24th Parliament · 1st Session
She .PRESIDENT .(Senator the ,Hon. Sir Alister McMullin) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.
page 425
– I address a question to the Minister for the Navy. Is it a fact that the former aircraft carrier H.M.A.S. “ Sydney “ has been .commissioned as a fast troop transport? Will the Minister consider having ‘built in Tasmania troop landing barges, motor boats, general purpose vessels and other small craft required for amphibious operations by our defence forces? Is the Minister aware of the excellent facilities for this work in the ports of Tasmania and of the need to stimulate employment in the shipbuilding industry ,in that State?
– It .is a fact that H.M.A.-S. “ Sydney “ was recently recommissioned in the role .of a fast troop transport. I understand that, included in the refit which preceded the recommissioning, were ‘the -vessels which would be, in the view of the staff, required for that particular role. On the .question of whether, if further troop ‘landing ‘barges or vessels of that kind were ‘required, they -should be built in a particular place, il believe ‘that ‘they should be built in Australia wherever it would be cheapest and quickest to do so. I strongly hold the view that money voted for the provision of defence is .for the provision of defence and not specifically for the provision of employment in any particular place. Nevertheless, if such vessels were wanted and .could be built cheapest and quickest in Tasmania, I am sure .that that is where they would be built.
page 425
– Yes, I did see the newspaper report referred to by Senator Sir Walter Cooper. I think it is evidence of wisdom on the part of the company concerned that it should send one of its senior officers overseas to become knowledgeable in this matter, because, as the honorable -senator .knows, natural gas is a major -source of fuel in many overseas countries. In the United States of America it is reticulated by pipeline over quite long distances. There have been some interesting developments in the production of natural gas in Australia. The Australian Oil and Gas Corporation Limited is conducting a search in the Sydney basin. I forget the number of wells it has sunk. Flows have been found, but as yet, gas has not been discovered in sufficient quantities to constitute a commercial proposition. As Senator Sir Walter .Cooper knows, natural gas ,is already being used at Roma. There are very large supplies indeed in New Guinea, but so far there has not been evolved a way in which they can be used commercially.
This is a matter which all people interested in fuel are watching closely, because comparatively recently a technique has been developed to transport the gas under pressure, I think in liquid form. I believe that the product is being exported from South America to Great Britain, although at this stage the shipments are more or less of an experimental nature. I would not say that they have reached the stage at which the venture can be regarded as a commercial proposition.
I do not think there is any need at this stage for an investigation at government level. Natural gas is one of the interesting by-products, if that is the right term to use, of the search for oil in Australia. It is hoped that we shall have not only oil, but also natural gas. The great advantage we shall enjoy if and when we find natural gas in large quantities in Australia is an aspect of the search for oil which is not sufficiently appreciated by the public. As I said earlier, all those interested in ‘fuel are watching the position closely, as is evidenced by the move on the part of the Brisbane company to which reference has been made.
page 426
– Can the Acting Minister for Trade tell me how many bushels of Australian wheat were sold in India in the years ended 30th June, 1960, and 30th June, 1961? Is it true that the wheat which was sold by Australia to India during the last financial year was paid for by the United States of America which, by doing so, in effect donated the wheat to India?
– This question calls for some detailed information. At the moment I have not the figures relating to sales to India. If the honorable senator places his question on the notice-paper, I shall obtain the details for him.
page 426
– I address these questions to the Acting Minister for Trade: How many motor cars were exported from Australia in the financial year 1960-61 and what was the number exported from 1st July, 1961, to the end of that year? To which countries were they exported? What are the prospects for increasing the export of motor cars from this country? Are we in a position, so far as costs are concerned, to compete on overseas markets with cars that are exported from other countries?
– I shall deal with the last part of the question first. There are most encouraging signs of improvement in the overseas market for Australian cars. Although we have been meeting keen competition in such markets as Hong Kong and Japan, in other Asian countries and in Africa the Australian car has been making its mark and there are encouraging signs of improvement in the number of sales. Because of the Government’s action in providing export incentives, most Australian manufacturers are now more interested in the export of vehicles than they were previously. More car manufacturers now have a franchise from the parent companies to export from Australia. Local companies have been under some restraint to sell only in Australia, but I believe some franchises now enable the companies concerned to sell outside Australia. We have been selling cars in Hong Kong, Malaya, New Zealand, Fiji, Singapore, South Africa, Indonesia, Iraq and Lebanon. Those are the main overseas markets, but altogether we sell to 24 countries. If the honorable senator will put on the notice-paper that part of his question in which he sought details of numbers of cars exported, I shall obtain the figures for him.
page 426
– I direct to the Minister representing the Postmaster-General a question in relation to the payment of telephone accounts. It will be necessary to preface my question with some information. Recently, a person who had had a telephone service at his residence for 25 years went on three weeks’ annual vacation. The telephone account was delivered to his home either the day after or a couple of days after he had left. I understand that the practice of the department now is not to send out final notices. Instead, there is a statement on the original account that payment must be made within fourteen days. On returning from his vacation, the subscriber found that his telephone had been disconnected, thus causing him a great deal of inconvenience. Cannot some inquiry be made before taking the drastic step of disconnecting a telephone service, having regard to the fact that in these days such a service is a necessity?
– I am sure the honorable senator will concede that there is an obligation on every citizen to make adequate arrangements to meet his commitments when they fall due. AH of us who are blessed with a telephone have to watch to see that we are in a position to pay our telephone accounts when they fall due. I know that the Postmaster-General’s Department is administered with a good deal of understanding, and I am surprised to hear that a short absence from home resulted in disconnexion of a service. If the honorable senator will be good enough to let me have the details of the case, I shall put the matter before the Postmaster-General. I know that he is anxious to abolish irksome, pinpricking activities that impair public relations. If anything can be done to prevent a recurrence of this kind of action, I am sure that he will do it.
page 427
– In view of the strategic importance of Thailand to Australia, I ask the Minister representing the Minister for External Affairs the following question: In the event of Communist aggression in or near Thailand, would it be necessary to wait for the unanimous approval of all member countries of the South-East Asia Treaty Organization before Australia could go to the assistance of the victims, in spite of the fact that two of the partners to the treaty, the United Kingdom and France, have not the same direct interest as Australia in events in South-East Asia? If, under the terms of the Seato pact, this is at present necessary, is any action being taken to alter the terms of the pact to enable rapid action to be taken by any of the Seato partners in any country where aggression occurs? As the United States of America has said that she will, if necessary, go alone to the aid of Thailand, will the Australian Government consider offering similar assistance in partnership with her? Is such aid possible under the Anzus pact? If not, will the Minister undertake to attempt the broadening of the Anzus pact when the participants meet in Canberra next May, to allow such action by Australia with the United States of America?
– The Anzus pact should not be confused in any way with the Seato alliance. The Anzus pact calls upon Australia, the United States of America and New Zealand to come to each other’s assistance if attacked. It is a joint assistance treaty, designed for no other purpose than the protection of the countries which are signatories to it. The widening of the pact into something that would be, in effect, a different instrument would be a great policy decision, on which I am not competent to comment and which, I think, is not contemplated at any level. As far as the Seato alliance is concerned, I think the recent statement by the United States Secretary of State made it perfectly clear that the United States does not regard it as necessary for all members of Seato to agree to action to help Thailand before the United States could help Thailand. In fact, the recent statements by Mr. Rusk and by Prime Minister Sarit indicate plainly that the United States proposes to carry out its obligations to assist Thailand should that country be attacked, and that the United States regards its obligations under Seato as individual obligations that should be carried out irrespective of whether the other members of the Seato alliance agree to such action being taken. That is the view of the United States. As for Australia’s interpretation of the treaty, I think any announcement on that matter should come direct from the Minister for External Affairs.
page 427
– Will the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service comment on the claim of Mr. Reid, Minister of Labour and Industry in the Victorian Government, that not only was the Victorian apprenticeship campaign ignored by the recent Department of Labour and National Service inquiry into apprenticeships, but that the appropriate departments in Queensland and Tasmania also were, not consulted? Is Mr. Reid correct in stating that an inquiry on so vital an issue was entrusted to a committee that was not officially constituted and whose members stated that they did not necessarily represent the groups from which they were chosen?
– The question is so important and demands such a specific answer that I must ask the honorable senator to place it on the notice-paper.
page 427
– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. Is the Minister aware that a Mr. G. L. Facey, an exserviceman on the land in the JerramungupGairdner River area in Western Australia, has been sold up and evicted from his property? Does the Minister know that 140 members of the farmers’ union in the area were against the sale and eviction? Has the Minister been advised that the farmers’ union is so critical of the. administration of the war service land settlement scheme that it is urging the establishment of a royal commission to investigate all aspects of the scheme? Because of the grave implications in this particular case will the Minister treat the matter as urgent and obtain for me a report giving full details -of events leading up to the sale and eviction?
– I am not aware of the details of this sale. I am disturbed to learn that it has caused so much local resentment. In view of the urgency of the matter I think Senator Branson will be, best served if I bring his question to the notice of my colleague, the Minister for Primary Industry, and ask faim to acquaint Senator Branson with the facts with the least possible delay.
page 428
– My question is directed to the Minister representing the AttorneyGeneral. A few days ago, speaking about the Bankruptcy Act, the Attorney-General said -
I understand it is unlikely that the committee will have completed its report on the new draft bill until late in the present year.
Having regard to the number of wageearners whose wage claims, on the bankruptcy of their employers, must be deferred pending the settlement of claims of other persons with higher priorities, and whose entitlements to annual leave and long-service leave are. jeopardized, will the Attorney-General take immediate steps, without waiting for a complete review of the act, to amend section 84 of the Bankruptcy Act 1924-1960 to grant higher and more extensive priorities to wageearners that are more in keeping with the priorities accorded to them when a company is wound up? The priorities to which I refer are provided, for example, in section 292 of the uniform Companies Act recently passed by the Parliament of New South Wales.
– I will bring the honorable senator’s question to the notice of the Attorney-General and ask him to reply direct to the honorable senator.
page 428
– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for External Affairs. Is it a fact that red China is now in the gloomy position, under Communist rule, of being able to produce enough food to keep its 700,000,’000 people for only nine months of the year? Also is it a fact that the National People’s Congress, which usually convenes between February and July to approve the states’ budgets, was not convened in 1961? ls it a fact, too, that to justify the abolition of the Big Leap Forward the Communist Party now provides a new approach which designates the pattern of economic development as a wavy line - alternating highs and lows, or in a stop-and-go movement - rather than the straight line as suggested by Communist authorities during the 1958-59 Big Leap Forward period? Can the Minister explain why many socialist regimes have such difficulty with their food production policies that they are forced to purchase food from Western democratic governments? Has the Government made any assessment of the possible food requirements of socialist countries in the years to come? If it has, can long-term contracts be obtained, particularly for wheat, barley and oats, with adequate credit facilities? Can the Minister advise me whether die Government believes that, despite the fact that we free Australians abhor socialist regimes, we should do our utmost to provide food for the starving millions suffering in their present unfortunate circumstances?
– That is a quite comprehensive question and I shall attempt to give as comprehensive an answer. I understand, Mr. President, that it is indeed a fact that the food production in red China has fallen far short of what the regime hoped for and, indeed, has fallen short of what is necessary to feed the population throughout the area. No doubt, as a result of that and other difficulties in that country, such as the backyard iron ore smelting processes, the National People’s Congress was not called last year at the time it is usually convened. There is no doubt that a change has occurred in the line of approach of the government in China, which now no longer talks of the Big Leap Forward since the leap was into an unknown abyss, because the government has started to impose on the Chinese people a commune system which has been one of the large factors leading to the breakdown in food production in that country.
These difficulties in agriculture are, as the honorable senator suggested, not confined to China. Russia also is experiencing difficulties in food production, and is openly admitting the fact. Undoubtedly, in both cases, this has happened because of a rigid bureaucratic control of primary production, symptomatic of all socialist regimes and always resulting in a fall in production from the land.
As to whether the Government believes we should do what we can to feed the people who are the victims of these impossible regimes, I say only that, provided we do not put ourselves in a position where our overseas trade depends on political) decisions by Communist countries, 1 am sure that Australians wish to do what they can to help to feed those who cannot be fed by their own governments.
page 429
Representations by Senators - Departmental Procedures.
– I think I should address this question to you, Mr. President. It arises from the fact that departments of the Public Service have recently notified me, Senator Dittmer and other senators that answers to letters from us regarding various matters have been forwarded to members of the House of Representatives. I have protested vigorously, and I have in front of me letters on the subject from one Minister. Will you be so kind as to look into this matter? Is it not an infringement of the rights of the Senate and of senators for public servants, acting under instructions from a Minister, to divulge to members of the House of Representatives the contents of letters sent to them by senators? Will you, Mr. President, investigate this matter and, at your convenience, make a considered statement to the Senate? I might say that May’s “ Parliamentary Practice “ deals with this subject at page 132, but only as to the law of libel. That reference may be a help to you, Mr. President.
– I shall look into the matter and report to the Senate later.
page 429
– By way of preface to my question, which is addressed to the Acting Minister for Trade, I point out that I learned recently that quotes had been received for carrying agricultural machinery made by South Australian manufacturers to ports on the west coast of South America at the rate of £18 a ton, by weight or measure. The corresponding rate between Port Adelaide and Fremantle is in excess of £25 a ton. The rail freight to Western Australia is slightly less disadvantageous than the sea freight. Has this occurred! since the Department of Trade has supported the establishment of a direct and regular shipping service to South America to foster trade with South American countries? Is- it true that freight rates appear to be most favorable for Australian exporters?
– It is true that, with the encouragement of the Government, two shipping lines have engaged in trade between Australia and South America. A vessel operated by the Boomerang cargo fine sailed m January for Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Guiana and the Caribbean, and a second vessel will leave on approximately 20th March. A second service is being provided by the AustraliaSouth America line. Vessels operated by this line will depart for South America about once every three months. I understand’ that the rates being charged are the ruling rates for this type of service to that area
page 429
– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Postmaster^ General. No doubt he recollects that in the last sessional period of the Twenty-third Parliament, at the request of local government authorities in Western Australia, I asked him a question about the provision of television services in country areas in that State. He informed me that the Government was keenly interested in the matter and was making an investigation regarding the provision of such services, but he was not in a position to make a definite statement. Can the Minister inform the Senate now whether the Government has made any progress in its inquiry, whether any arrangements have been made for the provision of television services to country areas in Western Australia, and whether submissions made to the Government by interested parties have been considered and approved or disapproved?
– I recollect that Senator Cooke asked the question in the Senate during the last session of the previous Parliament. Only yesterday I received from the Postmaster-General a comprehensive statement on this and other matters that had been raised during the latter part of that session. Because of the highly technical nature of the Postmaster-General’s statement, I think I can best help Senator Cooke by making a copy of that statement available to him. If, after he has had the opportunity to examine it, he requires further information, I shall be happy to try to answer his questions.
– Has the Minister representing the Postmaster-General seen the announcement in to-day’s “ Canberra Times “ that the Postmaster-General’s Department has designed a special television aerial for use in Canberra, which probably will be installed under the roofs of houses and so prevent the ugly forest of aerials despoiling the charming Canberra scene, as has happened in other cities that have television services? Will the Minister advise the Senate whether this type of aerial that has been designed for use in Canberra is suitable for other Australian cities, and who will manufacture the aerials for Canberra residents?
– Antennae installed under the roofs of houses are suitable in certain conditions, but it is not possible for one to generalize when discussing this matter. For example, next-door neighbours may require different types of antennae for the reception of television programmes. One person might well get first-class reception with an antenna installed in the ceiling of the home, and his neighbour, with a similar antenna, might not get good reception because the beams bounced off some object. Some dealers have a policy of installation which covers that situation. They charge a flat rate for an antenna and guarantee adequate reception. I believe that that system makes it possible for a householder to have a hidden antenna; but if circumstances make that antenna unsuitable the dealer has to supply an antenna that will give adequate reception. The latter point will be of interest to people who are installing television receivers.
page 430
– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Defence aware that Great Britain’s Defence Minister, Mr.
Harold Watkinson, will visit Singapore this month to discuss the new unified command organization? Also, is he aware that Mr. Watkinson will confer with Australian representatives in Singapore, but that he does not intend to visit Australia or New Zealand? Is the Minister aware, too, that in a defence debate in the House of Commons on Monday last Mr. Watkinson, while defending Singapore as Britain’s main Far East base, also stated that Britain must insure against anything happening at Aden or Singapore and that long-term, strategy might require looking beyond those areas for airfields and anchorages? In view of this, will the Minister place before the appropriate authorities in Australia or England the claims of Australia for the establishment of a naval base on Australian territory, either at Fremantle or elsewhere on the west coast, or at Darwin; or could he arrange a conference with Mr. Watkinson at ministerial level during his projected visit to South-East Asia?
– I noticed the press reports about Mr. Watkinson’s visit to Singapore. I also noticed that my colleague, the Minister for Defence, Mr. Townley, had in mind the possibility of asking Mr. Watkinson to come to Australia. I think Mr. Townley indicated that the itinerary that Mr. Watkinson had announced hardly seemed to make such a visit likely. The matter of naval bases in Australia is one for constant consultation between Australian defence authorities and British and American defence authorities. I would not like to discuss the possibilities and developments in that direction.
page 430
– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration. Is there any truth in the statement made recently in this chamber by a member of the Opposition that the present Government has promised intending migrants full employment on arrival in Australia? If no such promise or guarantee is offered, does the Department of Immigration make any attempt to regulate the flow of migrants according to employment opportunities? Is any assistance given to newly arrived migrants to help them find employment? What is the target for migrants for this year, and is it expected that the target will be reached? Is the number of arrivals comparable with that of recent years?
– At no time has the Department of Immigration given migrants any indication that they will receive employment in Australia.
– What?
– Or that they will be given full employment when they arrive in Australia. That has never been a condition of the scheme. Since the commencement of the post-war immigration programme, migrants have been recruited on the basis of guaranteed employment, and care has been exercised when interviewing prospective migrants to furnish factual information concerning the prospects of employment in Australia. Every assistance is given to migrants to find employment, and the help provided by the Commonwealth Employment Service is available to them. For some months past, measures have been taken to see that the current migrant intake has been confined to dependants of migrants already established in Australia and persons in those categories in which employment is always freely available, such as people with technical or other skills. There is a continuing demand for those workers. I am advised that there has been no accumulation of newly-arrived migrant workers awaiting employment in Australia for some months. I have not before me the actual figures on that particular aspect, but if the honorable senator places that part of her question on the notice-paper, I shall obtain the figures for her. There is certainly no truth in the statement made by an honorable senator opposite that migrants are promised that immediately they arrive in Australia they will be given full employment.
page 431
– Has the Minister in charge of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization received a reply to the question I asked recently concerning the growth of a noxious weed in the coastal regions of north Queensland?
– Yes, Mr. President, the C.S.I.R.O., to which I sent the grass samples given to me by the honorable senator, has forwarded me a note about them. I hope I will be forgiven if I find it difficult to pronounce the botanical name of the grass. I shall hand the note to the honorable senator later. The C.S.I.R.O. states -
The specimen submitted is Cenchrus echinatus L., a summer growing annual, commonly called “ cheeky grass “ in the Northern Territory and “ Mossman River grass “ in Queensland. U is known in the Kimberleys and north-western Western Australia, the northern part of the Northern Territory, and on the Atherton Tablelands and north coast districts in Queensland. Its distribution is limited to the higher rainfall areas, and it invades disturbed areas, especially cultivation. It is unlikely to invade native pasture unless it is overgrazed.
For the most part it occurs in cattle country, where it is not a serious pest so far as the stock are concerned, but the burr is troublesome to humans. Information available indicates that it is unlikely to invade sheep country, but if it did it would become an important source of vegetable fault in wool. It can be a troublesome weed in the maize fields on the Atherton Tablelands.
It can be controlled by cultivation or by spraying with TCA (trichloracetic acid) or young plants can be killed by treatment with oil emulsions of PCP (penta-chlorophenol).
This species is listed as a weed by the Queensland State Botanist, who would no doubt be able to provide further information on its present and potential distribution in that State, and on measures for control.
I add, Mr. President, on the second part of the honorable senator’s question, that the declaration of the weed as a noxious weed and the legal obligation to destroy it, which such a declaration would involve, would not be a matter for the C.S.I.R.O. or the Federal Government. I suggest that the honorable senator might, if he wished, take up that aspect with the Government of Queensland.
page 431
– My question, which is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for External Affairs, relates to Antarctica. Has the Minister anything to report about the stir created in Chile recently when the announcement was made, during the visit to that country of the Duke of Edinburgh, that the United Kingdom was establishing a colony or a dependency in Antarctica? Was the act of the United
Kingdom’ foreshadowed during the Antarctic Treaty negotiations which took place here iti Canberra last year?
– I have seen the information concerning the action taken by the United Kingdom in regard to the Falkland Island Dependencies and I have seen newspaper reports of the reaction in Chile to what the United Kingdom has done. I think the honorable senator will know that the question of the Falkland Island Dependencies has for long been a bone of contention between the United Kingdom and the Government of Chile. As I understand it; the most recent action of the United Kingdom has been taken in an endeavour to comply with the terms of the Antarctic Treaty recently signed in Canberra. The United Kingdom has, as it were, split the Falkland Island Dependencies into two parts. It is continuing to call the islands lying north of the area covered by the Antarctic Treaty, the Falkland Island Dependencies. It’ is divorcing from those the islands lying inside the area covered by the Antarctic Treaty and is regarding those islands still as United Kingdom territory, but divorced from the Falkland Island Dependencies. The view of the United Kingdom is that in that way it complies with the treaty, and that the treaty makes no provision for recognition or refusal of recognition of territories in Antarctica claimed at the time the treaty went into operation; so that the Australian claim to territory, and similarly the claims of other countries, are frozen, as it were. The United Kingdom takes the view that the part of the Falkland Island Dependencies lying inside the treaty area is also, in effect, frozen. That is the reason why the United Kingdom has taken this action.
page 432
– Is the Minister for Health aware that the fitness tests which were applied in American schools last year, and which led to national alarm, have been applied in some parts of Australia to several thousand teenagers, with results that are just as alarming as those obtained in the United States of America? In view of current’ press reports of moral laxity among teenagers in several States, does the Minister recognize the urgency of extend:ng the work of the National Fitness
Council so that more teenagers may be encouraged to employ their leisure in a hap1pier and more healthful environment? Will the Minister therefore examine the necessity to devote additional financial assistance to the work of the National Fitness Council?
– I am old-fashioned enough to believe that delinquency and moral laxity in teenagers can, in far too many instances, be sheeted home to lack of parental control. The National Fitness Council has a very fine record of service in this country. I am sure the honorable senator will be pleased to know that only last week the council met, after a period in recess of some five or six years. When I say that it was in recess, I refer to council meetings. It is not to be thought’ that the council was in recess in respect of its activities, because that was not so. We called a meeting, which was well attended, and Senator Arnold made a splendid contribution to the deliberations of the council. He made a very fine impression. It is too early for me to indicate at’ this stage what government assistance will be made available to the council in the future. For! some years now the annual grant’ has been £72,000. Before a- decision can be made if will be necessary to analyse and examine the council’s submissions and the programmes it wishes to arrange, All in all, it will be necessary to make a scrutiny of its proposed activities.
page 432
– Did the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for External Affairs hear the eloquent and sincere appeal that was made in the Senate last night by the Deputy Leader of the Australian Democratic Labour Party, Senator McManus, for a united foreign policy for Australia, with all political parties working together to evolve it? As most Australians would support this appeal, is the Government making, any fresh moves to induce the Australian Labour Party to be represented on the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Parliament? Can the Minister inform the Senate why, in the past, the Australian Labour Party has refused to nominate members for appointment to this committee?
– I heard the speech made By Senator McManus in this place last night; in which he said’ it would be beneficial to Australia- if” there could be a bi-partisan foreign policy or, at any rate, the greatest possible measure of bipartisanship in the formulation of foreign policy. I entirely agree with: that: a’s”’ an” ideal; but at this stage I do not see how a united foreign policy is possible when there are such deep cleavages between” the Opposition and the Government on a number of foreign policy points such as the recognition of red China and participation in treaties such as the Anzus and Seato pacts. Nevertheless, there should be an area in which a bipartisan approach is possible.
The door to participation in the activities of the Foreign Affairs Committee is open to the Opposition at any time. The places on that committee’ which Opposition members would be competent to fill if they so wished are temporarily filled by members of the Government who are prepared to resign at any time the Opposition says it will nominate members for appointment to the committee. I think the reasons why Opposition members have not joined the committee so far should be’ advanced by them rather than by me. The reasons I have heard advanced by them are that they regard the committee as not having sufficient power to justify their participation in it, as being merely an organization through which knowledge can be disseminated to members, and as not being of sufficient importance to justify their doing something which they consider may prevent them from having full freedom of action in this field.
page 433
What were the weight and value of (a) beef (b) scoured wool and (c) greasy wool exported by Australia to the United States of America during the years I960 and 1961?
– The Commonwealth Statistician advises that exports of the specified items to the United States of America in the years ended 30th June, 1960, and 30th June, 1961, were as follows: -
PHARMACEUTIC Ali BENEFITS.
asked the Minister for Health, upon noticer—
– I have ascertained that the actual statement made by Dr. Hugh Hunter, Deputy Medical Secretary of the Australian Medical Association, was that new drugs come on to the market every day, and- in different forms, that these drugs are tested by manufacturers, research bodies, and the medical profession, and that as soon as any side effects are noted they are reported immediately. Manufacturers carry out extensive trials, both in the laboratory, and clinically, before new drugs are released. Apart from ethical considerations’; it is in- the drug manufacturers’ own interests to maintain high standards of safety and potency in their products. However, experience has shown that in rare instances a drug generally regarded as safe is found at some later stage to produce an unforeseen side effect.
Drugs which the.- Commonwealth provides as pharmaceutical benefits are tested both for potency and freedom from toxicity. The Commonwealth Therapeutic Substances Act provides for the determination of standards and the carrying out of tests in relation to drugs to which this act applies, that is, drugs which are imported; also drugs which are on the pharmaceutical benefits formulary, and drugs which are the subject of interstate trade. The Commonwealth, through the laboratory facilities available to it, has a continuous programme of testing of these drugs. Apart from these controls at Commonwealth level, the sale of therapeutic substances, including new drugs, is the responsibility of the relevant State authority.
page 434
-Pursuant to the provisions of section 21 of the River Murray Waters Act 1915-18 I lay on the table the following paper: -
River Murray Waters Act - Annual Report of the River Murray Waters Commission, together with statements of gaugings and diversions, for year 1960-61.
.- I move-
That the paper be printed.
I ask for leave to make my speech at a later date.
Leave granted; debate adjourned.
SALES TAX BILLS (Nos. 1 to 9) 1962.
Bills received from the House of Representatives.
Motion (by Senator Paltridge) put -
That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent the Questions with regard to the several stages for the passage through the Senate of all or several of the Sales Tax Bills Nos. 1 to 9 being put in one motion, at each stage, and the consideration of all or several of such Bills together in Committee of the Whole.
– There being an absolute majority of the whole number of senators present, and no dissentient voice, I declare the question resolved in the affirmative.
Standing Orders suspended.
Bills (on motion by Senator Paltridge) read a first time.
– I move -
That the bills be now read a second time.
The purpose of these measures, and of the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Bill which will follow, is to give effect to the reductions in the rates of sales tax on motor vehicles, and on motor vehicle parts and accessories, which were recently announced by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies). It is proposed that motor cars, station wagons and other passenger vehicles formerly taxed at 30% shall be subject to tax at the rate of 22i%, and that those commercial motor vehicles, motor cycles and motor vehicle parts and accessories which have been subject to tax at 16-2/3% shall be taxed at the general rate of 12i%.
These measures form part of the Government’s plans, following upon the recent comprehensive review of the economy, for immediate action to reduce unemployment. The Government has given close consideration to the representations of the motor vehicle industry, which has passed through a period of reduced sales and a falling level of employment. This has had its effect on manufacturers who supply component parts and accessories for motor vehicles.
The demand for motor vehicles has recently become progressively stronger. It is the desire of the Government, however, to accelerate this improvement because it is appreciated that this industry is of considerable importance from an employment standpoint. It is therefore proposed that the reductions should take effect on and from 7th February, 1962, the day following the date of the Prime Minister’s announcement. It is clear that, as a result of the reductions, there has already been a substantial increase in inquiries in the trade and it is hoped that the steps being taken will increase sales and employment, not only in the motor vehicle industry itself, but also in the industries directly and indirectly associated with it.
I have no doubt that the bills will find favour with honorable senators generally.
Debate (on motion by Senator McKenna) adjourned.
page 435
Bill received from the House of Representatives.
Standing Orders suspended.
Bill (on motion by Senator Paltridge) read a first time.
– I move -
That Che bill be now read a second time.
This bill is related to the Sales Tax Bills Nos. 1 to 9 which have just been introduced. One of the purposes of those bills is to reduce the rate of tax on commercial motor vehicles, motor cycles and motor vehicles parts and accessories from 16-2/3% to 12½%. The goods affected are at present specified in the Fourth Schedule to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act 1935-1961. The sole purpose of this bill is to repeal that schedule, with the result that the goods in question fall into the category of unspecified goods which are subject to the general rate of12½%. As already indicated, it is proposed that the repeal shall be effective on and from 7th February, 1962.
Debate (on motion by Senator McKenna) adjourned.
page 435
Representations by Senators: Departmental Procedures - Publication of Information Booklet.
Motion (by Senator Spooner) proposed -
That the Senate do now adjourn.
– During question time this morning, Senator Brown mentioned a matter which had been discussed previously in the Senate - the policy that has developed in the last few months of directing to the member of the House of Representatives for the division in which a constituent lives, a Minister’s answer to a senator’s representations on behalf of that constituent. I do not know how long this practice has existed, but when I returned from overseas last year, just before the general election, I found that answers to representations I had made to Ministers were being sent to the members of the House of Representatives for the districts concerned. I contacted the departments and said that I resented this very much, but I was told that it was a matter of ministerial policy and that the departments just had to follow that course. This has happened before during my membership of the Parliament, but the practice was not persevered with then. Because it was so obviously unfair, not only to the senator concerned, but also to the constituent, it did not survive. I do not know whether action of this kind was ever requested by members of the House of Representatives.
I regard the matter as being of very great importance to individual senators and to the Senate as a whole. At first, when I found that letters in reply to representations had been re-directed by the Minister for Social Services (Mr. Roberton), I thought that it was a political move by the Government. On reflection, however, I do not believe that the practice was started in an attempt to gain political capital. The Minister not only sends to Liberal members letters relating to representations that I make - it is always a Liberal member whose work I am doing - but he sends to Labour members of the House of Representatives answers to representations by Liberal and Country Party senators - which is just as indefensible. Labour members of the House of Representatives do not want to have sent to them letters in answer to representations by Government senators.
I have always regarded my relationship to a constituent who comes to me as being akin to the relationship between doctor and patient. What a constituent tells me in my office in Sydney is sacred to me. It is never repeated. A case may be difficult or tricky. When I write to a Minister, I put the case fully, but sometimes I leave to the imagination something that cannot be well stated in a letter. It is rather a shock to find that, after I have made representations, sometimes over a- long period, the1 Minister, upon1 making a decision, transmits the decision to some one who, up to that point, knew nothing about the case and was not interested in it. That brings into the picture one more figure; and that may be embarrassing fo a constituent, who often seeks advice from’ a senator for a particular reason1.
When constituents see us, they trust that our approach to their problems will be such that they will’ not be embarrassed. They tell1 us their stories freely. They might not do so if they thought that the results of our representations would be sent fo some other dovecote - to a man of whom, perhaps, they had never heard, or even a man with whom they had friendly personal relations. A constituent may approach a senator for a particular purpose in respect of which, perhaps, he would not go to his member. The relationship of senators to constituents is being broken down, and I personally resent that very deeply indeed.
– So do the people.
– And1 s© should all senators’.
– That is the point. I do not know what can be done to eliminate this practice. If Ministers persist, the Senate should have power to say that the practice must cease or action will be taken. I do not know whether a question of privilege arises. I regard my privileges as a senator as being infringed by this practice, but I do not know whether the way is open for me to put the matter, as one of privilege, before the Committee of Privileges. This is not a matter being raised by a Labour senator for political purposes. I suppose that even Government senators- have raised this matter in the sanctuary of their own rooms. I would be very disappointed if they had not done so. Stern action must be taken to get some decision on this matter. If necessary it must be referred to the Committee of Privileges. This issue is referred to in “Australian Senate Practice” by the Clerk Assistant. The matter dealt with there arose, from a question asked by Senator Willesee on 6th August, .1958, relating to a case in England in which a member of the House of Commons - a Mr. George Strauss - who had written to a Minister complained that his letter was being used against him in court. It was suggested that that letter was privileged-. Arising out of that question the then Attorney-General made a complete survey of the position.. The matter I am raising is not on all fours with the case to which I have just referred. The present matter is an internal one. The question of privilege does not arise because of any pending court action, but if the letters in the other eases fo which I have referred were considered privileged, surely privilege should attach to a letter written by an honorable senator to a Minister and dealing with the private affairs of a constituent. I would like you, Mr. President, and the Leader of the Government, to inquire into the practice of which I am complaining because it is deeply resented by every honorable senator. The continuation of this practice is like a cancer growing in the side of every senator. Every time an honorable senator discovers that one of his letters has been redirected to another member of the Parliament his ill will must increase. I plead with the President and the Leader of the Government in the Senate to apply their goodwill and their intelligence towards stopping this practice’ under which the letters of honorable” senators aTe redirected to other members of the Parliament.
– I raised this matter during the last Parliament. I, too, have been embarrassed by the actions of the Minister for Social Services (Mr. Roberton). A man residing in the Robertson electorate, who did not want his federal member to know his business, came to me with a problem about a pension. On his behalf I made representations to the Minister for Social Services. I eventually received a reply from the Minister but, for the first time in more than twenty years’ experience in this Senate, I was also informed by the Minister that the honorable member for Robertson had been acquainted with the circumstances of the case. I had already promised the man concerned that the matter would be treated in confidence. I had told him that as a senator I was entitled to have my correspondence with the Minister treated as privileged. But to my amazement the Minister for Social Services brought the matter to the notice of the honorable member for Robertson. I -had ‘to explain to the man who had approached me that ‘for some unknown reason the Minister for Social .Services had acquainted the honorable member for Robertson with the facts of his case. I am not as generous as Senator Armstrong.
– Or Senator Dittmer either.
– I know that Senator Dittmer is very .critical of .certain Ministers about this matter. I .am not as generous in my attitude as was Senator Armstrong. In my .view ,it is .clear that .the Minister for .Social .Services has adopted the practice of bringing these .matters to the notice of the honorable member .for .Robertson for party political advantage. Robertson is a swing seat and is “held by a Government supporter ‘With a majority of less than 1,000 votes. The Minister for Social Services informed (the honorable member for Robertson ,Ula I had made .representations on behalf .of .one of this constituents and the Minister forwarded ,to the honorable member all of the .information .concerning -the matter. fin the i course of my (parliamentary duties I make -representations on .behalf of people living in a number ,of electorates represented by .Government supporters. The electorate .of (the Minister .for Supply (Mr. Fairhall) is close to -where ,1 live and J frequently .make representations .on behalf of his constituents. The .correspondence in those cases is always handled without reference to Mr. Fairhall. The same practice applies in respect of constituents of Mr. Lucock, ;the honorable member for Lyne. J make representations on behalf of residents of the Lyne .electorate but never yet has ‘the Minister for Social Services revealed to the .honorable member for Lyne details .concerning those representations. Senator Tangney and -Senator Amour have complained to me in the last few weeks that whenever they contact the Minister for Social Services about a person residing in a shaky Liberal-held seat their correspondence is revealed to the member holding that seat. The only inference to be drawn from this practice is that it is being resorted to for party political purposes.
– We .are getting the -same treatment
-Well. it is time you spoke up in -the Senate about it. This practice of [the Minister for Social Services is monstrous. We in this Senate should have the same privileges as are accorded to members of the House of Representatives, lt is appalling to think that any correspondence that I have with the Minister for ‘Social Services should be -forwarded to the member in whose electorate the person concerned -resides. The only correspondence -that is dealt with in this way -is correspondence relating ‘to persons -who reside -in the swing electorate of -Robertson. The inference is clear.
As a senator I have every right to take up a case on behalf of a constituent and to believe -that -my representations on ‘his behalf -will be confidential as between the Minister ‘to whom I refer ‘them and myself. Over many years that .has been the case, but apparently this -Government is now prepared -to filch if-rom .us our rights and privileges. H agree with Senator Armstrong that somebody in this Senate- should take up this matter with a >view to protecting the rights of ‘honorable senators.
– If Ministers .had any sense of responsibility they would want to protect the rights Of the people also.
– That is so. I do not know whether this matter should be dealt with by the -President, who is custodian of our privileges, .or whether the Senate itself should take action in the matter. I certainly feel that something must be done to stop this pernicious practice of revealing to honorable members the contents of correspondence between honorable senators and Ministers. The practice is turning this Senate into .the status of a second-grade chamber. If that is the Government’s intention, let us .abolish the Senate. If the Government .wants the Senate to be a second-grade chamber, why does it not designate it as such? I thought this Senate was the highest parliament in Australia. Instead of being regarded as the highest legislative chamber in the land it is regarded by Ministers of this Government as a chamber the members of which are not entitled to the ordinary privileges and courtesies.
– I am sorry. I should not accuse all Ministers of this practice. I am referring to one Minister only.
– More than one Minister is involved. The Postmaster-General is guilty too.
– 1 apologize to the other Ministers, who have never been guilty of this practice as far as I am concerned. I am referring only to the Minister for Social Services. 1 would like the Leader of the Government to assure us that the practice will be discontinued. If he cannot do that, I would like this Senate to take up this matter with a view to putting a stop to the practice.
– 1 rise first to say that the inference drawn by Senator Arnold is not justified. He may feel that it is justified on the facts as he knows them, but this practice has not been confined to the representations of honorable senators opposite. The contents of a letter that I sent to a Minister were revealed to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Therefore, I think the implication that this is a party political matter is quite unjustified.
– Two wrongs do not make a right.
– I am not saying that the procedure is right.
– Are you saying that it is wrong?
– Give me time. Do you want to make my speech for me? You want to make everybody’s speeches! I regret that the matter has been brought by some speakers onto the party political level, and I compliment Senator Armstrong for not doing so. He raised it as a matter for the attention of honorable senators. It is a matter for the Senate and for them, and I hope that the Leader of the Government in the Senate will have it settled with the Ministers concerned before we have another debate on the subject. As to the practice, I have no hesitation in agreeing with Senator Armstrong that it is wrong.
– I come into this debate for only one reason, and that is to say that the same thing happened to me during my term in the Senate from 1944 to 1946.
– We have said it was. wrong even then.
– I lodged my protest against the practice in those years. I had hoped that the practice had ceased.
– You were not here in. 1944.
– This occurred, from 1944 to 1946, during my term here, and I will give you chapter and verse. It was most noticeable that when I maderepresentations to Ministers on behalf of electors the members of the House of Representatives for the electorates in which those persons lived were notified before I was notified, and the information even appeared in the press.
– It was wrong.
– It was wrong. I admit that it was wrong. More than that, it was peculiar that in a Liberal-held seat of the House of Representatives no notification was ever made to the member.
– Now you are making it a party political matter.
– I am giving the facts. If an honorable senator made any representations on behalf of an elector in a Labour-held seat, the member of the House of Representatives for the electorate in which that person lived was notified long before the senator was informed.
– It is wrong.
– It is correct.
– I meant that the practice is wrong.
– Yes, the practice is wrong. I thought that the honorable senator interjected that what I was saying was wrong. I know the subject on which I am talking, and I felt strongly on the matter at the time. I will say this much, that after I approached the Minister responsible he assured me that the practice would cease, and I can say that that sort of thing did not happen again.
– It has happened again recently. The Minister concerned did not give such an assurance.
– I can give you chapter and verse of what has happened. I am delighted to learn that perhaps this practice will cease.
– in reply - I come into the debate briefly, I hope, to let the Senate know that I have approached the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) and the two Ministers concerned - this practice is followed in respect of only two departments - and informed them of the views of both sides of the Senate on the matter. ‘I think I mentioned on the motion for the adjournment of the Senate last Thursday night that the views expressed by Opposition senators had been expressed earlier by Government senators. So I put the matter before the Prime Minister and the two Ministers who adopt this procedure, and as soon as I can I shall tell the Senate what may be the Government’s decision about it.
I want to make two other points. First, I say to Senator Arnold that on the information that has become available to me through Government senators this practice is not restricted to Labour senators. Government senators are complaining just as much that their representations on behalf of electors are being sent to Labour members of the House of Representatives. So it is a general practice; it is not being used for party political purposes.
The other point I want to make is that I was interested in the exchange of views between Senator Armstrong and Senator Mattner. I had thought that this was a practice of long-standing, and I was interested when Senator Armstrong said it was a recent innovation.
– No, it happened before, then it was discontinued, and now it has started again.
– I do not know whether that is terribly material. I had comforted myself with the thought that there might be some justification for this practice if it was a procedure of longstanding. I shall let the Senate know as soon as I can what may be the Government’s decision. I hope that it reflects the wishes of both sides on the matter.
– I wish to raise another and somewhat more pleasurable matter.
– On a point of order, Mr. President. The Minister has spoken in reply and, therefore, I submit that he has closed the debate.
– Senator Vincent wishes to speak on another matter.
– It does not matter what his subject is. The Minister, by speaking when he did, closed the debate.
– Obviously, I made a mistake in calling the Minister when another honorable senator wished to speak. The Minister’s speech closes the debate.
– You did not make a mistake, Mr. President. The Minister rose and you called him. But his speech closed the debate.
– The reason I called the Minister was that he wished to speak in relation to a specific matter raised on the motion for the adjournment. I knew that Senator Vincent wished to speak on another matter, so there it is. Is it the pleasure of the Senate that the debate on the motion for the adjournment be continued? There being no dissentient voice, I call on Senator Vincent to proceed with his speech.
– by leave - I thank honorable senators. I shall be brief. I want to refer to the “Official Handbook of Britain”, for this year, copies of which all honorable senators, I think, have received. I do not think a comparable book is published in Australia. The nearest approach we have to it is the Commonwealth “Year-Book,” which is somewhat different. I simply want to invite the attention of members of the Government to the very great advantages that the British publication enjoys over the Australian one. The British publication is a readable document - not a mass of statistics. Although our “Year-Book” has great value as a statistical volume, it is not a very attractive or imaginative book. The British publication has been compiled not only as a factual summary of British activities for the year but also as a document that can be read, and it is a popular one. It is well illustrated and covers a variety of subjects from the national economy and industry to culture, sport, and so on. In view of the importance of a book of this nature, I think the Australian
Government should consider issuing a similar publication. It would be one of the best advertisements we could send overseas. The British book has been compiled obviously for one purpose only - namely, to publicize and inform people about the doings of Great Britain. If we had a comparable book it would inform peopleoverseas of what this country is doing.We are always complaining that nobody understands us.Such a book would also attracttourists to Australia - something we are so keenabout.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Senate adjourned at 12.26p.m.
Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 8 March 1962, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1962/19620308_senate_24_s21/>.