinion. I would think that the restrictions have contributed to the strengthening of markets. A United Nations research committee has either been established, or is in the course of being established, so that relevant statistics on lead and zinc can be prepared. Australia has, or will have, representation on that committee, whose purpose is to provide both producers and consumers with accurate statistics on supply and demand - which, surprisingly enough, are not readily available at present. The intention is that, when the statistics are available, both producers and consumers will be able to forecast trends and achieve greater stability in the market.

page 1341

QUESTION

CIVIL AVIATION

Senator KENNELLY:
VICTORIA

– I preface my question to the Minister for Civil Aviation by remarking that, except in Queensland and Tasmania, Trans-Australia Airlines is at present debarred from operating intra-state services. In view of the Minister’s many statements to the effect that he desires to maintain in Australia two major airlines engaged in- competition: on a fair basis, I ask him whether he has seen the following statement on page 4 of the last annual report of T.A.A.: -

An. operator barred from access to intra-state routes is at a very serious economic disadvantage compared with his competitors.

Will’ the Minister ask the governments of New South Wales, Victoria, South. Australia, and Western Australia to pass legislation, complementary to Commonwealth legislation, so that T.A.A. may operate in those States and. so that the beautiful, free and fair competition between the airlines which he so often states is Government policy may be translated into fact, instead of remaining just a pious and empty phrase?

Senator PALTRIDGE:
Minister for Civil Aviation · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– 1 congratulate the Deputy Leader of the Opposition’ upon his colourfully phrased question. The intra-state operation of Trans-Australia Airlines, other than in Queensland and Tasmania, is a matter which we have discussed in this chamber from time to time during the last couple of years. I have always discussed it in the context thai, until recently, TAA. has enjoyed a. complete monopoly of the Northern Territory services, and even now enjoys a monopoly of the Darwin run - a very valuable market indeed for a domestic operator.. The question whether TAA. should operate within other States is constantly under examination and the Government, in pursuance of its policy of keeping two airlines in the air, indulging in beautiful, free and fair competition, will be influenced by what occurs from time to time. If Senator Kennelly reads the report further, he will find that, notwithstanding, this alleged disability, T.A.A. claims that it has captured more than SO per cent, of the available market.

page 1342

QUESTION

ATOMIC RADIATION

Senator HANNAN:
VICTORIA

– I direct a question to the Leader of the Government in his capacity as Minister for National Development. Has he seen to-day*s press reports on the increase of strontium 90 in New Zealand’s soil? fs he able to state whether the levels measured are above or below those obtaining in Australia? Do these levels represent a danger to health in Australia?

Senator SPOONER:
LP

– - This is a Dorothy Dix-er. I was asked a question on this subject a week or so ago, and I arranged for the Australian Atomic Energy Commission to give me some information because I thought that it might be of general interest. The commission has supplied the following facts, relating to the amount of strontium. 90 indicated in soil- readings: -

The count in the Sydney area is about 4.2 millicuries per square mile,, compared with 9.7 minicuries in Wellington, New Zealand. This variation, between Wellington and Sydney is probably caused! by different weather, patterns related to the direction of prevailing winds. Such differences are to be expected as part of the normal worldwide pattern of local variations. The world average figure is S.2 millicuries per square mile, but the average count, in. the: southern, hemisphere is. about one quarter of that in the northern hemisphere. Wellington’s figure is below the northern hemisphere average. The count in the United States in> 1958 was’ about 27 millicuries. Thus the reading; for strontium; 90 m Sydney is about one seventh of the United States average reading; in 1958.

Senator O’BYRNE:
TASMANIA

– My question to the Leader of the Government is supplementary to. the one just asked by Senator Hannan. Did the Minister hear a radio broadcast over the Australian Broadcasting Commission, network last night in which a prominent physicist spoke of the dramatic increase in. radio activity levels in soil Id New Zealand in which, a spectacular buildup of strontium 90 has been detected as reported by the United States Atomic Energy Commission? Has he read the comment of Dr. John. Read of the New Zealand branch of the British Cancer Campaign in which he stated that the increases are very alarming, and in which he questioned the safe dose that could be absorbed without causing harm such as bone cancer and leukemia? In view of the statement in the broadcast which referred to the possibility of a fall-out occurring in Victoria, Tasmania and southern parts of Australia would the Minister assure the Senate that our delegates at the United Nations General Assembly meeting win oppose the proposed French thermo-nuclear bomb tests which are also being opposed by the British delegates?

Senator SPOONER:

– I did not hear the broadcast to which Senator O’Byrne has referred.

Senator O’Byrne:

– It was on the A.B.C last night.

Senator SPOONER:

– I am just saying that 1 did not hear it. I do not doubt the veracity of Senator O’Byrne’s statement. When J read the newspaper report I thought that I might well get a question about the matter da the Senate. That fact, combined with the previous question I had been asked, caused me to .obtain this information which 1 .think puts things an their correct perspective. .’Everybody is interested in the fact that there is such a .marked difference between New Zealand and Australia.

Senator O’Byrne:

– In which newspaper was the report published?

Senator SPOONER:

– In this morning’s “‘Sydney Morning Herald”.

Senator O’Byrne:

– It was suppressed in a number of newspapers.

Senator SPOONER:

– I think Senator 0’Byrne has a greater sense of the dramatic than I have if he thinks that newspapers would suppress anything that was likely to be of such interest. I can only repeat to him that what 1 have read is factual information from the Australian Atomic Energy Commission, which I think it will be admitted is well-informed on the point.

page 1343

QUESTION

IMPORTATION OF PUBLICATIONS

Senator COLE:
TASMANIA

– My question is directed to the Minister ‘for Customs and Excise. Following upon a recent question to the Minister about the possibility of a flood of back-dated American periodicals and comics coming into Australia .because of the Government’s recent relaxation of import regulations, I wish .to ask: Is .he aware that a Sydney importer has arranged for the shipment. of millions of back-dated American comic books for sale through stores at cut prices? Is the Minister aware that this huge shipment has left the United States and is due in Australia soon? Has he established that his department can take the action necessary to prevent the entry of this huge shipment of undesirable material into this country? He recently intimated to Senator Buttfield that he would inquire as to his powers in this connexion.

Senator HENTY:
Minister for Customs and Excise · TASMANIA · LP

– I am not aware that a huge shipment of comics is coming here for any importer. The first intimation that the Customs authorities receive of such matters is when import documents are presented to them at the port of entry into

Australia. I have heard a rumour .on the lines that Senator Cole mentioned, but I have no factual evidence in relation to the matter. Before action could be taken under the Australian Industries Preservation Act, the industry in Australia would have to establish that the comics were coming into Australia at a price below the price charged in America, or wherever they came from, and that the Australian industry was likely to be detrimentally affected. That could not be done until invoices could be produced. Only then could we invoke the provisions of the Australian Industries Preservation Act, if the circumstances so warranted.

Senator VINCENT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I desire to ask the Minister for Customs and Excise a supplementary question, ls .there a branch of the Literature Censorship Board at each port of entry to Australia? Can the Minister tell rae how long it normally takes ‘for (literature arriving in a State to be cleared by the board?

Senator HENTY:

– There is not a branch of the Literature Censorship Board in every State. The board is situated in Canberra. If, at the port of entry, officials believe it to be necessary for literature to be reviewed by the board, the literature is sent to the central administration and then to the Literature Censorship Board. It is impossible to state the length of time that elapses before a decision is made, because the circumstances vary. I have not recently received a complaint of undue time having .been taken to deal with any .such matter.

Senator Vincent:

– What length of time would normally be involved if the material had to be sent from Perth to Canberra, and then returned to Perth?

Senator HENTY:

– That would depend on the length of time it took for the literature to reach the -board and for the board to deal with it. The time involved depends entirely on the circumstances. The honor;able senator will appreciate that there may be half a dozen or a dozen other matters ahead of the one in question, awaiting consideration by the board.

Senator HANNAN:

– I desire to ask the Minister for Customs and Excise a supplementary question. Can he say whether it is a fact that the quantity of undesirable comic material with which his department has to deal at ports of entry into Australia has been considerably reduced since the advent of television in this country?

Senator HENTY:

– As I have no facts in my possession on this aspect of the matter, I am unable to answer the question.

page 1344

QUESTION

SHIPPING FREIGHTS

Senator WRIGHT:
TASMANIA

– I wish to direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Trade. Is it a fact that, since the Senate rose for the recent recess, the Overseas Shipping Representatives Association has announced its decision not to increase overseas freights on Australian produce during the next season? Will the Minister say whether it is clear that this decision will apply to apple exports tor 1960-61? Will it extend to 1961-62? Will the Minister continue the investigation that was previously requested into allegations that members of the Australian Overseas Transport Association have indirect interests which are not completely separate from shipping interests?

Senator SPOONER:
LP

– If the new freight arrangements do not apply to the Tasmanian apple industry, I will inform Senator Wright accordingly to-morrow. I know of no reason why those freights should not be stabilized in the same way as are freights for other primary products. If I am wrong, I shall tell the honorable senator to-morrow.

As to the allegations, I am sorry that I have not heard them previously. I remember Senator Wright putting a question on notice about the constitution of the Australian Overseas Transport Association. So that adequate inquiries can be made, I ask him to put this question on notice in case my memory is at fault.

page 1344

QUESTION

DEVELOPMENT OF NORTHERN AUSTRALIA

Senator DITTMER:
QUEENSLAND

– I preface a question to the Minister for National Development by stating that on 11th October, 1959, Mr. Walkley, a managing director of Ampol Petroleum Proprietary Limited, in a television interview, said that an authority should be set up by the Government to develop northern Australia. He said private enterprise had not the necessary money. Has the Minister’s attention been drawn also to a statement by Mr. Fletcher, appearing in the “Courier Mail” of 13th

October, in which he said that development of the north was beyond private enterprise, and called for the establishment of a grand council to develop the area? As Mr. Walkley is a prominent business man and. Mr. J. W. Fletcher is a former anti-Labour parliamentarian, a successful grazier and a man eminently respected for his ability, who has been a member of committees of inquiry into the north on behalf of both the Queensland and the Commonwealth. Governments - their plan appeared in moredetailed and elaborate form in the first speech in the Senate by Queensland’s, newest senator - will the Minister ask Cabinet to give consideration to the viewsof Messrs. Walkley and Fletcher? If Cabinet cares to neglect the north, the money for the Mount Isa railway having had to be squeezed out of it, will theMinister consider suggesting to the Senate that a select committee be appointed toinvestigate the feasibility and practicability of the ideas of Messrs. Walkley and* Fletcher for the setting up of a north> Australian development and settlement organization?

Senator SPOONER:
LP

– I do not know that we do the north any great service by starting with the assumption that there is not a> good deal of progress being made there already. The north has moved ahead more of recent years, as a result of the development of mining and other activities, than it had done for a long time before that.

Over the years, there has been a series of proposals that authorities of some kind - of the Commonwealth, or of the Commonwealth and the States - be constituted for the purpose of further developing the north. To them I give the answer that the Commonwealth is doing a great deal itself in the Northern Territory, that the Commonwealth, in conjunction with Queensland, is. doing a great deal in Queensland and that, in addition, the Commonwealth, in conjunction with the Western Australian Government, is doing a great deal in the north of Western Australia. I doubt whether the Queensland Government would welcome any joint authority, and I know that the Western Australian Government is very satisfied with the present arrangements and with the finance that the Commonwealth Government made available to’ it recently for the Ord River project.

Turning to the next part of Senator Dittmer’s question, I rather expected that he would be a little disappointed that the Commonwealth has done so well by Queensland in the Mount Isa railway arrangements. I can sympathize with his disappointment at the fact that the Queensland Government is so satisfied with what we have done. Here I might mention that some weeks ago I ventured to forecast to the Senate that this result would be achieved. Indeed, nothing else was possible when the Prime Minister himself took such a personal interest in ensuring that Queensland’s development went ahead.

Senator DITTMER:

– I address a supplementary question to the Minister for National Development. Did the Western Australian Government make representations for the setting up of a composite body? Further, did Mr. Nicklin, Premier of Queensland, make a full statement in connexion with the reconditioning of the Townsville to Mount Isa railway? Does the Minister know that the Queensland Cabinet claims that the Liberal Treasurer of Queensland had the Commonwealth Government on a spot in connexion with the Mount Isa railway?

Senator SPOONER:

– Taking the second part of the question first, I think the short answer is that the Queensland Premier, Mr. Nicklin, has written to the Prime Minister in the most appreciative terms, expressing the great thanks of the Queensland Government for what Mr. Menzies had done. The answer to the question whether the Western Australian Government had made a request is: Yes, and after discussions with the Western Australian Government and proposals were put to it, that government, for its part, expressed great satisfaction with the final outcome. In other words, we have satisfied customers in all the State governments.

Senator WRIGHT:

– I address a supplementary question to the Minister for National Development. Has the loan in respect of the Mount Isa railway been the subject of a ministerial statement to the Senate? If not, will the Minister inform the Senate of the terms and conditions of the loan, such as the amount, the rate of interest, the period, and the terms of repayment? Will he also say whether it is proposed to make the loan the subject of a special piece of legislation, or whether it is to be made as a result of executive action? Finally, will he say whether or not the loan has been before the Australian Loan Council?

Senator SPOONER:

– To my recollection, there has been no specific statement in either the Senate or the House of Representatives, but the full details of the loan are contained in a comprehensive statement which the Prime Minister issued. The honorable senator will find in that statement full details of the period of the loan, which is for twenty years, the rate of interest, which is equivalent to that charged by the World Bank, and, indeed, all other details concerning it.

page 1345

QUESTION

CATTLE

Senator McKELLAR:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Leader of the Government in the Senate seen a report, dated 4th November, 1959, in the Australian Associated Press, stating that farmers at Llandrindod Wells, in Wales, are now producing a second or twin calf by using a hormone costing 5s.? Will the Minister inform the Senate whether any such experiments have been made in Australia?

Senator SPOONER:
LP

– I know of no such experiments having been made. If Senator McKellar will place the question on the notice-paper, I shall see whether the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization can supply any useful information on the subject.

page 1345

QUESTION

CIVIL AVIATION

Senator SANDFORD:
VICTORIA

– Can the Minister for Civil Aviation state the amount of money that has been spent by the Government on aerodromes, navigational aids and other aviation facilities in Australia during the last five years? Do the airlines pay fees for the use of such facilities? If so, how are the charges levied against each airline, and what is the aggregate amount of fees collected during that period?

Senator PALTRIDGE:
LP

– I shall have to ask for notice of the question relating to the amounts collected from the companies and the sums spent in providing facilities. The companies are subject to an air navigation charge which is provided for under an act passed by this Senate.

page 1346

QUESTION

POSTAL CHARGES

Senator COOKE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I preface a question to the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral by stating that it refers to postage rates on mail sent to and by charitable institutions, such as missions. I understand that the Braille Society receives a concessional postage rate and that certain charitable organizations receive a half rate concession for local telephone calls, although the full rates are levied for trunk line calls, rental, and so on. Will the Minister request the Postmaster-General to consider allowing a concessional rate of, say, 50 per cent, of normal postal charges on parcels and other articles of mail posted to or sent by approved charitable institutions?

Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:

– It would be difficult to make such a concession as it could not easily be determined whether the parcels and mail were going to aged’ people.

Senator Cooke:

– Similar concessions are made by the railways authorities.

Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:

– If the honorable senator will place his question on the notice-paper I shall obtain an answer for him from the Postmaster-General.

page 1346

QUESTION

WHEAT AND BARLEY

Senator LAUGHT:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry aware that, on account of drought conditions in South Australia, the wheat yield in that State this year may not be more than 5,000,000 bushels, or about onesixth of the normal yield, and that the barley crop is estimated to be of similar proportions? Will the Department of Primary Industry cause a survey to be made urgently to obtain an up-to-date estimate, first, of the wheat and barley yields, and secondly, of South Australia’s requirements of these cereals for ali purposes until the 1960-61 harvest is reaped? Should it be found that the present stocks of wheat and barley are insufficient to satisfy the essential requirements of South Australia for the next fourteen months, will the Minister consider using his good’ offices to prevent, sales of wheat and barley from South Australian stocks by the respective boards, thus saving the rather wanton expenditure on freight and handling charges, on wheat and barley leaving the State and later coming back to it?

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · VICTORIA · LP

– I have learned with regret of the drought conditions prevailing over most of South Australia. I shall bring to the notice of the Minister for Primary Industry the honorable senator’s request that a survey be made in order to ascertain what it is thought the yield of this year’s harvest will be, and also to decide what the requirements of South Australia are likely to be. As to what policy will be followed after that research is undertaken, should it be undertaken, I do not know. I was myself under the impression that, at the moment, barley was not being exported from South Australia, but that may have been an erroneous impression.

page 1346

QUESTION

IMPORTATION OF PUBLICATIONS

Senator COLE:

– I desire to ask the Minister for Customs and Excise a supplementary question. I now ask him whether the comic books that will arrive here in future will be investigated as to their suitability by the Literature Censorship Board before they can be offered for sale.

Senator HENTY:
LP

– Every type of literature is covered by the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations issued under the Customs Act, and these books will be treated as; all other literature- is treated.

page 1346

QUESTION

POSTAL CHARGES

Senator TANGNEY:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– My question to the Minister representing th& Postmaster^ General is more in the nature of a final appeal than an actual question. I now ask the: Minister whether, in view of the. vicious rise in the postal rates for Christmas cards - a rise: of 66$ per cent: - and also in view of the customer resistance to. the rise,, as- is evidenced, by recent statements made by church authorities and business folk, he will consider sending all Christmas mail at the old rates as a token concession; and in order to get the people used to the big changes in postal rates.

Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:

– I do not think that there is much chance: of such a change being made, at this late date, es;pecially in< view of the difficulty of determining whether- Christmas, cards or other postal matter is enclosed in the envelopes. However, I shall, bring the honorable senator’s question before the PostmasterGeneral.

Senator Tangney:

– Could not that matter be determined during the sorting process?

Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:

– All postal articles go through automatic sorting machines. They are not dealt with manually. There is no chance of getting an automatic sorter to distinguish between a Christmas card and a letter. The difficulties would be too great. However, I shall bring the matter before the Postmaster-General and obtain a reply.

page 1347

QUESTION

TAXATION

Senator WRIGHT:

– Will the Minister representing the Treasurer inform the Senate as to the practice that is followed by the Commissioner of Taxation with regard to the spot checks made by itinerant officers on farmers in the various States in relation to the correctness of income tax returns? Is each visit the subject of a written report, so as to ensure that the authority of these officers is not abused and that a check may be made against a record in case of complaint? I also ask the Minister whether costs incurred by taxpayers with accountants in revising figures for income tax investigation are allowed as deductions in income tax assessment.

Senator PALTRIDGE:
LP

– I am not personally aware of the practice followed in relation to the spot checks to which the honorable senator has referred, nor as to the allowability or otherwise as a deduction of the charge incurred by taxpayers in the employment of accountants in their negotiations with the taxation authorities, but I shall be pleased to refer the question to the Treasurer and get a reply for the honorable senator.

page 1347

QUESTION

POSTAL CHARGES

Senator TANGNEY:

– I direct to the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral a supplementary question in relation to Christmas cards. In this Sputnik age, when scientists can send rockets to the moon, is it beyond the realm of possibility for the Postal Department to instal at every post office a special posting box for Christmas cards, in order to overcome the difficulty of sorting Christmas cards from other mail, and to give to the people the benefit of a lower rate in the festive season?

Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:

– I have told the honorable senator that I shall bring the matter to the notice of the PostmasterGeneral. That is all I can do.

page 1347

QUESTION

BANKING

Senator DITTMER:

– Has the attention of the Minister representing the Treasurer been directed to the fact that Lombard Australia Limited is circularizing people, drawing attention to deposits on a depositimmediatecall basis? This firm has a registered telegraphic address, namely “ Drabmol “, and is apparently attempting to act as a dishevelled substitute for the reputable banks. Has the company a banking charter? If it has not, as it is likely to interfere substantially with the deposits in banks, will the Minister seek to control it by charter?

Senator PALTRIDGE:
LP

– I am not personally aware of the existence of the firm to which the honorable senator referred, nor of the activities that he mentioned. I can only say that I shall refer the question to the Treasurer.

page 1347

QUESTION

UNEMPLOYMENT IN QUEENSLAND

Senator BENN:
QUEENSLAND

– I understand that the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service has an answer to a question which I asked on 27th October last.

Senator GORTON:
LP

Senator Benn referred to unemployment in Queensland. The Minister for Labour and National Service has now supplied the following reply: -

I refer to the question without notice concerning unemployment in Central Queensland which Senator Benn addressed to you in the Senate on 27th October last.

As you pointed out in your reply to Senator Benn at the time, the use of public works to provide employment in particular areas is a matter for determination by the State Government.

Neverthelsss, I am not unmindful of the problems of seasonal unemployment in Queensland, nor is the State Government. As you will know, my department maintains a number of full-time offices in Queensland in metropolitan and country areas and departmental officers keep a close and continuous watch on developments in the labour market and, in particular, on unemployment. I see no occasion, therefore, for a special investigation to be made by my officers of the present unemployment situation in the central district of Queensland.

I might add that close liaison is maintained in these matters between my officers and representatives of the State Government, and the information -which my officers have is made available to the State Government.

page 1348

QUESTION

TUBERCULOSIS IN QUEENSLAND

Senator BENN:

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

In view of the result of surveys which showed that SO per cent, of children of school leaving age in North Queensland, when given skin tests for tuberculosis, registered positive reactions and similar tests made in Melbourne revealed that only 5 per cent, showed positive reactions, will the Minister make a statement on the subject and inform the Senate whether his department will actively co-operate with the Queensland Department of Health in its campaign against tuberculosis?

Senator HENTY:
LP

– The Minister for Health has now furnished the following reply: -

The tuberculin skin sensitivity test is one of the tests used by tuberculosis control authorities in the search for the disease.

Tuberculin skin-testing is used to determine whether or not a person has been exposed to infection with tubercle bacilli. However, a positive reaction does not necessarily mean that such infection will result in the development of disease.

In Queensland, as in all other States, the Commonwealth and State Health Departments have been engaged for some years in an intensive campaign which is intended to achieve the eventual eradication of this infectious disease. There is the closest co-operation between the Commonwealth and Queensland Health Departments.

Every one with a positive reaction to a tuberculin skin sensitivity test should have a precautionary chest X-ray. Chest X-ray surveys will commence in Cairns on 9th November, 1959. Attendance at these surveys is compulsory.

page 1348

QUESTION

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, CANBERRA

Senator WRIGHT:

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

  1. Have tenders been called for the construction of the new Government Printing Office?
  2. If so, has a contract yet been signed in respect of it?
  3. Is it the practice to await parliamentary approval for expenditure before signing a contract or to sign a contract in anticipation of such approval?
Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:

– The

Acting Minister for Works has furnished the following replies: -

  1. No.
  2. See answer to question 1.
  3. It is the practice to await parliamentary approval that it is expedient to proceed with a proposed public work which has been referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works before a contract is signed.

page 1348

QUESTION

TELEPHONE SERVICES

Senator LAUGHT:

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

  1. Is it a fact (a) that not one private home in Elizabeth North, where there are 4,000 people, has a phone, and (b) that the headmaster of Elizabeth North school, who has the duty of administering two schools, has been refused a telephone link between the two schools?
  2. Is it also a fact that the phenomenal growth of this part of South Australia in the last twelve months has shown normal departmental planning and extension work for this area to be quite inadequate?
  3. If the answer to 1 and 2 are in the affirmative, will the Postmaster-General, in view of the dire need of the Elizabeth North area for an adequate telephone service, consider sending the OfficerinCharge of the Telephone Branch from the Central Office of the Department to this area to make a survey of its needs, with power to make recommendations for immediate action to remedy the situation?
Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:

– The

Postmaster-General has supplied the following answers: - 1. (a) No. Seven of the sixteen subscribers’ telephone services at present installed at Elizabeth North are in private homes. A further eight services will be connected shortly and four of these will be in residences, (b) No. A telephone service is provided at the Elizabeth North school while the applications which have been made for a service at the Broadmeadows Road School and an extension line to the headmaster’s residence will be met as soon as the necessary outdoor cable plant is available.

  1. No. Comprehensive plans have been prepared to meet the telephone needs of the whole Elizabeth area and everything practicable is being done to satisfy these as quickly as possible, having regard to the continuing high demand in other parts of South Australia and the obligation to ensure that resources are utilized to the best advantage of the community generally. At present 392 services, including 17 public telephones, are connected to the temporary automatic exchange at Elizabeth. Outstanding applications, including 67 at Elizabeth North, total 136 representing little more than 1 per cent, of the total deferred applications in the State. Plans for the current financial year include commencement of a new permanent automatic exchange building to cost approximately £40,000, the laying of additional underground cables throughout the area and the provision of extra links between the Elizabeth and Salisbury exchanges.
  2. See 1 and 2.

page 1349

QUESTION

HOSPITAL BENEFITS SCHEME

Senator ANDERSON:
NEW SOUTH WALES

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

  1. Is it a fact that a member of the Hospitals Contribution Fund of New South Wales who subscribes under table 4B, with Government subsidy added, receives whilst in hospital a total of £23 16s. per week?
  2. Is it a fact that a member of the fund who subscribes under table 13, with Government subsidy added, receives whilst in hospital a total of £ 12 12s. per week?
  3. Is it a fact that the family rate of contribution under table 4B is £9 12s. per annum, whereas the family rate under table1B is only £2 8s. per annum?
  4. Is it a fact that persons subscribing under table 4B who have reached the age of 65 years, and are subsequently admitted to hospital, find to their amazement that, although they have been subscribing for table 4B to cover approximate intermediate bed hospital charges, they are, in fact, entitled only to the benefits of table1B?
  5. Is it a further fact that many subscribers under table 4B over the age of 65 years have not been informed by the fund that they are paying for a benefit which they are not entitled to receive?
  6. If the answers to questions 1 to5 are in the affirmative, will the Minister insist that the Hospitals Contribution Fund correct the apparent injustice and imposition indicated in 4 and 5?
Senator HENTY:
LP

– The Minister for Health has now furnished the following reply: -

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.
  3. The family rate contribution in table 4B is £10 per annum and in table1B £3 12s. per annum.
  4. No. On 1st January, 1959, the Hospitals Contribution Fund of New South Wales, along with other registered hospital benefit organizations, introduced special accounts to provide for payment of fund benefits, generally 16s. per day, in cases previously excluded under the organizations’ rules relating to pre-existing and chronic ailments and maximum benefits.

Registered organizations which established these accounts were required under the provisions of the National Health Act to meet several conditions including: -

  1. All contributors 65 years of age and over and their dependants must be transferred to the special account.
  2. In the special account, the combined Commonwealth and Fund benefits cannot exceed the daily charge for hospital accommodation, and
  3. Special account fund benefit is not payable for treatment in hospitals not recognized for this purpose.

A special account contributor in table 4B can still receive 48s. per day fund benefit for 84 days a year provided the total benefits do not exceed the daily hospital charge. When the maximum period of 84 days is reached, or the hospitalization relates to a chronic or pre-existing ailment, then 16s. per day fund benefit is paid. Before the introduction of special accounts, no fund benefit was paid in these latter cases.

  1. No. Special account contributors in table 4B are not paying for a benefit which they are not entitled to receive.
  2. There is no question of an injustice or imposition by the Hospitals Contribution Fund in this matter.

page 1349

QUESTION

HEALTH RESEARCH

Senator BUTTFIELD:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

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

  1. Will the Minister institute an inquiry to ascertain the amount spent in Australia on research into human health and that spent through the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization on animal health?
  2. In view of an article published in an Adelaide periodical review by Dr. Ross Adey, a former Reader in Anatomy at the Adelaide University, and now Professor of Anatomy in California, in which he stated that the United States of America spends 17s. per head of population on medical research compared with 5d. per head in Australia, will the Minister give consideration to recommending extension of medical research in Australian universities?
Senator HENTY:
LP

– The Minister for Health has now furnished the following reply: - 1 and 2. I do not know the source of the figures quoted, but much more than 5d. per head of population is spent on medical research in Australia. The Australian National University alone spends more than that each year. In addition to considerable State, university and private medical research, the Commonwealth makes £210,000 a year available to the National Health and Medical Research Council for research. It is, therefore, apparent that the honorable senator’s request for an inquiry is based on erroneous figures.

page 1349

QUESTION

DRUGS

Senator WARDLAW:
TASMANIA

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

  1. Is it a fact, as recently reported in the press, that due to the price-cutting methods of a young Paris financier named Jimmy Goldsmith, the cost of expensive drugs in Britain has fallen rapidly, that of cortisone and similar hormone tablets, for instance, falling from about £60 to £9 per 1,000 since his entry into the market?
  2. Is it also a fact that, although established firms and opposition interests, deeply resentful of the price cutting, have cast serious doubts on the quality of the products offered by Mr. Goldsmith, rigorous analysis has established that their criticism is unfounded, and Mr. Goldsmith has been successful in obtaining important contracts from the British Ministry of Health?
  3. If the reports are correct, will the Minister have inquiries made as to whether Australia is benefiting or could benefit from the lower prices offered?
  4. Would it be possible or advisable for the Commonwealth to manufacture these drugs under licence or under C.S.I.R.O. supervision and control?
Senator HENTY:
LP

– The Minister for Health has now furnished the following reply: -

  1. The cost of cortisone and similar hormone tablets has recently fallen in Britain.
  2. Mr. Goldsmith obtained, hospital contracts from the British Ministry of Health. However, subsequently, complaints were received that continental cortisone and similar hormones had produced serious side effects.
  3. Prices payable by the Commonwealth have fallen by 20-30 per cent, during the past twelve months.
  4. The manufacture of these items is already being undertaken in Australia. It is not proposed that the Commonwealth Government itself engage in such manufacture.

page 1350

QUESTION

SHIPBUILDING

Senator McMANUS:
through Senator Cole

asked the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice -

What is the estimated cost of constructing in (a) Australian shipyards, and (b) overseas shipyards, a typical vessel, which, by tonnage, refrigeration facilities and other necessary equipment, would be suitable for transporting Australian primary products abroad?

Senator PALTRIDGE:
LP

– The answer is as follows: -

Whilst it could not be said that there is any typical type vessel for transporting Australian produce overseas, for the purpose of this reply it has been assumed that the honorable senator is referring to a fully refrigerated cargo liner of about 14,000 tons deadweight with a service speed of 161 knots. In that case it is estimated that the approximate cost of building in an Australian shipyard would be £A2,900,000 while the cost of building in a United Kingdom yard would be about £A2,000,000. If the present shipbuilding subsidy on vessels built in Australian yards of up to 33i per cent, of building costs were allowed, the Australian price would be approximately comparable with the estimated United Kingdom figure.

page 1350

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

Motion (by Senator Spooner) - by leave - agreed to -

That, in accordance with the provisions of section 11 of the Australian National University Act 1946-1947, the Senate elects Senator Laught and Senator Tangney to be members of the Council of the Australian National University for a period of three years from 1st July, 1959.

page 1350

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Motion (by Senator Spooner) - by leave - agreed to -

That leave of absence for one month be granted to Senator Hannaford on account of absence overseas.

Motion (by Senator McKenna) - by leave - agreed to -

That leave of absence for one month be granted to Senator Hendrickson on account of absence overseas.

page 1350

HOUR OF MEETING

Motion (by Senator Spooner) agreed to -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until to-morrow at 10.30 a.m.

page 1350

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Discharge of Motion

Senator PALTRIDGE:
Minister for Shipping and Transport and Minister for Civil Aviation · Western Australia · LP

– I move -

That the following order of the day. Government business, be discharged: -

Airports (Business Concessions) Bill 1959- Second Reading - Adjourned debate.

I take the opportunity to explain that within the next two or three days I shall be introducing another bill in connexion with this matter. I shall give notice of it to-morrow.

page 1350

QUESTION

APPROPRIATION BELL 1959-60

In committee:

Payments to or for the States.

Proposed Vote, £1,030,000.

Department of Immigration

Proposed Vote, £2,039,000.

Miscellaneous Services; - Department of Immigration

Proposed Vote, £9,369,000. (Ordered to be considered together.)

Senator BENN:
Queensland

– Referring to Division No. 811, I mention that in the year 1948 the Commonwealth Government made arrangements with the States to deal with the problem of tuberculosis throughout the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth appreciated that State Governments had control of the hospitals in their States and that those hospitals were equipped to deal with this problem up to a point.It was appreciated that the States could deal with the problem more effectively than could the Commonwealth which had no existingorganization. It was arranged at that time that the sum which was being spent byeach State - that was in 1948-would be reimbursed by the Commonwealth, and any excess expenditure over that sum would be made good to the various States by the Commonwealth Government.

I observe that it isproposed to make available to the States this year the sum of £1,030,000. To-day I asked a question in the Senate about what is being done In Queensland where an effort is being made to combat the ravages of this disease. I was given a very good reply. I notice that the item is worded, “ Re-imbursement of capital expenditure by State governments”. I shouldlike to know what sum has beenspent by the Government in the nature of recurring expenditurefor the maintenance of the various hospitals or wards. That class of expenditure would not come within capital expenditure. I donot knowwhether the Ministerhas that information available at the present time. Ifwe take the wording ofthe item literally it means capital expenditure ‘only. This arrangementhasbeen in operation since 1948, andthe hospitals in the various States are now, I would think, fully equipped to deal with this problem. The Minister may perhaps enlighten me on this matter.

SenatorHENTY (Tasmania- Minister for Customs andExcise) [4.4]. - The amount of £1,030,000, underDivision No. 811, is the sumto be reimbursed tothe Stategovernments for capital expenditure they have made. The State governments make a claim and they are thenreimbursed. Division No. 81 1 refers only to capital expeaditure. Thequestion asked by the honorablesenator isoutsidethis item altogether but I can tell him that sofar in Queensland the capital expenditure has been £4,232,271, maintenance expenditure £4,678,342, and the allowance paid to sufferers, £1,993,167,making a total of £10,903,780.

Senator Benn:

– From 1948?

Senator HENTY:
LP

– Yes, from 1948 to 30thJune, 1959. Withthe concurrence of the committee,I incorporate the figures for the other States,so asto provide comprehensive information. They are as follows: -

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

. -Irefer to Division No.811 -“Tuberculosis Act - Reimbursement of Capital Expenditureby State Governments - £1,030,000”.I should like the MinisterforCustoms andExcise(SenatorHenty) to give me some information on the effectivenessof the campaignthat is being waged against tuberculosis. As he has said, this item relates to the extra capitalexpenditure incurred by the States since the base year, some ten or eleven years ago. The Commonwealthreimburses the States their expenditure forthis purpose. I take it that payments tosufferers from tuberculosis and, doubtless,payments in respect oftheir maintenance, aremadefrom the National Welfare Fund.

I now find it necessary to turn from page 144, on which Division No. 811 appears, to page 68. This illustrates the difficulty of dealing with the proposed votes out of order. We have to swing from one to another. I refer now to the proposed vote for the Department of Immigration. At page 68, the commitments in respect of migration offices in the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Greece and Austria are specified separately. Then, under Division No. 395, there is a proposed vote of £74,900 for other overseas posts, ls the Minister in a position to inform the committee what those other posts are, and the proposed allocation for each of them?

I swing now to page 101 where, under Division No. 642, the first ten sub-items of Item 1 - Assisted Migration - refer to proposed votes in relation to assistance to British, Maltese, non-British, German, Dutch, Italian, Austrian, Greek and Danish migration. Can the Minister say whether the financial arrangements made for assisted passages differ as between the various countries, or whether there is a common provision for all of them?

Senator HENTY:
Minister for Customs and Excise · Tasmania · LP

– I shall deal first with the questions that have been raised by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna). He asked me about the success of the tuberculosis eradication campaign. Although it bad been known that the eradication of tuberculosis would take many years to accomplish, there are already signs that the effort and the money devoted to the campaign are beginning to yield results. There has been a dramatic fall in the death rate from 24.8 deaths per 100,000 of population in 1949 to 5.4 per 100,000 in 1958. The number of new cases of tuberculosis discovered has declined each year since 1953, although there has been no relaxation - in fact, there has been an intensification - of the case-finding programme.

The number of persons receiving tuberculosis allowances has fallen substantially since the peak was reached in 1952. This has not been brought about by any alteration of conditions governing the payment of the allowance, but solely because there are fewer persons with pulmonary tuberculosis who are in need of financial assistance.

Turning to the number of notifications of tuberculosis in Australia, honorable senators will be interested to learn that the number was 3,607 in 1948, and 3,948 in 1958. In one year in the intervening period the number reached almost 5,000. With the concurrence of honorable senators, I incorporate the following table in “ Hansard “-

I turn now to the major facilities that have been provided, or are being provided, in the States under the Tuberculosis Act 1948. In addition to many X-ray units and other minor capital items, the major facilities that have been, or are being, provided with Commonwealth money in the various States are as follows: In New South Wales, 100 beds at the Royal North Shore Hospital; 100 beds at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; 102 beds at St. Vincent’s Hospital; 28 beds at the Royal Alexandra Hospital for Children; 40 beds at the Lidcombe State Hospital and Home; 100 beds at the Princess Julianna Hospital at Turramurra; a 120-bed chest hospital at North Ryde for tuberculosis mental patients; tuberculosis wards - a total of 73 beds - at Canterbury, St. George, Parramatta and Manly Hospitals; tuberculosis wards - a total of 93 beds - at Goulburn, Tamworth, Grafton, Lismore, Wagga Wagga, Dubbo and Albury Hospitals; and a new clinic with twenty diagnostic beds in Sydney for the Anti-Tuberculosis Association of New South Wales.

In Queensland, the list is as follows: A 566-bed chest hospital at Chermside, Brisbane; 48-bed chest wings at Cairns, Townsville, Rockhampton and Toowoomba Hospitals; a 100-bed chest hospital at Thursday Island for tuberculous natives, together with a hostel and an out-patients’ department; a 40-bed chest wing at Cherbourg Hospital for tuberculous natives; a 74-bed chest unit for tuberculous patients at the

Toowoomba Mental Hospital, and a central chest clinic and a tuberculosis laboratory in Brisbane. In Western Australia, there have been provided a 200-bed chest hospital at Perth, a 78-bed chest hospital at Claremont for tuberculous mental patients; a chest clinic at Fremantle; a preventorium at Perth for children from tuberculous households; and a tuberculosis laboratory.

In Victoria, a head-quarters has been provided in Melbourne for the State’s mass X-ray division, known as Milton House. Hundreds of thousands of pounds have been expended on the completion and improvement of the State’s big sanatoria at Heatherton and Gresswell, on improvements at the Austin Hospital, and on tuberculosis chalets in country centres. Forty beds have been provided at Mont Park Mental Hospital.

In South Australia, there have been provided ten new tuberculosis beds at Kalyra Sanatorium in Adelaide; 30 beds for males at Parkside Mental Hospital, and 40 beds for females at Northfield Mental Hospital for tuberculous mental patients; 25 beds for tuberculous children at the Adelaide Children’s Hospital; and a central chest clinic in Adelaide.

In Tasmania, the list is: 24 beds at the Tasmanian Chest Hospital in Hobart; 32 beds at the Northern Chest Hospital near Launceston; and chest clinics at Launceston, Devonport, and the Royal Hobart Hospital. I think Senator McKenna will agree that that is a comprehensive answer to the question he raised.

Senator McKenna:

– Yes.

Senator Armstrong:

– Can the Minister furnish information in relation to “ other overseas posts “ under Division No. 395?

Senator HENTY:

– The “other overseas posts ‘’ referred to under that division are in Scandinavia, Switzerland and Hong Kong. The total expenditure in Scandinavia is £61,700, in Switzerland, £4,200 and Hong Kong, £9,000- a total of £74,900.

Senator Armstrong:

– What about Ireland? Is there a post there?

Senator HENTY:

– I have referred to the posts under the item mentioned by Senator McKenna. There is a post in Ireland, which is controlled by the Department of External Affairs. Senator McKenna asked about passenger contributions. For British immi grants the contribution is £145 Australian for each person. The amount for generally assisted passengers on steamers is £71 8s. 6d. Australian for each person. For Maltese immigrants the charge is £37 10s. for each person, and for German, Italian, Austrian, Greek and Danish immigrants, as well as for refugees, it is approximately 100 American dollars.

Senator ORMONDE:
New South Wales

– I wish to refer to the Department of Health.

The CHAIRMAN (Senator the Hon. A. D. Reid). - Order! We have dealt with the Department of Health. The only matter to which the honorable senator may refer is the reimbursement of capital expenditure by State governments on tuberculosis, as provided for in Division No. 811.

Senator ORMONDE:

– I wish to refer to pneumonoconiosis, which could develop into tuberculosis. Pneumonoconiosis is a disease contracted by mine workers as the result of dust getting into their lungs. I attended a meeting of mine workers on the south coast of New South Wales recently and found that the workers there were very pleased at the fact that pneumonoconiosis has been almost completely wiped out of the coal-mining industry. This achievement is the result of a highly developed medical attack on the disease in the industry; but the miners now feel that there has been a slackening in control. For instance, they say that the periodical medical examinations conducted in the south coast mines are being delayed due to shortage of medical staff. Will the Minister use his influence to see that this position is rectified?

Senator HENTY:
Minister for Customs and Excise · Tasmania · LP

– Although we are dealing with Division No. 811, which relates to the reimbursement of capital expenditure by State governments on tuberculosis, I shall go outside that matter for a moment and say that if miners who are suffering from a disease caused by the dusting of their lungs develop tuberculosis they will receive the normal benefits applicable to tuberculosis sufferers.

Senator BENN:
Queensland

– I refer to Division No. 642 relating to the Department of Immigration. Under the heading “Assisted Migration”, there is provision for; “British- migration”,. “ General Assisted. Passage Scheme,, British (other than United Kingdom), and Irish.”,, “ Maltese migration-“,, and “ General Assisted- Passage Scheme, non-Brtiish “.. I do not see any reference to those migrants who. are brought here; though-very rarely, from, behind the iron curtain. At the present time, I know of people in Australia who are anxious to bring out from Poland those 6$ their- relatives- who- are still in. that country. Naturally, the relatives living in Poland are anxious to come tb’ Australia.

On taking, up the matter with the Department of Immigration I have ascertained that an* arrangement has. been made with the. governments concerned to- allow those- people to- come to- Australia provided they can pay their own? fares. In the majority of cases, the. prospective immigrants are unable to do. that In such cases, the relatives living in Australia are asked to’ make* substantial’ contributions towards the cost of the passage of the prospective immigrants. These people find’ it extremely difficult’ to provide. £700- or £800. for fares from Poland to Australia. I have in mindone case relating tff a father; mother’ and’ three’ children Who are living in Poland^, but there is no provision for giving such people financial assistance to come out here.. No provision: is made’ for’ it in Division No. 642, and1 although I’ know it is too late to make any alteration now, I do’ ask the Minister to note my remarks. Perhaps next year some small sum’ such’ as £3,000 or £4,000’ might be placed’ in the Estimates for the purpose of giving* financial’ assistance to’ those people living’ in’ Poland and some of the other’ countries behind the iron curtain- who. wish tor come: to- Australia.

Senator ARMSTRONG:
New1 South’ Walts

-: - r hope’ the Minister realizes’ that’, Because’ of the motion agreed to* by the’ Senate’ last night, several honorablesenators1 on the Government side feel that they should: not speak tb- the particular estimates under discussion, and for thai1 reason- the Senate- is losing” the value of their contributions

I notice’ that the Department of Immigration has as yet made no provision for the setting up of a post in- Spain,, a< country from which we are drawing a- few hundred immigrants. This is the third; year in. which-

Spain, has been; one. of the, sources, of immigrants tor Australia-. In the first year,, we. drew about, 500, immigrants, from Spain,, in- the second- year another 500,. and in the. current- year, we are. planning; to’ draw 1,000 from that country. As - this is. a> new- country to enter- our- immigration- field, it provides another choice for- the department and leads to a further, diversification! of the nationalities entering Australia. For that reason, it’ is- important that a post be set up in Spain.

Spain fs a country which, for some reason, is not visited much by Australians and, for that reason, Australians- lack a sound- knowledge of the types available in that country. I am afraid’ that’ too many Australian people still’ associate the Spanish with the Moors. Actually, I think it was about the year 1300’ when Isabella and Ferdinand expelled’ the Moors from Spain.

During- my visit to1 Spain* last year, I’ was- impressed” with> the types available in that country^ not- only’ in’ the- north where the people are fair and’ blonde, but also in the south. As all honorable senators know, it is important that incur immigration planning; we seek- toattract skilled labour to- this- country. I> saw in Spain what’ the Spaniards call “ universities of labour “, or technical, colleges, of a standard’ higher than I, have seen anywhere else, in, the world. I inspected- one> of these labour colleges at- Cordoba. I believe there are. three others in Spain-. Neither of the universities in Sydney compares with them in regard- tor the. standard’ of equipment available. At the university I inspected there were three magnificent swimming pools and excellent playing- fields, while the” whole establishment covered’ hundreds’ of acres:. But more important; the type of workshop that was< available, for the training of the young men ensured that most, expert, technicians were turned out. Unfortunately, at the moment there is difficulty in. finding employment for such, people in- Spain. The normal, migration for Spaniards is to South America, but for various reasons’ that has been curtailed in the last few years’. So, there is a pool’ of highly trained young, men and- women available in Spain, for migration-.

The point- B put- to- the Minister concernsthe fact that at- the moment, migration- from Spain is handled, from, the- Rome office of the Department- of Immigration-. I should- not think the Minister would have available information to indicate how much of the proposed vote of £194,800 for the activities of the department in Italy is to be applied to Spain, but if he could obtain the information I would be grateful. There is in Spain the possibility of a continuing volume of migration to this country. Unless we have a man on the spot all the time 1° am afraid we shall fall into the errors we made when we first had migration from Italy. In those days, we depended a great deal on people other than the departmental officers. For instance, we had to accept medical reports from Italians, with the result that a great many people came to Australia who might still be in Italy had the position been different. Of course, that problem has now been solved. We have now a very strong team in Italy, and everything there is going according to plan. The work of the Australian organization in Italy is of the highest calibre.

I think it is important to- set up a post in Madrid to tap this source and to make sure that the people selected are’ the kind of people that we need’. I do- not think we need to. spend a lot of money in this respect. When we look at some of the: posts overseas, we see that they are staffed very sparsely and do not cost a great deal to maintain. We cannot, of course, adopt the position at the Hong Kong post for purposes of comparison, because I suppose a lot of the costs in connexion with that post are borne by the Department of Trade. The Department of Immigration may not be charged as much as it might be charged if it had an office entirely to itself. The proposed vote for the department’s activities in Scandinavia covers a number of countries. Although the post is in Copenhagen, frequent visits are made to Sweden, Finland and other countries which have been serving as a source of very good migrants. Having spent three years in exploring the possibilities in Spain, as it were, it is important that we should now set up an office in that country and give one or more departmental officers complete responsibility for handling the migration of Spaniards to this country.

Taking the matter a step further, are we satisfied that we are getting all the migrants’ that we could get? The proposed intake for this year has been increased to 125,000, but I take it that the net intake will bc only about 70,000 or 80,000 at most. The reason for that is that the gross intake figure includes people who leave Australia to go overseas for twelve months or more and who come back here. However, the fact is that a surprising number of people da not come back. Every day; we read of Australian graduates’, for instance,, who want to undertake post-graduate courses, overseas for a year or two, going overseas. Many of them marry and settle down in other countries, and never come back to Australia. I think that the figure that should be taken as a guide is the net migration figure, not the gross figure, because that is misleading. The department aims at a target every year, and I am afraid that there is sometimes a little bit of scurrying at the end of the year to get the numbers, up. In my opinion, the net migrant intake of 70,000 or 80,000 is not sufficient, having regard to the present rate of growth of our country. I do not think, any honorable senator is- in doubt about my views on immigration. I believe that immigration is our lifeblood. We have proved that we. can absorb large numbers of migrants, and the migrants have proved that they can do a good job in helping, to develop this country. The Government should base Its. immigration policy on the net gain to Australia rather than on the gross figures.

I ask the Minister to bring to the notice of his colleague the important matter of the need to set up an office in Spain. Unfortunately, the Minister for’ Immigration, on his trip overseas last year, was not able to go to Spain himself,, and a. lot of other people who have tried to go there, for some reason or other have not got. there. As I have said; it is only necessary to visit various areas of Spain to realize what tremendous reservoirs there are of good-type people available for migration..

There is one other matter that I wish to bring to the notice of the Minister. At the conclusion of the war there were in this country rather large numbers of Asian people who were, strictly speaking, prohibited immigrants. However, because of the circumstances that existed at the time, or for other reasons,, they were allowed to stay here. One of the conditions on which they were allowed to stay was that their wives and families: would not be permitted to join them for fifteen years. That was a very severe punishment to impose. Of course, the problem becomes less acute with every year that passes. It was a problem that arose directly from the difficulties and the turmoil of war. I think that the Minister might consider the matter now. If he saw fit to reduce the term to ten years, every one concerned would be covered, and the problem would be solved in a Christian and merciful way.

The matter that I now propose to raise has perhaps more to do with the Colombo Plan than with immigration. It relates to Asian students who come to this country to study. However, if such students do not return to their countries, responsibility devolves on the Department of Immigration. Unfortunately, there is a very serious problem in regard to housing these students. I wonder whether the Department of Immigration could combine with the Department of External Affairs for the purposes of providing suitable hostels near the great universities of Australia at which the Asian students are studying, so that they might be properly accommodated. I believe that the establishment of such hostels would promote better understanding between Australia and the countries from which the students come. The students would go back happier if they could live under such conditions while studying here, instead of trying to battle along in “diggings” and the generally unsatisfactory conditions under which so many people are living. Something like this would be a valuable step indeed.

Senator BUTTFIELD:
South Australia

– I desire to refer to Division No. 642, sub-division 4 - Publicity. At the outset, I reply to Senator Armstrong who said that Government senators should not occupy time by speaking on these Estimates, by saying that I am going to say something about them. I am pleased to note that the vote for migration publicity has risen by £23,000 to £150,000, but I still feel that we should urge the Minister to increase the appropriation for publicity. I think that for too long we have all been reluctant to expend enough money on migration publicity. In the field of immigration we have a tremendous job, and more publicity is needed. It is becoming increasingly difficult to attract to Australia the right type of immigrant, and we also have to keep in mind that our own people need to be kept aware of what is going on.

I come now to the remarks of Senator Armstrong concerning our restricted immigration policy. As I have said, it was easier immediately after the war to get migrants from overseas. Now, with conditions improving in Europe, it is becoming increasingly difficult to get them. If we are to keep up our present rate of immigration - I should like to see the rate increased - we must spend more money on publicity in Europe to see that the right kind of people are given the necessary information. We must constantly put before them the truth concerning conditions prevailing in Australia, and if we want our own people to accept our immigration policy, as we do, we must spend money at home in such ways as assisting the Immigration Advisory Council, the Immigration Planning Council, the Citizenship Convention, and so on. It was distressing to me to find recently that the press in one State had attacked the Immigration Advisory Council when it was endeavouring to inform the people of that State about assimilation needs.

The third point on which I propose to speak briefly is our policy concerning Asians, to which Senator Armstrong referred. We have read a great deal on this subject in the press of late, largely because we have had so many people here from overseas countries in connexion with meetings of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. This subject was constantly referred to, and the general trend of such remarks was that we were not doing all we might do for the Asian people. With that view I do not agree at all. I think we are doing a tremendous amount, but we are not spending sufficient money in informing our own people and people overseas how good our policy is. With great respect to Senator Armstrong, I think he is one who needs to be informed on our policy. I do not think that he is correct in saying that the wives of Asians cannot come here until after the expiry of fifteen years. The fact is that the spouse of any Australian citizen, from whatever country he or she comes, can come to Australia and become naturalized very soon. However, I do find as I move about Australia, that very large numbers of its people have no idea of what our policy in this matter is. They do not know that we have many categories under which Asian people can come here, live amongst us, and become naturalized.

We could spend a great deal more on publicity that would tell our people of these categories, and that we are bringing more people from Asian countries into Australia than from some countries to which quotas apply. We hear a great deal of what 1 can only describe as emotional talk from various groups about establishing quotas for Asians. As I have said, we are doing more in this held than we would do under a quota system; we are bringing in more than that system would provide for. And so I say, let us tell the people how good our policy is, and the number of categories that we have under which people from other countries can come in. Having just been to a number of Asian countries, I can say that we also need to tell the people of those countries how good our policy is. When in Asian countries one is frequently asked why Australia does not allow more Asian people to live in Australia. When the situation is explained to them, and when in particular we tell them that our immigration policy is based on economic grounds, and on the prospect of the successful assimilation of immigrants, their attitude changes. We must make it clear to them that we do not want to bring to this country people who would be unable to find employment here, or those who would find it difficult or impossible to fit in to our social and economic pattern. We must explain to them that we fear that cheap labour would upset our economic stability. Our immigration policy is largely based on the prospect of successful assimilation, and the ability of immigrants to find suitable employment. There are many Asian people in Australia whom we have accepted readily because of their ability to fit into our community life. Australia has no colour prejudice. I am certain of that. I say in conclusion that we ought to keep up our policy of allowing them to come in where they can be assimilated, and also we should tell our people more about our policy. I hope that the Minister will be able to persuade his colleagues to increase the vote for migration publicity next year.

Senator HENTY:
Minister for Customs and Excise · Tasmania · LP

– I rise to answer some of the matters brought forward by honorable senators.

Senator O’Byrne:

– Are we to be allowed time off for the period of the Minister’s speech?

Senator HENTY:

– There has been a good deal of irrelevant talk, but I now propose to answer some of the questions relating to the work of the department. I shall answer those honorable senators who have asked specific questions.

Senator Benn referred to people living behind the iron curtain. All our immigration agreements are bilateral agreements, and therefore Australia has no agreement with countries behind the iron curtain. However, a number of voluntary organizations are active in this field and are doing good work without charge to the Government.

Senator Armstrong referred to the position relating to immigrants from Spain. The number of persons who come to Australia from Spain is not sufficiently large to justify setting up an immigration office in that country. Those who come from Spain are mostly rural workers, but that is not true of all of them. One immigrant from Spain is a barber in Canberra. He sometimes cuts my hair, and does a good job.

Senator Armstrong:

– Can the Minister say how the money is split up?

Senator HENTY:

– I have not the breakup before me. I should imagine the cost of a visiting team to Spain would be included, but as I have said, the number of immigrants coming from Spain does not justify the setting up of an agency in that country. I add that all the comments of honorable senators will be placed before the Minister for Immigration (Mr. Downer) in due course. All I am doing now is to give an on-the-spot answer to the points raised.

Senator O’BYRNE:
Tasmania

– I am concerned about the ultimate outcome of our immigration policy. It is my view that no immigration policy can be regarded as successful until the people who come here from other countries, generally referred to as new Australians, become naturalized Australian citizens. I am somewhat alarmed at the relatively small number of new Australians who are becoming naturalized Australian subjects.

Senator Henty:

– Would the honorable senator make naturalization compulsory?

Senator O’BYRNE:

– I have risen to ask the reason why these people appear to be unwilling to accept the advantages of Australian citizenship.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Order! The time allotted for the consideration of the .group of departments under the control of the Minister for Customs and Excise has expired.

Proposed votes agreed to.

Department of the Navy.

Proposed Vote, £42,612,000

Attorney-General’s Department

Proposed Vote, £2,011,000

Miscellaneous Services - Attorney-General’s Department

Proposed Vote, £29,500

Department of Labour and National Service

Proposed Vote, £2,336,000

Administration of National Service Act

Proposed Vote, £175,000

Post Discharge Re-settlement Training.

Proposed Vote, £1,000

Department of Primary Industry

Proposed Vote, £1,860,000

Miscellaneous Services - Department of Primary Industry

Proposed Vote, £735,000

Bounties and Subsidies

Proposed Vote, £13,500,000. (Ordered to be considered together.)

Senator BROWN:
Queensland

.- The Department of the Navy is under the control of Senator Gorton, who has in the past shown a keen interest in it. I do not know whether the work of the department has become intensified since the late Mr. Archie Cameron was Minister for the Navy, but I remember meeting Mr. Cameron in Queensland on one occasion, when he told me he had very little to do as Minister for the Navy. That statement was backed up by tory writers, such as Harold Cox. Maybe times have changed, and the present Minister is fully and completely occupied in the department. That gives him an opportunity to ascertain the answers to questions asked in the Senate. He has courteously answered such questions, until yesterday when he fell from grace in answering a question or two that 1 posed to him with regard to submarines. He was rather facetious in a kindergarten sort of way, and he raised a laugh, which was very satisfactory to honorable senators opposite who support him. I was sorry that the Minister did not answer me properly, because the matter of defence is very serious. I should say it was the most serious matter in which every member of this National Parliament should take the keenest interest.

Outside the Parliament, there is a colossal indifference to defence. The situation is clouded as to defence measures that we should take. Various Ministers and service leaders seem to have a different approach to the question. Much of this is due, I suppose, to jealousy amongst the services. In America, such jealousy was so intense that some eighteen months ago Mr. Eisenhower, in a public speech, called’ the service leaders tb order and said that it had to end. The same intensity of feeling is not displayed in Australia, but nevertheless there is jealousy amongst the various services. However, I do not want’ to continue on that tack. It behoves every one, including the Minister, to approach this question from a patriotic angle with the idea of determining the best form of defence. There is no doubt that because of our geographical situation and our weakness in population we would be up against it in the event of an outbreak of war.

A certain amount of difficulty is experienced in dealing with these votes, as lt is very hard to determine exactly what is covered by various items. For instance, Division No. 481 covers naval construction. It is proposed that an amount of £5,587,000 be applied to this purpose. This is less than the amount voted last year, but more than the expenditure last year, which was £5,219,937. Under Division No. 482, which relates to the purchase of aircraft and aero engines, no appropriation is proposed. I should like to know the reason for that. We are informed by critics of the Navy, who are. not necessarily unpatriotic, that many naval aircraft are- obsolete and that we should be purchasing: modern replacements. Division No. 480’ covers repair and other charges in relation to aircraft and aero engines. I should like to- know how many helicopters we have, because it is contended! that these aircraft are splendid spotters of submarines. If- has been stated from time to- time that we have only a few helicopters. On the. last occasion, I think, we; were toto that we had* five.

Senator Armstrong:

– How many of them were working?

Senator BROWN:

– Only one of them, according, to the press, was in working, order at that time. Yesterday the Minister chided me, saying that I must not believe everything I read in the press.. I certainly do not. I do not believe all that Ministers tell me, because they, too, make mistakes sometimes. I should! like to know how many up-to-date helicopters we have,, and whether those that we hare are really serviceable.

We have a number of naval ships; An answer that. I was. given to a question recently makes a fine shaving in. regard to the number of naval vessels we have, but upon, analysis we find) that many of these are in mothballs, and, according to some writers on naval tactics, many are obsolete and worthless. We- should approach this matter in a patriotic way and not in an effort to’ gain political advantage. I do not seek any political advantage from it. We must ask ourselves whether our Navy Is really modem, whether it is serving its purpose, and whether we should ask the country to expend more money on bringing the Navy npi to date. Mr. Bryant, who is the honorable member for Wills in another place, asked the Minister for the Navy several questions, a number of which were answered. He asked -

Is. the aircraft carrier H.M.A.S. “ Melbourne “ to be withdrawn from commission when its present aircraft become obsolete?

The Minister replied” -

This- is a matter of Government policy of the kind on which it is- not practice to supp]/ answers to questions:

Mr; Bryant asked, further

When is this likely to occur and with what vessel wm it be replaced?

The Minister, in a kindergarten manner, replied -

See the answer to 3 above.

Mr. Bryants fifth question was ; ls’ provision being’ made for the Royal Australian Navy to- acquire, more- submarines to replace certain surface, craft;. i? ses., how many submarines are to. be purchased and what surface craft will be subsequently replaced?

The Minister replied -

See< the answer to 3 above.

Those were no answers at all. Yesterday, fit all earnestness and with- a- desire to elicit information, I asked whether or not. the Government would bring our defence- forces up to date by obtaining certain submarines. The press, which, after’ all; gets a good deal of information and often acts as* a prod ia the Sank of the Government to make it do the right thing, had stated that some submarines were to be obtained. I asked whether, the purchase of six submarines was contemplated1, and whether these had been discarded by Great Britain because they were obsolete? I felt that it would be better to spend’ a few more millions’ and buy uptodate vessels, although T realized, of course, that even obsolete submarines might well be suitable for training purposes; We are ford that the Australian sailor makes one of the best submariners in the world. On occasions we have had here British submarines, in which our men have- trained. The Government could! well purchase these submarines, for such ai purpose.

Senator Hannan:

– Why did not the honorable senator take part in this year’s “Operation- Shop Window”, and see the modern ships of the Navy?

Senates BROWN. - Does the honorable senator really believe that if I took part in that operation, and enjoyed the splendid hospitality of the Navy - I atn told that there was no; shortage of Scotch - I would know all there was to know about: this, matter? I do not set myself up as one who understands itr but I do read a great deal, and: I cannot help noting the consideredopinion of some of the greatest fighters and leaders in the world - in the Australian Navy, in the British Navy and, if you like, in the Russian Navy - that the submarine is the weapon of to-day, and will render obsolete the ordinary surface ships that we have used in the past. It was not necessary for me to- go along and drink a few whiskies while taking part in “Operation Shop Window”. What a childish, stupid interjection that was;

I am trying to be serious about what is a serious matter for Australia. Government supporters are laughing and throwing off at the Opposition, but we are trying to find out whether the Royal Australian Navy is as efficient as it should be, or as it could be if the Government were willing to spend a few more millions upon it instead of offering reduced taxation to those who do not need such a reduction. The Budget provided for an income tax reduction of more than £20,000,000. A friend of mine told me the other day that for him the reduction was equivalent to a gift of a packet of cigarettes. For others, it was worth thousands. That £20,000,000 was, perhaps, needed for the defence of this country, for the purchase of modern submarines and other vessels that are capable of really defending Australia. It is unfortunate that vessels of the “ Yarra “ class - I think that is the name - are not fast enough to catch modern submarines. I am told that such submarines are speedier than the fastest surface naval vessels that we have to-day. If that is so, we must put on our thinking caps and decide what we must do about it.

It is always difficult to discuss the estimates for the Navy because we do not know the Government’s policy - which has never been stated fully and frankly to the people. A few years ago we had Mr. Menzies telling us that there was a danger of war, but the other day Senator Sir Walter Cooper read us a statement, given to him by a Minister in another place, which sought to convince us that there was no need to fear the onset of a nuclear war. There is a division of opinion as to that. The Government is just skating along, and refusing to take the public into its confidence by announcing its policy.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Anderson:
NEW SOUTH WALES

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

Senator KENDALL:
Queensland

– I refer to Division No. 475. - Department of the Navy - General Services, and especially to item 10, “ Minor building maintenance and works, £21,000”. Indeed, there are a number of divisions under which I could speak. I have had a long association with the Navy. I have, also, a great admiration for the work that is proceeding in Canberra. Indeed, these days I think of Canberra as my second home. Accordingly, I am always interested in going around and seeing what is being done. When I heard that an Admiralty House had been built, I made tracks in that direction, in order to have a look at it. 1 found my way all right to the end of Mugga Way but then encountered what could only be called a sea of mud. In fact, I felt like calling, “ Away, sea boat’s crew”, when I saw it. I proceeded for about 300 yards and then saw what looked like a fibro residence of about ten squares with a flagstaff in front and a notice stating that it was Admiralty House. I could not believe my eyes. It was almost unbelievable that a senior officer - the Chief of the Naval Staff of this country - should be put into a poky little place like that, surrounded by a sea of mud.

From inquiries that I made afterwards - though not from Admiral Burrell - I learnt that it was so small inside that around the wall of the dining room there was what, at sea, we would call a rubbing piece, so that when guests put their chairs back after finishing their dinner they would not push them through the plaster of the wall. I bring this matter to the notice of the Minister for the Navy (Senator Gorton), although perhaps it has something to do with the Minister for the Interior (Mr. Freeth) also. I consider it disgraceful that the senior naval officer in Canberra, indeed, in Australia, should be housed in such a place as that. There are, just being finished, plenty of homes where he could have been placed until at least the road to his residence was sealed. I had great difficulty in even turning my car around to get back to Mugga Way. I make these few remarks in the hope that something will be done.

I wish now to refer to Division No. 638 - Department of Primary Industry - and in particular, to item 6, “ Pearl shell surveys, £24,000”, and item 20, “International Whaling Commission - Contribution, £260”. First, I should like to mention the fishing industries, which are the responsibility of the department. I begin by congratulating the department on having, at long last, purchased a trawler which will be of some value in fisheries surveys. The vessel was called “ Princess Elizabeth “. but one reads that, because of her transfer to the Australian register, she will have to be given a new name. That is not the case at all. If there is no other ship called the “ Princess Elizabeth “ on the register, she may retain that name, which I consider a very good one. I should like to find out under what regulation such a change has been considered necessary.

A fisheries trust fund of some £880,000 was set up after the sale of the Australian Whaling Commission. From the records, I find that a prawn survey took £13,000, that a barracouta survey took £12,000, that the buying of this vessel took £150,000, and that a crayfish survey cost about £175,000. This left a balance of £550,000. I point out that not one penny has been expended on long-term loans to fishermen - one of the main purposes for which the trust fund was established. Similar provision is made in other countries. I notice that in Great Britain over the past year £19,000,000 has been spent in long-term loans to fishermen to use for re-engining, docking, new building, repairs and that type of thing, while in the United States the amount spent was 10,000,000 dollars. We certainly might not be able to compete with those nations, but we should spend something. There is not one single item under this heading where a long-term loan of any description has been made to fishermen who are sadly in need.

Four or five months ago we had in Queensland a converted American yacht named the “ Rican Star “. Her hull was not in very good condition, but she had passed survey. She was fitted with two sets of refrigerating machinery so that if one set broke down the other one would be all right; and she could carry 480 tons of fish in her refrigerated holds. She was intended to be used as a mother ship for prawners in Hervey Bay. She would have been an ideal ship, but the young chap who had bought her ran out of money. The creditors held a lien on the ship, and she was not allowed to leave port. I applied for him, or really for the company, to the committee which was set up to deal with this business. I asked the committee to do something because this vessel could have been of extreme value to the prawners. A refrigerated vessel such as this can go out with 30 or 40 prawners. They can bring their prawns to the mother ship which can stay out for possibly a week until she has 400 or 500 tons of prawns aboard. She can then bring them into port. Most of our prawners are small in size, slow in speed and they lack refrigeration. They have to make frequent trips to discharge the prawns which they catch.

I very strongly suggest to the Minister that he look at what the council is doing because so far every request for assistance has been rejected. One of the primary reasons for its being set up - I had a lot to do with it at the time - was to assist our fishermen in addition to carrying out surveys. So far nobody has obtained any assistance at all. I ask the Minister most sincerely to have a really good look at this matter to see whether something cannot be done to help these men. Many of them are honestly in need. They could be put back into the ranks of those who are earning good dollars for Australia and thus help us with our balance of payments problem.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– In order to keep the debate within bounds I think I should answer specific questions at fairly regular intervals. The Department of the Navy is one of four separate departments that are now being dealt with. Senator Brown asked about Division No. 481 - Naval Construction - which covers money allocated for the continuing construction of the four type- 12 frigates which are in various stages of construction in various shipyards. He also asked, in connexion with Division No. 482, covering aircraft and aero-engines, why no allocation has been made this year although an allocation was made last year. The reason is that sufficient aircraft and aero-engines for the lighter type aircraft were purchased originally and the final payment has now been made.

A question was also asked about helicopters possessed by the Navy. They are the Bristol Sycamore helicopters. In answer to the question as to whether they are up-to-date and capable of doing the job for which they were purchased, somebody has first to define the job they are designed for. I do not know what Senator Brown had in mind. These are light helicopters and are used for rescue purposes and for picking up anybody who has had the misfortune to hit the sea from an aircraft carrier. They are not equipped, and not designed to be equipped, -with the heavy anti-submarine equipment which heavier helicopters have, but they are suitable for the job for which they were bought. They are modern helicopters capable of doing what is required of them.

Senator Armstrong:

– How many of them are there?

Senator GORTON:

– Roughly half a dozen.

Senator Armstrong:

– How many of them ure at .present in service?

Senator GORTON:

– Anybody who )knows anything about aircraft knows that you cannot say how many are in service at any given moment. They are all obviously designed to toe overhauled after a given number of flying hours. There are 20-hour inspections, 50-hour inspections and 1’00-hour inspections. They undergo these inspections at different times, and when they reach the mileage at which they have to be inspected they are naturally out of the air while those inspections are being carried out. They are all, except for this inspection procedure or the repairs of anything that goes wrong inside the inspection times, able to be used. The honorable senator may have had in mind an occasion some time ago when this class of helicopter was grounded for a while owing to an accident to a British helicopter of the same class in Singapore. That helicopter required some inspection of the rotor blades, or the equipment which holds the rotor blades, but the period of grounding has now passed and the helicopters aTe airworthy again.

Senator Kendall referred to Admiralty House at Canberra. I think I should say at the outset that that is not a naval house at all. The Navy does not own it although it is a house built for the chief-of-staff according to a design approved by all the chiefs-of staff some years ago when these houses were projected. The chiefs-of-staff were asked what kind of houses they wanted, the amount of rent they were prepared to pay and they settled for houses of this kind. It was a matter, of course, entirely for the Department of the Interior and for the chiefs-of-staff. My sole point is that the Navy is not in any way concerned with the house in question or the provision of it.

Senator Armstrong:

– Is the Admiral happy .about it?

Senator GORTON:

– I am only answering questions on behalf of the Department of the Navy. I do not propose to answer questions dealing with the affairs of individual officers because I do not know of those matters; and if I did know, this would not be the place to answer such questions. In regard to the questions asked by Senator Kendall about primary products I shall endeavour to obtain .that information for him.

Senator COOKE:
Western Australia

– I refer to Division No. 474 which relates to civil personnel in naval offices and establishments. It is anticipated that in 1959-60 there will be a smaller number of officers and general seamen, but the number of petty officers and seamen will increase slightly. I wish to ask the Minister a question about the disposition of that personnel. Where are they located? I am particularly interested about those located in Western Australia. I should also like to know how many have been transferred in recent times to Canberra on the administrative side of the Navy. What is the anticipated number of naval personnel to be transferred to Canberra? Is the Government in a position to say what will be the number of personnel maintained in Canberra operating away from their bases?

Senator Gorton:

– You are concerned with petty officers and seamen?

Senator COOKE:

– I should like to get the figures for both if I could. I wish also to make a submission in relation to naval construction and naval bases. For some considerable time the view has been held by informed persons that some type of naval base should be established in Western Australia. I believe that certain sites have been surveyed and considered by the Navy. It is quite obvious that during the last war Western Australia was regarded as being strategically located for the repair of submarines belonging to the United States of America and other nations. I urge the Minister for the Navy (Senator Gorton) to give quick consideration to the provision of anaval basein Western Australia.I think it ismore necessary now thanever before fora baseto be provided there. It will be recalled that, duringtheearly stagesof the last war, we heard a lot about the strength of the naval base at Singapore, whichwas situated between Australia and ourneighbours in South-East Asia. Subsequent events proved that that base was not as strongand as well supported as we had been led to believe, although we had received repeated assurances on the matter from the Government. Following the fall of Singapore,a temporary naval repair service was established at the port of Albany, to provide emergency service only, and other facilitieswereprovided atFremantle. Needlesstosay, in those circumstanceswe were notableto provide anything likethe highdegreeofservice that would havebeen possibleifthere had beena properly equippednavalbase in WesternAustralia. Onlybythe graceofGod and,probably, by a fewerrorsonthepartofourenemies, werewesavedfromfinding ourselvesin a mostserious position.I shouldlikethe Ministertoinformme, ifhecan,whether the Government,and particularlythe DepartmentoftheNavy, favoursthe expenditureofmoneyin WesternAustralia to provide a navalbase there.If this course is not favoured, willconsideration be giventothe establishment of machineryto effect a quick conversion from a : peacetime set-up toa defence set-up in time of war?

I should likethe Minister to inform me, also, of the intentions of theDepar tment of the Navy inrelation to the installations at Leeuwin in Western Australia. I understand that repairs have been undertaken.Of course, statements have been made on the matterbypeople who are only halfinformed. I do not feel that I am as well informed on it as I should like to be.

Ishould like to ask the Minister to furnish the committee with details of all “proposed expenditure on navalworks inWestern Australia. BoththeAir Force and the Army are well established in thatState, but the naval establishment seemstobeweak.It is soweak, indeed, that one could be pardonedfor saying that it appears that the Navy hasnoreal interest there. Turning to thevery big expenditure ontheDefence Services -

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

– Order! Thehonorable senator shouldconfine hisremarksto theproposed vote for the Department of the Navy.Hemay not, at this stage, deal withall theDefence Services.

Senator COOKE:

– At the outset,Isaid that £155,000,000is beingprovided for defence purposes, ofwhich £42,000,000 is being allocatedto theNavy.I submitthat this hugeexpenditure shouldbe spread evenly throughout Australia. If anyexpenditureshouldbespread evenlythroughout this country, in order to preservebalance in our economy, Isubmit that itshouldbethe expenditure on defence.Ishould likethe Ministerto informmeofthenames of any navalvessels atLeeuwin.

I turn now to Division No. 473 - Royal Australian Naval Reserves. Iknow that a lotof young fellowsinWestern Australia whoare eager to join theNaval Reserve havebeen told thatthat is notopen to them, and that they shouldgo into the AirForce orthe Army.Many young fellows who wished to undertake training in the Naval Reserve are very disappointed. I should be glad tobe informed of the number of persons trainedby the Royal Australian Naval Reserve who are liabletobe called up by the Navy. Can the Minister inform me of thestrengthofourreserves, giving the numbers for thevariousStates?

Senator VINCENT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– I refer to DivisionNo. 471 - Permanent Naval Forces. Thematter that is exercising my mind is the provision of a suitable harbour in the north of Western Australia. Although I do not expect the Minister forthe Navy (Senator Gorton) to be able toanswer immediately the questionI shall ask him, I think that this is the most appropriate time for me toventilate the matter in his chamber.

The Minister will be aware that the Western Australian Government is contemplating the construction of an artificial harbourat Black Rocks, for which the Federal Governmentissupplying the necessary money. As faras I am aware, the question of the construction ofa harbour at Black Rocks has been discussed only from the point of view of commerce and industry in thatarea. As far asI know, theService departments,particularlythe

Department of the Navy, have not expressed their view on whether the proposed harbour will be suitable for naval purposes. I am raising this matter now because a senior naval officer has informed me that the site for the harbour at Black Rocks would be most unsuitable as far as the Navy is concerned. I shall not bore the committee by stating his reasons for that opinion. They seemed to me to be quite sound, although I am not an expert in these matters. I am raising the matter now so that the Minister may give consideration to it. I know that the Western Australian Government is virtually committed to the construction of a harbour at Black Rocks. Whether this matter has been considered fully by the Navy, I do not know. I invite the Minister to tell the committee, either now or later, whether he considers that the site at Black Rocks is the most suitable site in all respects for the construction of an artificial harbour in the north of Western Australia, bearing in mind that there is no other modern harbour between there and Darwin to the north, and between there and Geraldton to the south. I have been told that, so far as naval requirements are concerned, there are much more suitable and satisfactory sites, somewhat distant from Black Rocks.

Senator ORMONDE:
New South Wales

– I should like to ask the Minister why, earlier this month, a United States Navy Neptune bomber flew to McMurdo Sound in Antarctica to evacuate a sick member of the Australian Antarctic expedition. Why was it necessary for an American plane to be used on that mission? I should like to know also why it was found necessary to fly in from Mirny a Russian doctor to attend the patient. Was it because we were unable to provide the service ourselves?

Further, it was suggested about ten years ago that the right type of ship be built in Australia for emergency work such as this. I understand that over the last ten years something like £1,000,000 has been paid to Norway for the charter of Norwegian ships for this work. Can the Minister explain these matters?

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

Senator Cooke asked about the uniformed Navy personnel recently brought to Canberra. There are 120 uniformed personnel of all ranks, including board members, now in Canberra. It is expected that there will be 40 here in 1960 and 60 in 1961.

The naval base in Western Australian is outside the scope of the present discussion, and all I can do is repeat that the establishment of a proper naval base would involve the expenditure of very many millions of pounds. It would cost more than Australia could afford at the present time, and even the partial establishment of a base would be at the expense of that cutting edge of defence which we so sorely need.

Leeuwin is to be activated as a boys’ training establishment in Fremantle. I believe that the first course is due to arrive there on 1st July of next year. I do not know whether the honorable senator requires details of what will be paid to the instructors at the school, or of the pocket money which will be given to the boys while in training, or whether he is just concerned with the building programme. Building operations will be spread over a number of years. At the moment, I do not know how much it is proposed to spend each year, but I shall give the honorable senator those figures later.

Senator Ormonde:

asked why an American Navy Neptune bomber flew to McMurdo Sound to take off a sick Australian. He wanted to know why an Australian plane was not used or, alternatively, why a ship did not do the work. I remind the honorable senator that this is a matter entirely for the Department of External Affairs, but I point out that the country at McMurdo Sound, where the Australian base is situated, is not suitable for large planes.

Senator Ormonde:

– Have we no air strip there?

Senator GORTON:

– No, nor is the country suitable for the landing of the type of aircraft used by the Americans. When I was at McMurdo Sound last year, they were using Neptunes, large transport planes, Super Constellations and others, and landing them on the frozen sea clear of the ice. This cannot be done in summer. I point out also that to fly from Australia te Antarctica would be an extremely long, hazardous and dangerous undertaking for an aeroplane. Further, if a man were sick enough to require evacuation, he should be evacuated by aeroplane and not by ship. I am not clear about the flying in of a Russian doctor to Mirny.

Senator ORMONDE:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I am informed that he was taken in from Mirny to attend the same patient.

Senator GORTON:

– I point out that Mirny is a Russian base.

Senator Ormonde:

– He was flying from Mirny.

Senator GORTON:

– I do not know precisely why that doctor had to go there but, in any case, that is a matter for the Department of External Affairs.

Senator COOKE:
Western Australia

– I thank the Minister for the information he has given in reply to some of my questions, but I remind him that he did not state where the navy personnel is to be stationed. I should like to know at what bases in Western Australia, South Australia and so on the 12,046 persons are to be stationed.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– I am sure the honorable senator would not expect me to give the exact numbers to be stationed at each base, but I can give him some idea of them. In Western Australia, there is only the stores section at the ammunition depot, while at Leeuwin there will be a small administrative staff. South Australia has virtually no navy component. There would be in the vicinity of 4,000 navy personnel continually at sea. The main bases of the others would be at Flinders, which is one of the main recruit training depots in Victoria. Recruits are first brought to Flinders where there is a quite large establishment for training in all the branches of Navy life. Another large base at which personnel will be stationed is Watson, another recruit training base in Sydney. It is also a torpedo and anti-submarine school. There is a smaller base at Penguin, in Sydney, where submarines tie up. The Fleet Air Arm Station at Nowra would account for a considerable number, and there would also be a large number at H.M.A.S. Harman, the communications centre in Canberra. Others are stationed at Darwin, Manus Island and other small centres round the Commonwealth.

Senator LAUGHT:
South Australia

– I wish to refer to the AttorneyGeneral’s Department, and I direct attention to the fact that about a year ago the Attorney-General had in hand the consolidation of regulations made under Commonwealth statutes. 1 understand that regulations which do not now apply will be omitted from this consolidation, and I should like to know when we may expect that consolidation to be ready.

I should like to ask also what provision is being made for the consolidation of Commonwealth acts, and what provision is being made to put copies of the consolidated acts and regulations in the hands of the judges of State courts. It should be remembered that a good deal of the judicial work of the Commonwealth is being done by State judges of Supreme Court status and by judges of lower court status. My experience in appearing before judges of the lower courts in South Australia indicates that consolidations of Commonwealth acts are not readily available. Consequently, some confusion exists when, for instance, a barrister or solicitor quotes from a consolidation and the court itself has not access to the consolidation.

I should think, Sir, that, for a State the size of South Australia, fifteen or twenty copies of consolidated acts, and likewise of regulations, would be required for distribution amongst courts that are being called upon more and more to exercise federal jurisdiction, as provided in the Constitution. If I may forecast, I foresee a very important piece of legislation being cited in courts in the States. I refer to the Matrimonial Causes Bill, which could be passed within the foreseeable future. Consequently, judges in South Australia, to take the case of my own State, may be called upon to adjudicate on federal law. I put it to the Minister that his department should give serious consideration to making available consolidations of Commonwealth acts more freely than they have been made available to the States in the past, because the State judges and magistrates are being called upon more and more frequently to give effect to Commonwealth law. It is well known that, as the Constitution stands, there is not an elaborate system of federal courts. We have the High Court and the Federal Bankruptcy Court, but we have; no federal; courts on the- Supreme Court or- County Court, level. Therefore; over the years* the Commonwealth has been saved considerable sums* of money by not having to’ establish such courts* 1 suggest: that it would be. both: courteous andi convenient if more copies ofl consolidations of Commonwealth statutes and regulations were’ made available.

Some time- ago, it was made known’ that a high-level committee was1 considering the compilation of. a, report for the Parliament in- relation to the. Bankruptcy Act and- regulations. L have not heard, for some considerable time, of the: progress being, made by that committee. If I. remember, correctly, it was appointed, about three years ago., I. ask the Minister representing the Attorney-General whether he can say. when it- is expected- that, the report will be in his Hand’s and whether,, after he receives it, he proposes to fable it. Can he say what action’ is likely to be taken, when the report is received? I urge upon, the Minister the importance of this matter because, with the increasing, tempo of business in Australia at the present time, the Bankruptcy Act which- was passed 35 years ago has become somewhat obsolete. Furthermore, procedures have developed in relation to bankruptcy which,- While they ate commercially sound, were’ not known 35’ years ago. By “ commercially sound “ I mean sound, from’ the stand-point of- liquidating: the affairs of the unfortunate’ debtor. They are procedure’s which are, I think, somewhat speedier than those provided for when the present legislation was enacted’. No doubt the committee has gone into such matters Very closely, but so- far, no report appears to have been made. I should like the Minister representing the Attorney-General to let me know the stage that the report has reached.

Senator Wright:

– Does the honorable senator really expect the act to be simplified arid not further complicated?

Senator LAUGHT:

– It is fairly complicated how, but there is always a chance that it may be simplified. In any event, there is the chance that’ some of us may be able to mike. observations regarding Simplification; even if the committee’ does not do sb I have great hope that the modern Senate could suggest improvements of the law, because of the vast experience that Australia i. as had in the last 35’ years, particularly in: commercial matters. I should’, be very grateful if the Minister representing: the Attorney-General could enlighten me on the matters I. have raised.

Senator O’BYRNE:
Tasmania

’.- I refer to Division No.- 484 - Defence Research and Development!. The- proposed vote is £70,000, while the appropriation last year was £55,000 and actual expenditure £54,479. It would appear that this particular activity of the Navy is very limited! Yet, if defence research and development should be taking* place in any branch of the services; surely that branch is the Navy.. The. Department of Air has the assistance of rocket research and. of other research in connexion with- guided missiles. It’ has had the benefit, of the development of such- things as- the Sidewinder. However, I, do not know of any announcement that has< been made concerning, similar research in connexion- with the Navy.

As I see it, the future of the Navy is bound up with submarines. We have- read reports that the navies’ of other countries are now equipped with- atomic-powered submarines, and that interception can be effected and atomic warheads fired’ without a submarine having to surface. In that respect, there is a tremendous field for naval’ research in this country. I should like the’ Minister to give the committee a break-up of the sum of £70,000, so that We may have an idea of the activities to which the expenditure will be applied. Surely that is not the total of the Navy’s share in defence research and development, in all fields of modern, research for the services. Such a sum would not be nearly sufficient to cover the employment of people with ability in dealing with this important phase of the new era which faces the Navy. As Australia is an island continent, we are Very much dependent on under-the-water defence. Aircraft carriers are useful to convey aircraft, armed with guided missiles or atomic bombs, to intercept attacking aircraft, but I suggest that our biggest problem, in the event of war. would’ be to counter attacks by atomicpowered submarines.

Sitting suspended from 5.45 tb 8 p.m.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– Prior to the suspension, I had asked the Minister to give a dissection of the amount of £70,000 proposed to be appropriated for defence research and development. I spoke of the tremendous field that existed, particularly in the Navy, for a scientific approach in the new era to defence on the sea. As I see it, the Navy has. a most important role to play as a defensive unit. Traditionally, the Navy has been mainly offensive. It has kept control of the seas and it has. been one of the main factors in the creation and continued existence of the British. Empire and the British Commonwealth. But with the advent of modern weapons, the role of the Navy is, in my view, changing to the point where its main function will become purely defensive and its purpose will be to keep our sea lanes open and our coastline free of attack by a potential enemy..

The phenomenal development that has taken place in submarines has made most of the large naval service vessels, including aircraft carriers, virtually obsolete. I feet quite certain that in the Navy of the future we shall see a virtual disappearance of very heavy ships. The modern atomic-powered1 submarines, such as those of the United States of America - we may take it that other powers have similar vessels - can travel at 30 knots, submerged for months on end’, without refuelling. This poses a tremendous problem to our defence planners. Nevertheless, within the limits of our resources, we must face up to these realities. The Navy’s striking power must be diverted towards countering this tremendous threat. Perhaps hundreds of atompowered submarines could stand 100 miles off-shore and deliver atomic warheads onto our major cities. They could, at a distance of 30 miles, from merchant or naval, fleets, deliver guided missiles from under the sea. This poses, a problem that is, as I see it, virtually without solution by those people who are responsible for planning.

The total vote proposed for the Navy is £42,000,000, which is slightly more than the expenditure last year. This gives an idea of this country’s commitments, not only for the present but also for the future. Our new defence policy must be concentrated’ on the defence of our coastline and sea lanes against attack by atomic powered submarines. We know that Cabinet is at present considering the overall defence policy. The Australian Navy of the future will have to consist, of small,, fast. manoeuvrable vessels, equipped with guided missiles and other modern, equipment.

I wish to deal now with- national service training. A Senate select committee was appointed in 1951, under the chairmanship of Senator McKenna, to go thoroughly into the efficacy of national service training: It was frustrated. A snub was given to the Parliament when the defence leaders, acting on the advice of the government of the day, refused to give evidence to the committee. The committee’s purpose was to examine thoroughly the long-range value of national service training. To-day this form of training has- become redundant. The Army needs 40 recruits, a week, to keep it up to strength. An amount of £10,000,000 per annum for the national service teaming scheme is a tremendous price to pay for 40 recruits a week.

Senator McKellar:

– What has that to do with the Navy?

Senator O’BYRNE:

– I am speaking of another matter. If the honorable senator were more intent, on the debate, he would have heard. We should not take it for granted that we should save £10,000,000 a year by the abolition of national service training. One of the main advantages flowing from national service training has been the improvement in the physical fitness of the young men of the age group affected. I believe, that the money spent on this scheme could well be diverted to such activities as those of the National Fitness Council, the Young Men’s Christian Association,, the Young Workers’ Movement, and Police Boys’ Clubs. Young men would thus be able to derive the advantages formerly derived from national service training. I should like to touch also upon the subject of the Army.

The CHAIRMAN (Senator the Hon. A. D. Reid). - The vote for the Army has already been agreed to. The Department of the Army was considered with Senator Henty’s group of departments.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– Our greatest task in relation to these estimates is to; ensure that the money appropriated for defence will be spent in the most efficacious way possible, so that the people of Australia will be able to feel relatively secure. But it all comes back to this: Defence, in all its forms, is something to which we must give our closest consideration. The threat of war will continue to hang over the world until our top statesmen decide to abandon armaments and seek universal peace. While the present state of affairs remains unchanged, the problems of defence expenditure, which worry every one, on both sides of the ideological barrier, will continue to grow apace.

To-day we are spending tremendous sums on armaments. At this moment we are considering the expenditure, even in our own small country, of £60,000,000 by the Department of Air, of £42,000,000 by the Department of the Navy, and of other large sums. They amount, in all, to £200,000,000. Thousands of millions of pounds are being spent in the same way in other parts of the world. If these tremendous expenditures on defence could be diverted into other channels, we should be a much happier race and could envisage a happier world for generations to come. I hope that what is happening now in relation to defence will eventually make those who are responsible for planning accept the view that it is impossible to defend a country against attack by thermonuclear weapons, and that the only alternative open to man is to seek peace.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– I should like briefly to attempt to answer the queries of various speakers, dealing first with those of Senator O’Byrne and then working backwards in time. Senator O’Byrne referred to the proposed vote of £70,000, under Division No. 484, for defence research and development in connexion with the Navy. He regarded the proposed vote as insufficient for all the research and development that should take place in that field. In my opinion, he is quite right in coming to that conclusion, but this is not the only money sought to be voted for those purposes. Senator O’Byrne referred to the research and development required in other Services, such as the Army and the Air Force. So far as I can see, looking through the estimates, nothing is provided for such work in connexion with the Army, and only £10,000 is provided for work in connexion with the Air Force. The reason for the inclusion of such small amounts in the proposed votes for the various services is that most defence research and development is carried out by the Department of Supply, on behalf of the Services. He will see that more than £500,000 has been provided for this purpose in the appropriation for that department.

I think that we all share his regret concerning the financial burden that is imposed by defence requirements, but our regret is tempered by the consideration that although it is true that no nation wants war, the people of many countries are unable freely to choose and dismiss their governments. They cannot control their governments and immense power is concentrated in the hands of one, two or three individuals, who are a danger to the peace of the world. They have always been a danger. While this situation persists, I would urge the provision of, and be prepared to provide, sufficient armaments to prevent the people of this country from ever being put into the position of having to seek to win back the right and ability to control their Government, which could plunge them into the sort of blood bath that we have seen in Hungary, Poland, Berlin and many other places in recent times.

Senator Kendall:

asked what had happened to the money that had been set aside for the provision of loans to fishermen. I have been informed that the committee set up for the purpose received so many requests for loans that the loans could not be met from available funds. It was decided, therefore, as a matter of policy, that no preference should be given in the matter of loans and that the funds available should be reserved for major developments in the particular industry.

Senator Vincent:

asked about the Navy’s attitude to the establishment of a port at Black Rock, in Western Australia. The port does not possess all the attributes that the Navy would like to see in a port in that area. We would, I think, from a purely naval point of view, prefer a port at some other position in the locality. For commercial and other reasons, the port is to be developed by the Western Australian Government, which decides what State interests will best be served by the development of a port in a particular place. Accordingly, it has decided that Black Rock should be developed as a port. The answer to the specific question is that, so far as the Navy is concerned, for purely naval purposes we would prefer a port somewhere else.

Senator Laught:

asked some questions of the Attorney-General concerning the consolidation of regulations. This has not yet been completed. That process of consolidation is being continued. Volumes are provided to the State of South Australia and, indeed, to all States. This is done on a reciprocal basis. We give something like 128 copies of our consolidated statutes to South Australia and that State provides us with about twenty copies of its consolidated statutes.

The bankruptcy committee has not yet completed its report, but the matter is approaching finality. When the report has been completed, it will be considered by the Government. I should imagine that an opportunity to debate it will then be given to both Houses of the Parliament. The honorable senator would then be able to voice what I anticipate is his belief - that some of the provisions of the South Australian law on bankruptcy should be considered with a view to their possible inclusion in a general law.

Senator ANDERSON:
New South Wales

– I should like to make a brief reference to Division No. 608 - Administration of National Service Act. The administrative side of national service is undertaken by the Department of Labour and National Service. I note that, last year, the expenditure was of the order of £83,000 and that, on this occasion, it is to rise to £96,000. As I understand it, the national service intake this year will be the same as it was last year. I should just like to know the reason for the increased administrative cost.

Senator O’Byrne, in referring to this Division, spoke about recruiting, but it has no relation to that subject at all. National service trainees are, of course, on a draft, the size of which is fixed in accordance with the Government’s policy for the year. At the risk of being ruled out of order, I should like to make a comment in the broad concerning national service training. I welcome the increased expenditure as being, perhaps, an indication that an increase in the number of young men undertaking this training is contemplated. To my mind it is a very essential part of our overall defence pattern. The training in citizenship, quite apart from the training in service skill, is an important factor in building up the young men of our nation. I am all for the service training of young men, and I should like to see even more done in this connexion. I personally would like to see some provision made in the curriculum for training in civil defence functions. I think that is important at the moment.

Having asked for information, I wish to make one general observation about the naval estimates. We do not want to forget that we live on an island continent. The naval portfolio must of necessity be a difficult one to manage in a changing world. Almost overnight the necessity could arise to change from one form of naval defence to another; nevertheless, because we do live on an island continent our dependence upon a strong naval force is axiomatic. I think we all would support any move the Government might make to maintain our naval forces at the highest possible level having regard to our economic development after some fifty odd years of nationhood.

Senator BENN:
Queensland

– I wish to refer to Division No. 216 - Industrial Registrar’s Branch. I wish to refer also to Division No. 402 - Public Service Arbitrator’s Office. The Minister in charge of this group of estimates is so versatile that he can switch his mind from the affairs of the Navy to the affairs of the Industrial Registrar’s Branch and can then immediately transfer his mind to the Department of Labour and National Service.

I wish to mention the amount of money that is spent in the fixing of wages and working hours. When we examine the tribunals that exist for this purpose we are truly perplexed. I am sure that not many people in the Commonwealth know how many wage-fixing tribunals there are in Australia at the present time. In the Commonwealth sphere alone there are no less than six tribunals functioning. When we consider for a moment the functions and judicial powers of these tribunals, it requires very little thought to realize the cost of their collective work.

The major authority is the court that functions under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. We know the functions and judicialpowers ofthat tribunal and we know itspersonnel.It isnotmy intention to-nightto dealwith thatcourtto any extent at all.Ileaveit alone,but itisa tribunalfullyclothed with power todeal with wages andworking conditions.Imove ontothePublicService Arbitrator. Hisofficeisprovided for notunder the Attorney-General’sDepartmentbutunder the Departmentof Labour andNational Service. We have a repetition therebecause the Public Service Arbitrator exercisesthesamepowers thatare exercised by thecourt under theConciliationandArbitration Act. He is doing almost the same work that is done bymembersof the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission.

Ileave the Public Service Arbitratorand move on.There is another Commonwealth act known as the Coal Industry Act. Under that act anauthorityis clothed withpowers to fixwagesand working conditions. That is numberthree.I pass on immediately to number fourwhich operates under the Stevedoring Industry Act. Againunder that actthere is a tribunal with power to fix wages and working conditions. Going further afield tothe Australian Alpswhere thebiggest projectin the Commonwealth is being carried out, we find thattheSnowy Mountains Hydro-electric Power Act providesfor theestablishment of a tribunal to dealwith wages andworking conditions. Not satisfied with all those tribunals and allthose authorities, clothed with power to do the same work, we have in addition, under the Navigation Act, another tribunal which repeats the performance. There you haveintheCommonwealth sphere authorities clothedwith judicial powers in regard to industrial matters.

Perhaps I may be pardoned for mentioning these things because when we come to consider the States we find that the position is just as perplexing. As a matter of fact it becomes more complex. I would say that my own State of Queensland is not by any means the greatest offender, but we have in Queensland two tribunals functioning for the fixation of wages and working hours. One operates under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act and the other under the Apprenticeship Act. The latter has power to fix the wages and working conditions of apprentices. Coming to

New South Wales,wefindalmostarepeti- tionofwhat exists inQueensland.In New SouthWalesthereis anindustrialarbitrationtribunalwhichdealswithwagesand working conditions in the same way asdo othertribunals inthe Commonwealth. Operating under the CoalIndustry Act is anothertribunal. In Victoria wefind thatthereis atribunalfunctioning underthe Labour and Industry Act.I havefound itverydifficult indeedto ascertain exactlywhat itspowers are,butit definitelyhas industrial powers and does exercisethem. Victoria alsohas whatisknown as the wagesboard system. It is a system similarto that introducedby Napoleon Bonaparte when he was carrying on his wars yearsago. Evidently thatsystemisquite sufficient for Victoriabecause thatStatehas operated that systemfora numberof years.South Australiahas somethingsimilar. Once more wefind a tribunalestablished todeal withwages and workingconditions; and theState also has awages boardsystemsimilar to thatin Victoria. Western Australia has anarbitration court which has power todeal with wages andworkingconditions, andit also has industrialcommitteeswhich function for the same purpose. Apparently, what- ever is left undone bythe Commonwealth Conciliation and ArbitrationCommission andthe Western Australian Industrial Court is carried out bythe industrial committees.In Tasmania the Wages Board Act provides for wagesboards to function in respect of the variousindustries. I have given the Senate a brief picture of the industrial tribunals which operate throughout the Commonwealth. Their main purpose, of course, is to establish industrial peace, to see that it is preserved and at the same time to afford the workers of Australia a measure of social justice. I shall not refer at length to the suspension of automatic adjustments of the basic wage, which is something thatoccurred in 1953. It has forced the unions to make application to the court for variations of the basic wage. It is here that the Industrial Registrar's Branch comes into operation. I mentionthisin case there is any doubt in the minds of honorable senators thatI am in order in referring to thismatter. The unionsare compelledto make application to the court to have the basic wage reviewed. After the application is lodged at the Industrial Registrar's Office, there follows a waiting period of at least a month or two. During that time, it often happens that there is an increase in the cost of living. That happens, not only in Victoria and New South Wales, but in all the States of the Commonwealth. The hearing of the case may last for another month or two. It is a major issue which cannot be easily settled, and another month or two elapses before a decision is< given. Perhaps in the period of time between the lodging of the application in the registrar's office and the court's decision, there has been a substantial increase in the cost of living. There may also have been a change in the degree of prosperity of the country. The decision of the court in relation to the basic wage is made belatedly; it is made after there has been a substantial increase in living costs. I do not expect the Minister to be able to answer immediately the question I shall now ask him. Is it possible at the present time, under our Constitution, to have a degree of uniformity in the judicial functions of the arbitration tribunals? Is it possible to have a uniform basie wage in operation throughout the length and breadth of the Commonwealth? {: .speaker-KAC} ##### Senator Vincent: -- Why should there be a uniform basic wage? {: .speaker-K1T} ##### Senator BENN: -- If the honorable senator becomes a Minister, I will ask him questions. I am quite sure that I would not now ask him for any information, having some knowledge of his capacity in other respects. Is there industrial quietude in Australia? The answer, **Mr. Chairman,** is " No ". There is considerable industrial dissatisfaction throughout the whole of the Commonwealth. The State basic wage operating in Queensland is higher than the Commonwealth basic wage, so we have the situation that men performing similar classes of work are receiving different rates of pay. I know of nothing more calculated to create industrial dissatisfaction than that state of affairs. It can be seen on every hand. There is also the situation that the Commonwealth Government requires the States to pay pay-roll tax and then, when it receives this tax from the States, it reimburses them a percentage of the revenue. That is the crazy form of public finance that is adopted to-day. But it is no more crazy than the system that is in operation in respect of the industries iri the Commonwealth. 1 ask the Minister: Is there any hope in the future of this Government doing something - even if it involves ah amendment of the Constitution - to achieve a degree of uniformity in the industrial laws of the Commonwealth? {: #subdebate-28-0-s28 .speaker-KTL} ##### Senator McKELLAR:
New South Wales -- I should like to ask the Minister for the Navy **(Senator Gorton)** two questions, but first I want to endorse **Senator Anderson's** remarks about the necessity to continue the national service training scheme, and also about the importance of the Navy. I refer to Division No. 342^ Administration 'of the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act- 'General Expenses - item 4, "Payments to Australian Wheat Board for services in connexion with inspections of flour mills- £8,600 ". The appropriation for this item in the last financial year was £7,500, of which £6,792 was expended. I should like the Minister to explain the need for that expenditure. I refer, also, to the schedule of salaries and allowances, wherein it is shown, in relation to the Department of Primary Industry, that there is a Director of War Service Land Settlement - one position, the same as in 1958-59. Immediately underneath that entry, it is shown that in 1958-59 there were 129 positions of assistant directors, deputy directors, and so on, and that in 1959-60 there are 131. I know that the war service land settlement scheme has been considerably abridged, and I should be glad if the Minister would inform me whether these positions are occupied by personnel concerned with the administration of the scheme. {: #subdebate-28-0-s29 .speaker-K7Y} ##### Senator TANGNEY:
Western Australia -- I refer to Division No. 474 - Civil Personnel - Naval Offices and Establishments. Under this division, the proposed vote for salaries and payments in the nature of salary for the permanent civil personnel and for temporary and casual employees is £7,061,000, compared with a proposed vote of £13,360,000 for pay and allowances in the nature of pay, and general expenses of the permanent naval forces, under Division No. 471. According to the schedule of salaries and allowances, there are 12,030 members of the permanent naval forces, and a total of 3,054 civilian personnel employed in naval offices and establishments. Since the war, there has been a gradual demobilization of naval personnel. In addition, as we know, the retiring age in the Navy is very low, compared with the retiring ages in industry and elsewhere. I should like the Minister to inform me whether any of the 3,054 civilian personnel employed by the Department of the Navy were formerly members of the permanent naval forces. I always feel that there is a terrific wastage when members of the permanent naval forces retire and sever their connexion with the Navy. I believe that the specialized knowledge that they possess as a result of years of experience is not availed of to the fullest extent. Of course, I realize that Public Service considerations are involved. I have wondered whether anything has been done to permit of a transition from the active naval side to the civilian side, so that the benefit of the years of experience of these men would not be lost to the Navy. Furthermore, the rehabilitation of these men in civilian life along these lines would result in the greatest amount of benefit to the community as a whole. I refer now to Division No. 475 - General Services, item 9, "Concessional postage for servicemen - Payment to PostmasterGeneral's Department, £65,000 ". I should be glad if the Minister would inform me how this sum is arrived at. What concession per letter is granted to service personnel? None of us quarrels with the granting of such a concession to men on active service; indeed, I think that more consideration should be given to them than has so far been given. But when men engaged in what is virtually a civilian occupation are receiving these concessions, I think Parliament should be told something more about it. At the present time, £65,000 is made available for postal concessions to active members of the Navy. This works out at £5 8s. a head a year. As the concession rate is only one penny, these members of the Navy must be ardent letter writers because £5 8s. a head works out at 1,296 letters a year. It may be said that they have a girl in every port, but if they are wise they will not write; they will ring up. I should like to know how this £65,000 postal concession to naval personnel is arrived at. The other question I ask is whether any agreement has yet been reached whereby retired naval personnel who are still in their 40's may be absorbed into the civilian side of the Navy. {: #subdebate-28-0-s30 .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP -- The answer to **Senator Tangney's** question relating to the absorption of ex-naval personnel into civilian employment in the Navy is that this is being done already. There is nothing at all to prevent a person who has completed his service in the Navy from going to work for the Navy in some civilian capacity. If he is employed in that way, then my understanding of the position is that the time served by him in the Navy counts for furlough and other things in the same way as if he had been employed in the Public Service. It does not necessarily follow that naval service as such renders a man better than some other person for a civilian job in the Navy. For instance, service as a seaman or gunner or engineer in the Navy would not necessarily qualify a person for a job connected with shipbuilding, ship repairing or stores work, although association with the Navy would be of some help if he went to work at Garden Island dockyard, or in some other capacity in the Navy. As I have said, retired naval men are, in fact., being employed as civilians in the Navy. {: .speaker-K7Y} ##### Senator Tangney: -- To a very great extent? {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON: -- To quite a large extent in the case of people who apply Of course, large numbers of Navy personnel do not want to apply. They leave the service, for there are many avenues open to them, and they prefer to engage in some other occupation. As to postal concessions, I point out that Navy personnel enjoy a substantial postal concession in that they pay one penny instead of 5d. on a letter. They also enjoy concessions in connexion with telephones and telegrams. **Senator McKellar** referred to the money allocated to the Australian Wheat Board for the inspection of flour mills. This amount has increased because costs generally have risen due to basic wage increases, and so on. {: .speaker-JZQ} ##### Senator Anderson: asked about the increasing costs of national service training as applied to the Department of Labour and National Service. That department, of course, is concerned with the national service trainee only up to the time when he goes into the Army. It is expected that the costs will rise by £15,000 in the next year. Of that amount, £11,000 is due to increases in the basic wage, and the additional payout which will fall due within the period under consideration, and there have been some rises in costs in connexion with travelling allowances and things of that nature. **Senator Benn** remarked on the number of different wage-fixing tribunals in operation in Australia at the present time. It is quite true, as he indicated, that there is a large number of different wage-fixing authorities, such as the Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority, the Coal Industry Tribunal and so on. There are sometimes historical reasons for the existence of tribunals. They have grown up. For instance, when **Senator Benn's** party was in office it may have established certain wage-fixing tribunals, and they have carried on. Another reason is constitutional in that, for instance, the Coal Industry Tribunal is established under an agreement between the New South Wales Government and the Commonwealth Government. It could not have been set up but for that agreement. The stevedoring section of the Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority stems from the trading powers of the Commonwealth Government. It was set up only as a result of those trading powers of the Commonwealth; and so it goes on. **Senator Benn** also spoke about uniformity. It would be possible to obtain uniformity provided the Constitution was altered in a number of ways to permit of that; but I suggest that it is at least doubtful whether it would be right and proper, or wise, to have uniformity when the conditions of work differ so widely between one part of Australia and another. However, a considerable degree of uniformity has been achieved in the operations of the various wage-fixing tribunals, and, despite **Senator Benn's** allegation that a certain amount of indus trial unrest exists under the present system, very little industrial disturbance has been carried to the ultimate point where loss of working time has resulted. {: #subdebate-28-0-s31 .speaker-KAC} ##### Senator VINCENT:
Western Australia -- I thank the Minister for his reply in connexion with the proposed construction of a port at Black Rocks. I appreciate both the reply and the frankness with which he gave it. It is a most important question about which we in Western Australia are concerned. I sincerely hope that the Western Australian Government will have regard to what the Minister says because, after all, the defence of north Australia is, I suggest, the most important element in the vast developmental schemes that are now in the embryonic stage, but which will grow and progress. If they are not commenced with proper regard for such important factors as defence, we can expect trouble in the future. I wish to refer briefly to three matters under this vote. The first I connect with Division No. 401 relating to the Department of Labour and National Service. I ask the Minister whether a young university undergraduate, who is currently a volunteer in the University Squadron in the Royal Australian Air Force is, as such, also liable to do national service training if called upon. I have had brought to my notice the case of a young trainee in a university squadron who has received a callup notice under the National Service Act. There appears to be a hiatus in the conditions relating to call-up for national service training. There seems to be nothing definite as to whether this young man should now belong to the Royal Australian Air Force or go into training under the national defence scheme. I should be grateful if the Minister could clear up that point for me to-night. {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator Gorton: -- The Royal Australian Air Force or the Royal Air Force? {: .speaker-KAC} ##### Senator VINCENT: -- The Royal Australian Air Force - the University Squadron in the Royal Australian Air Force in Australia. The second matter to which I wish to refer relates to Division No. 211, the vote for the Attorney-General's Department. The Minister will no doubt vividly remember that in 1954 a royal commission inquired into the matter of the defection of one Petrov. He may recall that certain important recommendations were made by the learned judges who constituted the commission, concerning the question of appropriate amendment of the federal statutes relating to espionage. The commission made strong recommendations as to how those laws should be amended, and certain verygrave weaknesses in our existing law were pointed out by it. That, was in 1954, but no alteration has been made. I asked a question on this matter, I think more than twelve months ago, and received a reply that the matter was then under consideration, but I have not had any further reply from the Minister in that connexion. There may be some constitutional problem, or same legal or technical problem, associated with the amendment of our laws- relating to espionage, but I mention the fact at this stage because I feel that it is most relevant to do so, in view of the fact that we are now about to form' closer associations with the Soviet Union and since it. can be expected that the Soviet will establish a very large embassy in Canberra once more. Although it appears at the moment that Comrade Khrushchev is most anxious to be friendly and to do everything he can to reach agreement at summit level, I am one of those who believe that that situation, may not persist indefinitely. Even if our laws relating to espionage are not connected with the matter of Russian espionage, there can, of course, be dangers so far as we are concerned in relation to other nationalities. Acts of espionage could be committed by other people on behalf of other powers. Perhaps the Minister might care to inform me whether or not the Government proposes to introduce legislation in accordance with the recommendations of the Petrov royal commission. The third matter that I wish to raise with the Minister relates to Division No. 401 - the proposed vote for the Department of Labour and National Service. The matter that I raise concerns a select committee, of which I was a member, which dealt with payments by shipowners to maritime unions. That select committee made certain recommendations as to how existing laws should be amended to prevent such malpractices, such industrial evils, from occurring. At the time, the practice was very aptly and properly described by many witnesses as a national evil. I do not think that any one suggested, at the time; that there was not something wrong. I am not prepared to say that such payments are being made now. I do not suggest for one moment that they are, but there is still the weakness in the law which permits them to be made. I invite the Minister to state whether or not the department is considering amendment of the law and, if such consideration is being given, when we may expect a statement in pursuance of the very important recommendations of that select committee. {: #subdebate-28-0-s32 .speaker-KAF} ##### Senator WADE:
Victoria ,- I. rise to ask the Minister whether provision has been made in the estimates for the Department of Primary Industry for assistance to be granted to the Murray Valley Development League. This league has been in. operation for some fifteen years and has rendered magnificent service to the development of the Murray valley.. Its activities are not confined to Victoria. It operates on. both sides of the river and has its headquarters at Albury. For fifteen years it has. laboured successfully to assist the. primary producer.. To-day, it is doing its utmost to foster secondary industries in Murray valley towns and is even turning its attention to developing the tourist industry. The plans of the league envisage increasing, the papulation of the 'area to 1,000,000 people. I know of. no place in Australia where quicker results are to be obtained from the development of potential than may be achieved as a result of the work being done in the Murray valley by the Murray Valley Development League. I am aware, **Mr. Chairman,** that **Senator Gorton,** the Minister in charge of this matter in the Senate, has a lively and continuing interest in the organization. I ask him to submit to the Government the point I have made. I believe that the granting of such assistance would be one of the best investments we could possibly make in the development of this area. {: #subdebate-28-0-s33 .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP -- Taking **Senator Wade's** remarks first, I recollect, as a private member of the Parliament, approaching the then Treasurer with members of the Murray Valley Development League who had asked for Commonwealth assistance for their organization. The attitude which the Commonwealth took then, and I think would take now, was that while the league was a body formed of private citizens, in effect, and as a result of private initiative, for the development of areas in more than one State, it was not the function of the Commonwealth Government to assist such bodies because once such a body was assisted it was open for organizations which desired to develop, say, the Channel country of Queensland, or areas of New South Wales or South Australia, also to claim similar assistance from the Commonwealth Government. No assistance has been forthcoming to the league from any of the State Governments concerned in the matter. In my belief, the Murray Valley Development League has done an extraordinarily good job in that particular area. However, I doubt very much whether it is the kind of organization which can look to the Commonwealth Government for assistance from taxpayers' money. {: .speaker-KTL} ##### Senator McKellar: asked previously whether, in regard to the estimates for war service land settlement, the rather large number of people listed after the Director of War Service Land Settlement were all associated with war service land settlement. The answer is: No, they are not. They are associated with various functions of the Department of Primary Industry. {: .speaker-KAC} ##### Senator Vincent: asked about the position regarding the call-up for national service training in the Army of individuals serving in the Royal Australian Air Force or the Royal Australian Navy. The position is that people so serving, and who have been so serving for some time before they become due for call-up, are exempted from call-up into the Army, though, having been exempted from call-up for national service training, should they leave the reserve in the R.A.A.F. or the R.A.N., in whichever they may be engaged, or not attend parades of the R.A.A.F. or the R.A.N., their exemption is forfeited and they become liable for callup for national service training. I suppose, to put the matter in a nutshell, the point is that if they are " dinkum " in enlisting in the reserve of either of the other services, they are exempted, but if they try to get out of Army service by enlisting in another service, they are not exempted. I was asked about the sedition laws, and I can only refer the matter to the AttorneyGeneral, who, I seem to remember, has been asked questions on the same matter from time to time in another place. As to the question of payments to maritime unions, which were alleged to be in the nature of blackmail, to allow ships to come or go without industrial disturbance, I gave an answer which had been supplied to me by the Minister for Labour and National Service **(Mr. McMahon).** He pointed out the large number of factors involved and said - I speak from memory - that he would confer with the AttorneyGeneral and the heads of other departments concerned on that matter. {: #subdebate-28-0-s34 .speaker-K6P} ##### Senator BROWN:
Queensland .- When I rose earlier to speak the Minister was busily engaged speaking to members of his staff. Because of the many questions that he is called upon to answer, I realize that it is necessary for him to get assistance. And, of course, I excuse him for not answering a number of the questions that I posed when I spoke earlier this afternoon. Knowing how courteous the Minister is, I hope that he will now give me some slight consideration by listening to me for a few moments, after which I hope he will try, to the best of his ability, to answer the questions that I have placed before him. I shall not bring tears into my voice, but I appeal for his attention when I ask why no money has been set aside for the purchase of aircraft and aircraft engines. That there is a reason for this I have no doubt {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator Gorton: -- I have already answered that question. {: .speaker-K6P} ##### Senator BROWN: -- The Minister must have done so during my temporary absence from the chamber, because when I came back I asked **Senator Armstrong** whether an answer had been given, and he replied that the Minister had not answered except in relation to helicopters. I do not know whether the Minister answered questions relating to the use of helicopters, but the naval authorities say that they are necessary and that we have not enough of them. That being so, I should have thought that the Minister, with his knowledge and understanding of naval requirements, would bring his powers of persuasion into operation with a view to having money set aside to purchase more helicopters. I understand that they are very useful in spotting submarines. I misunderstood the Minister yesterday because I was perturbed by his rather facetious manner. Usually he is calm, cool and courteous, but yesterday he was so facetious, in rather a kindergarten way, that I did not understand what he was driving at. I. thought he said that the Government was becoming possessed of eight submarines but on reading the record of " Hansard ", that splendid organization which does not make any mistakes, I find that the Minister said, "The honorable senator should not believe everything he reads in the press ". I assure him that I do not, but I do take notice of what appears in the press. The Minister went on to say that when I read something in the press I should read it correctly. The press stated that Australia was to purchase eight submarines, and I now ask the Minister to be good enough to be frank in his reply, when I ask him whether the Government has decided to purchase any submarines and, if so, where it proposes to get them. If it is proposed to get them from England, I ask whether they will be outmoded, outdated and obsolete. I ask him, further, whether, in view of the development and progress that has taken place in matters of defence and also of attack, it would not be better to buy undersea vessels of a kind that will enable Australia to keep in step with modern developments. We should spend the money on a submarine, or a number of submarines, that would be useful in defending Australia, instead of buying obsolete submarines. Of course, if the Minister is not permitted to give this information, I could understand his not doing so. He may not be able to tell me everything, although I think that all potential enemies already know pretty well everything we are doing. I also asked another question about a particular naval vessel, the name of which I cannot recollect at the moment, but I understand that it was a very fast-moving vessel and could catch any submarine in existence. I have here a statement showing that the present Minister for Defence **(Mr. Townley)** said in 1950 that submarines would always be deadly weapons, and that we did not possess a vessel capable of catching a modern submarine travelling, under water, let alone on the surface. That was in 1950. {: .speaker-KPI} ##### Senator Kendall: -- That was just after the Labour Government went out of office. {: .speaker-K6P} ##### Senator BROWN: -- I stand here to-night as a man anxious to see the best defence provided for Australia. I am not concerned with what Labour did, or with what the honorable senator's party did, or with what any other party did. We meet to-day in a time of crisis, and as members of thislegislature we should try to determine what is best for Australia in the way of defence. If the honorable senator wants to bring politics into the discussion, I tell him that Labour stands for the best defence of Australia. I tell him also that Labour is bitterly opposed to the squandering of money and to wasting cash in buying ships that are no longer of service to the nation. I remind my co-workers in the cause of democracy on the other side of the chamber that Labour gave Australia its first Navy, and that Labour was then attacked by the political progenitors of honorable senators opposite. They wanted to take up a collection and send the money to England to buy a dreadnought. However, let us forget politics for the moment. The Minister knows that our Navy is almost impotent against the forces that may be brought against us. {: .speaker-KNU} ##### Senator Hannan: -- Before the honorable senator leaves that point, I ask him whether he suggests that we should hunt for submarines with submarines? {: .speaker-K6P} ##### Senator BROWN: -- I say to my friend on my left that one of the greatest authorities on modern warfare has said that in the battles of to-morrow we shall have submarines hunting submarines. If that be so, one of the best things we could do for the defence of Australia would be to buy a number of submarines, not necessarily as powerful as those that may be used against us, but fast enough to overcome them in the fight under the water. {: .speaker-KNU} ##### Senator Hannan: -- Did he say that we should search for them with submarines? {: .speaker-K6P} ##### Senator BROWN: -- As a matter of fact, in the warfare of to-morrow, submarines will hunt submarines. Some years ago the Government built a ship that it said was fast enough to catch a submarine. It is not fast enough to catch a submarine of to-day. If we are to spend millions of pounds on the defence of Australia, let us take notice of gentlemen who have studied these matters and who realize what is going on in the world. Let us spend the millions of pounds on modern armaments. A few weeks ago, Alastair Mars, a famous British wartime submarine commander, who was then in Australia, named nations that he thought might menace Australia in years to come. He declared that an investment in half a dozen atomic-powered submarines - I know they would cost a huge amount of money - would be the best insurance policy for this country. We have a Navy, for the personnel of which I have the highest regard. I would not say a word against the men of the Navy, but let us use them in the best interests of Australia. An atomic submarine would cost about £20,000,000. A few months ago America launched a submarine that cost £49,000,000. It is one of the largest in the world. Russia claims that in a few years it will have 1,000 submarines. A British admiral has said that Russia now has 500 submarines. He also made the significant statement that there were 100 modern Russian submarines in the Pacific. I do not want to frighten the people of Australia, but we must face the facts. I do not know why the ignorant people opposite laugh. I am in deadly earnest. It has been said to me that I should not mention these things as they would frighten people. {: .speaker-KAF} ##### Senator Wade: -- You said you did not want to frighten them. {: .speaker-K6P} ##### Senator BROWN: -- That is so, but I want to tell the truth. I do not want to hear stupid, ignorant laughter from' the other side when I am dealing with this serious question. There is not a shadow of doubt that there is a tendency among public men to hide the truth from the people. The truth about civil defence has been hidden, and also the truth of what happened in Darwin. Honorable senators who have not read the report can obtain it from the Clerk of Papers. There was no civil defence at all in Darwin. The commissioner who studied the matter said that if there had been some organization we would not have suffered the tragedy that occurred there. Many of our men were found in Adelaide, having used nightsoil carts to get away. In a hotel the commissioner found food left on the table and halffull glasses of beer. Every one in Darwin had panicked and run away. I do not say a word against them. No doubt, I would have run myself. The point is that there was no organization, and the Government to-day is not doing the right thing about civil defence organization. In America, attention is being given to civil defence. In Sweden, every factory employing more than 100 men has to take part in civil defence preparations, and underground factories are being built. There is no doubt that in Russia many establishments are underground, safe from atomic and hydrogen bombs. Nelson D. Rockefeller, the Governor of New York, is making earnest efforts to build up the civil defence of New York. We are not doing anything. However, I am getting away from my subject. Let us have the truth from the Minister. Are we or are we not to spend money on modern submarines? Is it a fact that Indonesia has two submarines? {: #subdebate-28-0-s35 .speaker-K0L} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Pearson:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA -- Order! The honorable senator's time has expired. {: #subdebate-28-0-s36 .speaker-KAF} ##### Senator WADE:
Victoria .- I invite the Minister's attention to Division No. 638, item 12, which relates to miscellaneous services, Department of Primary Industry. I refer to the grant for extension of agricultural advisory services. Last year the appropriation was £280,000 and the expenditure £258,956. The proposed appropriation for this year is £250,000. I ask the Minister for an explanation of the reduction in the amount. We are living in a world where our primary industries are facing the fiercest competition. The money that we apply to the development of these industries is particularly well spent. I believe that we have an obligation to the State instrumentalities that are doing a great deal of work for the benefit of our primary industries. I shall be very grateful if the Minister will inform me of the reason for the reduction in the amount to be provided this year for this purpose. {: #subdebate-28-0-s37 .speaker-K1T} ##### Senator BENN:
Queensland .- I refer the Minister to Divisions Nos. 341, 342 and. 343.. The total' of the- appropria-tions proposed under these three divisions! is £1,860' 000. If we were to examine, to-night the. estimates of the. six. State' governments,, we. would find that, they coutaained similar items- I ami wondering; just: what is. the. difference: between the work: of the Commonwealth and the work of the; six State, governments in the realm> of primacy industry. I know that there is- a statutory difference between the functions of the Commonwealth, and those, of the States, but the position in relation- to the practical- work that is usually carried out by governments in relation to primary industry is very confusing to me and to many other people. i come from a State that has no fewer than eighteen or nineteen boards functioning in relation to prima-ry industries. The majority of them are marketing' boards. I ceroid name four if it would assist the Minister, bat I do not propose to do so. Marketing boards, in some cases* sell' products on: the internal market. I thought that the Commonwealth might operate only in relation! to- commodities sold externally, but Ifind that is not so. We in Queensland produce sugar, some of which we sell on the. Australian market, and the balance, which is worth about £37,000,000, we sell, overseas. The sale of that sugar is governed by an international agreement: >To change the scene a little, we turn to wheat, and find that there is a Commonwealth wheat board, and that that commodity also is sold subject to international agreement. There does appear, on> the face of things, to be a duplication of effort as between the Commonwealth and the States. > >When it comes even to giving technical advice to producers, we find that the Commonwealth Government exercises certain specific functions, that there are advisory boards, that there is the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, and that other offices are working to the same end. The States have authorities which perform that function. One does not know where the work of the Commonwealth ends and that of the States begins. If the Minister could help me in this matter I would be very pleased indeed. > > **Senator GORTON** (Victoria - Minister for the Navy) [9.2 lj. - **Senator Wade** referred to Division No. 638 - item 12, " Grant for expansion of Agricultural Advisory Services,. £250*000 ", and asked why it. was. less than last year's: expenditure of £258,956. Last year's appropriation, was greater than normal in order to> meet at commitment from the previous year., That, commitment- has now been! met. The amount is fixed: each year by. the Australian; Agricultural Council and has been running at £250,000 every year except last year. This year's appropriation is for the normal amount,. £250,000. {: .speaker-K1T} ##### Senator Benn: asked' me a very general! question indeed concerning the amounts set aside under Divisions Nos; 341, 342 and 343 of the estimates, for the Department of Primary Industry. His question is answered,, largely, by reference to- the break-up of the overall figure of £1,860,000 for the department. If one skims through it, one sees, for instance, that some of the money/ goes on fisheries.. The Commonwealth) has an obligation in. respect of fisheries- activities outside the- three-mile limit.. Inside that limit, die- States have an obligation. There are dried fruits, boards. That also is a Commonwealth matter. There is- also the question raised by- **Senator. McKellar** concerning payments to the Australian Wheat Board for various: services. There; are also payments to the States for services in connexion with the inspection of fresh fruit - no doubt in connexion with the fruit fly - plants, vegetables and other items. The Division of Agricultural Economics is the only one which does not speak for itself. It operates on an Australia-wide basis, as opposed to a. purely State basis, conducting surveys into such matters as improving cattle production,, tomato and apple crops and so on. Many of its activities are prompted by requests from State agricultural departments and similar bodies. To give a short answer, it attempts to do on a nation-wide basis, things that cannot be done by the States operating alone. In regard to **Senator Brown's** statements and questions concerning submarines, r think that I can only - in my usual calm and courteous manner - be completely frank and say that questions designed to elicit statements on Government policy are not answered in this House. {: #subdebate-28-0-s38 .speaker-K19} ##### Senator POKE:
Tasmania -- I wish to address myself to Division No. 401. - Department of Labour and National Service- Administrative. Can the Minister say why there has been such a large increase in total salaries and in the number of personnel on the administrative side of the department? One additional Assistant Secretary has been appointed. There are to be seven more employment officers. I am particularly concerned about that and would like to know whether it may be taken as an indication that unemployment is continuing to increase. I realize that the department puts out a bulletin on the subject fairly regularly. That bulletin sets out the percentage of the work force which is unemployed. I have mentioned on previous occasions that this figure for the work force is nothing less than fictitious. The department says that the work force consists of some 4,000,000 but it takes into account a number ofemployers andself-employed persons. I should like to know whether the provision of additional staff points to an increasein the number of unemployed. My assessment of the unemployment position is that although the percentage may have decreased, the number of unemployed has beenincreasing during the whole of the last three years. {: .speaker-K5K} ##### Senator Scott: -- That is not so. Senates POKE.- It is. I invite the Honorable senator to examine the record. He will find that there has been a steady increase in the number of unemployed over the last three years. Why has there been an increase of some 39 in the number of assistants? The number of typists and machinists has declined by 37 and the number of assistants has increased by 39. That indicates to me that a greater degree of automation, or mechanization, has been introduced butI would like the Minister to tell me if that is the reason for the change. I refer now to page 239 of the Estimates, still dealing with the Department of Labour and National Service. The amount for the acquisition of sites and buildings has been increased by about £5,000. We find that there is to be an increase of over £9,000 in the expenditure on buildings, works, fittings and furniture, making a total increase of approximately £15,000. Perhaps the Minister will be good enough to give the reasons for that particular increase. I would like for a moment to deal with the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission for which provision is made under the estimates of the Department of Labour and National Service. The commission has been a bone of contention in the trade union movement for a number of years mainly because it has become a virtual dictatorship. Once a person is appointed a judge of this tribunal he remains a member of the tribunal for life. He can make any award that suits his own particular whim or the whim of the Government which happens to be in power at the time. SenatorLaught. - He makes it according to law. {: .speaker-K19} ##### Senator POKE: -I will touch on that point later, but I should like the honorable senator to allow me to continue my remarks in the way in whichI wish to present them. I suggest that there has been, a number of occasions when the judges of the commission have paid no regard whatever to the weight of the evidence which hasbeen placed before them. {: .speaker-KQQ} ##### Senator Laught: -- That is a serious allegation to make. {: .speaker-K19} ##### Senator POKE: -- It might be a serious allegation to make but I have known wagefixing tribunals which have not had regard to the weight of evidence thathas been placed before them. As a matter of fact I have been on such tribunals which have given decisions completely against the weight of evidence that was presented to them. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- Youhave, neverbeen on a Commonwealth arbitral tribunal. Senaton POKE.-I was talking about wage-fixing authorities.I have appeared before the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. For the benefit of **Senator Wright** let me say thatI have appeared before the commission on more than one occasion. I now wish to deal with the fixation of the basic wage which is a function of the Commonwealth Conciliation andArbitration Commission. Going back to 1907 when the Harvester award was made, the basic wage was fixed on the basis of the needs of a family unit. For a considerablenumber of years periodical variations were made to the basic wage. Then in 1921, if my memory serves me correctly, the system of automatic adjustments according to the C series retail prices index was introduced and that system continued until September, 1953, when the basic wage was frozen. Now, unions have to go to the tribunal every so often to apply for an increase in the basic wage. The increase that is granted does not reflect the true cost of living as shown by the C series retail prices index. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- What does that prove? {: .speaker-K19} ##### Senator POKE: -- It proves simply that the worker is not getting wage justice in relation to the prices that he has to pay for necessaries for himself and his family. Our industrial legislation is in need of a complete overhaul. The legislation is repressive as far as the workers are concerned. It has been the cause of many industrial upheavals in Australia. There is no other reason for those industrial upheavals. {: .speaker-JZQ} ##### Senator Anderson: -- We are going through a period of unparalleled industrial peace. {: .speaker-K19} ##### Senator POKE: -- We may have industrial peace; but I emphasize that the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission has never made an award which compared favorably with any agreement negotiated privately between employees and employers. I have never seen an award made by the commission that compared favorably with any agreement produced by direct negotiation. The Stevedoring Industry Act also contains a very bad provision. Before a person can be registered as a stevedore he must be a member of an appropriate organization, be it the Waterside Workers Federation, the Australian Workers Union or the North Australian Workers Union. That principle is recognized by the court and by the Parliament. Yet there is no provision in the Stevedoring Industry' Act that having become a member of an appropriate organization a person must remain a financial member of that organization. That is a bad feature of the act, and I ask the Minister to consider the introduction of amending legislation to make it compulsory for a member of an appropriate organization to remain a financial member once he has been granted membership of that organization. Can the Minister indicate whether it will be possible to introduce amending legislation for that purpose? {: #subdebate-28-0-s39 .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator WRIGHT:
Tasmania -- I rise to speak in view of what **Senator Poke** has just said about the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. I would think it would be conceded that that authority is no longer classified as a judicial body, and therefore it is not beyond the bounds of propriety to refer in this chamber to its operations. Nevertheless, any reference to it should be made with a grave sense of responsibility, having regard to the delicate and important duties that the tribunal discharges. Having said that, I think we should remind ourselves that on the last occasion early this year when the commission reassessed the basic wage it did make a pronouncement that had the result of lifting the basic wage by 15s. a week. Everybody who examined the reasons given in the judgment of the tribunal would feel compelled to say, I think, that the main basis for that award was the expectation of economic progress during the coming twelve months rather than proved facts. I mention that, because we do not want to delude ourselves just because three legal men, appointed for life as presidential members of a commission, sit and hear what goes by the name of evidence and hear argument - economic, forensic and otherwise - and then give a judgment, not on an individual dispute between an employer and an employee, but upon a general assessment, much in the same way as a House of Parliament makes an assessment of the economy for budgetary purposes. This tribunal now assumes to itself annually the role of assessing in a general way the capacity of the Commonwealth to sustain an increase in the wage factor of costs. When we realize the extent to which that makes an impact upon this Government's Budget, and then realize the extent to which it makes an impact upon the general cost factor of the economy, we see what a tremendously strong and powerful jurisdiction that tribunal - no longer judicial, but arbitral - exercises each year. I am sorry that **Senator Poke** has left the chamber because at this stage the theme of my thought is not very divergent from his. I think that the primary producing section of the community is the one that gets least consideration from this tribunal because it is not in the maelstrom of contention between employer and employee - in the industrial sphere, that contention becomes most intense - and it is last on the line to receive net profit after paying out of its gross profit the whole of the Australian cost of production. In addition, it has to rely on the overseas factor - prices - in the main, for its reward, lt is in that respect, I think, that we ought to re-assess the question whether this tribunal is properly constituted to discharge the national function of assessing a basic wage for the community. It was constituted with the idea of hearing a dispute promoted by a single union against a group of employers who were associated together in one industry, and to assess a basic wage for that industry, but during the last fifteen years it has become the practice for unions acting in unison to promote a claim each year. The employers are generally represented on the other side, so that the decision for the year is a general nation-wide assessment of what the tribunal thinks is the capacity of industry to pay. That responsibility is too wide and terrific to be discharged by three men alone, and I pray that the Minister here will inform the Minister whom he represents that there is opinion - I think it will be considered to be responsible and earnest opinion - that the responsibility should not be confined to three men; that it is needful to introduce a balanced judgment representative of a greater number of members of the tribunal than a mere three, so that out of the luck of numbers, out of the skill that would come from additional appointments to that tribunal, representative of a greater variety of interests, there would be achieved a better balance for the residual section of the community to whom I have referred, particularly the primary producers. I am interested to learn what the people who are described as employment officers in the Department of Labour and National Service actually do. Last year, there were 551 of them on the pay-roll; in this financial year, provision is requested for 558 employment officers, the proposed vote being £681,320. Will the Minister be good enough to tell me the particular function that an employment officer discharges, and how we can find employment for no fewer than 558 men in this category throughout the Commonwealth? {: #subdebate-28-0-s40 .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator ARMSTRONG:
New South Wales -- Before the suspension of the sitting, **Senator Brown** asked the Minister for the Navy **(Senator Gorton)** some very reasonable questions about the submarine fleet, but the Minister quite obviously dodged answering him; he did not even refer to the matter. When **Senator Brown** raised it again after dinner, and pressed the point, the Minister took refuge by saying that as any question about submarines concerned government policy, he was not prepared to answer it. The Minister's attitude does not impress me one little bit. I cannot follow his reasoning that this is a matter of government policy. If I asked him what is the strength of the Army, he would tell me. If I then asked him how many of that number are officers, and how many are private soldiers, he would tell me. Coming to the department that he administers, if I asked him how many naval ships are in commission, or could quickly be brought into commission, he would tell me. There is nothing secret about these matters. {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator Gorton: -- If you asked me how many submarines we have, I would tell you. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator ARMSTRONG: -- That is one of the questions that the Minister was asked, and I intend to ask it again before ( conclude. {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator Gorton: -- And you will be told the number. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator ARMSTRONG: -- The Minister says that I will be told the number of submarines we have, but whether he will tell me the right number is another matter. I do not know what aspect of **Senator Brown's** questions is regarded as being a matter of government policy. I should like the Minister to inform me how many submarines we have. Obviously, that is not a matter of government policy. I want to know where they came from. This, also, is not a matter of government policy. I should like him to inform me whether they are obsolescent. This might be a matter of government policy. {: .speaker-KPI} ##### Senator Kendall: -- Any naval vessel under construction is obsolescent before it is completed. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator ARMSTRONG: -- I hope no one will say that a naval officer in training is obsolescent before his training is completed. If our submarines are obsolescent, I should like the Minister to indicate the degree of their obsolescence. Is it intended to continue to use themfor the training of Royal Australian Navy personnel, or are they to become : a secondary part ofour defence Fleet? I should like to know, also - this may bea matter of government policy - how much the Government paidfor these submarines. I think I have asked any questions clearly. So that there will be no confusion inthe matter, I shall now sit down and awaittheMinister'sreply. {: #subdebate-28-0-s41 .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON:
Minister forthe Navy · Victoria · LP -- Ithink that the questions that **Senator Armstrong** has askedcan be quite simply answered. His first question was: How many submarines does the Royal Australian Navy own atthe present time? Was that the question? {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator Armstrong: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON: -- The answer is, " None ". I should like to expand that completelytruthfulanswer,for the honorable senators information. Threesubmarines owned by the Royal Navyarestationed in Australia, and areengaged in exercises with our ships. All I can say as to their obsolescence or otherwise is that they are not the most modern types of submarines owned bytheRoyal Navy. As to what we paid for them, the answer is that we paidnothing. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator Armstrong: -- Doyou pay any rental? {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON: -- There issome arrangement for the payment of crews, but the amount involved is not significant. {: #subdebate-28-0-s42 .speaker-JQN} ##### Senator COOKE:
Western Australia -- I refer toDivision No. 401which relates totheMinistryof LabourAdvisory Council. In1958-59,asumof£17,000 wasprovided fortheexpensesof this council. Ofthat sum,only£3,690 was expended. Despitethatunderspending of a little under £14,000, provision ismadethis year for £12,400. I should liketoknow what that expenditure of £3,690 in 1958-59 covered and what the expenditure isexpectedto be in 1959-60. Further, I should like the Minister to tell us who the members of the councilare, andwhether the council is a statutory body.Does it incur expenditure thatiscoveredelsewherein theEstimates, or does theamount mentionedhere cover thewholeofthe council'sexpenditure? Again, is it called in to advise, and on what matters does it advise the Ministry of Labour? {: #subdebate-28-0-s43 .speaker-K7Y} ##### Senator TANGNEY:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP -- I direct attention to Division No. 638, which relates to the Department of Primary Industry. The first question I should like to ask relates to the small amount of £240 provided for drought relief to the dairy industry. I should like to know from the Minister the basis on which this £240 for drought relief is assessed. It seems to me to be a small amount to provide for the whole of the Commonwealth although it has some significance in that it indicates that the Commonwealth Government is in the habit of setting aside some amount fordrought relief for the dairying industry. Asa South Australian senator, I think it appropriate thatI invite the Minister's attention to the fact that the closer settled areas of South Australia are suffering a disastrous drought at the moment. This year, the rainfall in the Adelaide metropolitan area has been well under ten incheswhereas normally it is approximately twenty inches. In other parts of South Australia where dairying is carried on the rainfall for the last twelve months has barely exceeded five inches. I should like to know also whether the Department of Primary Industry has a general power to assess reliefif,ata later date, aconcerted approach ismadeto the Commonwealthfor relief for primary production in general inSouth Australia dueto theunusually low rainfall this year.The dairying industryin particularhas been able to carry on fairly well to date, thanks tothe supplies of fodderwhich wereconserved last yearbut, with no grasshay beingcut this year, it ispossible that during next summer, autumn and winter,and perhaps spring, the position of the industry will become quite parlous. In those circumstances, Ithink it in order to mention thematternow. Nodecision hasas yet beenreached in South Australia,but I predict that itwillnot be very long before atentativeassessment will be coming forward fromthe authorities there, and I accordingly ask the Minister togive this matter some consideration in advance. I comenow to item 15 in Division No. 638; it relates to the provision of £10,000 for fruit fly research. I point out that over the last five or six years the South Australian Government has spent £2,000,000 from its own funds in combating the fruit fly. I should like to know the basis upon which this £10,000 for research has been assessed. I should also like to know what results have been achieved so far. While dealing with fruit fly research, I invite the Minister's attention to the fact that the fight against the fruit fly appears to be one which could be better waged by the Commonwealth than by the individual States because, as 1 see the position at the moment, there appears to be no fruit fly in South Australia even though vast sums have been spent in guarding against it. Fruit fly infestation seems to be fairly widespread in the metropolitan area of Sydney, and in districts further north. The States of South Australia and Victoria are spending large sums of public money in keeping it away from their borders. ft would appear to me to be a matter that should be attacked on a Commonwealth basis rather than by the individual States. Apparency the Department of Primary Industry is interested in fruit fly research, and I ask the Minister whether he thinks it would be possible and better to attack the whole question of fruit fly research on a Commonwealth basis. My third and last question relates to Division No. 638, item' 18: - Dairy industry - Committee of Enquiry - for which £20,000 has been set aside this year. I should' like to know briefly from the Minister the progress that has been made so far by the committee, when its report is expected to be ready, and whether the report will be tabled in the Senate and subsequently debated, or whether it will be dealt with by the Minister without reference to the Parliament. {: #subdebate-28-0-s44 .speaker-JZU} ##### Senator ORMONDE:
New South Wales -- My question is prompted by the remarks of **Senator Wright,** when he was speaking of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court. Has the Minister ever considered the desirability of instituting a productivity index? Although our courts determine a wage, as **Senator Wright** has said, on evidence, they have no formula on which to base it, nor have they any fixed method of arriving at their decision. I think that that is wrong. In the United States of America, of course, there is a productivity index, and there is also one in the United Kingdom. There may be indexes in other places, too, but in this country we have none. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- How does the index work in the United States of America? {: .speaker-JZU} ##### Senator ORMONDE: -- I am not qualified to answer that question. I do not know. I remind the Minister, and I ask him to express a view on the matter, that at the last hearing before the federal court, **Mr. Justice** Foster directed attention to the fact that there was no productivity index. Although the court was asked to decide on a wage rate for this country on the basis of the ability of industries to pay, obviously the court was not satisfied that it had the right material in its hands to make such a determination. **Mr. Justice** Foster referred to the fact that the only index that the court had before it as evidence was an index supplied by the Australia and. New Zealand Bank Ltd. In other words, no governmental body in Australia had done anything to provide a formula or an index. To-night, we had a meeting in the precincts of the House and set up a committee of the Australian Labour Party on automation. One of the matters about which we shall be asking the Government to do something is the compilation of a productivity index. ' know that that is also the policy of the Australian Council of Trade Unions. We shall be pressing for that from now on, and I therefore ask the Minister whether he can give his views on the matter. Some weeks ago, I asked the Minister about the future of the Cockatoo Island dock. He informed me that he did not know whether there would be any further orders for the dock when the ship now on the stocks there was completed, but that other work depended on future defence policy. I now ask the Minister whether he is in a position to inform the committee whether the prospects for the Cockatoo dock have improved. {: #subdebate-28-0-s45 .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP -- I inform **Senator Ormonde** that I do not think it is proper, in a debate on the Estimates, to express views; rather should one answer questions and give information to the best of one's ability. The answer to- the question he asked in regard to the Cockatoo dock is, as he has been told, that on the completion of the two ships which are in various stages of building at the dock, no allocation of future naval work to the dock is contemplated. The allocation of naval work will depend on decisions to be made by the Government as to the shape and composition of the Australian defence forces. I point out, however, that the Cockatoo dock is a civil dockyard, not a naval dockyard, although it does naval work under special agreements. It can do, has done, and could do again, civil shipbuilding work if necessary. {: .speaker-KQQ} ##### Senator Laught: asked a series of questions, the first of which referred to the sum of ?240 which is set aside in the Estimates for drought relief in Queensland. This is a part of the Commonwealth contribution for losses of cattle in that State through drought, the amount to be given to the State having been spread over a large number of years. In regard to the general question he asked me, as to what would happen if a similar drought occurred in South Australia, the answer is that when a natural disaster strikes a State, such as the floods or fires which struck in South Australia and Victoria and the floods and drought which occurred in Queensland, the State is expected to help itself. But if it is an act of God from which serious consequences flow, then it is open to the State concerned to approach the Commonwealth for special assistance, and each case is judged according to its particular merits. The honorable senator asked me about the sum of ?10,000 which is set aside from the Commonwealth Budget for the campaign against fruit fly. That is a Commonwealth contribution to a fund for research into the life cycle of the fruit fly and must not be, and cannot be, compared with the large sums of money spent by South Australia and Victoria on the eradication of fruit fly once it has been found in a particular area when, of course, all the fruit must be stripped, the trees sprayed, and so on. **Senator Laught** also asked about the composition of the Dairy Industry Enquiry Committee. That committee has already been to Western Australia, South Australia and Queensland and has held meetings and taken evidence in those States, lt will shortly visit the other States. The chairman hopes to have the report of the committee completed by May next at the latest. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: asked me for an answer as to what the 557 employment officers scattered throughout the Commonwealth found to do to occupy their time. The sort of work they are called upon to dois to give assistance to people who wish to obtain employment. That does not merely mean that people who are unemployed approach the officers and say, " We are out of a job. Can you help us? " People coming on to the labour market from schools also use the Commonwealth Employment Service as an employment agency. People in employment who desire to change to a better job, or those who seek advice about the opportunities in other States or in other industries, also are helped by these officers to obtain employment of their choice. In order to be able to provide this service, they keep in close touch with employers to see which employers have job vacancies, where the vacancies are, and the types of people they want to fill them. The officers give special assistance in the placement of migrants and of people who are physically handicapped in any way. They try to get employment for people who are in a difficult position vis-a-vis others on the labour market. They advise people just out of school on the sort of jobs that they would be most fitted for. With the co-operation of employers, they provide opportunities for young people to visit factories and to see the work performed in them. The young people are thus given an opportunity to see whether or not they would like to work in a particular industry. They collect and collate information for the department on the state of the labour market generally. This information is one of the factors to which the Government pays some attention when formulating economic policy at Budget time. They help to administer the national service training scheme, arranging call-up, medical examination and travelling, looking after a man from the time he is called up until he is left under the wing of the Army. They administer work tests to people who apply for unemployment benefit. Conditions are laid down that must be complied with by those people if they are to continue to receive the benefit over a long period. Those are rough details of the sort of work on which these employment officers are engaged. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator Armstrong: -- Are there another 50 this year? {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON: -- No, the number has risen from 551 to 558. That is not any indication of an increase in unemployment. The reason lies in the vast number of things with which these officers have to deal and in the rise in population generally. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- It is not intended as an attempt to reduce unemployment, I hope. {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON: -- Both the honorable senator and I believe that unemployment is of such small proportions that it does not need reduction. **Senator Cooke** asked why money was set aside for the Ministry of Labour Advisory Council, although the Australian Council of Trades Unions had withdrawn from it. {: .speaker-JQN} ##### Senator Cooke: -- Also the reason for the disparity between the budgeted amount of £17,000 last year and the expenditure of £3,690, and the proposed vote of £12,400. {: .speaker-KH5} ##### Senator GORTON: -- The amount is to be set aside because the Government hopes that during the year the council will be able to operate as it used to operate. I think it is intended that productivity teams, drawn from representatives of employers and employees, will go to the United States, the United Kingdom and other places, to see production methods there. Money is set aside for that purpose as a result of agreements between this Government and the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom. {: #subdebate-28-0-s46 .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE:
Tasmania .- 1 wish to direct attention to the provision for the Legal Service Bureau in the proposed vote for the Attorney-General's Department. Provision was made last year for a director of the bureau. This year there is to be no appropriation for that purpose. What is the reason for that? This bureau has a very important function to carry out. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- What is it? {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE: -- When it was established, its main function was to act as adviser to ex-servicemen. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- What is it now? {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE: -- It is practically defunct. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- A very important function, now defunct! {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE: -- It is practically defunct, for the simple reason that people like the honorable senator have a grip on the racket of representing people. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator Armstrong: -- Another monopoly {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE: -- It is another monopoly, which has gradually been able to exclude this very important section of government activity. Nevertheless, the need for it does exist. New Australians need some place where they can obtain legal advice on such matters as the purchase of motor cars and homes. Some of them are not getting the advice that they should get. Over the past year I have learned of very poor advice that has been given to new Australians on legal matters. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- By whom? {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE: -- I shall not mention any names. The advice was not given by the Legal Service Bureau. The advice of that bureau is not available to these people. There should be some central office to which these people can go to have their legal rights explained. I should like to know the reason for the gradual whittling down of the Legal Service Bureau. During the years immediately after the war it was of great benefit to ex-servicemen who could not afford large legal fees. It carried out a very important function and I should like an explanation of the reason for abolishing the position of director. I refer now to the Supreme Court in Darwin. I cannot find in the estimates any place where the salaries of judges of the High Court and others are enumerated. The salary of the justice of the Northern Territory Supreme Court is shown as £4,000. It is very difficult to make a comparison of his salary and that of any other Commonwealth judge, because other salaries are not shown in the estimates. There is only one justice of the Northern Territory Supreme Court. The Territory has a rapidly expanding population. During the past year I spent a week in Darwin with the Public Works Committee, which went thoroughly into many aspects of the proposed new Supreme Court building in Darwin. {: .speaker-JZQ} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Anderson: -- Order! I do not want to cut across the honorable senator, but I think he is getting away from the proposed votes we are now considering, on to a matter that comes under the jurisdiction of the Department of Territories. {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE: -- I advert to the salaries of the following officers of the Attorney-General's Department: SolicitorGeneral £6,000, First Assistant Secretary £4,852, Parliamentary Draftsman £4,852, and the Crown Solicitor £4,852. I have mentioned the salaries of four senior - and very worthy - officers of the AttorneyGeneral's Department. Honorable senators will see that the salary of the Justice of the Supreme Court in Darwin does not compare favorably with those salaries, despite the amount of work that he has to do. I have taken up this matter following my own observations of the position there. I feel that the provision of amenities for this gentleman in the Northern Territory has been niggardly. For instance, he drives an old-fashioned bomb of a car which does not lend dignity to his high office. I had a discussion with one of the senior members of the High Court. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- Oh please! {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE: -- He spoke of the need for an exchange of justices, and said that they should serve in the southern States for a portion of each year. These are very important matters which should be discussed in the Parliament. The inhabitants of the Northern Territory tend to be somewhat isolated from Canberra, and from people like **Senator Wright** who, for some reason or other, likes to prevent discussion of these matters. I do not know the reason for his attitude. Perhaps he thinks that we should consider subjects which he feels to be more important. {: .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator Wright: -- I merely said, " Oh please! " {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE: -- Well, please refrain from saying, " Oh please! " This is a very serious matter. Attention should be given 'to the question that I have raised, if only because of the increase in the work that is being done in the Northern Territory by the real pioneers and frontiersmen of this country. Nothing but the best is good enough for them. I do hope that the Attorney-General, whose activities in the Northern Territory are administered by some one else, will have a close look at the poor conditions under which justice is being dispensed in that part of the world. It will be some years before the new Supreme Court is built. The report of the Public Works Committee is there for every one to read. It tells of the primitive conditions that exist. I hope that the Attorney-General will make a point of looking at the administration of his department in the Northern Territory, so that the officers there will be able, even under present circumstances, to carry on their work with appropriate dignity and under the conditions which they so richly deserve. {: #subdebate-28-0-s47 .speaker-K5K} ##### Senator SCOTT:
Western Australia .- I wish to refer to Part XXII.- Miscellaneous Services, Division No. 638 - Department of Primary Industry. I am especially interested in item 6, " Pearl shell surveys, £24,000" and item 17, " Air beef- subsidy, £7,000 ". In 1958-59, pearl shell surveys cost £21,782 - out of an appropriation of £23,500. This year £24,000 is to be spent. I think that every one well knows that the Australian pearling industry has been going through dire times. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator Armstrong: -- It is obviously a case of bad leadership. {: .speaker-K5K} ##### Senator SCOTT: -- It is not. It is the result of over-production. Half of the pearling fleet that is stationed at Thursday Island is tied up. Three-quarters of the Darwin fleet is not fishing this year, and only about 60 or 70 per cent, of the fleet in Western Australian waters is operating - yet we are still spending money on surveying the pearl shell beds of Australia. Originally, these surveys were conducted to ensure that pearl fishing masters would not fish out the pearl shell beds. However, the market has collapsed, and very few vessels are now operating. Perhaps the Minister will tell me why the Commonwealth is to spend £24,000 on this work during the coming year. I notice that the air beef subsidy is to be decreased by more than £1,000 this year. We all know that .it is paid to the killing centre at Glenroy in north-western Australia. The owners of that undertaking have said that, but for the subsidy, they would not have been able to carry on. We all know that three or four years ago the Government of Western Australia decided not to continue paying its share of the subsidy. That Government was a Labour government. We know also that the Commonwealth Government had to increase its subsidy by approximately 100 per cent, to keep that beef-killing station operating. Why is this year's appropriation to be only £7,000, compared with last year's figure of £8,817? We all know of the success of the air beef scheme. We know, too, that the killing centre based at Glenroy has enabled nearby station owners to kill large numbers of cattle that in other circumstances could not have been killed. We know that people living in the area have derived great benefit from the existence of the Glenroy centre.I am wondering whether the lower appropriation this year is attributable to the fact that a new company, based on Derby, has a freezing chamber, and that beef is now flown from Glenroy to that centre, instead of to Wyndham, where previously it was frozen before shipment. I am wondering whether the shorter distance is responsible for the reduced appropriation, or whether the change has been made for some other purpose. If not, I should like to know from the Minister why the subsidy is being reduced. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator Armstrong: -- The Minister has one minute in which to answer you. {: .speaker-K5K} ##### Senator SCOTT: -- I should like to ask the Minister a great many more questions. It is of the greatest importance that the air beef subsidy should be kept going in order to help people who are killing cattle in the area. The **CHAIRMAN (Senator the Hon. A. D. Reid).** - Order! The time allotted for the consideration of the proposed votes has expired. Proposed votes agreed to. {: #subdebate-28-0-s48 .speaker-K7A} ##### Senator SPOONER:
New South WalesVicePresident of the Executive Council and Minister for National Development · LP -- I move - >That the time allotted for the consideration of the following votes be amended, as follows: - > >Repatriation Department, £83,021,000. - until 11.30 p.m. this day. > >Department of the Interior, £5,115,000. > >Miscellaneous Services - Department of the Interior, £138,300. Civil Defence, £300,000 War and Repatriation Services - Miscellaneous - Department of the Interior, £287,000. Australian War Memorial, £94,300. - until 12.15 p.m., Thursday, 12th November. Australian Capital Territory, £4,191,000 Department of Territories, £310,000 Northern Territory, £5,881,000 Norfolk Island, £32,000 Papua and New Guinea, £13,142,000 Cocos (Keeling) Islands, £36,000. - until 2.45 p.m., Thursday, 12th November. Department of Works, £3,915,000. - until 3.45 p.m., Thursday, 12th November. Postmaster-General's Department, £105,066,000 Broadcasting and Television Services, £9,626,000. - until 4.45 p.m., Thursday, 12th November. Parliament, £1,204,000 Prime Minister's Department, £3,228,000 Miscellaneous Services - Prime Minister's Department, £4,608,400 War and Repatriation Services - Reconstruction and Rehabilitation, £2,459,000. - until 5.45 p.m., Thursday, 12th November. Department of External Affairs, £2,582,000 Miscellaneous Services - Department of External Affairs, £2,012,000 Economic Assistance to support defence programme of South-East Asia Treaty Organization member countries, £718,000. International development and relief, £6,259,000 - until 9 p.m., Thursday, 12th November. Department of Trade, £2,164,000 Miscellaneous Services - Department of Trade, £663,000. - until 10 p.m., Thursday, 12th November. Department of National Development, £1,931,000 Miscellaneous Services - Department of National Development, £1,288,700 War Service Homes Division, £1,121,000 Australian Atomic Energy Commission, £2,186,000. - until 11 p.m., Thursday, 12th November. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, £6,772,000 Miscellaneous Services - Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, £144,000 Department of Defence, £1,258,000 Recruiting Campaign, £310,000. -until 12 o'clock midnight, Thursday, 12th November In amplification, I merely say that we have recast the working of the guillotine in accordance with some of the suggestions that came from the opposite side of the chamber during the debate last night. I think that the re-arrangement will be an improvement. {: #subdebate-28-0-s49 .speaker-KTN} ##### Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania -- I did have the opportunity of a discussion with the Minister for National Development **(Senator Spooner)** regarding his own department when he proposed the break-up that he has suggested. The break-up of the departments in charge of **Senator Cooper** has only just come to my notice. At this stage I certainly cannot see - in relation to the matters that **Senator Cooper** is handling - that the apportionment of time will make the best use of the very limited time available. For instance the Repatriation Department vote is allotted less than an hour this evening commencing from this moment. All I can say regarding the break-up of the different items is that it must be an improvement upon the very untidy debate that has just concluded, when the debate ranged from one item to another in the most disconnected way. The Minister certainly did his best to answer all the queries that were raised, but it was a most untidy, incoherent type of debate that was completely inconclusive. This must be an improvement on that. {: .speaker-K0C} ##### Senator Armstrong: -- Not much of an improvement. {: .speaker-KTN} ##### Senator McKENNA: -- I quite realize that, and I say to the honorable senator that if a number of honorable senators want to address themselves to the estimates of the Repatriation Department, less than an hour will not enable them to do justice to that very important subject-matter. The Opposition has declared its objection to the severe limitation that has been imposed upon this debate. We do not oppose this motion, because it must be an improvement upon what was proposed hitherto. I do not propose to take any further time now. I intend to allow those who wish to say something about the repatriation estimates to have their say. {: #subdebate-28-0-s50 .speaker-KBW} ##### Senator WRIGHT:
Tasmania -- One accepts this sectionalizing of the departments that have been subject to the guillotine as an attempt to rationalize the irrational. In that respect it represents an attempt to improve on what 'has been shown to be a most confused debate. However, when one surveys the departments the expenditure of which has to be debated by this chamber before to-morrow at midnight, one sees conclusively how futile parliamentary proceedings are becoming and how this chamber is being denied the responsibility to scrutinize departmental expenditure. Take for instance one item. The proposed vote for the PostmasterGeneral's Department is £105,000,000 and the time allotted to discuss that vote together with that for broadcasting and television services, which together involve an expenditure of £115,000,000, to the nearest million, is one hour. I protest. {: #subdebate-28-0-s51 .speaker-KBC} ##### Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia -- The only thing 1 wish to say is that the deterioration in this debate came after the guillotine was introduced. I consider that the debate on the departments handled by **Senator Paltridge** was very good and very orderly. At the Minister's request we dealt with the items seriatum. We did not jump all over the place, and there were very intelligent discussions. The debate on that section was one of the best appropriation debates I have heard during the last ten years. I repeat that deterioration took place when the guillotine against which we protested was introduced. Now we are to get a refinement of the torture in an attempt to break up a schedule that was introduced only this week. **Senator Wright** has, I think, shown how ridiculous and how unfair the position is. The way this Parliament is behaving lately one would think that it is completely wrong for politicians to come into the Parliament and talk at all. It seems that we are starting to resent the very job we were sent here to do. {: #subdebate-28-0-s52 .speaker-K4S} ##### Senator SANDFORD:
Victoria -- I enter my protest against the limitation of debate on this most important matter of repatriation to less than one hour. We should have ample opportunity to discuss and debate very fully this most important section of the Estimates. I notice that this year there is an increase in the proposed expenditure on repatriation. I do not know whether that is because of inflationary trends, or whether it is the intention of the Government - I hope it is - to extend greatly the facilities for ex-servicemen, particularly in regard to hospital and medical treatment. I have taken the opportunity every year to place before the Minister for Repatriation matters that I consider, and matters which every right-thinking person must consider, to be of very great importance. We see in the community to-day in human bodies the results of the disastrous two world wars through which we have passed. I myself have on my files dozens of cases of men being driven to desperation seeking hospital and medical treatment that is available to them, but because they cannot claim a repatriation entitlement they are refused that hospital and medical treatment. {: #subdebate-28-0-s53 .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- Order! The committee is not discussing the proposed vote for the Repatriation Department at the present time; it is discussing the motion moved by the Minister. The honorable senator cannot discuss the proposed vote until this resolution has been passed. {: .speaker-K4S} ##### Senator SANDFORD: -- All I can say is that I take very strong objection to your ruling in that respect. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- Order! {: .speaker-K4S} ##### Senator SANDFORD: -- In that event 1 will re-emphasize my objection to the things I had commenced to speak about. {: #subdebate-28-0-s54 .speaker-JQN} ##### Senator COOKE:
Western Australia -- I ask for your ruling, **Mr. Chairman,** as to whether, in view of the ridiculously restricted debate under this schedule, the Standing Orders, which provide that an honorable senator may speak for a quarter of an hour, and then after a break speak for another quarter of an hour, will be adhered to. {: .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- Order! If an honorable senator wishes to take his second quarter of an hour, he may do so if no other honorable senator rises to speak. The Standing Orders will be strictly adhered to. {: .speaker-JQN} ##### Senator COOKE: -- All I can say is that this is a parody of Parliament. As **Senator Wright** has pointed out, the committee has only one hour in which to debate the estimates of two departments whose expenditure amounts to £110,000,000. Both are very contentious departments at the present time. The Postmaster-General's Department which has just raised its charges should receive the closest scrutiny. If one speaker speaks for a quarter of an hour and the Minister dithers for a quarter of an hour, that exhausts the discussion on those departments. Broadcasting and television services from a highly controversial subject at present, both in regard to expenditure and administration. Television has been only recently introduced into some of the States, and the Senate should be vitally interested in this matter. There could be only two -speakers during the consideration of a proposed vote. A ditherer on the Government side, and the Minister dithering in reply, could exhaust the whole of the available time for consideration of a proposed vote of £9,000,000. I say that the Minister has adopted a thoroughly disgraceful attitude towards the committee. Of course, I realize that the motion will be agreed to, because the Government has the numbers. The Minister has acted arrogantly in this matter. There have been instances during the consideration of the Estimates when Government supporters have asked questions about comparatively trifling matters and the Minister, when replying, has directed his attention only to answering those questions and has ignored important questions that had been asked by honorable senators on this side. I voice my strongest objection to the manner in which the Government is preventing a proper consideration of the Estimates. This afternoon, I asked a question about a matter that is highly suspect. A Government supporter dithered away a quarter of an hour asking inconsequential questions, to which it was obvious that he did not really require answers; he just wanted to dither away the time. I strongly oppose the motion. Question resolved in the affirmative. Repatriation Department. Proposed Vote, £83,021,000. {: #subdebate-28-0-s55 .speaker-K4S} ##### Senator SANDFORD:
Victoria -- I regret, **Mr. Chairman,** that I commenced to speak to this proposed vote before the question for the allotment of time had been resolved. As I said before being called to order, the proposed vote for this financial year is about £6,000,000 greater than the vote last year. I think that it is absolutely wicked of the Government to allow us only such a relatively short time in which to discuss the activities of the Repatriation Department, which discharges the important function of providing repatriation benefits for ex-service personnel throughout Australia. Every year for some time past, in common with other members of the Opposition, 1 have advocated an extension in the provision of hospital and medical facilities for ex-service personnel, and I hope that the additional money proposed to be made available in this financial year will enable this to be done. I have in my files particulars of dozens of cases in which exservicemen have beer driven almost to desperation because of their inability to obtain hospital and medical treatment. These facilities should have been made available to them. Some of the cases are particularly tragic. The ex-servicemen concerned could not obtain a repatriation entitlement, although it appears to be conclusive that their illness, if not directly caused by war service, at least was aggravated by that service. As their disability has not been accepted as attributable to war service, they are unable to obtain hospital and medical treatment at the expense of the Repatriation Department. I am sure that the Minister for Repatriation **(Senator Sir Walter Cooper)** will concede readily that, in every State of Australia, there are repatriation hospitals that are not fully occupied. For instance, there are vacant beds at the Heidelberg Repatriation Hospital in Victoria, although I am unable, offhand, to state the number. Some wards of the hospital are not being used to their full capacity, and yet ex-servicemen who are in need of hospital and medical treatment are not admitted to them. {: .speaker-JZU} ##### Senator Ormonde: -- The same position exists at Yaralla, in Sydney. {: .speaker-K4S} ##### Senator SANDFORD: -- A similar state of affairs exists in all States. I appeal to the Minister to do what he can tb make hospital and medical facilities available to the ex-servicemen who need them. The number is increasing every day, particularly the number of ex-servicemen of World War I. who need attention. Surely in the evening of their lives men who defended this country and have helped to bring it to prosperity are entitled to receive humane treatment from this Government. They are getting on in years, and as each year passes many of them become ill. It is well known that the reason why many thousands of ex-servicemen do not enjoy a repatriation entitlement is that, when they were discharged from the services many years ago, they shunned the idea of bothering the Repatriation Department. They went to employment in various parts of this country and were quite prepared to bear the cost of treating any minor ailments they suffered during the early years of their absorption into civil life. But with the passage of years many of these exservicemen have developed all sorts of sicknesses. How can the Minister or the officials of the Repatriation Department - I am not casting any reflection on them, because they are doing a grand job in accordance with Government policy - refute the claim that is made in many instances by ex-servicemen that the intolerable conditions under which they served their country at least aggravated the complaints from which they are now suffering? I make an earnest appeal to the Minister to consider what can be done to make free hospital and medical treatment available to ex-servicemen who need it; an entitlement should be made easier to obtain than it is at the present time. I could cite many cases similar to the one I shall now mention. A young fellow enlisted in the First Australian Imperial Force at seventeen years of age. His medical history record shows that he was wounded in the head. This man was not able to obtain hospital treatment from the Repatriation Department, and he died eighteen months ago. Although he was unable to obtain a pension from the department, he died from a depressed tumour on the brain. How in the name of goodness could any one claim that the wound he sustained in his head at the war did not have a bearing, ultimately, on his death? I come now to the totally and permanently incapacitated ex-servicemen, who are dying at the rate of ten a week. Does not every member of this chamber think that a grateful country should do more foi the T.P.I. 's than it is doing? I am not suggesting that the Repatriation Department is not doing a good job, but I think the whole of the provisions in relation to the T.P.I. 's should be overhauled. The procedure for ex-servicemen seeking inclusion in this classification is vexatious and costly. Sometimes the delay runs into months. Frequently, ex-servicemen in respect of whose applications decisions have not been given come to me and to other members of this Parliament in a desperate endeavour to obtain urgently needed hospital and medical treatment. When these ex-servicemen's applications are rejected, it can be said, virtually, that they are being turned out to die. In war-time, any material damage is made good without a thought as to cost. Yet, in this financial year, it is proposed to make available only £83,000,000 for the purposes of the Repatriation Department. This is a relatively small amount of money, compared with the whole Budget. The cost of granting this concession to men whose health is failing would be very small indeed. As their classification indicates, these totally and permanently incapacitated ex-servicemen require the utmost care and attention. In many cases, they are looked after at home by their wives, who certainly do not receive from the Repatriation Department the recognition to which they are entitled. In Victoria alone these men who served in World War I. under intolerable conditions are dying off at the rate of ten a week. We owe them a deep debt of gratitude, and the cost of granting them urgently needed hospital and medical treatmen should not be considered in terms of pounds, shillings and pence. Just as the interest due to investors in war loans has always been a first charge on the Governments resources, so should we grant this urgently needed hospital treatment and medical attention to those to whom this country owes such a great debt of gratitude. As we have less than an hour to debate repatriation matters, I shall not delay the Senate longer. What I have said to-night I have said on many occasions. If it is not practicable to grant free hospital treatment and medical attention to all exservicemen, then at least let us grant this benefit to the ex-serviceman from World War I. and gradually extend its operation when we can. At least let us use our repatriation hospitals to their capacity. If we do that we shall not only grant an urgently needed service to our exservicemen but also relieve the burden on all State hospitals which are in a desperate plight at the moment in seeking to provide accommodation for all those in need of it. In his 1949 policy speech, the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** said that we owe a great and grave obligation to the people who served this country. Let us honour that obligation by making available to them the treatment they need so urgently. I appeal to the Minister to use every endeavour to review repatriation entitlements with a view to granting to these ex-servicemen the hospital and medical treatment which they so richly deserve and which we have an obligation to provide for them. {: #subdebate-28-0-s56 .speaker-K6W} ##### Senator COLE:
Tasmania .- As plans are now in hand for the remodelling of the Hobart Repatriation Hospital, I appeal to the Minister for Repatriation to see that provision is made for psychiatric wards for the treatment of ex-servicemen in Tasmania who need it. Statistics show that there was a greater number of mental cases and cases of nervous frustration during the last war than during any previouswar. In Tasmania, there are no facilities in the repatriation hospitals for the treatment of returned servicemen suffering front these complaints. At the present time they are asked to go for treatment to suchgovernment institutions as the one at Mill' brook R!ise. That is certainly a very worthy institution and I am sure that the patients receive the best of attention there; but the returned servicemen do not wish to attend such institutions. They want to be treated in their own repatriation hospitals. It seems that a certain stigma attaches to attendance at civil institutions. This would not be so in the case of repatriation hospitals. All ian ex-serviceman would need to say, if he were being treated at a repatriation hospital, would be that he had been ordered into the repatriation hospital at Hobart for certain treatment whereas, the moment he says he has been sent to Milbrook Rise people know that he is suffering from some mental condition. I know of several ex-servicemen in Tasmania who have refused treatment that is really necessary because they objected to being sent to a civilian institution for the treatment of neurosis. I therefore plead with the Minister to see that facilities and wards are set aside for the psychiatric treatment of ex-servicemen in Tasmania. {: #subdebate-28-0-s57 .speaker-K5X} ##### Senator SHEEHAN:
Victoria .- I appreciate the work that the Repatriation Department performs, but to me, as to **Senator Sandford,** the department appears to be somewhat of an enigma. Former soldiers, mostly of the First World War, who are now getting on in years, to all intents and purposes with excellent cases for pensions or other assistance from the department, are being refused assistance for unknown reasons. I have often said to former soldiers who have discussed their cases with me that I could not make out why their claims should have been refused by a department which was staffed largely by former members of the services who should be aware of the conditions that existed on active service. We find that because, in the turmoil of battle, men were taken from the front line back to hospital, a minor detail is missing from their records. The fact that that detail is missing is used as a reason for denying them pensions. Assessment tribunals are appointed to deal with such matters. Honorable senators who have had experience in this field, or who have had information brought before them, will know that ex-servicemen are denied pensions in circumstances which are difficult to understand. From time to time, in this chamber and also in another place, we debate the question of the onus of proof, and we are informed that the soldier is entitled to the benefit of the doubt and that it is for the department to prove that he is not so entitled. We have had assurances from the Minister on many occasions that ex-servicemen are entitled to the benefit of the doubt. Despite those assurances, however, we on this side of the chamber have brought before the Minister cases in which the onus has been thrust on to the soldier and has not been accepted by the department. In the Minister for Repatriation **(Senator Sir Walter Cooper)** we have a man who appears to give most sympathetic treatment to the claims of ex-servicemen. Within the last few weeks, the Minister took in hand a case that I brought to his notice, and I am pleased to say that a satisfactory result has been obtained. But I do not know why a satisfactory result was not possible in the very first instance, or why it was not apparent when the case was first brought under notice that the request for a pension was a justifiable one. That is what I cannot understand about this department. On the surface, it appears to be doing good work and to be sympathetic in many respects; yet there are instances such as those to which I have just referred. I fought a case for months and months, until I was almost ashamed to see the unfortunate widow concerned coming to my office. Eventually, by a very small turn of the wheel, or on a very insignificant piece of evidence in my humble opinion, having regard to the mass of evidence that had been presented to the department not only by me but also by advocates over a period, the widow was successful. I cannot understand why it was not apparent from the very first that that was a claim that should be recognized by the department. As I have said, the department appears to be an enigma. I ask the Minister and those responsible for the administration of the department to see to it that the reasonable requests of ex-servicemen are granted, particularly those ex-servicemen of World War I., in view of their advancing age. The case comes to my mind of a man who applied for classification as a totally and permanently incapacitated exserviceman. His claim had been refused on at least two occasions. I took up the matter with the department, which had suggested that there was nothing wrong with the man. He subsequently returned to his home and later died. After the unfortunate man was dead, the department approved his claim, and his widow received a small increase of pension. That is the kind of thing that makes me ask the Minister: What is wrong with a department which, on the surface, appears to be doing good work, but which allows such things to happen? I ask him to see whether the position cannot be rectified. Instead of having the drawn-out struggle, such as that described by **Senator Sandford,** eventually followed by success for the ex-serviceman, it should be possible for a reasonable application to be approved when it is first made. That is my only complaint against the department, but it is an important one. Certainly, it is important for the unfortunate men who are broken in health as a result of their war service. I think something should be done for them. {: #subdebate-28-0-s58 .speaker-KAF} ##### Senator WADE:
Victoria -- I direct the attention of the Minister to Division No. 672 - War and Service Pensions and Widows' Allowances. I want to place before him submissions on behalf of widows of English servicemen when those widows are living in this country. I am informed, **Sir, that** such widows are at a distinct disadvantage when the privileges and benefits that they enjoy are compared with those of widows of Australian exservicemen. I cannot see the justification for that being so. I know that it is a matter of reciprocal agreement, but I also know that when the Empire - or the Commonwealth of Nations as we choose to call it to-day - is threatened, there are no lines of demarcation. Men from all over the British Commonwealth are prepared to pay the supreme sacrifice to achieve that which, to them, is more precious than life. I believe that there are some English war widows living in this country - I do not know how many there are - who are having a great struggle to bring up their children, to educate them and to prepare them for the responsibilities of life. Because of the service that their departed menfolk rendered to the Commonwealth, I believe that such widows and their children should be treated on the same basis as are the widows of our own deceased servicemen. {: #subdebate-28-0-s59 .speaker-JQN} ##### Senator COOKE:
Western Australia -- I refer to the schedule to Division No. 671, appearing on page 208. Apparently there has been some reorganization of the staff of the Repatriation Department. The number of clerks has been reduced by 100, and of assistants by 81. The number of medical officers has increased from 67 to 82. The expenditure of the department seems to be kept in pretty reasonable balance, and in all other sections the staff does not appear to have fluctuated to any great extent. I would like the Minister to give some further information about this re-organization. {: #subdebate-28-0-s60 .speaker-JQP} ##### Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:
Minister for Repatriation · Queensland · CP [11.11]. - **Senator Sandford** and **Senator Sheehan** have asked practically the same question. They have asked why certain ex-members of the forces cannot gain admission to repatriation hospitals for treatment of their disabilities. I would point out, first, that the whole repatriation legislation is based on the assumption that an ex-serviceman may be accepted for hospital and medical treatment only if his disabilities were caused or aggravated by war service. In the last ten years, while t have been Minister, eligibility for admission to repatriation hospitals has been widened. For instance, the totally and permanently incapacitated ex-serviceman is now entitled to be treated in a repatriation hospital for any disabilities, whether warcaused or not. The person receiving a 100 per cent, general rate pension can also be treated for a disability that was not war-caused. War widows and certain widow mothers can be admitted to repatriation hospitals, as can nurses who served in the 1914-18 war. It can be seen, therefore, that we are taking in more classes of people with disabilities not war-caused, as we are able to find room for them. I admit that some of the repatriation hospitals are not full at the moment, but we have others that are more than full. For instance, in Hobart we have found it necessary to build an extra ward for the repatriation hospital. In Queensland the hospital at Greenslopes is not entirely full, but it is very close to it. If we decided to admit a whole new category, such as, for instance, all who served in the 1914-18 war, whether their disabilities are war-caused or not, we would find it impossible to provide accommodation. We might find ourselves with full hospitals, some of the patients having disabilities not war-caused, while we were unable to accept a man with a war-caused disability. We might be forced to send that man to another hospital. It is not, therefore, as easy as it seems to take these people in. We are increasing the scope of admission entitlement as we can see our way clear to do so. We make further categories eligible for admission for treatment of disabilities not war-caused, as we find that we have room for persons in that category and can look after them. **Senator Sheehan** also spoke of exservicemen who have not been able to have their disabilities accepted as war-caused. It is now more than 40 years since the cessation of hostilities in the 1914-18 war. A man may come along to the department suffering from heart trouble, or neuritis, or something of that kind that comes with age. He has probably not been near the Repatriation Department since he was discharged in 1918 or 1919, and there is no mention of his present complaint on his history sheet. In fact, there is no entry on the sheet between the time of his discharge and the time of making his claim. If he were treated for the complaint even ten or fifteen years after the war, his claim would be much clearer. But if he has not been treated for this complaint in a period of 40 years, it is very difficult to justify acceptance of a claim that the disability is due to his war service. {: .speaker-KBC} ##### Senator Willesee: -- But it seems unjust :that you cannot help that man? {: .speaker-JQP} ##### Senator Sir WALTER COOPER: -- The medical opinion would be that the man had contracted his complaint in his normal walk of life. Heart trouble is a very common disease, especially with persons over 60 years of age. If he has not complained *x>t* it beforehand, surely he cannot claim that it was caused by his war service. As I have said before, we have a commission and boards and tribunals dealing with these cases. Every member of those boards is a returned soldier, and many members of the boards, the tribunals and the commission are ex-servicemen of the 1914-18 war. One of the members of each of those different authorities has been selected from a panel of names sent to the Minister by a returned serviceman's organization. One-third of the members of both adjudicating bodies are persons who have nothing whatever to do with the Repatriation Department, and who were selected from a panel of names provided by an exserviceman's organization. Nothing could be fairer. I know that it has often been said that a tribunal takes its orders from the Government. I would have this Senate know that since I have been Minister, at any rate - I do not know what went on before - no tribunal 'has ever been interfered with in any way. They are entirely independent, and their decisions are their own and have nothing to do with the department or the Government. Surely to goodness the three returned soldiers on a tribunal would not refuse a man the benefit of the doubt! Naturally a claimant's disability cannot be accepted if it is quite clear that it could not have been caused or aggravated by war service. I have no hesitation in saying, as I have said before, that the full benefit of the onus-of-proof provision, section 47, has been given to the ex-member, whether by the commission, a board, or tribunal. At present there are 53,400 ex-servicemen of the 1914-18 war who are drawing incapacity pensions. {: .speaker-JQY} ##### Senator Courtice: -- There are still one or two who should be and are not. {: .speaker-JQP} ##### Senator Sir WALTER COOPER: -- We may quite easily say that. I could have said a lot when the previous government was in office. I think **Senator Courtice** will agree that the commission, boards and tribunals are doing a great job and giving the full benefit of section 47 to ex-members of the forces. **Senator Sandford** said that the T.P.I, person was, in most instances, being looked after by his wife. I am sure that that is not so. Such a person may go into hospital for the treatment of anything at all that is wrong with him, whether or not it is war-caused, and many of them do go into hospital. If he is treated at home, and his case is a bad case, he may obtain the attendant's allowance of £2 15s. a week. **Senator Wade** referred to British widows. The widow of a man who was in the British forces, as distinct from the Australian forces, and has come out here as a migrant, is not entitled to a war widow's pension. Such a man is not a returned soldier within the meaning of the act. There is no reciprocity with the United Kingdom in regard to war pensions. There is reciprocity in regard to social service pensions. There could not be reciprocity, because our war pension scheme is entirely different from that of the United Kingdom. We do act as agent for the British Ministry of Pensions. We could not introduce reciprocity because the rates of Australian pensions and United Kingdom pensions are different. Our rates are high. Our ordinary pension rate for a person below commissioned rank is considerably higher than the United Kingdom rate, and it would not be possible to have reciprocity. Only one new ward is being built at the Hobart hospital. Provision is being made for an expenditure of £278,000. That ward may be used for acute cases that need treatment, but not for ex-members who are certified. {: .speaker-K6W} ##### Senator Cole: -- I did not mention those cases. {: .speaker-JQP} ##### Senator Sir WALTER COOPER: -- There will be some facilities. I understand that there are not many - about four or six - at Millbank. {: #subdebate-28-0-s61 .speaker-KBC} ##### Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia -- We are indebted to the Minister for having made a complete explanation of the difficulties he faces under the act at the present time. I think that this highlights more than ever the injustice of applying the "guillotine" to this debate, because I should have liked to develop quite a number of arguments with the Minister following upon his interesting speech. I also admire the Minister's loyalty to his staff. lt is perfectly obvious that there i§ no section of the Commonwealth's activities to-day with which there is greater dissatisfaction than there is with repatriation. The Minister has said that difficulties are being met under the act. This shows very clearly that there is something wrong with the act. The very desirable steps that have been taken recently to allow certain categories of patients to be treated in repatriation hospitals must be accelerated. It is a defeatist attitude to say that there is not room for more people. After all, the sickness of any Australian is the responsibility of the Australian Government. An ex-serviceman of the 1914-18 war who is not eligible to enter a repatriation hospital must perforce enter a civilian hospital, although he may not be able to get into such a hospital, either. I suggest it is the responsibility of this Government to look after him in some way. It is only a question of the building in which he will be sheltered and the doctor or nurse who will look after him. Obviously, the act is deficient. Not enough strides have been made towards widening the provisions to enable the department to say, " As long as you were in a world war, especially the 1914-18 war, we will not dilly-dally and argue about why you did not go to the Repatriation Commission in 1921 ". I said by interjection that it seemed unjust for a person who has kept away from a repatriation hospital, to be told, upon going there finally, that he must have been all right for all those years. Instead of that being used as evidence against him, it should be regarded as evidence in his favour. As only two minutes are left for the discussion of these votes, and others wish to speak, I curtail my remarks at this point. {: #subdebate-28-0-s62 .speaker-K7Y} ##### Senator TANGNEY:
Western Australia -- I have raised previously the matter of medical benefits for children of war widows who have attained the age of sixteen years, but are still attending school and are dependent upon repatriation benefits for their sustenance. I do not think that many would be involved. I ask the Minister to consider the extension of those medical benefits to children between the ages of sixteen and eighteen years while they are attending secondary schools. I should like to raise another point, which relates to radiology assistants in repatriation hospitals. At the present time, instead of being regarded as highly trained and skilled men whose work is of inestimable benefit to radiologists, they are given the same rating as ordinary technicians. I am not in any way critical of the work done by technicians who are installing telephones or doing other work of that kind, but the men who are assisting radiologists in repatriation hospitals are doing highly specialized and technical work. I ask that some consideration be given to placing them in a special category. There are not many of them. Their work is of a very exacting nature and upon it the whole treatment of a patient may depend. Therefore, I ask the Minister to consider giving a separate classification to radiology assistants, so that their remuneration will be commensurate with the importance of their work. {: #subdebate-28-0-s63 .speaker-10000} ##### The CHAIRMAN: -- Order! The time allotted for the consideration of the proposed vote has expired. Proposed vote agreed to. Department of the Interior. Proposed Vote, £5,115,000. Miscellaneous Services - Department of the Interior. Proposed Vote, £138,300. Civil Defence. Proposed Vote, £300,000. War and Repatriation Services - Miscellaneous - Department of the Interior. Proposed Vote, £287,000. Australian War Memorial. Proposed Vote, £94,300. (Ordered to be considered together.) {: #subdebate-28-0-s64 .speaker-KAF} ##### Senator WADE:
Victoria .- I wish to refer to item 1, "Travelling and Subsistence, £6,500" of sub-division 2 of Division No. 23 1 - Administrative - relating to the Department of the Interior. Last year's appropriation for travelling and subsistence was £33,000. The actual expenditure amounted to £30,223. There must be a very substantial reason for the reduction this year to £6,500. It certainly makes interesting reading for people who are inclined to chide the Government for what is sometimes claimed to be unnecessary expenditure. I direct the attention of the Senate also to item 7, " Motor Vehicles - Hire, maintenance and running expenses, £19,000 ". Last year, £43,000 was appropriated for this purpose, and actual expenditure amounted to £40,288. We have heard a great deal about the cost to the Government of the hire, maintenance and running of motor cars. It is most refreshing to find that expenditure in this direction has been cut in half. {: #subdebate-28-0-s65 .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'BYRNE:
Tasmania . I should like to refer to Division No. 604 -Civil Defence - of Part XXI. - Defence Services. Civil defence is under the control of the Department of the Interior. Last year, £102,066 was spent in this field. This year, £300,000 is to be appropriated. I should like to ascertain from the Minister the break-up of the expenditure, because, if the subject is to be tackled at all adequately, an appropriation of only £300,000 is not nearly enough. The school at Mount Macedon is doing excellent work in imparting to various sections of the community information concerning the possible results of a thermonuclear bomb attack. Many people have emerged from that school with a desire to do something about civil defence, but they have been able to do very little because they have found abroad an air of indecision. No lead is being given by the Government to people who are prepared to do whatever is asked of them. During my time at Mount Macedon I was struck by the magnitude of the problem of civil defence, and of the need for co-ordination between the States in regard to such basic services as ambulance work, fire fighting and the like. Let us consider for a moment what is lacking in the firefighting field. I have not heard of any move to achieve standardization of firefighting equipment. There is no guarantee that a municipality will be able to make use of equipment available from the fire-fighting services of an adjoining municipality. This indecision is seen in all the sectors which would be called upon to provide civil defence - the only type of defence with which we would have to cope. I have before me a copy of the Toronto weekly, " Globe and Mail ". It gives an idea of the different approach in our country and in Canada to this matter of civil defence. We are really pulling the wool over our eyes by having a school of civil defence at which people may learn what to expect in the event of a nuclear war. The inadequate sum of £300,000 is to be provided for all purposes. In this Canadian publication, which is issued at Toronto, the Defence Minister, **Mr. Pearkes,** is reported as saying that every prudent householder should have a room ready in his home, preferably in the cellar, where he and his family could sustain themselves for 48 hours - the maximum period that it would take the authorities to estimate the extent and direction of the lethal radio-active fall-out which would follow any nuclear attack. He emphasized also that farm dwellers were just as vulnerable to fall-out as were people in cities, and that Canadians might be killed even though a nuclear explosion occurred in the United States. A home shelter was demonstrated by the army for the benefit of persons attending a conference over which **Mr. Pearkes** presided. The shelter consisted of a concrete block enclosure which must be proof against the dust through which fall-out spreads. The shelter should contain stocks of food, and drink, and also sanitation equipment. It should have a first-aid kit, radio and recreation materials, and heat and light. Honorable senators will see that, in Canada, the Government is getting right down to the fundamentals of civil defence. Whether its efforts would be effective or not no one knows. I should think that the shelters would be completely ineffective; that they would merely give people a false sense of security. It is rather interesting to read that pamphlets giving detailed information of these shelters and of the life to be led in them will be made public shortly. It will be possible to obtain blueprints for the construction of air-raid shelters. **Mr. Pearkes** was asked whether money spent on air-raid shelters would be tax free and he said that it would not. From a further publication of the same date, " The Montreal Gazette ", one learns that the Army has demonstrated a do-it-yourself shelter. This is actually what is happening in Canada, compared with Australia where a very few conscientious, highly skilled and patriotic people are trying to spread the message from Mount Macedon. They are up against a brick wall when they attempt to make their message known after they leave the school. In connexion with the Army display in Canada, it was said that families might have to spend up to fourteen days in a space about the size of a normal bathroom. The newspaper article continues - >The Army made this clear today in unveiling its new look in civil defence. Along with a demonstration of the way the national survival operations will be carried out by the Army and civilian task forces, a do-it-yourself fall-out shelter went on display. I have already mentioned the matter of price. The article discloses that the price of these shelters ranges between 220 and 290 dollars. Evidently the authorities expect the people of Canada to purchase these air-raid shelters. It might be a good business proposition. I do not know whether the authorities think that by selling these shelters to the Canadian people at from 220 to 290 dollars they are going to save the people in the event of a thermo-nuclear war. The shelters are then described. I should like to ask the Minister whether any similar shelters are contemplated in Australia. The article describes the Canadian shelters as follows: - >The shelter itself is a concrete block cubbyhole that can be tucked into a corner of your basement. It is without doors and is entered through a concrete block passage way designed as a baine against radiation being borne into the living quarters on dust. > >The curtained doorways and holes in the inner walls about a foot or two above floor level provide ventilation. The article continues - >Senior army officers, with the help of maps, charts, floor models and simulated casualties, illustrated what a nuclear attack on the capital ^ will mean. In Canada, the authorities are at least warning the people of what they can expect and telling them of the precautions to be taken in the event of a nuclear attack. Earlier in the debate to-night we were speaking about submarines, and the possibility of those vessels being incorporated in the Royal Australian Navy in the future. A submarine could stand 100 miles off the coast and blaze away from underneath the sea. lt could drop thermo-nuclear warheads on our cities. Yet, for the fourth and fifth year in succession about the same amount has been allocated for civil defence. The amount spent last year was ?102,000 out of an appropriation of ?300,000. There is nothing to say that the full ?300,000 will be spent this year. From what I know of the school at Mount Macedon the personnel there are very much aware of the need for economizing in the running of the school, but they are also fully aware of the fruitlessness of the task they have before them. Once the people who attend the school pass out of its influence there is no way in which they can apply the knowledge they acquire at the school. Our attitude to civil defence has been described as one of hiding from our responsibilities. The reply that we send people to the school at Mount Macedon is a soporific for those who ask what we are doing about civil defence. In reality we are doing nothing. The proposed appropriation in no way meets the problem that faces us. The Government is shelving its responsibility in not doing at least as much as is being dane in Canada where the people are being told to build these small cubby-houses for use in the event of war. We want to have two bob each way. We want to ride in the vanguard of the warring nations on one hand and yet we are prepared to neglect our civil population, which will be most vulnerable in the event of war. The ones in t*-e forefront of the battle will be in less danger than the civil population. Our women and children will be the most vulnerable and will suffer the greatest casualties. {: #subdebate-28-0-s66 .speaker-K0L} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Pearson: -- Order! The honorable senator's time has expired. {: #subdebate-28-0-s67 .speaker-KTL} ##### Senator McKELLAR:
New South Wales -- In opposition to **Senator O'Byrne** I am very pleased to relate that something is being done in Australia in civil defence. I was one of those who were very concerned at what I thought was an apparent lack of effort in this field, but during the last few days I have been able to gain a little knowledge of what is being done. As the result of gaining that knowledge I feel much happier in my own mind than I was earlier. I realize that the sum of £300,000, which is considerably in excess of the amount of £102,000 that was expended last year, is perhaps a small amount to spend on such a vital matter as civil defence. {: .speaker-JZU} ##### Senator Ormonde: -- Peanuts! {: .speaker-KTL} ##### Senator McKELLAR: -- I agree it is peanuts, but after all we have to have a beginning. It is very encouraging to me at any rate that a beginning has been made seemingly on a very sound basis. In New South Wales, in conjunction with the Commonwealth Bureau of Meteorology there are twenty stations recording the amount of fall-out. In Tasmania, there are nine, in Queensland 34, in Western Australia 36, and in Victoria thirteen. There is one in the Australian Capital Territory at Canberra, thirteen in South Australia and fifteen in the Northern Territory. {: .speaker-JYA} ##### Senator O'Byrne: -- Do you call that civil defence? Recording stations would not save one life. {: .speaker-KTL} ##### Senator McKELLAR: -- They are all part of civil defence. The honorable senator would not understand, but I think most of us do. I also hope that similar pamphlets to those being put out by the New South Wales civil defence organization are being put out in the other States. One of these pamphlets mentions that at the present time industrial civil defence has reached the highest stage of efficiency in Sweden. The New South Wales "Civil Defence Bulletin " also discloses - >The industrial defence personnel is made up of about 80 per cent, male and 20 per cent, female employees. The men are partly employees of military age who have been released for priority production, partly men exempt from military service or over military age, which in Sweden is 47 years. Service in industrial defence is compulsory for these categories and their training, which is unpaid, takes place outside working hours, the company providing certain meals. Possibly the lessons learned in Sweden will be of benefit to Australia. I learn also from the "Civil Defence Bulletin " that some organizations in New South Wales are using their civil defence facilities in the provision of relief during floods, bushfires, and other national disasters. Although we regret the need for these organizations to act in that capacity, it must be conceded that this work is helping them to become more proficient. The following paragraph, also, appears in the journal from which I have quoted: - >In our New South Wales Civil Defence Organization a monitoring service is being established, and there will be a monitoring service in each shire or municipal controller's organization. This section will be responsible for monitoring radiological fallout. Knowledge gained by the members of the monitoring service will be most valuable, even in times of peace. Therefore, **Mr. Chairman,** the assertion of honorable senators opposite that the Government is doing nothing in the matter of civil defence is incorrect. We have made a beginning and, as I said earlier, although what we have done is only relatively small, it shows that the Government realizes the vital importance of civil defence and is tackling the problem. The point that is exercising my mind is: How much cooperation is there between the Commonwealth and the States' organizations? Unfortunately, I am not very well informed on this point. Perhaps the Minister will be good enough to enlighten me about it. I agree with **Senator O'Byrne's** remarks about the importance of civil defence, and I hope that much more attention will be given to this vital subject than has been given to it in the last few years. {: #subdebate-28-0-s68 .speaker-JQP} ##### Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:
Minister for Repatriation · Queensland · CP [11.52]. - I should like to inform **Senator Wade,** in reply to the question he raised concerning travelling and subsistence allowances, that some of the items under Division No. 231 have been reduced, due to the creation of Division No. 237- Surveys. This provides for the payment of travelling expenses, except car charges, and for the subsistence of officers of the Department of the Interior in all States and in the Australian Capital Territory. The honorable senator also referred to item 7 - General Expenses, under Division No. 231 - Administrative. The proposed vote of £19,000 is needed to defray payments in respect of the hire, maintenance and running expenses of trucks and cars attached to the transport depot in Canberra. ? The transport pool is administered by the Department of Supply in the several States. **Senator O'Byrne** referred to the proposed vote of £300,000 for Division No. 604 - Civil Defence. In 1958-59, the cost of running the Mount Macedon Civil Defence School was the sole charge against this division. The expenditure for that purpose in 1958-59 was £102,066. In this financial year, of the proposed vote of £300,000, £109,000 will be expended in maintaining the school at Mount Macedon. An amount of £191,000 will be allocated in accordance with the policy that was outlined by the Minister for the Interior on 29th September. You will recall, **Mr. Chairman,** that I read in this chamber a copy of the short statement that my colleague made, which set out what is being done by the Government in relation to civil defence. The amount 1 have mentioned is being held for expenditure on civil defence after we have collaborated with the States to see how best the money can be spent, in accordance with the basis laid down in the statement to which I have referred. Progress reported. {: .page-start } page 1399 {:#debate-29} ### ADJOURNMENT {:#subdebate-29-0} #### Australian National University Motion (by **Senator Spooner)** proposed- >That the Senate do now adjourn. {: #subdebate-29-0-s0 .speaker-K7Y} ##### Senator TANGNEY:
Western Australia -- In view of the lateness of the hour, I shall detain the Senate for only a few minutes. I should like to pay a tribute to **Senator McCallum** who, to-day, retired from the Council of the Australian National University. We have been colleagues in that sphere for seven and a half years. During that period, **Senator McCallum** has been of great assistance to me concerning council matters, and he has worked very hard in the interest of the Australian National University. He has been a very worthy representative of this Senate. I congratulate **Senator Laught** on his appointment to the position on the council vacated by **Senator McCallum,** and I assure him that no easy task awaits him in living up to the standard of representation that was maintained by **Senator McCallum.** Question resolved in the affirmative. Senate adjourned at 12 midnight

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 11 November 1959, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1959/19591111_senate_23_s16/>.