Senate
30 October 1963

24th Parliament · 1st Session



The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sir Alister McMullin) took the chair at 1 1 a.m., and read prayers.

page 1571

QUESTION

NAVAL TRAGEDY IN NORTH QUEENSLAND

Senator KENNELLY:
VICTORIA

– I direct a question to the Minister for the Navy with reference to the evidence of the captain of H.M.A.S. “ Sydney “ at the hearing yesterday morning of the board of inquiry into the whaler tragedy in which five naval officers lost their lives. The captain stated that H.M.A.S. “ Sydney “ operated on a very reduced complement designed to allow it to steam in two watches only and to have a maintenance party aboard. Is the Minister aware of this shortage on a key vessel in Australia’s fighting fleet, and are any other ships similarly affected? Docs not this indicate a grave situation in which Australian fighting ships are so seriously undermanned that their efficiency is impaired?

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · VICTORIA · LP

– Yes, I have had an opportunity to read what was said by Captain Dovers which was what Senator Kennelly attributed to him. I was aware of the fact that H.M.A.S. “ Sydney “ was complemented in this way. I point out that H.M.A.S. “ Sydney “ is not in fact a lighting ship or a ship of the fighting fleet. The ship was in reserve until comparatively recently when we took her out of reserve in order to make her a fast fleet transport able almost at a moment’s notice to pick up troops, their transport and equipment and to transport them overseas to any area in which they might bc required.

At the time H.M.A.S. “Sydney” was brought forward and was converted it was planned that she should spend most of her time in Sydney Harbour at seven days’ readiness to do this job. It was planned that only once or twice a year would the maintenance crew required for that purpose bc augmented by reserves so that the ship could make a couple of short training cruises. However, as the man-power position in the Royal Australian Navy improved and it became possible lo allocate more ratings this original plan was changed so that the ship could spend most of the time at sca complemented, as Senator Kennelly has said, on a watch.andwatch basis. This is a reduced complement from the full peacetime complement for an ordinary ship that is to sail great distances.

H.M.A.S “ Sydney “ was to do this work so that she could provide sea training for ratings and participate in combined exercises with the Army. It was ordered that her radius of steaming from Sydney was not. to be greater than a radius which would enable her at her economical steaming rate to return and be alongside Garden Island within 72 hours in order to pick up troops who might be required to be transported in an emergency and to have her crew augmented to full wartime complement. This has been done, and H.M.A.S. “ Sydney “ has been complemented watch-and-watch. She will continue to be complemented watchandwatch to carry out those duties in that way and under those conditions. This does not indicate any grave situation at all. None of the operational fighting ships of the Navy is complemented watch-and-watch because they have a different job and they have to go much further abroad. The only other ship in the Navy that I know of which is not complemented at peacetime strength, that is for three watches, is also a training ship, or a ship used largely for training - H.M.A.S. “ Anzac”. I do not think that Senator Kennelly needs to be disturbed. It is true that a ship that is complemented watch-and-watch cannot work as efficiently as a warship fully complemented, but then H.M.A.S. “ Sydney “ is not required’ to operate at peak efficiency in the role in which she is being used.

page 1571

QUESTION

CREDIT RESTRICTIONS

Senator LILLICO:
TASMANIA

– Has the Leader of the Government noted in this morning’s press that Sir Ian Potter denies that Australia is facing a credit squeeze and states that Mr. Calwell has completely misconstrued his article? What is the Minister’s opinion of the article?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:

– I have seen the report. This morning’s press places a very different complexion on the article. First, there is a complete denial from Sir Ian Potter that he said that the nation is facing a credit squeeze. He says that a credit squeeze is quite unnecessary. I refer the Senate to the leading article in to-day’s “ Sydney Morning Herald “ which states that Sir Ian Potter’s article is being used for some unfair political ends by people who evidently have no wish to understand his meaning. [ refer the Opposition also to the leading article in this morning’s Sydney “ Daily Telegraph “, which states that there is no truth in the Opposition’s credit scares and that examination of Sir Ian Potter’s remarks shows that he did not predict a credit squeeze. I have also had a chance to read Sir Ian Potter’s article. Here is an extract from it -

In terms of monetary management it must be conceded that the authorities have done an excellent job. We have seen a steady reduction in the volume of unemployment and an increasing rate of immigration. Yet at the same time there have been very few signs of the inflation that might normally be expected in such a policy of expansion.

Let me read also another extract from this article, upon which the Opposition is pinning its faith -

Like almost every other country in the western world, Australia desires to pursue a policy of expansion without inflation. We have walked this tightrope with signal success over the past three years.

Now, Mr. President, I ask the Opposition to take what comfort it may from the scare it is trying to create. This is election time; the Opposition is electioneering. It is desperately anxious to trump up some issue that it can use during the campaign. When we are returned as the Government on 30th November, we shall continue, as we have continued in the past, Australia’s immigration programme, maintain our policy of full employment, and ensure that Australia continues to grow and that our living standards continue to rise.

page 1572

QUESTION

AMMUNITION DEFECTS

Senator McCLELLAND:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for the

Army whether a report was made by the brigadier in charge of ordnance services earlier this year expressing concern at the -

  1. inability to hold ammunition stock against operational and training requirements;
  2. the additional expense of rectifying defects; and
  3. the almost total lack of confidenceon the part of Army ammunition personnel in the local production and inspection of ammunition.

Among a number of instances of defects the following were given -

  1. 105 mm. high explosive cartridges which had a cavitation in the high explosive filling, requiring up to 100 per cent. X-ray at a cost of at least £70,000. (b)5.5inch and 3.7inch high explosive shells having the same defect to be remedied at a cost of £11,000 and £15,000 respectively.
  2. Mark 17 fuses which fired prematurely and which had to be held “not for issue” pending an investigation into the cause of the premature explosion.
  3. Of 100,000 rounds of 40 mm. cartridges delivered, 74,732 had defects, the estimated cost of rectification of which was £50,000.

Has this state of affairs been allowed to continue over a period of five years at least and what, if anything, has been done since the report to which I refer was written earlier this year?

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

– The report has not come to my notice. I should think that this matter affects two departments, the Department of the Army and the Department of Supply. If the honorable senator will put the question on the noticepaper I shall ask both Ministers to give me a reply. I shall forward the reply by letter to the honorable senator or, if he prefers, answer the question personally after the election.

page 1572

QUESTION

BLOWERING DAM

Senator McKELLAR:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question to the Minister for National Development refers to the necessary resumption of land for the construction of the Blowering dam. By way of preface I state that some families are apparently having difficulty in obtaining information from the Snowy Mountains Hydro-electric Authority or the New South Wales Government about their tenure of their existing properties. Can the Minister tell me whose responsibility it is to acquire the land, and will he give the Senate any other information he may have on this matter?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER.Senator McKellar was good enough to inform me that he intended to ask a question about this subject. I have confirmed in other quarters that there is some confusion of thinking in the Tumut district as to the acquisition of properties. I have therefore referred to the terms of the agreement. The overriding principle is that the dam is being built by the Snowy Mountains authority for and on behalf of the New South Wales Government. Therefore, in relation to this work the Snowy Mountains authority will bc reporting to the New South Wales Government. The only immediate interest of the Commonwealth is that it is lending half of the cost of the project and is making available the services of the Snowy Mountains authority. All matters, such as the routes of roads and the resumption of properties are to be determined as the result of consultations between local residents, the local authorities and the New South Wales Government. The Department of Main Roads of New South Wales will be constructing the main public roads.

There are two clauses in the agreement which affect those who have properties. The first clause sets out the works which the State will carry out as distinct from the works which the Snowy Mountains authority will carry out. I have here the clauses of the agreement that deal with the works for which the State is to be responsible. The works are the re-location of roads, the building of some weirs and the acquisition of land. To save time, with the permission cf the Senate, I incorporate the clauses in “Hansard

The State will carry out these works -

Re-location of existing roads, together with structures incidental thereto, and re-location or re-establishment of other existing services, including transmission lines and telephone lines;

Silt dams and weirs on the Tumut River and tributaries upstream of the storage to prevent siltation within the reservoir, and works necessary for the protection of the foreshores of the storage, if field investigations show these dams, weirs and works to be necessary and if they are carried out within the period referred to in clause 11 of this agreement;

The acquisition of the land required for the construction of the dam, spillway, outlet works, and incidental works, and for ultimate inundation, and for the re-location of existing roads, together with structures incidental thereto, and services, including transmission lines and telephone lines, and for the silt dams and weirs and for works necessary for the protection of the foreshores.

Clause 10 of the agreement, which affects those who have properties to be resumed, reads -

The State will acquire an estate in fee simple in all lands other than Crown land’s required for the Blowering storage works, the land to be inundated, and the generating station, and. will grant the Authority free use of such portion of those lands as the Authority considers necessary for the purposes of this agreement.

In simple terms, the owners of those properties that it will be necessary to resume have to carry out their negotiations and make their arrangements with the New South Wales Government and not with the Snowy Mountains authority. The Snowy Mountains authority in this case is only a constructing authority.

page 1573

QUESTION

ASTHMA CURE

Senator BROWN:
QUEENSLAND

– This is election time, and as I am not an unusual politician, I shall ask a political question. I ask. the Minister for Health the following questions: Is it not a fact that commendable efforts are being made to find a cure for asthma? While the Minister is away doing bis best to win votes for his party, will officers of the Department of Health supply me with the fullest information concerning these efforts to find a cure? Is it not a fact that in many asthma cases faulty diet is a direct cause of the illness? Is the Minister aware that Mr. Fred Thompson, a Brisbane dietitian, now retired, has had success in treating asthma by means of a balanced diet? Has the Department of Health any records of claims made by doctors and others regarding the cure of asthma by dietary methods?

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · VICTORIA · CP

– A political question demands a political reply. While I am away winning sufficient votes to return the Government to office on 30th November, I shall have great pleasure in asking officers of my department to supply to the honorable senator the information that he seeks.

page 1573

QUESTION

INTERNATIONAL TERMINAL BUILDING AT SYDNEY AIRPORT

Senator ANDERSON:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I direct to the Minister for Civil Aviation a question relating to the international terminal building at Sydney. Can the Minister say when the existing unsatisfactory international terminal building at Sydney will bc replaced? Is there any danger that the development of the new airport at Tullamarine, Melbourne, could delay the provision of new and more appropriate facilities at Sydney, which is Australia’s leading international airport?

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

– The development of the new international terminal building at Sydney airport is a firm project approved by the Government and is part of the five-year programme of airport development which was announced last November. Planning is in progress both for this project and for the development of the new airport for Melbourne at Tullamarine. The site of the new terminal at Tullamarine, by virtue of its topography, is the easier to develop. The area west of the runway s’ystem at Sydney airport where the new terminal building will be located will need some land reclamation before it can be used, and it is more difficult of access by road than Tullamarine. The Department of Civil Aviation and the Department of Works are engaged on both projects simultaneously, but the Sydney project will, because of the inherent difficulties of the site, take longer to plan and develop. The Tullamarine terminal building is scheduled to come into operation, together with the remainder of the new airport, in 1967. The new international terminal building at Sydney, with the aprons, taxiways, car parks and access roads associated with it, is scheduled for completion in 1968.

page 1574

QUESTION

WATERFRONT EMPLOYMENT

Senator WRIGHT:
TASMANIA

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service. Has the Minister had an opportunity to notice in the annual report of the Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority which, so far as I am concerned, was circulated yesterday, that the average earnings in all ports in Australia for 28.5 hours a week amounted to £23 5s. 2d., and that 38.4 per cent, of the time recorded as time worked was non- productive time? I ask the Minister whether these stevedoring costs are not out of line with general costs of work in Australia. Having regard to these costs as an element in freight costs, will he give urgent attention to the matter?

Senator GORTON:
LP

– I have not examined with particularity the statistics in the report which I tabled in this chamber yesterday; but I shall bring Senator Wright’s opinions to the attention of the Minister for Labour and National Service.

page 1574

QUESTION

HOUSING

Senator ANDERSON:

– Has the Minister for National Development noted an article in a newspaper this morning dealing with the problem of house buyers with regard to the deposit required as a proportion of the purchase price? Is it correct to say that the co-operative building society movement which receives money under the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement makes up to 90 per cent, of the cost of homes available to purchasers? Is it also true that each terminating building society, in its loan allotment, makes provision for approximately 20 per cent, of loans to be made on homes which have already been erected?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:

Because I am always interested in housing, I read this morning with a great deal of interest the article to which the honorable senator has referred. I think that Senator Anderson’s remarks are correct and that they represent a contribution to thinking on this matter which was not mentioned in the article itself. I think that the building society movement, with Government guarantees, is an effective housing arrangement. There must always be problems in connexion with housing. But as I said yesterday in the Senate, a record number of houses was commenced in Australia during the quarter just ended. Whatever problems there may be, it is satisfactory indeed that the construction of a record number of houses was commenced in the last quarter. I make the claim that a good deal of that construction is directly due to the activities of the Commonwealth Government. The Government is finding about £100,000,000 a year for housing which enables the construction of about 40 per cent, of the houses that are being built in Australia. That sum of £100,000,000 a year is being lent by the Commonwealth at interest rates of 3i per cent, per annum under the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement and at the rate of 3$ per cent, per annum through the War Services Homes Division. So approximately 40 per cent, of houses are being built with money supplied by the Commonwealth Government at very concessional interest rates. In these circumstances I think that the Menzies Government has some right to take satisfaction from the progress that is being made.

page 1575

QUESTION

IRON ORE

Senator LILLICO:

– Has the Minister for National Development any further information on the proposed development of the Savage River iron ore deposits in Tasmania? Has some difficulty been found in overcoming the presence of an alien substance in the ore? Can the Minister say what are the commercial possibilities in the development of the field? If the deposit is sound commercially, can the Minister say whether the Commonwealth will assist to install harbour facilities at the mouth of the Pieman River or at any other site which might be more convenient foi exporting ore from the field?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:

Senator Lillico has been speaking to me about this matter for some time, but I have been able to get information on it only this morning. The information I have is that the exploration licence is held by an Australian company, Industrial and Mining Investigations Proprietary Limited. This company has been joined by Picklands, Mather and Company of the United States of America. The American company has agreed to make an assessment of the possi.bility of establishing an industry based on these deposits. The information supplied to me by the department indicates that that assessment has not yet been completed.

As I have said previously, this .deposit, which is now acknowledged , to - run into hundreds of millions of tons, has suffered from the disadvantage of having an impurity in the ore in the form of titanium. There have been two developments in that connexion. First, recent further drilling has. indicated quite appreciable areas where the titanium content is lower than in other areas and lower than was originally expected. Secondly, the American testing of samples indicates that this titanium content may not bc such an obstacle to using the iron ore as was previously thought. As yet it is too early to assess the commercial possibilities of the field. The testing in all directions is showing better results as to both the size of the deposit and the nature of the ore than were originally contemplated. I repeat that it is yet too early to attempt an assessment of the commercial possibilities of the deposit. Whether the Commonwealth would assist in the provision of port facilities is, as Senator Lillico will realize, a very big question. If the field were developed, a rather big industry would be established and extensive port work would bc involved. I can only say that when that stage is reached we will consider the matter on its merits.

page 1575

QUESTION

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO TASMANIA

Senator WRIGHT:

– My question is addressed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate. I refer to the very welcome announcement by the Prime Minister in another place last week, in reply to a question asked .by the honorable member for Franklin, Mr. Falkinder, that the Government had agreed to a non-repayable grant of £2,500,000 being made to Tasmania for the development of the south-western portion of the State. I ask the Minister: Has the Government been informed by the Tasmanian Government when it expects to be able to start that work? Has the Government any information about whether the necessary roads have been surveyed?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:

– My recollection is that this proposal came before the Government on the basis that the Tasmanian Government had done the preliminary work, that it saw the prospect of a very big block of economic power- being made -available, and , that it wanted to fit that production of power into its overall schedule. I forget the year that was mentioned. As Senator Wright knows, such projects require years of planning. The correspondence nominated the year in which Tasmania wanted to .bring this power project into operation. - The Tasmanian Government said that in order to achieve that target it would really need to start on the road work this year, and it- asked, as a matter of urgency, whether the Commonwealth would provide the sum of £2,500,000. According to my recollection, the preliminary survey either has been done or is well advanced and it is contemplated that an immediate start on the work will be made by the Tasmanian Government.

page 1576

QUESTION

OIL

Senator SCOTT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Would the Minister for National Development care to comment upon the significance of the new oil strike, which has been made 40 miles west of Moonie in the Surat basin by the UnionKernA.O.G. organization? Can he inform me whether this well qualifies for a subsidy?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:

– I have no information other than that which I gave to the Senate yesterday. The hole is a subsidized one. The Commonwealth is contributing its share of the cost of drilling. The information I gave yesterday indicated that there was a small flow of oil, at the rate of ten barrels a day. The great significance of the find is that oil has been located on the western side of the Surat basin, in the same sand as that in which oil was discovered at Moonie. The fact that the small flow is on a structure that is superimposed on another structure gives hope I think “hope” is the correct word to use that further drilling may show better results.

page 1576

QUESTION

ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE

Senator HENDRICKSON:
VICTORIA

– My question is addressed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate. After the Australian Government received details of the United States offer for the sale of TFX aircraft, did it consult the British Government to ascertain whether that Government could match the American terms? Was the Government afraid that any subsequent British offer might be equal to or even better than the American offer?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER.When the Government made its decision in this matter it had before it the report of the Chief of the Air Staff and his technical officers which set out and contrasted the performance and the characteristics of the British and the American aircraft. The recommendation of the defence authorities to the Government was that the American aircraft was easily the most suitable for Australian requirements.

page 1576

QUESTION

OIL TANKERS

(Question No. 58.)

Senator McCLELLAND:

asked the

Minister representing the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice -

  1. Is oil imported into and landed in Australia by overseas tankers?
  2. Is any of this oil reloaded into tankers for shipment to other parts of Australia?
  3. If so, do any Australian’ tankers do such’ work?
  4. Are there any Australian tankers available for the performance of such work?
  5. What arrangements, if any, has the Government made to have Australian tankers engaged on the Australian coastal run?
Senator PALTRIDGE:
LP

– The Minister for Shipping and Transport has supplied the following answers: -

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.
  3. See answer to 4.
  4. Pending the formulation of policy on the subject, the importation of a tanker by R. W. Miller (Holdings) Limited to be registered in Australia was approved. The vessel is now in Australian waters, is licensed under the Navigation Act and is manned under Australian conditions.
  5. The policy of the Government is to ensure that over a period the carriage of petroleum products on the coast is by Australian licensed vessels built in Australian shipyards. Discussions have been held with representatives of the companies concerned who have been asked to submit firm’ proposals designed to achieve this objective. It is expected that replies will have been received from the companies in the near future.

page 1576

QUESTION

DRIED FRUITS

(Question No. 88.)

Senator HENDRICKSON:

asked the

Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice -

  1. Has the Government considered the annual report of the Australian Dried Fruits Control Board which stales that many dried fruit growers are being forced from the industry, due in part to the Government’s failure to prevent rising prices and high shipping freight rates?
  2. Has the Government considered the board’s recommendation that immediate financial assistance be granted to the industry?
  3. If not, will it do so as a matter of urgency in order to help preserve a valuable industry affecting the lives of many of our people?
Senator WADE:
CP

– The Minister for Primary Industry has supplied the following answers:-

  1. The annual report of the Australian Dried Fruits Control Board did not state that many dried fruit growers are being forced from the industry. However, the report did draw attention to difficulties facing growers, including high production costs and shipping freights. Production costs were high in relation to overseas prices for the 1962 sultana crop but this situation was largely due to excessive world supply and consequently lower than normal export prices. However, the prices position has materially improved in recent months. The Government is conscious of the incidence of freight rates on export returns and in co-operation with marketing boards and other interested organizations is continually interesting itself in this matter with some measure of success. 2 and 3. In view of the Government’s decision to offer a stabilization scheme and the more favorable marketing situation in recent months, the Government has decided against providing special financial assistance to certain sections of the industry, as requested by the Premiers of New South Wales and Victoria.

page 1577

QUESTION

NATURALIZATION

(Question No. 141.)

Senator MURPHY:
NEW SOUTH WALES

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

  1. Which countries, if any, refuse to recognize the existence of Australian citizenship obtained by naturalization of their respective nationals?
  2. Which countries claim that dual nationality exists after naturalization of their nationals notwithstanding the laws of Australia?
  3. Which countries claim that any person, originally a national of that country, who has been naturalized in Australia reverts to the former nationality by the mere fact of returning to such country even for a visit?
  4. Have there been instances of persons naturalized in Australia being required to make payments to avoid military service on visiting the country of their original nationality?
Senator HENTY:
LP

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

  1. An authoritative view of the nationality laws of other countries can only be given by the governments of those countries. Information is not readily available on the nationality laws of many countries. However, information furnished to the United Nations by the governments of various countries reveals that of the European countries from which Australia has received numbers of migrants, both Albania and Poland have provided in their nationality law that a citizen of either of those countries may not at the same time possess the nationality of a foreign state.
  2. It is known that the nationality laws of some foreign countries do ‘ not provide for the automatic loss of nationality by their nationals upon their acquiring another nationality. Nationals of the countries of Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Greece, Hungary, Romania, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Yugoslavia lose their nationality only if, prior tobecoming a citizen of another country,they obtain a release from nationality from the appropriate authorities in those countries. No case has come under the notice of the Department of Immigration where a release from the nationality of one of those countries has been obtained prior to naturalization in Australia. However, it is known that some countries, such as Greece and Switzerland, recognize dual nationality. When dual nationality is recognized, the principle of master nationality would operate and this means that where a dual national is in the country of either nationality, the nationality of that country becomes the master nationality.
  3. With the exception of dual nationals, the Department of Immigration is not aware of any instance in which an Australian citizen by naturalization reverts to his former nationality merely upon returning to the country of bis original nationality.
  4. It has come to the notice of the Department of Immigration that some naturalized Australian citizens of Greek descent, who have returned to Greece, have been informed that they must undergo military training or pay a fine in lieu of undergoing this training.It is understood that the liability to military service does not arise until the person has been in Greece for one year. Such a person’s master nationality in Greece would, of course, be Greek.

Where a naturalized Australian citizen who appears to be a national of another country is issued with an Australian passport, he is given a written warning notice in the following terms:

Holders of Australian passports who are Australian citizens by naturalization may possess, in addition to their Australian citizenship and British nationality, the nationality of the country of their birth or origin. “When in the country of a second nationality they may not be exempt, by reasons of their Australian citizenship, from their obligations (such as military service)as a national of that country. They may be claimed as nationals of that country, in which case Her Majesty’s representatives abroad cannot intervene on their behalf against the authorities of that country, even though they are in possession of Australian passports.

page 1577

QUESTION

LOGANBERRIES

(Question No. 154.)

Senator WRIGHT:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice -

  1. Has the attention of the Minister for Primary Industry been directed to the real anxiety experienced by growers of loganberries in southern Tasmania owing to the depressed price of this commodity?
  2. In view of the fact that grower representation of the Fruit Industry Sugar Concession Committee has been discontinued since the lamented death of Mr. Robert Crane about twelve months ago, will the Minister undertake to see that the committee is fully informed of all the facts of this industry so as to ensure that when it is fixing the price for loganberries for the coming season, it will fix an economic price for the grower?
Senator WADE:
CP

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

  1. The Minister for Primary Industry has not received any representations recently from the loganberry growers of southern Tasmania.
  2. Representation of Tasmanian loganberry growers on the Fruit Industry Sugar Concession Committee has not been discontinued since Mr. Crane’s death. Shortly after that event, the Minister for Primary Industry appointed Mr.

    1. H. P. Blick to fill Mr. Crane’s position of representative of all Australian growers of noncanning fruit and, at the same time the Minister used his authority under section 7 (5.) of the Sugar Agreement Act of 1962 to issue a standing direction that a representative of the Tasmanian berry fruit industry be invited to participate in committee meetings at which matters affecting the industry were to be discussed. This privilege, reinforced by Mr. Blick’s representations, assures Tasmanian berry fruit growers of every opportunity to inform the committee of their situation.

The committee issued an invitation earlier this month to the Tasmanian Stone and Berry Fruit Board to send a representative of the berry fruit industry to the committee’s next meeting in mid-November, when it is expected that minimum prices will be determined for berry fruits, other than strawberries, for the 1963-64 season. The board has accepted the invitation. The committee has asked the Tasmanian Secretary for Agriculture to provide information to assist the committee in determining these minimum prices. All things considered, the committee may be expected to be fully informed for its task.

In regard to the suggestion that the committee fix an economic price for the grower, it should be pointed out that the Minister for Primary Industry is not empowered to direct the committee in regard to its determination of minimum prices.

page 1578

QUESTION

DRUGS

(Question No. 158.)

Has the Minister seen an article appearing in the Brisbane “Courier-Mail” of Monday, 21st October, headlined “M.P. Hits at Firms”, in which Mr. Mclvor, M.P., is reported as saying in a radio broadcast that Australians were being fleeced of millions of pounds by drug companies; that the recent price reduction in certain drugs was one of the greatest national scandals in years and that the Federal Government was prepared to allow the sick to be systematically robbed by monopolistic chemical interests?

Are the drugs mentioned by Mr. Mclvor on the free list?

If so, is it not a fact that Mr. Mclvor’s statement in regard to the Federal Government being prepared to allow the sick to be systematically robbed by monopolistic chemical interests is incorrect?

Senator WADE:
CP

– Following are the answers to the honorable senator’s questions: -

  1. Yes.
  2. The drugs referred to in the article are available under the pharmaceutical benefits scheme to pensioners free of charge and to other members of the general public on payment of 5s. per prescription.
  3. I can only speak in regard to drugs which are pharmaceutical benefits, as the Commonwealth Government exercises no control over the prices of drugs which are not pharmaceutical benefits. It is obviously incorrect to claim that the sick are being robbed in respect of drugs which are pharmaceutical benefits.

Furthermore my department has been very active in regard to the prices paid for such drugs, not only in recent months but also in previous periods. For example in 1962-63, as a result of this activity, substantial savings in expenditure under the pharmaceutical benefits scheme were recorded compared with our original estimates.

These price reductions and those which I have announced in recent months are indicative of the Government’s interest in this matter. I can assure the honorable senator that negotiations for price reductions on a number of other listed drugs are in progress and I expect to make further announcements in this regard in the near future.

“PRINCESS OF TASMANIA.”

(Question No. 161.)

Senator O’BYRNE:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice -

  1. What subsidy, if any, has been paid for the operation of “ Princess of Tasmania “ to date?
  2. What are the total profits earned by “Princess of Tasmania” to date?
  3. What numbers of (a) passengers; (b) freight (tons); and (c) vehicles, have been carried in each financial year since the commencement of operations of “Princess of Tasmania” on the Bass Strait run?
Senator PALTRIDGE:
LP

– The Minister has furnished the following replies: -

  1. No operational subsidy has been paid.
  2. It is not the practice to disclose the profits of individual ships operated by the Australian National Line.
  3. Since the commencement of operations by the “ Princess of Tasmania “ in October, 1959, the vessel has carried the following passengers, vehicles and cargo: -

page 1579

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OF THE AUDITOR-GENERAL

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sir Alister McMullin). - 1 lay on the table the following paper: -

Audit Act - Finance - Supplementary report of the Auditor-General upon other accounts, for the year 1962-63.

page 1579

ADVANCE TO THE TREASURER 1962-63

Statement of Expenditure

Senator PALTRIDGE:
Minister for Civil Aviation · Western Australia ; · LP

– I lay on the table the following paper: -

Advance to the Treasurer - Statement for the year 1962-63 of Heads of Expenditure and the Amounts charged thereto pursuant to Section 36a of the Audit Act 1901-1962.

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

That consideration of the statement in Committee of the Whole be made an order of the duy for later hour of the day.

page 1579

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Discharge of Motions

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:
Vice-President ‘ of the Executive Council and Minister for National Development · New South Wales · LP

[11.50]. - I moye -

That the following Orders of the Day, General Business, be discharged: -

No. 2 - Coal Utilization Research Advisory Committee - Report - Resumption of debate upon the motion, That the paper be printed.

No. 4 - Commercial Television Stations - Grant of Licences in Sydney and Melbourne - Ministerial Statement - Resumption of debate upon the motion, That the paper be printed.

No. 6 - Royal Commission on Matters Involving the Postmaster-General’s Department and the Victorian Police Force in relation to Illegal Gambling- ReportResumption of debate upon the motion, That the report be printed.

No. 10- Civil Aviation- Annual Report 1962- 63 - Paper - Resumption of debate upon the motion, That the paper be printed.

No. 11 - Tariff Board - Annual Report 1962-63 - Paper - Resumption of debate upon the motion, That the paper be printed.

No. 12 - South-East Asia Visit- Report of Commonwealth Parliamentary Delegation - Paper - Resumption of debate upon the motion, That the paper be printed.

No. 13 - Extension of Television Services - Report of Australian Broadcasting Control Board - Paper - Resumption of debate upon the motion, That the paper be printed.

I point out that these orders are all the subjects of motions for the printing of papers, and as such cannot be considered by the Joint Printing Committee at its end of session meeting to consider recommendations for printing. In the circumstances, it is proper to discharge these items from our notice-paper and have the documents considered by that committee.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– I understand that on the dissolution of the House of Representatives all matters will be discharged from the notice-paper. In the circumstances, it seems that the motion merely seeks to discharge some items a day or so ahead of the dissolution of the Parliament and the complete wiping off of all matters. If that is correct, the Opposition has no objection.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 1579

CHOWILLA RESERVOIR AGREEMENT BILL 1963

Bill returned from the House of Representatives with an amendment.

In committee (consideration of House of Representatives’ amendment):

House of Representatives’ amendment -

That the following new clause be inserted in the bill:- “ 4. The payments by the Commonwealth to the Slate of New South Wales provided for by the agreement referred to in the last preceding section may be made, by way of financial assistance to that State on the terms and conditions contained in that- agreement, out of the Consolidattd Revenue Fund, which is appropriated accordingly.”.

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:
Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for National Development · New South Wales · LP

[11.52]. - The amendment which the House of Representatives has inserted in this bill, which originated in the Senate, is self-explanatory. It is the appropriation clause, under which the Commonwealth will provide the funds that are required in terms of the principal agreement. 1 move -

That the Mouse of Representatives’ amendment bc agreed to.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– Quite recently we had before us the bill which purported merely to ratify an agreement made between the Commonwealth and the State of New South Wales. It contained no appropriation clause to make available the moneys which the Commonwealth agreed should be loaned to the State of New South Wales. That procedure enabled the bill to be introduced in this place. The Constitution provides that a bill containing an appropriation clause can originate only in another place. So we have an interesting demonstration of the power of the House of Representatives under the Constitution and of some ingenuity on the part of the Government in giving to the Minister in charge in this place the opportunity to introduce the bill without an appropriation clause. I am quite happy that he was in a position to follow that procedure. The Opposition supports the proposal.

Amendment agreed to.

Resolution reported; report adopted,

page 1580

BILLS RETURNED FROM THE HOUSE QF REPRESENTATIVES

The following bills were returned from the House of Representatives without amendment: -

River Murray Waters Bill 1963.

Menindee Lakes Storage Agreement Bill 1963.

page 1580

DEFENCE (VISITING FORCES) BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 29th October (vide page 1528), on motion by Senator Gorton-

Thai the bill be now read a second t.’me.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– The bill now before the Senate is a very important one. In the view of the Opposition it is desirable, and from our study of it we would say that it is well conceived. The bill repeals the 1939 act dealing with situations that arise through the presence of visiting forces in Australia. That is the main purpose of the bill, although it does deal with other aspects such as those where visiting personnel may not be in the country as part of a force but may be here either pursuant to an arrangement or as deserters or persons who are absent without -leave from the defence forces of their country. As I have said the bill repeals the 1939 act on this subject. It is essential, having regard to freedom pf communications and the alliances that exist to-day, that there should be an act regulating the status of visiting military forces in our country.

The bill is based upon the old act and upon a consideration of the National Security (Allied Forces) Regulations that operated throughout the war. The Government has had regard also to the 1952 act of the United Kingdom. This bill becomes all the more necessary as lending support to the Agreement Covering the Status of United States Forces in Australia, recently concluded, which was before the Senate in relation to the presence of United States personnel at North West Cape. It is essential that this legislation be available to supplement and support that agreement.

One finds the bill of particular interest. Australian courts are to vacate some portion of their jurisdiction in favour of the tribunals and authorities of visiting defence forces. Whilst we may find that necessary in the circumstances, we must take seriously any legislation which deprives our own courts of jurisdiction they would normally exercise, particularly in relation to crime, because crime is deemed to be territorial. Any crime committed within the confines of Australia comes immediately within the jurisdiction of our own courts, and that jurisdiction can be vacated only by the express provision of the Parliament itself.

I do not feel disturbed about the civil rights of Australians in relation to visiting forces. From my perusal, at the time, of the status of forces agreement I think that the rights of Australians in relation to visiting forces are well preserved. So primarily the matter to be considered from a practical point of view is the nature of crime in a greater or lesser degree.

Countries throughout the world have had, of course, vast experience of the forces of one country visiting another. I have no doubt that the Government addressed its mind to that experience in drawing up this bill. I should have thought that the Minister for the Navy (Senator Gorton) would have told us something about the experience in West Germany, but there was no reference to that in his speech. I thought that a wealth of experience and knowledge could have been gained by a consideration of what happened in West Germany owing to the presence of the forces of so many countries, including America, Britain and others, over many years past. Notwithstanding the lack of any reference to that, we do know that the type of thing that this bill deals with has been very much in the forefront of the minds of administrators in relation to the presence, in recent years, of foreign troops in West Germany and in and about Berlin.

I regret that a bill of this importance and great interest should come to the Parliament so late in the session, and on the eveof a general election. It is essentially, in my view, a committee bill, and I personally would have appreciated the opportunity to consider leisurely in committee each of its clauses. For my own benefit I made a summation in, I hope, nontechnical language, of each clause, and I shall take the rather unusual course on this occasion regarding the bill as essentially a committee bill of reviewing the bill almost clause by clause. Instead of dealing with general principles one must look at the separate provisions in order to understand what is being done.

Part I., which is the introductory part of the bill, states that the bill is not to operate upon the granting of the Royal assent after the passage through the two houses of the Parliament, but is to be operative from a date to be proclaimed. I should be grateful if the Minister for the Navy, when replying, would indicate what is in contemplation in that provision. When is the proclamation likely to be made, and what are the factors that induced the Government to seek the opportunity to proclaim the bill at its convenience or according to circumstances? The first part of the bill deals largely with definitions, but shows that the bill relates to three main fields, namely, visiting forces, deserters and absentees without leave and attachment of personnel and mutual powers of command. The first part concerns visiting forces only. The other two parts concern personnel other than purely visiting forces.

The bill has particular application to three classes members of a visiting force, members of the civil component of such a force, and the dependants of persons in both those classes. From clause 6 it is clear that the provisions of the bill will apply to a country of the Commonwealth of Nations, so declared by the regulations, and to any other country named specifically in the regulations from time to time. Under that provision there will be flexibility of application of the act. Automatically, almost, the regulations will name other Commonwealth countries, but apart from that a country has to be specifically named.

Part II. is the operative part of the bill dealing with visiting forces. Clause 8 contains a provision that the service tribunals and service authorities of a country named in the regulations as a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, or another country specifically named in the regulations, are given authority in accordance with the law oftheir country those are important words to remember over members of their visiting force and over all others subject to that country’s service law, they being neither Australian citizens nor persons ordinarily resident in Australia. As the Minister explained in the secondreading speech, the courts of the United States of America, in particular, have held that the military force hasno power over the civil component and the dependants of the civil component in peace-time. That situation alters in war. Clause 8 further provides that a, sentence of death imposed by a tribunal of a visiting force is not to be carried out in Australian territory. In that case the convicted person would have to be taken away from Australia for the sentence to be executed.

I come now to clause 9, which deals with the functions of our courts and their relation to the tribunals of visiting forces. This clause provides, in effect, that a person charged with an offence against Australian law is not liable to be tried by an Australian court if he is a member of a visiting force or its civil component, and if the offence arose out of his duty as a member of that force or component, is solely against the security of what is described as the sending country, is an offence against the person of a member of a visiting force or its civil component, or a dependant of either of them, or is an offence against the property of the sending country, of a member of the visiting force or civil component, or of a dependant of either of them. However, all that does not apply in two circumstances if, at the time of the offence, the offender was not subject to the jurisdiction of the tribunals of the sending country, or if the offender was a member of the civilian component and the charge could not be dealt with under the service law of the sending country. I have explained already how those circumstances might arise.

Senator Wright:

– May I interrupt to ask whether the term “ civilian component “ is defined?

Senator McKENNA:

– It is defined in sub-clause (3.) of clause 5. which reads -

A reference in this Act toa member of a civilian component of a visiting force shall be read as a reference to a person who, not being a member of that visiting force, an Australian citizen or a person ordinarily resident in Australia -

is employed by or in the service of -

that visiting force or a part of that visiting force; or

an organization established for the benefit or welfare of members of that visiting force and recognized by the designated authority of the sending country;

is serving with an organization that, with the approval of the Minister, is accompanying that visiting force; or

is attached to or is accompanying that visiting force and, in accordance with the law of the sending country, is subject to the service law of that country, but does not include a dependant of a member of that visiting force or of a person referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c) of this sub-section..

That is a very comprehensive definition and is typical of the earlier part of the bill. In Part I. there are many definitions and a knowledge of them is really essential to a reading of the later provisions of the bill. These definitions, and particularly the one in clause 6 where the expression “ a country in relation to which a provision of this Act applies “ is used, run right through the various provisions of the bill. Some ready knowledge of the definitions clauses is really essential. It is for that reason that I made my own summary of the bill and eliminated the need for continual reference back to the definitions clauses.

I had been dealing with the fact that what is provided in clause 9 does not apply to two classes of cases. I go on to comment that the Australian courts may act if the AttorneyGeneral certifies that he has been advised that the sending country does not propose to deal with the case. The Australian courts may also act, and keep on acting, until objection is taken to their jurisdiction during the trial. I summarize clause 10 by saying that in a case where Australian courts and the service tribunals of a sending country both have jurisdiction over an offence, if the AttorneyGeneral agrees to a. request from the sending country that’ Australian courts should not act, then Australian courts shall not act.

Clause 1 1 provides that a person tried by a tribunal of the sending country is not to be tried for the same offence by an Australian court. I indicate to the Minister that I would be appreciative if, in his reply, he would advise me whether he agrees that I have stated the correct import of the clauses I have paraphrased. Clause 12 contains the provision that despite clauses 8 and 11, to which I have already referred, powers of arrest, search, and that type of thing under Australian law are not affected, nor are provisions as to bail and remand. The clause further provides that where the Australian court finds that the accused is subject to the jurisdiction of the sending country, it shall notify the sending country’s authority. 1 shall come back to that point when we reach that clause in committee. There is provision for notification of the sending country, but I cannot find anything indicating by whom the notification is to be given. 1 shall raise that matter with the Minister at the committee stage.

Senator Gorton:

– To which provision are you referring?

Senator McKENNA:

– Sub-clause (2.) of clause 12. Perhaps I may comment upon that now and save time in committee. The sub-clause reads -

Where a person is charged with an offence against a Jaw of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory, and it appears that that person is subject to the jurisdiction of the service tribunals Of a country in relation to which section eight of this Act applies, the designated authority of that country shall be notified.

There is nothing to indicate who gives that notification, ls it given by a court, or by the clerk of a court? I merely indicate that on that point there seems to be a lack of precision. Perhaps the Minister will consider that point and reply, when we reach the clause in the committee stage. I am hot proposing an amendment to the clause; 1 am recommending one to the Minister. Sub-clause (3.) of clause 12 authorizes our own court to stay the proceedings for a reasonable time while it determines whether the matter is one for the tribunals and authorities of the visiting force. But if the Attorney-General certifies that the sending country has requested delivery of the accused then the accused shall be delivered and orders made by the Australian court shall be revoked.

Clause 13 has a particular division relating to the personal conditions of service of members of the visiting forces. Our Australian courts are not to have jurisdiction with regard to the pay, the terms of service, or the discharge of a member of a visiting force or of its civilian components. Clause 14 deals with inquests. Its main provisions are that the coroner is not to proceed with an inquest into a death where the deceased at the time of death was a member of a visiting force or its civilian component or a dependant of cither of them. The coroner shall adjourn an inquest if he is satisfied that a person subject to the jurisdiction of the tribunals of a visiting force has been charged or is about to bc charged with the homicide of the deceased person. But in any case, the coroner may proceed with the inquest if the Attorney-General so authorizes. The coroner is also authorized to do such things as may be necessary to provide for - the registration of the death under our laws. Again, under clause 14, Australian law is not to operate to prevent the removal from Australia of the body of a deceased person who is a member of a visiting force, its civil component or a dependant of either of them.

Clause 15 carries the matter a little further and provides that the AttorneyGeneral may authorize the recapture and confinement in Australia of a person sentenced to imprisonment or detention by the tribunal of a visiting force. Clause 16 is a rule of convenience. Under it regulations may provide that where under Australian law, a power is exercisable by an authority or person with respect to the defence force, or a part of that force or its service tribunals, with respect to property used for the purposes of that force, or with respect to taking possession of or acquiring such property, such power may be exercised by an authority of our defence force with respect to a visiting force as if the visiting force were a part of our own force. That provision is contained in sub-clause (1.) of clause 16. Under sub-clause (2.), the regulations may exempt a visiting force and its components and its property from the operation of a specified enactment as if the visiting force were a part of the defence force. The regulations may also exempt the visiting force and its property from the operation of a regulation as to “ prohibition, restriction or requirement “ as if the visiting force were a part of the defence force. That provision is essential, once a visiting force is in Australia, to allow practical arrangements to proceed wtih local authorities through our defence forces as though the visiting force were part of our own. We see no objection to that.

Clause 17, in effect, provides that where the Commonwealth agrees that claims arising out of acts or omissions of a visiting force shall be paid by the Commonwealth to an agreed amount or one determined by judicial process, payment by the Commonwealth of that amount shall be a full discharge from liability, not merely of the Commonwealth, but .of the person against whom the claim has been made. There are provisions in the Status, of Forces Agreement which relate- to that matter. Many civilian claims, of course, will be made directly by our own citizens against members of the visiting forces and its associated persons. But there are cases for which the Commonwealth accepts responsibility and this clause relates to them.

Clause IS is an evidentiary provision. It provides for the acceptance of a certificate of a designated authority of a visiting force as to who is a member of the visiting force. That certificate is deemed to be sufficient evidence, until the contrary is proved, as (o what is the service law of the visiting force. The certificate of the appropriate authority is to be conclusive on that point. There is also a provision as to the sentence, custody and trial of an offender by a service tribunal of the visiting force. In that case, too, the certificate is to be conclusive evidence.

There is a further provision that the Attorney-General may certify that an offence against Australian law by a member of a visiting force arose out of his duty as a member of that force. That certificate is to be deemed to be sufficient evidence. I should like to interpolate here that the determination of what is a matter of duty on the part of a member of a visiting force, fortunately, rests with the Attorney-General of this country. I raise the question quite mildly as to whether, in time of peace, it is wise to have such a very wide provision in favour of a visiting force. I suggest that in view of the circumstances at North West Cape it might be desirable to make special provision for those committing offences in the course of their duty in that area. In other words, I suggest thai the exemption in favour of the tribunals of visiting forces provided for in clause 9 in relation to offences occurring in the course of duty and immediately conferring jurisdiction upon the visiting force might be modified by some geographical reference to an area. I would invite the Minister to consider that.

Is there any practical problem, which makes necessary such an exceedingly wide provision that if a member of the visiting force commits an offence anywhere in Aus tralia in the course of his duty that is to be a matter, instantly for the tribunal of the visiting force?

Senator Gorton:

– I do not think that that is really the position under the bill.

Senator McKENNA:

– That appears to be the position under clause 9.

Senator Gorton:

– I think that you have to take into consideration the fact that the Attorney-General retains a certain right.

Senator McKENNA:

– I have conceded that. 1 commend the Government for adopting that provision. In this respect, the bill differs from the provisions of the United Kingdom act and it is an aspect of the bill that the Opposition likes.

Senator Gorton:

– You suggest that the provision should be localized?

Senator McKENNA:

– 1 think so - in peace-time, at all events. If the provision were confined to an area in which a member of a visiting force is functioning in peace-time it could be expanded very rapidly in war-time. It would be necessary only to make a regulation. 1 just raise this point for consideration and comment’ by the Minister.

I shall now pass to Part III. of the bill. I. do not think I need say a great deal about that-. I should like to mention not only that there might be deserters and persons absent without leave from the visiting force present in our country, but also that deserters from other countries might come here, perhaps to seek sanctuary. This part provides for their arrest on request from the other country if that country is approved by us through a declaration made by the Governor-General. So this part not merely applies to visiting forces in our country by agreement with our country, but it could apply to deserters from a force that is quite outside the country. This is the sort of thing that ought to be regularized.

The bill provides that a person so arrested shall be delivered to the visiting force subject to his having a right of appeal to an authorized officer - under the bill, he would be an Australian - who may refer to the Minister the correctness or otherwise of the address and the question of the man’s delivery to his own country. Either the authorized officer or the Minister may order release from custody. Perhaps it will save my commenting at the committee stage if 1 say now that 1 take it that nothing in the bill would take away the right of the person so arrested to apply for a writ of habeas corpus, which would be his normal right as a person in Australia with access to the courts. But clause 21 does not in fact deal with that particular matter. It deals with arrest, an appeal to an authorized officer, and an appeal ultimately to the Minister. 1 ask this question tentatively at this stage: Is there any danger that that provision might be deemed to be exclusive and exhaustive - to exclude the normal right of access to a court? I want an assurance on that point. I invite the Minister to indicate whether it might not be better to include there some brief provision to the effect that nothing in the section shall derogate from the arrested person’s right of access to our own courts by way of habeas corpus or otherwise.

Part IV. deals primarily with machinery matters connected with the allocation of members of our forces to the forces of other countries and the reverse process whereby persons from those countries are attached to our defence forces-. This part sets out their rights. That is an essential provision. Clause 24 deals with the situation when our forces are serving with the forces of another country and with the special situation when Australian, United Kingdom, Canadian or New Zealand forces are acting in combination. lt also authorizes the officer in charge of a pan of the Australian defence forces serving abroad wilh the forces of another country to request the service authority of that country to direct the arrest of an Australian member who is suspected of having committed an offence against Australian service law, and to deliver him into Austalian custody. There is a definition of the terms “ serving together “ and “ acting in combination “. It is provided that forces shall be deemed to be so serving or so acting only if so declared by an order of the Governor-General. They seem, to be necessary provisions, and we support them.

I come to Part V., which deals with miscellaneous matters, including some evidentiary provisions and the delegation of powers. The bill is of great interest to the Opposition. We could profitably spend a great deal more time in discussing the measure. Certainly, it would be of great interest to those of. us who are interested in such matters. Having regard to all the circumstances and the state of the business paper, I content myself with that brief review, in what I hope was understandable lay language, of my understanding of the proposals in the bill. The Opposition has pleasure in supporting the measure.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy and Minister assisting the Minister for External Affairs · Victoria · LP

– in reply - I should like to reply very briefly at this stage to one or two questions that were asked by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna). He may wish to raise them in greater detail later. He asked when it was planned that the act should be proclaimed. I do not think the Government contemplates any particular date in the sense of a particular day of a particular month. I point out that there is in existence an agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Australian Government and that the United States is proceeding with the planning and construction of a military installation on the assumption that that agreement will be ratified. Consequently, the Australian Government wishes to put that agreement into legislative form as soon as possible.

I am told that, in the opinion of the law officers of the department, the question as to habeas corpus does not arise. They say that it would bc necessary to insert in the bill a clause which took away or breached the right of habeas corpus before any court would assume that that right had been in any way affected. They are the only points that I recall the Leader of the Opposition having raised.

Senator McKenna:

– I referred also to clause 12 (2.), which deals with the matter of notification.

Senator GORTON:

– Perhaps that could be raised at the committee stage. Having made those, general replies to the points raised by Senator McKenna, may I say that in general the Senate seems to be satisfied with the principle of the legislation.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.

Clause 5 (Interpretation).

Senator WRIGHT:
Tasmania

– Some expression seems to have been omitted from sub-clause (3.). The relevant passage reads -

A reference in this Act to a member of a civilian component of a visiting force shall be read as a reference to a person who, not being a member of that visiting force, an Australian citizen . . .

Something seems to have been omitted after the words “ that visiting force “.

Senator COHEN:
VICTORIA · ALP

– It means “ or an Australian citizen “.

Senator McKenna:

– The word “ or “ is implicit.

Senator Gorton:

– The language is quite clear.

Senator WRIGHT:

– Having read the three contexts in which the expression is used, I now see the meaning of it and I accept the Minister’s statement that it is correct to interpolate the word” or “.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 6 and 7 agreed to.

Clause 8 (Exercise of powers by service tribunals and authorities of countries sending visiting forces).

Senator WRIGHT:
Tasmania

.- May 1 say by way of preface that I appreciate the explanatory matter that is included in the secondreading speech of the Minister for the Navy and Minister assisting the AttorneyGeneral (Senator Gorton) on this matter. It states the origins of these provisions and the consideration that has been given to their adaptation to Australian conditions. The adaptations, so far as they depart from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization provisions, seem to me to be improvements. I should like the Minister to explain why sub-clause (4.) of clause 8 has been included in the bill. It reads - (4.) Where a sentence has, whether within or beyond the territorial limits of Australia, been passed by a service tribunal of a country in relation to which this section applies ‘ upon a person who was, immediately before the sentence was passed, subjectto the jurisdiction . of that tribunal in accordance with this section, then, for the purposes of any proceedings in a court -

  1. the service tribunal shall be deemed to have been properly constituted;
  2. the sentence shall be deemed to be within the jurisdiction of the service tribunal and in accordance with the law of that country; and
  3. the sentence shall, if executed according to its tenor, be deemed to have been lawfully executed.

It appears to me that this provision is designed to makeun-examinable any question in relation to the lawful constitution of a service tribunal and the ambit of its jurisdiction in relation to the laws of the country concerned and, indeed, the application of the laws of that country. In respect of the lastmentioned matter,I can understand that some buttressing or supporting provision might be proper, because the position of the service court, in regard to the interpretation and application of the law of the country, might require to be given finality. However, I think offhand that the Australian courts must be satisfied that the service tribunal is properly constituted; that is to say, that it is a properly constituted service tribunal and also that it is acting within the scope of its jurisdiction.I invite an explanation of the need for the inclusion of the “ deemed “ provision.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

.- It will still remain competent, under this clause, for an Australian court to go into the question whether a person is or is not subject to the jurisdiction of a tribunal. In other words, the court may consider whether he is an Australian citizen or a citizen of the country to which the tribunal belongs. That is a matter which is arguable before the court and which may be decided by it. . The matter having been decided, the purpose of this provision is to save the Australian court from being concerned with the need to give opinions on matters of foreign law as they apply to foreign nationals. Let us take, for example, a United States tribunal. It would be a matter for the United States courts to decide whether an American tribunal which was dealing with ah American citizen was properly constituted. It is for that purpose and that purpose only that this provision has been included in the bill. The object is to remove from the Australian courts the necessity of having to give an interpretation to a foreign government dealing with a foreign national. The provision does not apply, of course, to any Australian national.

Senator WRIGHT:
Tasmania

– I do not intend to detain the committee for more than a minute or two in discussing this matter, nor do I wish it to be understood that I have given close consideration to the bill. My consideration has been of a general character. I have listened with advantage to the Minister’s comments, first, concerning the question whether or not a person is a serving national of the sending country, and, secondly, whether he was acting in the course of duty. 1 understood the Minister to say that the question would still be examinable by the Australian courts. 1 should have thought that that master would be the subject of a certificate by our Attorney-General.

Senator Gorton:

– 1 do nol believe 1 mentioned anything about the person concerned acting in the course of duty.

Senator WRIGHT:

– I accept the Minister’s correction if 1 have wrongly stated his comments. Before passing from that point, I wish to mention the expression “ the sentence shall bc deemed to be within the jurisdiction of the service tribunal “ in paragraph (b) of sub-clause (4.). Are we satisfied that that provision’ refers simply to the nature of the sentence? 1 should have thought that it was capable of meaning that once sentence is passed on John Smith the appropriateness of the sentence also is covered by the paragraph. However, that is a detail. I come to the point of substance on which 1 rose to reply to the Minister. ] should have thought that if the intention is as expressed by the Minister, it would be better achieved by saying that this provision shall operate until the’ contrary is proved, or something of that kind. That would give the Australian court the advantage of a prima facie presumption that the other court was properly constituted and acting within its jurisdiction.

I should think that, on grounds of general law, if a court acted as though it possessed jurisdiction it would be presumed to have acted properly until the contrary was proved. However, I feel that there is some danger in the provision whereby the court is deemed to have been properly constituted, in that it may deprive an accused person of a possible defence in a case in which proved facts make it obvious that the constitution of the court was contrary to the Jaw of either the sending country or our own. 1 should have thought that- all that was needed was to provide for something in the nature of a prima facie presumption in this respect.

Senator GORTON (VictoriaMinister for the Navy [1.2.43]. - The person wilh whom we are dealing must be a member of visiting forces. Under the Australian law, the service tribunal which deals with that person is deemed to be properly constituted. As Senator Wright has correctly stated, a foreign serviceman could not challenge in an Australian court whether the service tribunal was or was not properly constituted, but he could challenge it under the law of his own country which our laws do not bind.

Senator WRIGHT:
Tasmania

.- I should have thought that that was not quite so. The person concerned could invoke the habeas corpus provisions of our law, which arc regarded as equal in fundamental importance to Magna Carta and which, I rejoiced to hear the Minister say, will still bc available, notwithstanding anything contained in this bill. I should think that sometimes the question would arise of the legality of the constitution of the service tribunal which claimed the right to operate against such a person. It seems to me that by means of :his provision we may deprive a person of a possible defence, although it is no’ intended to do so. The provision is intended to facilitate Australian court proceedings by requiring that until the contrary is proved the Australian courts shall presume the service courts to be properly constituted.

Clause agreed to.

Sitting suspended from 12.45 to 2.15 p.m.

Clause 9 (Restriction, with respect to certain offences, of trial by courts of offenders connected with visiting force).

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

12.15]. - I am interested1 in clause 9(1.) (a). Part of the clause reads -

Subject to ill is section, a person charged with an offence against a law of the Commonwealth. . . is not liable to be tried for that offence by a court if he was, at the time when the offence is alleged to have been committed, a member of a visiting force or of a civilian component .of a visiting force and -

the alleged offence, if committed by him, arose out of and in the course nf his duty as a member of that force or component. . . .

I am concerned with only; so much of the clause as I have read out. lt is difficult to determine whether a particular offence was committed in the course of a man’s duty, that man being a member of a visiting force or its civilian component. The bill very properly, in clause 18 (4.) (c) provides that the Attorney-General, by his certificate, may conclude that, in the first instance. He may give a certificate that the offence did arise in the course of a duty. The Opposition is pleased that the Government has seen fit to keep control of that matter in the hands of Australia. We arc also pleased with the aspect that the Attorney; General’s certificate in the matter is challengeable in the courts. The certificate is sufficient evidence of the facts certified in any proceedings in a court until the contrary is proved, so the determination of whether the action of a visiting serviceman was done in the course of his duty will rest primarily upon the certificate of our own Attorney-General. That that certificate is open to challenge in the courts is all to the good.

But a provision that refers to an offence committed in the course of duty is an exceedingly wide provision. The question is whether it should be expressed in such broad and general terms, particularly in time of peace and having regard to the fact that this provision is needed at the moment for only on= particular area - the North West Cape area. I invite the Minister to indicate whether the Government gave any consideration to limiting the application of that provision to the area in and about the North West Cape project. Is there any need in peacetime, and in the circumstances of to-day, to spill that over to cover an offence committed anywhere in Australia? Did the Government consider that aspect, or will it consider it? I suggest that the “ course of duty “ referred to in clause 9 (1.) (a) should be dealt with quite separately.

While accepting what I have said about clause 1 8 (4.) (c) we believe that this provision should operate only in such areas of Australia as the GovernorGeneralinCouncil may by proclamation declare. In time of peace one can confine this to areas where there are large camps or installations of the type we have in the North West Cape area, but leaving visiting forces, like our own, prima facie subject to the ordinary criminal law in other areas and especially the. metropolitan areas.

The geographical peculiarities of Australia to which the Minister referred quite often in his speech make this much easier in Australia than in places like West Germany where, for example, there are thousands of United States troops living on the outskirts of great industrial towns like Heidelberg and Mannheim. But in time of war a wider definition of the area would become appropriate. We recognize that in the emergency of war many short-cuts have lo be taken. The procedure 1 invite the Minister to consider is not cumbersome. It rests on a proclamation by the GovernorGeneral which can be contracted or expanded at will. I should like the Minister to comment on the wide way in which this provision is drawn.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– The first point in relation to the question raised by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) is that this legislation is lo put into force an agreement arrived at between the United States of America -and Australia. The agreement provided for these provisions to be in force throughout Australia and not in a particular area of Australia. This bill is putting into legislative form the agreement between the two countries, and it covers an area agreed by the two countries to be covered. Nor is this unusual. It follows the British act, which has precisely the same provisions.

The Leader of the Opposition made a specific suggestion that perhaps the operation of this provision should be confined to the North-West Cape and the area around it; but although this agreement is concerned with the building of the NorthWest Cape project by a particular country, it is by no means limited either to a particular country or the forces of a particular country, or to their situation in a particular area of Australia. If the bill becomes law it will apply to any section of Australia where United States troops may be stationed. It will apply not only to North-West Cape but to any section of Australia where British troops or troops of any member of the Commonwealth of Nations mav. according to the terms of the bill, be stationed. In the case of troops from the Commonwealth, it would put into force the usual conditions and make those conditions applicable throughout the whole of Australia.

I do not think any serious worry is to be expected from the application of this provision throughout the whole of Aus tralia because, after all, a foreign serviceman must not only be on duty but must be admitted by the Australian Attorney General to have been on duty at the time of the offence. Therefore, should there be any real question of doubt, it is in the hands of the Australian Government to make an application.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 10 (Waiver of jurisdiction otherwise exercisable by a court).

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– This clause provides for waiver of jurisdiction if both the service tribunals of the visiting force and our own courts have jurisdiction. This is a provision for Australia to waive jurisdiction in particular cases. My concern is with the word “ person “ appearing in 10 (1.) which states -

Where-

a service tribunal of a country in relation to which this section applies has jurisdiction to try a person alleged to have committed an offence against the law of the Commonwealth or of a Slate or Territory; . . .

The jurisdiction of an Australian court is not excluded. There may be a request, and the AttorneyGeneral may agree to the request, from the country concerned to waive Australian jurisdiction and leave the settlement of the matter to the service tribunal of the visiting force. The word “ person “ is too wide a word to be used. I invite the Minister to tell the committee why that wide word was chosen when in almost every other clause of the bill the persons affected have been narrowed down, in terms of the definition, to members of the visiting forces, members of a civilian component, and the dependants of each. This is probably one of the few places where so wide a term is used.

Senator Gorton:

– It refers back to clause 8 (1.), which states -

The service tribunals and service authorities . . may . . . exercise over persons subject to their jurisdiction in accordance with this section all such powers . . .

Senator McKENNA:

– But is there a reference in clause 10 to clause 8 (1.)? At a quick glance, I do not see it.

Senator Gorton:

– No. I do not say that it specifically refers back, but the term “persons” is to be found in clause 8(1.) and (2.).

Senator McKENNA:

– That is true. Clause 8 (2.) states -

The persons subject to the jurisdiction of the service tribunals and service authorities of a country in accordance with this section are -

members of any visiting force of that country; and

all other persons who, being neither Australian citizens nor persons ordinarily resident in Australia . . .

I appreciate that. It may well be that the construction that the Minister places on the clause is accurate; but the provision might be clearer if, following the word “ person “ were added the words - being a member of the visiting forces of that country or of a civilian component thereof.

Alternatively, reference could be made to the person being such a person as is described in clause 8 (2.). We would then have the provision within the compass within which the Minister claims the clause applies. I think that the Minister will concede that on the face of it the term is exceedingly wide. He has indicated that the intention is to restrict it to members of the visiting forces, &c, as defined in clause 8 (2.).

Senator Gorton:

– Clause 10 has relation only to circumstances in which a tribunal has jurisdiction to try a person.

Senator McKENNA:

– I appreciate that.

Senator Gorton:

– And the persons over whom it has jurisdiction are defined in clause 8 (2.).

Senator McKENNA:

– Yes. I can see that there is force in the argument. I wanted to make sure that there was not some deliberate reason in the mind of the Government for using the word “ person “ to extend the jurisdiction beyond what is contemplated in clause 8 (2.). If I have that assurance from the Minister, I am content.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 1 1 agreed to.

Clause 12 (Arrest, custody, &c, of offenders against Australian law).

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– Sub-clause (2.) relates to a point that I raised on the second reading. It does not prescribe who is to give the notification. Obviously, a court is involved, because reference is made in the opening words to a person being charged with an offence. The matter is therefore before a court. Who is to give the notification the judge or stipendiary magistrate, the prosecution, the police or the clerk of the court?

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– I am informed that this clause was deliberately drafted in this way for two reasons at least, one being that the person to notify the authority could be one of a large number of persons. He might be an officer of a court, a military officeror a policeman. In particular, he might be somebody employed by and responsible to a State authority. I am told that it is never the practice to seek, by a Commonwealth act, to impose a requirement for executive action on a State authority, whether or not the actual power to do so is in the Commonwealth Government. It is left to the AttorneyGeneral or the Minister administering the act to make sure that the notification is made. There are so many people who could make the notification that one would not wish to limit the field unnecessarily by spelling it out. Some of them would be officers employed by the States, upon whom it is not customary to impose executive duties on behalf of the Commonwealth.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– I thank the Minister for the explanation. I did see the difficulty that quite a lot of people would be involved. I direct attention to the danger that there being so many possibilities in the field, and not one of the- persons concerned having the specific obligation, the duty may not be discharged at all.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– If that were so, the Minister responsible for administering the bill would not have seen that the notification was carried out. It is up to him to see that the law is carried out. It is his responsibility to ensure that there is notification, through whatever channel it may be, and to confer with the States if necessary. He could be held accountable if the law were not put into practice.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 13 to 20 agreed to.

Clause 21 (Disposal of person arrested under this Part.)

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– This clause is in Part III., which deals with deserters and absentees without leave. There is provision that a person who is alleged to be a deserter from the forces of his country, whether a visiting force or not as long as the country is proclaimed under the regulation may be arrested. If he claims that he has been wrongfully arrested, which, if it were true, would be a good and sufficient reason why he should be released from custody, his claim shall be referred to the authorized officer. The authorized officer may, in his discretion, hand him over to the authorities of the other country or may release him. Alternatively, he may refer the matter to the Minister. - In either case, what is decided by the authorized officer or the Minister will apply. The person will be either handed over or released.

I indicated earlier that the right to- habeas corpus proceedings should not be ousted by this clause. The Minister indicates that it is not ousted. I accept that. I concede’ that the courts, in the absence of a specific provision excluding that type of action would not hold it to be excluded by reason of the fact that it is not mentioned here. I ask the Minister to consider the propriety of having such a person come before a court in the first instance. There is no court interposed here at all, merely the authorized officer or the . Minister. Neither is a judicial officer. The question of a person’s deportation from the country should depend, I suggest, particularly in peacetime, upon the decision of a court. Did the Government consider the desirability in this case of allowing a man access to a court? After all, in the case of a deserter or an absentee without leave in this country I do not suppose the existence of this bill will affect his personal course of conduct. He may not know of his right to approach a court under habeas corpus, but at least if he comes before a court he will be alerted to the fact that he has rights, and that a case has to be made out against him according to law and not according to the discretion of either one of the authorized officers or of the AttorneyGeneral. What is the reason why the Government should depart from the usual practice of having a court determine a matter-of this nature? ‘ ‘ -

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– I am not quite sure that I follow what the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) is putting to me. Is the proposition that the alleged wrong-doer should, as soon as he has been apprehended - if he claims that he should not have been apprehended - have the right to appear before a court -of. law?

Senator McKenna:

– That is right.

Senator GORTON:

– And not rely on habeas corpus or other assistance to have himself brought before a court of law?

Senator McKenna:

– Yes, instead of the authorized officers or the Minister dealing with the matter. Why was not the court avenue preferred?

Senator GORTON:

– The only note that 1 have is that it is not a judicial power, but I. confess that 1 do not know what is nol a judicial power, The explanation, as far as I understand it, is that there is no offence alleged against the Australian law, but what is alleged is an offence against a foreign law. What I thought the Leader of the Opposition was suggesting was that the man apprehended would say in effect, “ / have not offended against a foreign law, because I am not subject to a foreign jurisdiction “. That is what 1 understood, if I am interpreting the Leader of the Opposition correctly. That would be a matter for habeas corpus application.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

, - Let me put to the Minister for the Navy (Senator Gorton) a comparable case of extradition. A person who commits a crime overseas in a country which has an extradition treaty with Australia can be arrested in Australia on application for extradition. He has committed no offence in this country, but he is dealt with by a court, and it is only pursuant to an order of the court that he can bc sent out .of this country under an extradition order. That would be the normal procedure. Why should that procedure be departed from in this case where a person in Australia is charged with the offence. that he deserted from the defence forces of his country - perhaps in some place, outside of Australia and not necessarily from. forces in Australia? The section picks up both cases. This seems to me to be the type of thing that should have been considered in the first instance. A man arrested in these circumstances would no doubt be extradited and would have to be brought before a court first. Why did the Government discard that procedure in view of the fact that it has been so meticulous in other ways to safeguard the right of access of persons to courts?

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– I am advised that extradition is in an entirely different constitutional milieu from the cases envisaged in this bill and that there is no constitutional power to impose this particular responsibility on our own courts. We go back to clause 19 to see who are the persons with whom we arc dealing. We are dealing with deserters and absentees without leave. Clause 19 provides - (1.) Where the designated authority ot a country in relation to. which this section applies, by writing under his hand, requests an authorized officer for assistance in the apprehension of a member of the forces of that country who is a deserter or an absentee without leave from those forces, the authorized officer may, in his discretion, issue a warrant in accordance with the prescribed form authorizing any member of the police force of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory or any member of the Defence Force to arrest that deserter or absentee.

The authorized officer may be an officer of the Navy, the Army or the Air Force. Those are the authorized officers who, on the request of the authority of some foreign power, may arrest a man claimed by that foreign power to be a deserter or an absentee without leave. Those are the only people to whom this provision with which we are dealing applies.

Then we come to clause 20. A warrant having been issued a member of the police force of the Commonwealth can detain a person who is claimed to be a deserter or an absentee without leave. That having been done, a person who may claim that he should not have been arrested has only, as the Leader of the Opposition has pointed out, recourse to habeas corpus to get out of detention, or the right of appeal, through the authorized officer, to the Minister. The Minister can cither set him free or not.

I am told that it would not be possible, constitutionally or legally, to interpose an Australian court to give a judgment on whether the man was a deserter or an absentee without leave, that being something which would be within the jurisdiction of the country from which he came. He would have to rely on habeas corpus if he claimed he was not subject to the jurisdiction.

Clause agreed to.

Remainder of bill - by leave - taken as a whole.

Senator WRIGHT:
Tasmania

.- There is only one matter which I wish to mention. I am not sure whether it is dealt with in the bill or was referred to in the second-reading speech of the Minister for the Navy (Senator Gorton). Has the position been considered of a serviceman, imprisoned in pursuance of the sentence of a service tribunal, who might escape from one of our prisons? Is he subject to arraignment under our law for escaping from our prisons? This question arose during the war in relation to imprisoned servicemen in civilian prisons. It was held that such a person who escaped from such a prison was not an escapee within the meaning of the ordinary State law.

I should like information as to whether it is intended to use Australian prisons for the custody of servicemen, and whether the point I have raised has been considered. I might indicate that it is not necessary to consider the point now. If the information is not available I will not be embarrassed, but I raise the point for the consideration of the Minister and his advisers in case the matter has not been covered.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– The specific point raised by Senator Wright was considered but is not covered in any specific legal form in this bill.

Remainder of bill agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Third Reading

Bill (on motion by Senator Gorton) read a third time.

page 1592

BROADCASTING AND TELEVISION BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 29th October (vide page 1568), on motion by Senator Wade-

That the bill bc now read a second time.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

.- The bill before the Senate faces up to the fact that there are in Australia certain localities which normally would be within the compass of an established television station, but which, for reasons of configuration and elemental reasons, do not receive clear reception. The bill seeks to provide machinery to effect a cure. The remedy chosen is the provision of what are called television translator stations. A television translator station is defined in the bill as - . . a station for the transmission by means of wireless telegraphy of television programmes, being a station of low operating power and designed to receive and re-transmit signals from a television station, or from another television translator station, without substantially altering any characteristic of the signals other than their frequencies and amplitudes.

I have been told that a translator station consists of no more than a wooden mast erected in a prominent position with an aerial and with electrical gear, perhaps contained in a box at the bottom of the aerial, to activate it. Operation of the station involves no attendance of staff. A translator is available to one station only. It picks up the signals from the station and projects them, on a lower output and on a different frequency, into sonic pocket or area of population that cannot get clear reception from the present television station. A translator, I understand, costs anything from £2,000 to £4,000.

When one hears that type of installation referred to as a station one conjures up in one’s mind the vision of quite an establishment of buildings and gear, but apparently it is a relatively cheap apparatus. The cost, ranging from £2,000 to £4,000, is conditioned by difficulties of access and difficulties of getting power over awkward terrain to the locality. In view of this relatively low cost one wonders, in the first instance, why the various television stations have not already established translators. The answer is that if they had they would have brought themselves within the purview of section 92 of the Broadcasting and Television Act. That section, among other things, provides that no licensee of a television station may have a controlling interest in more than two television stations.

As the act now stands, a translator station, as we call it, would come within the definition of “ television station “. The whole purpose of clause 3 is to say that a television translator station will not constitute another television station. So, the holder of a licence for a television station may operate and control exclusively translator stations without offending against section 92, which states that he may not have a controlling interest in more than two stations.

Therefore, the first thing that the bill does is to clear away the legal obstacle and to let the licensee of a television station have not merely one but a whole scries, if need be, of translator stations, the control of which would not constitute a breach of section 92. With the passing of this bill the path will be clear for commercial television licensees. 1 inquired about the extent of the use of translator stations that can be expected when this bill is passed. I was told that at the moment there are throughout Australia only about a dozen areas which have difficulties of reception from nearby television stations, and that the viewers in those areas comprise no more than about 75,000 people. Therefore, the provision of translator stations will not bring a television service to a great number of people. . We have been told that about 900,000 people get no television service at all at present. Of that 900,000 it is expected that only about 75,000 persons will get clearer reception, or any reception at all, as a result of the establishment of translator stations. I understand - I should like the Minister for Health (Senator Wade) to confirm this - that it is not expected that a great number of translator stations will be established, or that a vast number of people will benefit from them.

We of the Opposition concede at once that the important thing is service to viewers. We welcome an approach that will enable people in isolated pockets to get better reception. For that reason we support the bill. However, we are disturbed about some aspects of it. The main operative provision is in clause 4 which proposes to insert new section 105 b., sub-section (1.) of which states.

The Minister may, after receipt of a recommendation by the Board, grant to a person a licence for a television translator station upon such conditions, and in accordance with such form, as the Minister determines.

By that provision the Minister, so long as he has a recommendation by the board, becomes the absolute determiner of the grant or refusal of a licence for a translator station, it is rather extraordinary that proposed sub-section (1.) does not say what type of recommendation is to be made by the board. Will it be as to the establishment of a translator station at a particular site? Will it relate to the suitability of the applicant? This provision is broadly expressed and refers to a recommendation, but does not say what kind of recommendation or on what topic. When one reads proposed sub-section (2.) it becomes a little clearer, but it is still not quite clear. This provision reads -

The Board shall not recommend that a licence be granted for a television translator station if, in the. opinion of the Board, satisfactory reception of television programmes from a commercial television station is being obtained in the area in which the signals from that television translator station arc designed to be satisfactorily received.

That indicates in a negative way and rather indirectly that the type of recommendation of the board must bc: This is an area which is not satisfactorily served by some existing television station. Nevertheless, the provision is not as precise as I should like it to be. It raises this other important question: If, subsequent to the establishment of a translator station, a television licence is granted in the area resulting in clear reception, from a television station, is the principle to be that that translator station is to be removed?

It is contemplated that a translator station shall be established only in an area in which there is not clear reception from a television station. Let us assume that somebody gets a television licence to establish a television station in a developing area which has a translator station. If the prinicple embodied in the sub-clause to which I refer is adhered to and if there is clear reception from a new station the translator station should be removed. One can understand that if a number of translator stations were dotted about an area, perhaps transmitting programmes . from different television stations, a company which wanted to establish a television station which would give clear reception to the dead parts of the area would have grave difficulty in competing with the translator stations if they were allowed to remain there. So the first question that I ask the Minister in relation to this matter is this: Assuming that a translator station is established in an area and, later, a television licence is granted which would permit clear reception from a television station in the area will’ the translator station licence be revoked? If the principle contended for in the bill is upheld that would be done.

I am interested in this question because of the situation in Tasmania where the television station at Launceston serves the whole of the north-west coast. I am informed - and I should like verification from the Minister on this - that there is clear reception everywhere in that area except, perhaps, in Stanley and Smithton. All the intervening towns including Deloraine, Devonport, Burnie, Ulverstone and Wynyard have clear reception. The difficulty arises in the extreme north-west of the State. If a translator station were established in that area and, later, a company were granted a licence to operate a television station from Burnie or Devonport which would cover the area, surely the element of competition represented by a translator station should be eliminated. I realize that there are difficulties in connexion with Queenstown on the west coast and Strahan. It would be quite costly to install a series of translator stations or booster stations to reach those places. The terrain is most difficult. Queenstown is. in a hollow surrounded by mountains. There would be great difficulties, in any event, and a long haul of transmission from any station, even on the north-west coast, to that area. I ask the Minister whether, in view of the Postmaster-General’s Department, I have given an accurate description of the television coverage in the area of Tasmania to which I have referred. The Opposition is concerned to know whether, in the event of a translator station being installed in a certain area and a television licence being granted later for that area, the licence for the translator station would’ be cancelled. If that procedure were not adopted, real difficulties regarding the establishment and continued existence of a new television station in the area would arise.

I wish to direct attention ,also to the fact that there is no provision for any public; notification of the fact that the licensee of a television station has applied for a translator licence in any area. It may be, for instance, that there are pockets of bad reception, perhaps in the Dandenong ranges, and that the licensee of a Melbourne television station might apply for a translator station licence. It is possible that the Minister could grant such an application without the knowledge of the other two commercial stations in Melbourne. Would the licensees of the other two stations then be free to apply for translator station licences in the same area? If all three licensees applied for a translator licence on what principle would the Minister determine which licensee should receive the translator licence? Can .the Minister indicate what the practical possibilities would be in that connexion? Would the three interested licensees have to compete for the one translator licence or would they all, in the normal - course of events, be entitled to a translator station in the area of bad reception?

I think the Minister will acknowledge that it is fair that the proprietors of each of three commercial television stations, if they arc in proximity to a bad area, should each have an equal opportunity to get a translator station for the bad area. If only one of the licensees were to receive a. translator licence he would gain ah important preference over the other two. Would each of the three television station licensees receive a translator licence if each were a suitable person? I remind the Minister that they must be suitable persons or they would not be the holders of a television licence. If only one translator station is to be permitted for such an area would they have to compete- for it? How are two of the licensees to know that the other one has- made an application? I consider that if someone applies for a translator licence notification of that fact should be given to other television station licensees in that area. Why does the bill make no particular provision for that contingency? If there is to be. competition for a translator licence, on what principle will the successful applicant be decided? Why should there not be a public inquiry into the matter? That is the normal procedure in the case of such applications. I understand that no charge will be made for the use of a translator station by the Government, but it’ is acknowledged that, in laying out the few thousand pounds involved, not much revenue is likely to be received. Yet, if a television station is able to secure a wider coverage than two other stations in the vicinity it is quite certain that it will be able to increase charges to advertisers. It will have an advantage over, those who lack a translator station.

I shall move in committee an amendment, copies of which I .hope have been circulated, with reference to these two points: First, that there can be unfairness in the treatment .of licensees of television stations; and secondly, that there could be a brake upon the establishment of new television stations in developing areas if there is to be a flood of translators in the area. There is a third question: Once a new station comes into operation will the transmission of any translator station in the area be discontinued? I understand that each translator station can be operated only by one licensee. I understand that it would not be available on alternate days or at varying hours to more than one licensee.

So I direct attention to the possible unfairness of the matter being entirely in the hands of the Minister once it is decided that an area is experiencing bad reception, and to the fact that there will be no nearing by the Australian Broadcasting Control Board. Whilst we appreciate that this measure will be of advantage to some 75,000 people in remote areas, we want to be assured that no injustice will be done >o the licensees of television stations, and that the bill will not be used as a bar to the establishment of a television station in an area such as the north-west coast of Tasmania.

Senator LILLICO:
Tasmania

.- 1 rise because of the concern I have heard expressed by people who are interested in localities such as that mentioned by Senator McKenna - localities that might be described as being borderline areas from the viewpoint of population and the commercial possibilities of the erection of television stations. 1 fully sympathize with any community that wants to have a television, station of its own. . I believe that the establishment of these translator stations should not in any way bc a bar to the introduction of a full-time television station in. the area concerned when the population and the commercial possibilities warrant such a step being taken.

I noted that Senator McKenna said that these translator stations were comparatively simple affairs and that they could be erected at a cost of from £2,000 to £4,000. I noted, too, that the Minister for Health (Senator Wade) said, in his second-reading speech, that they varied in power from a fraction of 1 watt to about 200 watts. I believe that they serve an area having a radius of from 5 to 10 miles. Senator McKenna referred to an area on the north-west coast of Tasmania. I should say that 90 per cent, of that area is adequately covered by television stations in Launceston. I know from experience that the reception is good. The far north-west, comprising a population of 4,000 or 5,000 people out of a total population of more than 90,000 on the north-west coast, might be experiencing some difficulty. If that pocket of population is experiencing indifferent reception, the introduction of a translator station would obviate that difficulty and would give to the whole of the north-west a 100 per cent, reception.

This bill is designed to simplify the introduction of translator stations in order to improve reception in certain pockets, lt seems to me to be somewhat farcical that, if a commercial television station which :.s giving a service to an area such as the one mentioned wants to erect a comparatively small gadget to improve the reception in one pocket, it should have to run the gauntlet of a public inquiry and submit to all the other provisions of the principal act. It seems to me to be reasonable to suggest that, because the existing stations are giving a good service to 90 per cent, of the area in question, they should be able to install translator stations in pockets where the reception is indifferent. In his secondreading speech, the Minister said, referring to the purpose of the bill -

The result would be that the existing provisions of the act relating to the licensing of stations, involving the invitation of applications and the holding of public inquiries by the board, would not apply to translator stations. This, as I have said, has been one of the deterrents to tat establishment of translators and is, in any. case, a procedure which is inappropriate to apply to those small-type installations.

I repeat that to suggest that the placing of a gadget in a pocket having a radius of from five to ten miles should come within the scope of the original act is. rather farcical. I believe too, that, when somebody applies for a licence to establish a television station in an area served by a translator, the board should not be constrained in any way because this small gadget is already in existence. I sympathize with people who have to contend with an indifferent service, and I feel that a person who might be interested in the erection of a full-time television station in an area at some time in the future should not be able to lodge an objection to the establishment of a translator station in that area and thereby precipitate a full-scale public inquiry into the advisability of erecting it.

Senator Wright:

– Who makes that suggestion?

Senator LILLICO:

– That is what the amendment which has been circulated by Senator McKenna sets out to achieve.

Senator O’Byrne:

– It covers the northwest coast of Tasmania.

Senator LILLICO:

– I am speaking about the north-west coast and any other such area. If an objection is lodged by a person who is interested in the erection of a station at some time in the future, what view is the board to take? Will it say: “ This person may erect a station at some future date, so we feel that this translator station should be held up until he makes up his mind.”? If that is what is envisaged in the amendment, then persons who are experiencing an indifferent reception must continue to do so until somebody makes up his mind to apply for permission to erect a full-time television station in the area. That does not seem to be a reasonable proposition. I have great sympathy for the people in borderline areas who wish to have a television station to disseminate local news and, if possible, local programmes rather than programmes which come from an outside centre. Until such areas have sufficient population and the necessary facilities to warrant the establishment of a television station, the stations that already serve the areas should bc able to improve their services without all the humbug and paraphernalia of a full-scale inquiry into the feasibility of installing a gadget at a cost of £2,000 or £4,000. That is a comparatively small sum so far as television services are concerned.

As Senator McKenna pointed out, the matter is not in the hands of the Minister. The act provides that the Minister may do certain things upon the recommendation of the Australian Broadcasting Control Board. The Minister does not act unless he receives a recommendation from the board. If the board wishes to perform its functions in the interests of the viewing public, surely its findings will not be prejudicially affected by reason of the fact that in a certain area in which it is proposed to establish a television station there is already a translator. I think that the board would consider the interests of the viewing public and would not pay much attention to the fact that a translator was already there. I support the bill.

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
Western Australia

.- I rise to support the bill. 1 welcome the .action that has been taken by the Postmaster-General (Mr. Davidson) to remove certain difficulties in the administration of the. act. Anything that is designed to improve television services, or to provide services for people who do not enjoy them at the present time, has my full support, provided, of course, that the services which are made available are equal in quality to those provided in the established television areas. I do not agree with the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) because I think that if we were to adopt it there would be a dampening effect on small television stations in country areas which wanted to provide a service to groups of people who were without a service. As Senator Lillico has said, the suggestion of the Opposition would result in expense for small country stations. In addition, there would be delay in providing services. There would be very little incentive for country television stations to engage in the rigmarole of an inquiry, and so on, because the return to them would not justify their doing so. After all, the television stations concerned would be trying to provide a service for small groups of people.

The time has come in the development of television in this country for the use of translators which, I believe, have a part to play in the provision of television services. We in Australia have been rather fortunate in that we have been able to benefit from the experience of countries such as England and the United States of America, where television has been in operation’ for a good many years. We have taken advantage of the experience of those countries and we now have a television service which may properly be described as one of the best in the world. As television services developed in England and the United States it was found there were certain pockets which did not receive a satisfactory service from the television stations. We are now entering the fourth stage of the development of television in Australia, and we are experiencing exactly the same difficulty in that respect as was experienced in the two countries I have mentioned. The PostmasterGeneral has therefore decided to take the action which is proposed by the bill.

Under the provisions of the bill it will be possible to provide television services in fringe or borderline areas. The Minister for Health (Senator Wade), who represents the Postmaster-General in this chamber, stated in his second-reading speech that by the time we have reached the end of the fourth stage of the development of television services, 91 per cent, of the population of Australia will be receiving television services. That is a very good record. A great deal has been said in Western Australia in recent years concerning the use of translators and many representations have been made to the Postmaster-General on behalf of a variety of organizations with a view to having the translator system established in areas where telecasts are not being received at the present time. However, I believe there has been a great deal of misconception concerning the meaning of a translator system. I invite the attention of the Senate to the fifteenth annual report of the Australian Broadcasting Control Board, where reference is made to representations by Western Australian interests on this point. In paragraph 145, at page 49, the following statement appears: -

They have shown some misconception as to the uses of these means and their applicability to the problem of providing television in certain places.

Translator stations will indeed under certain conditions have a field of use in providing service to some small populated areas which, because of topographical and other reasons, cannot be served by the normal high power stations now in operation or those to be established. The use of translators involves the reception of a signal from a television station at an elevated site, where the signal is strong and re-radiating, it on a different channel to an area where the signal from the main station is relatively weak. The area to which service can be provided by means of these stations is restricted because of ‘he relatively low power on which they operate. They are, therefore, relatively wasteful of valuable television transmitting frequencies.

As Senator Lillico has pointed out, the translator stations have a power ranging from less than i watt to 200 watts. When we realize that the main television stations in Perth have a power of 100 kilowatts and give a coverage of more than 60 miles, we can appreciate the extent of the coverage of the small translators. lt should not be readily assumed that translators would be an appropriate means of providing television services in the Geraldton and Kalgoorlie areas. I ask the Postmaster-General to look at this situation as he has done previously. Now that we are in the fourth phase, surely we can expect an announcement of some sort about plans for the future in these two areas. I support the bill.

Senator SCOTT:
Western Australia

– I support this bill which is to amend the Broadcasting and Television Act to provide for the erection of translators so that people living in outback communities can receive television programmes. Senator Branson, who played an active part with some of our colleagues from Western Australia in obtaining this concession from the Government, unfortunately has been called home. Therefore I am speaking on his behalf. Senator Branson has taken an active interest in the outback areas with his colleagues from Western Australia and through their efforts these amendments have been accepted by the Government. Regarding translator stations serving small pockets in isolated communities, there is evidence in the documents I have before me to prove that effective coverage can be obtained up to 75 miles if transmission is in a direct line and there are two high points. In the United States of America, this system has been used extensively. A committee known as the Television Allocations Study Organization was established in the United States of America and its work, extended over two years. The work was carried out by 271 engineers representing 139 companies which constituted six engineering panels with subsidiary “ committees. Here is an extract from its report to the Federal Communications Commission -

TASO made an extensive study of the service provided by these translators: As cf the first part of I9S8, it was determined that over 700,000 persons resided in areas served by these translators and that 45 per cent, of the homes in these areas were equipped for reception. Television signals were reported as being picked up and retransmitted from stations varying from 43 to 220 miles distant, the average distance being 110 miles, in general, service was reported to be good, with only minor difficulties in operation being experienced. Translators appear to be effective in providing television service in areas remote from regular stations. They also appear to be effective in providing service in areas of low signal strength within the “ normal “ service areas of television stations.

The bill is designed to allow for (lie erection of a series of translators by existing commercial stations so that signals can be transmitted from the central station to various outlying parts in remote areas which are not thickly populated. 1 do not envisage that this system will extend into the very distant parts of Australia, but with this bill the Government will establish conditions under which commercial television stations may increase their listening or viewing audiences quite considerably at low cost by means of translators. People living in the country areas, who are producing a considerable part of Australia’s wealth, will thus have an opportunity to view television programmes.

I hope that the amendment foreshadowed by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) will not be accepted by the Government. I am informed that if, for example, .Lithgow wanted a translator, all stations within 200 miles could object, if the Opposition’s amendment were carried. Those stations could include the Sydney television” stations. A public hearing would be convened at very high cost for legal fees. The station which logically would provide a translator service to Lithgow would be Orange, and this station, with the small capital that it has, would be faced with exorbitant legal costs and would probably have to withdraw its appli cation. Thus, the people of Lithgow would suffer, or the translator would be provided , by one of the giant television companies’ in Sydney. This would entirely defeat the purpose of the bill, which is to make the extension of services to country people as attractive as possible.

Senator LAUGHT:
South Australia

.- I rise to support the bill because as a senator from South Australia, [ think its provisions will meet a great need in the northern areas of that State. In South Australia 82 per cent, of the country has a rainfall of less than 10 inches. Consequently, there are isolated pockets of population, but they are quite important in the northern parts of the State, in that connexion I mention Whyalla, Woomera, Port Augusta, Cowell and Kimba, and on the far west coast, Wudinna and Ceduna. These areas at present are unlikely to have satisfactory television reception .because in the recent consideration of applications the Spencer Gulf North application was withdrawn before hearing on the ground that there was not sufficient population to warrant a station. 1 hope this legislation will provide the green light and sufficient encouragement to the entrepreneurs behind that recent application to re-consider the practicability of re-applying. With the translator facilities that will be available to these people, without penalty, possibly they may see the practicability of going ahead. This will be excellent for those isolated pockets of people in the northern part of South Australia. I mention this to show how the amendment will be of great importance to South Australia and that it will give an . impetus to commercial television stations in the Spencer Gulf North area.

I have given some thought to the amendment foreshadowed by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna). I think it is too legalistic. It is like using a sledge-hammer to drive a nail. I consider that a public hearing in the manner he envisaged, with the possibility of objection from television stations within a radius of 200 miles, could bog down the whole use of this facility, and I hope that the Government will not accept the amendment when it is moved in committee, lt is important to be brief at this stage of the proceedings. I content myself with the remarks that I have made. I envisage that this bill will bring benefit to South Australia, particularly to the northern area.

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

– in reply - I acknowledge the measure of support that has come from both sides of the chamber for the principles involved in this legislation. As an amendment in the committee stage has been foreshadowed, 1 think it proper to reserve comment on the points that have been raised until that stage is reached.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

The bill.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– 1 refer to clause 4, which reads in part: -

After Division 5 of Part IV. of the Principal Act the following Division is inserted: - “ Division 5a. - Television Translator Stations. “ 105b. - (I.) The Minister may, after receipt of a recommendation -by the Board, grant to a person a licence for a television translator station upon such conditions, and in accordance with such form, as the Minister determines. “ (2.) The Board shall not recommend that a licence be granted for a television translator station if, in the opinion of the Board, satisfactory reception of television programmes from a commercial television station is being obtained in the area in which the signals from that television translator station are designed to be satisfactorily received. “ (3.) One of the conditions of the licence for a television translator station shall be that the station is operated only for the reception and re-transmission of the programmes of a specified commercial television station. “ (4.) The establishment, erection, maintenance and use of a television translator station in pursuance of a licence under this section shall be deemed not to be a contravention of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1905-1950 or of the regulations under that Act.

I move -

At the end of the proposed section 105b add the following sub-section: - “ ‘ (5.) An application for a licence for a television translator ‘ station shall be referred by the Minister to the board. The board shall give notice of receipt of the application in such newspapers and by such other means as the board thinks fit and shall give notice in writing of such application to all licensees of commercial television”, stations operating within a radius of 200 miles from the site of the proposed television translator station and to such other persons as the board thinks fit. If notice of objection to the granting of the application is lodged with the board by a person interested within fourteen (14) days after the giving of such notices the board shall hold an inquiry in accordance with the provisions of Division 3 of Fart II. of this act. The board shall not recommend that the application be granted if the board is of opinion that the television translator station would operate so as to prevent or to be likely to prevent the establishment of a commercial television station in or about the area to which the application relates or to be unfair to the licensee of any other commercial television station.”.

That is an endeavour by the Opposition to ensure that there is no favouritism in the grant of translator licences and that, if there are areas of bad reception in the neighbourhood of a great metropolitan centre where there are three commercial stations, these stations will have equal opportunities to compete for the grant of a translator licence, if only one is to be given. We want to ensure that there will be no unfairness. The other purpose is to make sure that the grant of translator licences will not prevent the desirable development of locally owned, efficient organizations to operate new television stations in developing areas which, unquestionably, within a short time will be capable of maintaining a television station on an economic and commercial basis.

The position of the Opposition might be met if the Minister were able to give three specific assurances. The first is that all commercial television stations covering an area of bad reception will be given equal opportunities to establish a television translator station in such an area. All three . stations may be interested. The Minister will see the fairness of giving them equal opportunities. He might also give an assurance that the presence of translator stations, will not be allowed to prevent the establishment, in a suitable case, of a locally-owned and operated television station. The third assurance I should like is that the translator station will be removed when a local television station providing satisfactory reception is established.

It appears to be a principle of the measure that a translator station may not be established if satisfactory reception is available from a commercial television station.

Is it not implicit that, in the event of a new station, providing good reception, being established in an area that was formerly considered dead, the translator station will be then removed to give the new station an opportunity to develop and exploit the resources of the area? I invite the Minister to tell us quite clearly what will happen if a translator area is deemed to be located adjacent to Melbourne. Will all three commercial stations in Melbourne, if they wish, be entitled to establish a translator station? If only one can establish a station, upon what principles will the Minister proceed in differentiating between them? Implicit in the three assurances I have sought is that the mere provision of translator licences should not be allowed to affect adversely an application that might subsequently be made to establish a television station in the area.

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

– 1 listened very carefully to the points raised by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) and I have come to the conclusion that his amendment is designed to have two main effects. The first is to provide means whereby objections may be raised to the grant of a licence, and in such event to provide for a public inquiry; and the second is to ensure that translators be not authorized if by their authorization the establishment of a normal station will be prevented. Senator McKenna has stressed, quite logically, that no one can forecast the future development of any area,

I remind him that before a translator licence may be considered there must be a parent station. Obviously it is quite impossible to operate a translator station without a parent station. In almost all cases, a translator station licence can be granted only to the licensee of an existing station. As the licensee is likely to be the only person interested, and as, in any case, he is the only one who can make, programmes available for transmission, if he were not prepared to do anything there could be no translator station.

The same principle applies to any number of stations which are subject to poor reception in the area. If any station desired to operate a translator station it would have equal opportunity to do so.

We might have one, two or even three translator stations established in an area where reception from the parent stations was poor.- Each parent station would have equal opportunity to operate a translator in that area.

Senator McKenna:

– Can I take it as a firm assurance that they will be given that opportunity?

Senator WADE:

– Yes, without any equivocation whatsoever.

Reference was made to the need for a public inquiry before granting a translator licence. There is no need for me to remind the Senate that that process would have already been completed by the inquiries that preceded the granting of the application for the parent station. As far as local publicity is concerned, so that it will not be implied that some station might steal a march on its competitors let me say that certain formalities will have to be complied with. A site has to be chosen and the local authorities have to be consulted. We believe that there are ample requirements necessary to preclude any secrecy that would benefit one applicant for a translator station more than any other. The normal requirements before the establishment of this type of business will be well known to all those who may be interested in establishing a station in any particular area.

The second point raised was that translator stations should not be authorized if their establishment would prevent the future establishment of a normal television station. There is no need for such a fear. It would be a retrograde step if, once a translator station were established in an area where there was a small pocket of population, it were permitted to monopolize that area indefinitely and prevent the area later obtaining a normal television station even though the area might develop into a centre such as Elizabeth in the State of South Australia. If such a development occurred the translator licence would be withdrawn. The licence is renewable every twelve months, and if the Australian Broadcasting Control Board were of the opinion that the population of an area was such that it could support a normal television station the board would .approve of such a station. I think I have answered the points raised by the Leader of the Opposition. If I have not given him the assurances that he asked for I should like him to say so.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– I thank the Minister for Health (Senator Wade) very much for the clarity of the answer that he has given to me. My impression is that he has given me the three assurances I sought. 1 find that very satisfactory. I hope the Minister will not misunderstand me if I again ask him whether he fully understood the nature of the assurances that I sought. It is my impression that he has given me the three assurances I asked for. Am I right in that impression?

Senator Wade:

– I have no hesitation whatever in saying to the Leader of the Opposition that I have given him without any equivocation, the three assurances that he sought.

Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia

– The Minister for Health (Senator Wade) has given Senator McKenna certain assurances in relation to translator services in isolated areas. After all. television is a form of communication which is of particular importance in Australia because of our wide spaces and the paucity of population in many areas. It is natural for there to be a tendency, once some sort of service has been provided, to make do with that service instead of going on to provide a full service. The history of communications in Australia shows that to be true.

The Minister mentioned the satellite town of Elizabeth in South Australia as an example of an area that might have an interim service but would later demand a fall service because of the growth of its population. This could apply to many other parts of Australia, particularly with so many projects going on. I should like to know whether population is the only yardstick that will be used to measure whether an area is to have a full television service. Does the Australian Broadcasting Control Board consult with the station involved and look at the matter from a commercial and monetary point of view? How seriously does the board regard the provision of a full television service where there may be in existence a translator service? As I have said, historically it has been shown to be natura! to make do with an interim service.

The Minister has given an assurance to Senator McKenna but 1 would like it to go on record that, some sort of service having been given to an area, the natural tendency to make do with that service will not affect the matter if the time comes when a’ full station should be established. The board might say in effect, “ Sufficient unto the day is the service thereof “, and let the matter go for some time.

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

– I think I should emphasize the necessity to keep our thinking in perspective so far as translator stations are concerned. Senator Willesee has described this service in fairly general terms as a communications service. Let me hasten to emphasize that one can easily become slightly romantic in his thinking so far as translator stations are concerned. Senator Scott made some reference to a 75 to 100 miles coverage in the United States of America. That type of coverage is not envisaged in areas where these translator stations will be established. They arc designed for areas that are receiving inferior, reception at present.

Should the time come, because of various factors that may arise, when another type of service is required, the Australian Broadcasting Control Board in its wisdom will examine every aspect of the case, and if a change in the system is warranted it will make a recommendation accordingly. Public opinion will play an important part. People in these areas will want to enjoy the same facilities as those enjoyed by people living in surrounding areas with comparative populations.

Senator VINCENT:
Western Australia

– I should like the Minister for Health (Senator Wade) to tell the Senate, what areas can be serviced by translator stations under normal and favorable conditions. In Western Australia we have two areas which are by no means isolated pockets; they are closely populated areas. T refer to the Geraldton area and the gold-‘ fields areas of Kalgoorlie and Coolgardie. There has been a great deal of public dis-; quiet in those areas because they have not got a television service, and a good deal of the pressure that has been exerted in connexion with this amending legislation has emanated from those two areas.I should like the Minister to inform the Senate whether translator services would be a practical proposition for the Geraldton and Kalgoorlie regions, because both areas are concerned at the inadequacy of the service now in existence.

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

– I am somewhat loath to dash the hopes of the honorable senator from Western Australia who, like his colleagues from Western Australia, has shown a very lively interest in the extension of television services. To be quite honest, I should tell him that this proposition before the Senate will not benefit the Geraldton and Kalgoorlie areas. They must eventually be serviced with a much better type of service than this. As we see it, there is no one company that could provide the programmes for a translator station for these two towns. The mileage is too great. The honorable senator asked how much coverage translator stations will give. 1 am loath to be quoted because circumstances alter cases, but generally speaking it can be accepted that the area of cover will be within a radius of from 2 to 10 miles.

Senator Vincent:

– Is that the maximum area?

Senator WADE:

– I do not want to be recorded as saying that that is the maximum area because physical features of an area would alter the coverage. The honorable senator asked me for a general statement. My reply is that we expect that each station will cover an area within a radius of from 2 to 10 miles. I should like to add the assurance that the ingenuity of the PostmasterGeneral (Mr. Davidson) is not exhausted when he produces this proposal, which will enable reception to be improved in pockets which do not have good reception to-day. I remind the honorable senators that localities such as Kalgoorlie and Geraldton in Western Australia are not the only ones that suffer this disability; other parts of the Commonwealth also are disadvantaged. The PostmasterGeneral and his department are continually working to supply a service in such areas, and they are working with a good deal of hope.

Amendment negatived.

Bill agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Third Reading

Bill (on motion by Senator Wade) read a third time.

page 1602

WHEAT INDUSTRY STABILIZATION BILL 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Wade) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator WADE (Victoria - Minister for

Health) [3.57].- I move-

That the bill be now read a second time.

The wheat stabilization plan has been an outstanding success and the purpose of this bill is to carry it on for another five years. There is fifteen years’ experience behind us when we consider this plan again, for the fourth time. It has operated in five-year periods since 1948, and in that period wheat stabilization has become more permanently established year by year. As a result the present plan is offered with the full support of the wheatgrowers and of the State governments. As far as I can find out there is nowhere . any opposition to the principles, and re-negotiation is not a matter of argument about the need for the plan, but one of discussion about some of the details.

Wheat is our most important agricultural industry, and it is second only to wool as a source of export income. Over the years it has been a troubled industry, facing the uncertainties of the seasons in production and the vagaries of the world markets in selling. There is no way of avoiding those uncertainties and risks; even today, with the harvest already in progress in the early districts, no one can tell what the crop will be. Indeed, the weather in the next few weeks could take away, or could add, millions of bushels to the crop, and millions of pounds to its value. Added to this is the erratic course of a world market for wheat, and it defies prediction. These problems are matters of great concern for all Australian governments, as well as for the wheatgrowers, and their joint efforts have given us an example of co-operation, of growers, States and Commonwealth that is a credit to all those concerned. It is also an outstanding example Of goodwill and intelligent work that has brought a solution to many of the worst problems connected with the industry.

The basic feature in our Australian scheme is a wheat marketing board that gives growers control over the marketing of their own production. In this the principle of pooling is operated, so that the risks and profits of the market are shared among growers. This immediately puts an end to one of the worst features of unorganized marketing the competitive struggle among growers for a market advantage, with -its inevitable result of a frittering away of the bargaining power that they possess only collectively. The organization of the marketing of the wheat makes it practicable and easy for the stabilization features to be added by the governments. The States, therefore, ensure that” growers will get a reasonable price for wheat sold on the local market. The Commonwealth then guarantees that same price for a reasonable quantity of the wheat exported from each crop. The effect is that the wheatgrowers are guarded against ruinous prices for a big proportion of the wheat harvest and one of the main risks to their standard of living is avoided.

This is not a simple gift to the wheat growers. No matter what the price of wheat overseas may be, the consumerin Australia gets it at a reasonable price. In fact it is now a quarter of a century since the Australian governments all decided that it was not fair to follow the erratic course of the world wheat market. They decided then that the Australian price should be fair both to producer and to consumerand experience since then has given them good reason to hold firmly to the principle. The principle adopted favours growers when prices on the world market are low, but it favours Australian consumers when world prices are high. Naturally, there are swings of the market first one way and then another. Since 1938 this swing has gone on; so that on world standards, at one time our Australian public will be getting cheap wheat and at another time dear wheat. It is common knowledge that in recent years the growers have been favoured because the local price has been higher than the low export price. Against this, however, are the many years of world food shortage, when Australian prices were much below world wheat prices. In the result both growers and consumers are paying a reasonable premium for an assurance of fair prices and the realization of this seems to be firmly set in the Australian conscience.

I turn now to the scheme embodied in the legislation before the Senate of which the main points are -

  1. Period of plan: Five years to apply to the crops of 1963-64 to 1967- 68.

    1. Australian Wheat Board: To be the sole constituted authority for the marketing of wheat within Australia and for the marketing of wheat and flour for export from Australia.
    2. Commonwealth guarantee: The guaranteed price will apply to 150,000,000 bushels of export wheat for the five years of the plan. In the first year the guaranteed price will be 14s. 5d. per bushel bulk basis for ports to be adjusted in succeeding years according to movements in production costs.
    3. Stabilization fund: To be collected by means of an export tax equal to the excess of export returns over the guaranteed return with a maximum tax of1s. 6d. per bushel.

The stabilization fund is the growers’ contribution towards financing the guarantee.

  1. Size of fund: A ceiling of £30,000,000 will apply during the new scheme compared with the present £20,000,000.
  2. Home consumption price: This will. be fixed by State legislation and be based on the guaranteed price.
  3. Freight to -Tasmania: A loading will be continued on the price of all wheat sold for consumption in Australia to cover the cost of transporting wheat from the mainland to Tasmania each season. The present loading is lid. per bushel.

    1. Premium on Western Australian wheat: The premium on wheat exported from Western Australia will be continued. It is to be altered from the present 3d. per bushel to the amount of the actual freight advantage shown by Western Australia up to a maximum of 3d. per bushel.

The most important change in the plan is that the Commonwealth Government has decided to increase its guarantee on export wheat from 100,000,000 to 150,000,000 bushels for each crop. In arriving at this decision the Government has taken account of the increased export capacity of the wheat industry and its significant contribution to our overseas income. This will, of course, give greater security to the Australian wheatgrower.

The guaranteed price will continue to be based on cost of production and will be varied each year according to cost movements. Increased efficiency in the industry due in no small measure to the results of research, to which the Commonwealth and State governments contribute, has resulted in higher yields per acre and a consequent decrease in the cost of production per bushel. Because of this, the Australian consumer will have the advantage of a decrease in the price of wheat whilst the cost of production return to the growers will be preserved. For the first year of the new scheme the guaranteed price to apply to 150,000,000 bushels of export wheat will be 14s. 5d. per bushel bulk basis f.o.r. ports. As in previous schemes the home consumption price fixed under State legislation is based on this figure.

The basic information on costs of production was provided by an economic survey of the wheat industry carried out by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Such a survey had been regarded as essential by the growers’ representatives and State and Commonwealth Ministers. The yield basis of 17 bushels per acre used in the assessment of costs for the new scheme Was recommended by the Wheat Index

Committee which conists of representatives of the Australian Wheat Growers Federation and the Australian Agricultural Council under the chairmanship of the director of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. This, figure which compares with 15.5 bushels used in the assessment of costs in , the present scheme reflects the increased efficiency of wheat-growers but is still below the high yields per acre of some recent years, lt is, indeed, very close to the average yield per acre of the last fifteen years.

Other changes in the scheme may be mentioned briefly. The ceiling on the stabilization fund has been increased from £20,000,000 to £30,000,000 to reflect the increase in the quantity under Commonwealth guarantee. Honorable senators will appreciate, however, that this provision only becomes meaningful when export prices rise above the guaranteed price. The other alteration in the plan relates to the premium on Western Australian wheat. Since 1954 an allowance of 3d. per bushel has been added to the average return of growers in Western Australia to take account of freight . advantages in respect of wheat shipped from that State. The changing direction of our wheat exports in recent years has made this advantage less definite and it was felt by the Australian Agricultural Council and the Australian Wheat Growers Federation that under to-day’s conditions a preferable system would be for the Australian Wheat Board to calculate the actual freight advantage Western Australia shows for each pool. It has also been decided that there should be a maximum of 3d. a bushel on this payment.

In presenting this new plan for honorable senators’ approval, I must pay a tribute to the representatives of the Australian Wheat Growers Federation, to my colleague the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr. Adermann) and to the State Ministers for Agriculture for their work in. the Australian Agricultural Council. Negotiations in a national plan of this character are necessarily long and involved, but growers. States, and the Commonwealth are agreed upon this plan as a result of work for which the wheat-growers’ representatives and the State Ministers deserve great credit. The wheat stabilization plan is one of the main facets of Australian agricultural- policy and it is most satisfactory that the parties involved have agreed on the terms of its renewal. The continuation of the concept of a guaranteed price and the extension of that guarantee over an. additional 50,000,000 bushels will ensure the well-being of the wheat industry during the next five years. J commend the bill to honorable senators.

Senator BENN:
Queensland

.- Mr. Acting Deputy President, there are two bills relating to the wheat industry stabilization plan. They are the Wheat Industry Stabilization Bill which is particularly concerned with the stabilization of the industry, and the Wheat Export Charge Bill which imposes a charge on wheat products exported from the Commonwealth. Perhaps it is timely to examine the stabilization plan proposed in the Wheat Industry Stabilization Bill May 1 preface what I intended to say on this matter by stating that all producers desire to have a measure of security in their industry. People in every industry like to feel that they can awake each morning and say, “This industry did all right for us yesterday and it will operate satisfactorily in future “. This, of course, is but another aspect of the struggle for security that we witness in every nation. Economic security is the desire of all peoples of the world.

The proposed stabilization plan for the wheat industry distinguishes between wheat that will be consumed locally and wheat that will be available for export. The legislation provides a guaranteed price’ of 15s. lOd. per bushel for wheat that will be consumed in Australia. The Commonwealth Government has agreed to guarantee a price of 14s. 5d. a bushel for wheat that will be available for export, being surplus to the needs of the Australian people. Let us see how it is possible for the Government to guarantee a price of 15s. lOd. per bushel in respect of wheat sold to Australian millers. I understand that the Australian Wheat Board has been a Commonwealth authority since 1 948 when, I presume, it was established by a Labour Government. However, I can recall that a State wheat board was operating in Queensland for a number of years. It was established, I think, 20 or 30 years ago for the purpose of handling, in particular, the marketing problems of the Queensland wheat industry. Consequently, in order to establish the Australian Wheat

Board it was only necessary for the Commonwealth to emulate what had been done in Queensland.

It is a simple matter for the Government to guarantee a price of 15s. lOd. per bushel for wheat that is used locally because the Commonwealth has the co-operation of all the State governments in this plan. As I said a while ago, I like to see people in all industries enjoy a measure of security. I like to think that they and their dependants are assured of a comfortable living. The Commonwealth has not fixed this home consumption price of 15s. lOd. per bushel whimsically. It has some say in the operations of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. That body employs a group of field officers who are able to go around the country and ascertain the cost of production. That information is passed to the Minister and in turn is transmitted to the State governments. They are then able to fix the price of the wheat that is to be consumed. The millers are informed accordingly. At the present time they are charged 15s. lOd. a bushel. The wheat is milled and then sold to the bakers. The millers know what price to charge the bakers. To cost the price of flour is quite a simple process. But the bakers cannot afford to operate at a loss. So they must recover any increase that is granted. The result of any such increase is reflected in the price of bread, biscuits or any other foodstuff that has a flour content. The cost is borne by the whole community. The little baby who sucks an arrowroot biscuit has to contribute its share of the cost of the guarantee.

Fortunately, Australia is able to grow a surplus of wheat. I use the word “ fortunately “ advisedly. Over the years our economy has expanded because of the quantity of goods we have been able to export to other countries. We have always had a surplus of primary products to export. Every year we have been in the fortunate position of being able to export millions of bushels of wheat. We are fortunate in that wheat can be grown in every State in the Commonwealth, including little Tasmania. Although Tasmania imports wheat, she can still grow that product. The fact that wheat can be grown in every State is good for the industry. Western Australia might experience a drought, but at the same time good seasons might be experienced in Victoria, South Australia, New South Wales and Queensland.

I now wish to deal particularly with the export price of wheat and the manner in which it is fixed. In the past the Commonwealth has said, “ We will pay 14s. 5d. per bushel for the first 100,000,000 bushels of wheat exported”. That has been satisfactory to the wheatgrowers. Many wheatgrowers are in a rather secure position, because land that is suitable for wheatgrowing is suitable also for wool-growing. So the farmer may change from wheatgrowing to wool-growing, or from woolgrowing to wheat-growing. He knows what his income will be each year, because the wool-grower and the wheat-grower get one cheque a year. Dairy farmers, on the other hand, get a cheque at the end of every month. If the price of wheat rises above 14s. 5d. per bushel, a levy, which is not to. exceed ls. 6d. per bushel, is collected to finance the stabilization fund. There could bc circumstances in which the price of wheat would rise to £1 a bushel. We never thought we would see the day when the price of sugar would rise to £125 per ton in Australian currency, but just recently it rose to £129 per ton on the London market.

I repeat that, if the price of wheat rises above 14s. 5d. a bushel, a levy not exceeding ls. 6d. per bushel is collected. It will be seen that in those circumstances a fairly substantial fund will be built up. I examined the relevant documents to see what happened in the last financial year, because Australia had a very good wheat crop. I thought that if the price was satisfactory, the Commonwealth Government would not have had to obtain money from the Consolidated Revenue Fund to pay the wheat-growers. But I discovered that the sum of £11,900,000 was appropriated from the Consolidated Revenue Fund for 1961-62. For the year 1962-63, a sum of £7,200,000 was provided from Consolidated Revenue. In other words, the people of Australia had to find those two sums to make good the Commonwealth’s guarantee to the wheat-growers. I take no exception to that, because I think that those who are engaged in all industries arc entitled to some measure of security.

I now turn to another aspect of this matter. I wish to direct the attention of the Minister for Health to the remarks of the Auditor-General under the heading “Wheat Industry Stabilization Fund” at page 76 of this report for the year- ended 30th June, 1963. I really do not like raising this matter, but as these comments left mc guessing after I read them I thought that the Minister would be able to enlighten me. The Auditor-General said -

Previous Reports have reerred to the amount of £266,280, being residual moneys from the Marginal Areas Scheme, remaining in the Wheat Industry Stabilization Fund established under the Wheat Industry Assistance Act 1938-1946.

The Wheat Industry Stabilization Fund (Disposal) Act 1962 provided for the distribution of the balance of the Fund to specified States for expenditure, for the benefit of the wheat industry, as approved by the Minister.

In 1962-63 payments were made from the fund as follows: -

I hope that the Minister will throw some light on this matter when he replies to the debate.

The Wheat Prices Stabilization Fund is important lo the consumers of wheat as well as to the growers. The AuditorGeneral’s report sets out the transactions of the fund for 1962-63 and compares them with those for 1961-62. The amounts of special appropriations are shown, as I have already mentioned. The amounts were distributed to the wheatgrowers by the Australian Wheat Board. I have often wondered where the money comes from initially before it is paid to the wheat-growers throughout the Commonwealth. The wheat is carted to the silos and passes into the charge of the Australian Wheat Board. Every one knows that the board could not carry on indefinitely unless it ‘ received funds from some source or another. I find, from the report of the Auditor-General, that a bank overdraft which- is guaranteed by the Commonwealth enables the board to pay advances to growers against future sales of their wheat. That is an instance of the’ facilities of the Commonwealth being co-ordinated for a very good purpose.

From time to time matters arise which have a contentious connotation in the minds of certain people. I propose to deal with one such matter. I refer to the sale of wheat to mainland China. I notice that China has become a very good customer of Australia. Exports of wheat to that country increased from 14,000,000 bushels in 1960-61 to 71,000,000 bushels in 1961-62. The probability is that China will be a constant customer of the Commonwealth. Our exports to Asiatic countries represent 63 per ‘ cent, of our total exports. Twenty-eight per cent, of our total exports go to Europe and only 4 per cent, to Africa. Every country that grows wheat is faced at the end of the year with the problem of the unsold grain. This is a problem which confronts all wheatgrowing countries, whether they grow as much wheat as do Canada, the United States and France, or as little as some of the other wheat-growing countries. There is a carry-over at the end of the year, but the problem always solves itself. Before the new season’s wheat comes on to the market the carry-over wheat will have been sold or disposed of in some other way.

It is not necessary for me to point out, Mr. President, that the wheat industry is very important to Australia and has been so for many years. It is one of the industries which have assisted the development of Australia generally and of the more heavily populated States, such as Victoria and New South Wales, particularly. The farmers in those States have been able to clear the land of timber and grow wheat crops year in and year out. Wheat and its by-products arc used in every country. Countries which are in the favourable position of having an excess supply of wheat arc able to demonstrate their goodwill and friendliness towards other countries which are less fortunate in respect of the production of wheat. Australia has contributed supplies of wheat to such countries, and that is a matter to be considered when we are dealing with this industry. I am sure that the stabilization fund will continue to operate to the satisfaction of the wheat-growers. I feel that the general public does not really know what the industry is contributing to the economy. When wc express in pounds, shillings and pence the value of the wheat that we export each year, it can be seen that the wheat industry is making a substantial contribution to our overseas balances.

The Opposition does not offer any objection to this bill or any part of it. We look forward to similar action being taken in respect of other industries. As we know, the . sugar industry enjoys a certain measure of protection, and the dairying industry is subsidized to the extent of fi 3,500,000 a year. The wheat industry does not make a great call on the Commonwealth, but when it does so the burden of the call is distributed over the populace generally.

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
Western Australia

– I am glad to know that the Australian Labour Party does not intend to oppose the bill. For that reason, I. shall not delay the Senate for very long by discussing the details of the stabilization scheme that is proposed in the bill. However, because the wheat industry is one of our most important industries and is in fact second only to the wool industry as a source of export income, I think I should make a few comments on it. The Wheat Industry Stabilization Act has been an outstanding success during the fifteen years that it has been in operation. It is necessary only to visit wheat-growing districts to agree with that statement. In the wheat-growing areas to-day there are prosperous towns where strongly based businesses are to be found. I do not altogether agree with Senator Benn’s suggestion that the Government is making a handout to the wheat industry. To my way of thinking, the wheat industry has played a big part in the prosperity of this nation. Where there are prosperous wheat-growers there are prosperous towns. Prosperous rural areas and towns help to create prosperous cities.

Because of the prosperity of the industry and also because of certain taxation incentives which have been offered by this Government, the wheat-growers have been able to replace worn-out and out-moded equipment by up-to-date equipment. This has helped the manufacturing industries which have been busily engaged in turning out plant and equipment.

At this time, wc should recall the early )930’s when there was an open market for wheat and buyers bought wheat on spec.

They made profits out of the wheat-growers. Many of us recall the days when a farmer, having taken off his crop and being faced with heavy debts, went into a town and was offered a price for his wheat. He could take it or leave it. In many cases, because of pressure of his commitments, the farmer was forced to take a price only to find out a day or two later that his neighbour was offered a higher price. This situation forced the farmers to seek a stabilization scheme and we have seen the results. To-day, this scheme has brought prosperity not only to the wheat industry but also to the cities and to Australia as a whole. When the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr. Adermann) announced the wheat stabilization scheme he said -

The guaranteed price will continue to be based on cost of production and will bc varied each: year according to cost movements. Increased efficiency in the industry has resulted in higher yields per acre and a consequent decrease in the cost of production per bushel. Because of this, the Australian consumer will have the advantage of a substantial decrease in the price of wheat while the cost of production return to the growers will bc preserved. For the first year of the new scheme, the guaranteed price . to apply to 150,000,000 bushels of export wheat will be 14s. 5d. per bushel bulk basis f.o.r. ports. As in previous schemes, the home consumption price fixed under State legislation is based or. this figure. lt is interesting to note exactly how the wheat index cost is arrived at. The Minister explained that the basic information on costs of production was provided by an economic survey of the wheat industry. carried out by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Such a survey had been regarded as essential by the growers’ representatives and the State and Commonwealth Ministers. The Minister stated -

The yield basis of 17 bushels per acre used in the assessment of costs for the new scheme was recommended by the Wheat Index Committee which consists of representatives of the Australian Wheat Growers Federation and the Australian Agricultural Council under the chairmanship of the Director of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics.

That is the basis of the scheme. Before the scheme was announced various newspapers throughout the Commonwealth commented on the efficiency or inefficiency of wheat-growers. Not only have the growers increased the output per acre, but this rise has been achieved in association with the development of new land to an extent such as has never been seen in any other period of fifteen years in our history.

This has been brought about despite a fall in the labour force in the rural industries. In addition, the fact that the Government from time to time has paid tribute to the efforts of the wheat-growers shows that ‘it believes they are efficient primary producers.

It is rather interesting to study the figures on which the cost of production has been based. !.t has been based on the experience in the years preceding each plan. The yields have been increased over a period of fifteen years that the plan has been in operation. Going back to the first year of the plan in 1948-49, we find the average yield was 12 bushels to the acre. In the second plan in 1.953-54 the average yield had increased to 13.5 bushels to the acre. In the third plan it had increased to 15.5 bushels and under the new plan the average yield has been increased to 17 bushels to the acre. Surely this proves that the wheat-growers are efficient.

Senator Benn referred to the stabilization fund and commented that the Government had contributed to it. That is quite right. Let mc remind Senator Benn, however, that over the period of fifteen years that the stabilization plan has been in operation the growers have contributed £86,400,000 to the fund and they have received from the fund a total of £110,400,000. This leaves £24,000,000 of which £4,800,000 was interest derived from money in the fund. So up to 1961-62, the Government had made a contribution of only £19,200,000. Surely that is not too great a contribution to make to an industry like the wheat industry which has had such a bearing on the prosperity of Australia. I support the measure and I hope that the wheat industry will continue to prosper as it has done in the past.

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

– in reply - The wheat industry will appreciate the unanimous support offered this legislation on both sides of the Senate. I shall not take up time by traversing the ground that has been so adequately covered by those who support the bill. Senator Benn asked for information concerning an item, mentioned in the Auditor-General’s report,, of £266,000 for marginal areas. This was an amount remaining in a wheat stabilization fund dating back to the Wheat

Industry Assistance Act of 1938 and designed to provide money to reconstruct marginal wheat areas. The £266,000 was the residue of the. amount provided and this has since been repaid to the States for the benefit of the wheat industry through the agricultural extension services. I am delighted to know that the bill has been given such a speedy passage.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1609

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following bills reported: -

Loan Bill 1963.

International Development Association (Additional Contribution) Bill 1963.

Currency Bill 1963.

page 1609

WHEAT EXPORT CHARGE BILL 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Wade) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

.- I move-

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill is complementary to the Wheat Industry Stabilization Bill and gives effect to one feature of the Commonwealth’s part of the new stabilization plan. It is a requirement of the stabilization plan that in times when wheat export prices are high, growers will contribute moneys which will be used for the benefit of the industry when prices are low. These moneys accumulate in a stabilization fund and will be used to meet the return guaranteed to growers for export wheat. If the fund proves inadequate the Commonwealth then has the responsibility of meeting the guarantee on export wheat to the extent that the fund is not sufficient to do so. The effect of the present bill is to provide the growers’ contribution to the stabilization fund.

The wheatgrowing industry agreed to this arrangement when the wheat plan was first introduced; and still regards the arrangement as a fair sharing of the risk by growers and the Commonwealth. The bill imposes a charge on wheat exported from Australia. The charge will be paid to the extent that the export price . exceeds the guaranteed price, but. at no time can it be, higher than the maximum rate of1s. 6d. a bushel provided in the bill. The present bill follows thelines of the earlier acts in the series of wheat plans. It will apply to the 1963-64 wheat harvest and to the four crops that follow it.

I commend the bill to honorable senators.

Senator BENN:
Queensland

– This bill is complementary to the Wheat Industry Stabilization Bill. As my party had no objection to raise to the previous bill, it approves this bill.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without requests or debate.

page 1609

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORTS

Launceston Airport. Lonsdale Exchange, Melbourne

Senator ANDERSON:

–I present the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works on the following proposed work: -

Construction of terminal and operations building and maintenance and stores centre at Launceston airport, Tasmania.

I present also the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works on the following proposed work: -

Construction of Lonsdale Exchange building, Melbourne, Victoria.

page 1609

WESTERN AUSTRALIA (NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT) AGREEMENT BILL 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Wade) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

.- I move-

That the bill be now read a second time.

As announced in the Budget speech, the Government, in the belief that the development of the northern part of Western

Australia called for a level of special expenditure higher than that arising from the commitments we had already undertaken, had decided to offer Western Australia a further provision of £3,500,000 for expenditure during the next three years. The Government of Western Australia has since accepted the offer, and the bill now before the Senate seeks the approval of Parliament to an Agreement between the Commonwealth and the State for the provision of further Commonwealth financial assistance for the purpose in the period up to 30th June, 1966.

The agreement, as set out in the schedule to the bill, provides that the further £3,500,000 will be applied primarily to the construction of a new jetty at Broome, in deep water, and to the construction of further irrigation works within the first stage of the Ord River irrigation project. There is also provision for the financing of such other works as may be agreed, within the available amount of £3,500,000 in the northern part of the State, that is, the part of the State that is north of the 20th parallel of south latitude.

The new jetty at Broome, which is to “bc of steel and concrete construction similar to the jetty now being built at Derby, will serve the dual purpose of replacing the present wooden structure, which has the disadvantages of being costly to maintain, unusable by motor transport, and inaccessible at low tide, and also of providing the West Kimberley area with a deep water port available at all times to local and overseas shipping. As the potential of the area is developed, there will be a growing need for improved sea transport facilities, and the new jetty at Broome should meet this need for many years ahead.

As the Broome jetty will be a revenueearning State asset, and as the State will bc saving considerable sums otherwise needed for maintenance of the old structure, the assistance in this case is to be repayable, as to 50 per cent, of the total funds provided, over a period of 15 years from December 1966. Interest, at the long-term bond rate applying when each payment is made by the Commonwealth, will be payable by the State every six months on the outstanding balance of the repayable amount. This is a similar arrangement. to that operating in the case of the new jetty at Derby.

Firm cost estimates for the work are not yet available, but it is probable that this work will absorb up to £1,500,000 of the £3,500,000.

The other works for which specific provision is made in the agreement are the Ord irrigation project works. These works comprise those needed for the supply of irrigation water to and drainage of the remaining farms to be served by the water stored in the newly-completed diversion dam on the Ord River. The diversion dam storage, which was officially opened by the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Menzies) in July last, has the capacity to irrigate approximately 50 farms of 600 acres each, a total of 30,000 acres. Five farms are already in operation, and a further seven have been allotted by the Western Australian Government. The assistance to be provided under the agreement will be applied by the State to the remaining irrigation and drainage works required for development of the whole area of 30,000 acres.

As was the case with respect to the assistance already provided by the Commonwealth for the Ord River project, the assistance under the agreement will take the form of a grant and will not be repayable by the State. Although firm cost estimates will not be available until contracts are let, it is expected that the Ord Irrigation project works will absorb up to about £1,750,000 of the total provision of £3.500,000. After allowance is made for expenditure of up to £1,500,000 on the Broome jetty project, a relatively small amount is expected to be available for other projects in the area. Under the agreement, it will be open to the State to propose other projects for financing from the remaining funds available within the provision of £3,500,000.

The measure before the Senate will undoubtedly make a further major contribution to development of the remote northern area -of Western Australia. Taken in conjunction with the Commonwealth assistance already being provided for other projects, it will also operate to step up significantly the scale of Commonwealth expenditure on special projects within the area. In the five years to 30th June, 1963, the Commonwealth provided a total of £6,500,000 for the Ord River project, improvement of the Wyndham jetty, investigation of the NapierBroome Bay area, beef cattle roads and commencement of construction of a new jetty at Derby. With the £3,500,000 now to be provided, and the provisions of £2,250,000 for beef cattle roads and £500,000 for completion of the Derby jetty for which legislation has already been passed, the Commonwealth will be providing a total of £6,250,000 over the three years commencing with the current financial year. The annual average of special Commonwealth assistance is thus being increased from £1,300,000 to almost £2,100,000 an increase of the order of 60 per cent. These figures provide an indication of the importance attached by the Government to development of the area and evidence in concrete and tangible form of what it is doing in recognition of that importance. I have much pleasure in commending the bill to the Senate.

Debate (on motion by Senator Willesee) adjourned.

page 1611

VINYL RESIN BOUNTY BILL 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Henty) read a first time.

Second Reading

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

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The Government has adopted the recent recommendation of the Tariff Board for a bounty on un-compounded vinyl chloride polymers and copolymers, including latex. The recommendation was contained in the board’s report dealing with these vinyl resins, which I tabled in the Senate on 14th August, 1963. The bill now before the Senate is designed to implement this decision.

In line with the board’s recommendation, a bounty of 4d. per lb. will be paid on the vinyl resins I have described, which are produced and sold for use in Australia, or used by the producer in the production of other goods. The bounty will operate as from 14th August, 1963, and will be subject to the usual reduction or elimination if and when profits exceed 10 per cent, before tax. The two producers of the goods in Australia are B. F. Goodrich-C.S.R. Chemicals Proprietary Limited and Imperial Chemical Industries of Australia and New Zealand. Over 200 people are engaged in the local production.

The vinyl resins are used in the manufacture of a wide range of goods including electrical insulation, motor vehicles, furniture, apparel, packages and floor coverings.

The Tariff Board found that the industry produced a wide range of vinyl resins of apparently acceptable quality, and is capable of supplying the total demand and the range of resins required by the market in significant quantities. The board concluded that the industry merits assistance and that the most practical method of affording this is by bounty assistance in addition to the existing duties; only in this way could the industry be assisted without undue disturbance to the costs of subsequent users.

It is intended that the Tariff Board will again examine the question of assistance to the industry before the expiry of the bounty. I commend the bill to honorable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator O’Byrne) adjourned.

page 1611

OVERSEAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 29th October (vide page 1542), on motion by Senator Wade-

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator CAVANAGH:
South Australia

– The Opposition does not merely support this bill, it supports it with some enthusiasm. The bill amends legislation which was a product of the Labour Party. It is one of the best examples of socialist legislation introduced by any government. It is necessary to have a clear understanding of this bill at the present time, in view of the forthcoming general election when the Labour Party will be very much alive to the need to stress the necessity of government control in spheres such as overseas telecommunications.

The history of telecommunications shows that Britain pioneered the system of cable communications between nations. The cable system continued until the year 1926 when there was developed what has become known as the beam wireless system. This latter system was capable of sending communications from one country to another at a much cheaper rate than was possible under the cable system. When the beam wireless system came into operation it . was expected that it would take over from the cable system unless something was done to prevent it from doing so. The beam wireless system has certain defects. It is subject to weather conditions and to fade-outs because of atmospheric interference, and at all times messages can be intercepted by another country, which in times of war could be an enemy country. However, as it was a cheaper method of transmission, despite the disadvantages it was used and effected considerable losses on the companies which were operating the cable system. These companies were mainly British companies.

The result was that conferences were called for the purpose of doing something about the losses that were being incurred by the companies operating the cable system. It was essential to maintain the cable system so that it could be used in the event of war, but the companies could not be expected to continue their operations in competition with a system that charged a much cheaper rate for messages transmitted from one country to another. There was also the possibility that the companies which controlled the cable system would see fit, in the interests of their shareholders, to sell their interests in that system to foreign powers. In those circumstances we could well have had the cable systems owned and controlled by other powers. A series of conferences was held in Great Britain to consider Commonwealth communications. It was decided to amalgamate the companies that were operating separate systems and to take over the beam wireless system and the then unprofitable cable sys’em and operate them conjointly for the purposes of carrying on a profitable investment.

In Australia the overseas telecommunication services were operated by Amalgamated Wireless (Australasia) Limited, a company in which the Commonwealth Government had 51 per cent, of the shares. That com pany operated the services for a considerable time. At the London conference an agreement was reached that there would be no extension of government activities in the field of communications. At the outbreak of the war the United States of America wished to have direct radio telegraph communication with certain Commonwealth countries and through the pressure of the times the governments concerned saw fit to agree to that. Cable and Wireless Limited which operated the cable system opposed the proposals at that time and claimed that they were in breach of undertakings given in 1929. The company also claimed compensation for loss of revenue. However, the British Commonwealth nations agreed that a radio telegraph service to America should be established, and that system was operated for wartime purposes.

In 1944, before the cessation of hostilities a conference was held in Great Britain at which the proposal that the radio-telegraph link with America should be discontinued at the end of the war, and the claim by Cable and Wireless Limited for compensation, was considered. The Australian delegates to the conference said that Australia was not prepared to discontinue the service to America, if future traffic after the cessation of hostilities warranted the continuance of such a service. The Australian delegates did not concede that Cable and Wireless Limited would suffer loss and, therefore, were not prepared to consider the question of compensation. As a result of this conference there was much disagreement and many reports of possible losses to the company. There was even a threat that all overseas communication services would be closed down. However, a plan was suggested by the Australian Labour Government and the New Zealand Government in an endeavour to settle the problem of overseas communications. Because of thearea from which the suggestion came, the plan was known as the Anzac plan for oversea telecommunication. As the result of the conference in England, the original Overseas Telecommunications Bill was introduced into this Parliament. By that measure it was proposed to take over from Amalgamated Wireless (Australasia) Limited Australia’s overseas telecommunications. The conference had’ agreed that Great Britain, India and the dominions should each take over their overseas telecommunications as a national enterprise. Mr. Calwell, who was then Minister of Immigration and Information, and acting for the Postmaster-General, introduced the Overseas Telecommunications Bill in another place. In doing so he recited the history of telecommunications and gave the reason for the Government’s decision to take control of the system. The first Opposition speaker to the bill was Mr. Eric Harrison who opposed the proposal to take over the assets of a private enterprise, notwithstanding that compensation was to be paid and the rights of employees safeguarded. The arguments raised by the Opposition at that time were rejected by the Labour Government. The Opposition’s amendment that a select committee be set up to inquire into the proposal was defeated. The bill was passed and became law, and the assets of Amalgamated Wireless (Australasia) Limited relating to overseas communications became Government assets.

In 1952 an amendment to the act was introduced by the then Minister for Health, Sir Earle Page, representing the PostmasterGeneral. That amendment contained machinery clauses to make necessary adjustments to the act. By then, additional countries which had gained independence, such as Pakistan and Ceylon, had become partners to the plan. At the same time provisions were inserted governing wages and working conditions of former employees of the company that had been taken over.

In the second-reading debate on that bill Mr. Calwell led for the Opposition and said that the introduction of the bill did an honour to the Chifley Government, which had taken over our overseas telecommunications to run them in the interests of the nation. He said the introduction of the measure placed the Government’s imprimatur on one of the finest pieces of socialist legislation that had ever been enacted by any government. That was the view of a party which, a few years earlier, had had the wisdom to realize that there comes a time when the interests of the nation necessitate government action to maintain or protect essential services to the community. By the amendment of 1952 the Menzies Government, in effect, approved acquisition of the assets of a private company under the 1946 act, although on other ocacsions, for purposes of propaganda, it would scorn such action.

The next occasion on which the act was amended was in 1958 when Mr. Roberton, the Minister for Social Services, representing the Postmaster-General, introduced machinery provisions fixing penalties for employees of the Overseas Telecommunication Commission who disclosed secrets. It provided also that there should be no claim for compensation for any default or omission to transmit messages. Again, on this occasion, Mr. Calwell, representing the Labour Party, supported the measure. Likewise, the amendments proposed by this bill will be supported by the Opposition.

The bill proposes three major changes. First, it empowers the Overseas Telecommunication Commission to set up radio and cable facilities in Nauru. Secondly, it empowers the commission to take over property owned by Amalgamated Wireless (Australasia) Limited, which is at present operating the system in Nauru. The Government has apparently found it necessary to take this action because of some doubt in the Crown Law office about the commission’s power to control this transmitting station in Nauru. Nauru is a trust territory administered in partnership. It is not an Australian Commonwealth territory. The bill will also enable the Government to set up similar facilities abroad with the agreement of the governments of other countries.

The effect of the fourth schedule will be to modernize the list of member States of the Commonwealth of Nations which are parties to the agreement. Therefore, as Mr. Calwell said, we commend the bill as an acceptance by the Government of the need for the nationalization of industries of this kind. For the purposes of this legislation, as on previous occasions, the Government has acquired property from private ownership and has extended national operations to overseas communications. There comes a time in the history of countries when, instead of deploring the fact that profits cannot be made out of an enterprise, it is in the interests of the community to transfer such an undertaking from private enterprise to government control. It was found, particularly during the war years, that we could not rely on private -enterprise to undertake such an important function as overseas communications because private enterprise ‘had obligations to its shareholders rather than to the nation. This venture, resulting from legislation introduced by a Labour government, has not been unprofitable. According to the report of the Auditor-General on the financial transactions of the Overseas Telecommunications Commission which was submitted with the commission’s seventeenth annual report, the. combined operations of the international telegraph and telephone services, the coastal radio services and associated activities resulted in a net profit of £468,957 for the year ended 31st March, 1963. Therefore, the Opposition, consistent with the introduction of the original legislation by a Labour government, and consistent with its support of previous amending legislation, now gives its wholehearted support to this bill and will assist in expediting its passage through this chamber.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1614

RAW COTTON BOUNTY BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 29th October (vide page 1545), on motion by Senator Wade -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator CANT:
Western Australia

Mr. Deputy President, the cotton industry has battled hard for existence in Australia. -Over a number of years, both Labour and non-Labour governments of the Commonwealth have seen fit to give financial support to it. Nevertheless, the burden of trying to establish this industry has been borne by growers in Queensland under most difficult conditions without irrigation. According to recent reports of fee Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization and the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, this industry must depend on irrigation if it is to be successful. Much credit must flow to the growers in Queensland for the battle that they have waged over the years to fulfil some of Australia’s needs with respect to cottongrowing. :It is true” that in South Australia, in the Murray irrigation area, and on the Ord River in Western Australia, people are start ing to ‘grow cotton and they will become entitled to the bounty provided by this legislation.

The bill before the Senate proposes to change the system of bounty payments in that the bounty for the next five years will be paid on raw cotton whereas under the 1951 bill and amendments to it, which will be repealed by this bill, the bounty was paid in respect of seed cotton. The bounty was previously paid at the rate of 14d. per lb. The bounty proposed under the bill before the Senate is to be paid at the rate of 16id. per lb. At first glance, it may seem that this is a more generous bounty, but when one analyses the position one finds that there will be little, if any, change in actual payments which will depend somewhat on the world market prices. However, the amount of bounty to be paid is to be limited to £2,000,000. Clause 8 of the. bill reads -

The amount available for payment of bounty in respect of raw cotton sold in any year in which bounty is payable is Two million pounds.

I notice that the words “ in any year “ are used. The sum of £2,000,000 will be paid in respect of about 29,000,000 lb. of raw cotton. According to the latest figures available to me from the Commonwealth “ Year-Book “, approximately 5,500,000 lb. of raw cotton was produced in Queensland in 1960-61. In that year, Australia used 45,500,000 lb. of raw cotton. It will be seen that there is a big disparity between the amount of cotton produced in Australia and the amount of cotton that is used by Australian industry. Therefore, it is rather admirable that the Government is endeavouring to assist this industry and thus avoid the expenditure of funds overseas on cotton goods. This will improve our balance of payments position.

In Queensland raw cotton is produced at the rate of approximately 150 lb. per acre which is not an economic rate of production. In the Murray irrigation area and on the Ord River it is expected that the rate of production will be very much higher. This will make it more economic for the growers Who will receive the bounty in addition to the world price. In Western Australia an experiment is being carried out. It started at the Kimberley research station with cotton grown under experimental conditions. Very high yields were obtained in this experiment but the same yields would not necessarily be obtained under i farm conditions. With the development of the Ord River area, the experiment is being extended to the growing of cotton under farm conditions. No doubt, over the years, this experiment will have its teething troubles. Therefore, the production of cotton will be more expensive in these formative years than one might expect it to be in four, five or six years’ time. The governments of Western Australia, both Liberal and Labour, are to be complimented upon their efforts to establish a cotton industry in that State. Cotton is not the only crop that will be grown in the Ord River, but for the purposes of this legislation it will be the most important.

As this is a measure which the Australian Labour. Party supports and welcomes in the interests of the development of northern Australia, particularly the north-west of Western Australia, I do not propose to delay the Senate for very long. I should like the Minister for Health to answer one query in respect of clause 12 (8.), which reads -

For the purposes of the application of section twenty-nine of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901-1963 to the services of a notice under the last preceding sub-section, a notice posted as a letter addressed to the occupier, or to the person who applied for the registration of a ginnery, at the ginnery shall be deemed to be properly addressed.

I do not know what “ properly addressed “ means. I suppose it assumes that, if the letter is properly addressed, it will reach its proper destination at some time or other. When notices are served on parties, it is customary for them to be sent by registered post. I should think that would be the proper way in which to address notices or communications that are to be sent to the occupier or to the person who applied for the registration of a ginnery. I should like some clarification of the matter. We do not oppose the bill.

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
Western Australia

– A short while ago we listened to the Minister for Health (Senator Wade) deliver his second-reading speech on the Western Australia (Northern Development) Agreement Bill. In addressing myself to the measure now before us, I wish to say something about the northern part of Australia. From time to time we have discussed legislation which has been designed to make available’ certain sums of money to Western Australia for the development of the Ord River area. That State is now provided with an opportunity to establish a cotton industry that will have a large potential. I am very pleased to see this legislation introduced; it will be of great assistance to the cotton industry. Senator Cant said a little about the cotton industry on the Ord River, but 1 should like to take advantage of this opportunity to tell honorable senators what is happening up there in greater detail.

We know that on the Ord River there are approximately 150,000 acres of suitable soils which can be irrigated from the Ord reservoir. In fact, we have water to spare. In the Fitzroy basin in the Kimberleys, there is an area about twice the size of that on the Ord River in which cotton could be grown. But there we have the problem of a lack of water. Cotton trials were commenced in 1950 at the Kimberley research station. In the first few years results were rather poor, due mainly to damage from a variety of insects. However, that problem was overcome with better insecticides, and since 1958 we have been obtaining yields of more than 2,000 lb. of cotton seed per acre. In fact, some yields have been as high as 3,000 lb.

Senator Mattner:

– I take it that was on the experimental plot.

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:

– Yes. In 1961-62, 30 acres were grown and harvested, with a yield of about 1,900 lb. of seed cotton per acre. In 1962-63, a 200-acre crop was grown. The information available reveals that half the crop has been harvested with a yield of 2,000 lb. per acre. The balance still remains to be harvested. In 1963-64, the five farmers who have been established up there, plus the pilot farm, will plant cotton during November and December. This should mean that an area of from 1,200 to 1,500 acres will be harvested in April and May of 1964. The expectations for 1964-65 are that seven farms which have been allocated recently will plant cotton in November and December of 1964. This planting, added to the repeat programmes of existing farmers, should provide approximately 3,000 acres in the 1964-65 summer.

It is expected that expansion will continue at the same rate. This will provide an additional area of about 1,500 acres of planted cotton each year until the Kununurra ginnery has reached its capacity. Moreover, the Government of Western Australia has established a ginnery at the Kimberley research station. Its immediate capacity, with a twostand plant, is seven bales an hour. Provision has been made in the design for an additional gin stand which will increase the output to ten or twelve bales an hour. It is expected that this ginnery will cater for approximately 15,000 acres of cotton.

It will be seen that the potential exists in Western Australia for the development of a sound cotton industry. This legislation will open the way for the expansion of the industry in that part of the Commonwealth and elsewhere. I feel sure that within a few years a well established cotton industry will operate in the north. I support the bill.

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

– in reply - I am very happy to note that this legislation has been received cordially on both sides of the House. For that reason, I do not intend to take up the time of the Senate with repetitive comment. Senator Cant sought certain information. I inform him that the sum of £2,000,000 which is to be made available under this legislation will provide for the production of 35,000,000 lb. of raw cotton. The current production of raw cotton is about 5,000,000 lb. per year. It will be noted that there will be wide scope for development of the industry. This is the sort of assistance that the growers have been seeking, and I am sure it will be of real value not only to the industry but to the economy of Australia. The honorable senator directed attention to clause 12 (8.), which deals with the method of notification. I am informed that if the Minister for Primary Industry decides to cancel the registration of premises as a ginnery, the written notice of such cancellation may be addressed to either the present occupier of the premises or the original applicant for registration of the ginnery.

I repeat that the cotton industry will appreciate the support that has been accorded to this measure by the Senate and that I am sure the legislation will give to the industry an impetus that will prove to be very valuable to the Australian economy.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1616

PHOSPHATE FERTILIZERS BOUNTY BILL 1963

Bill returned from the House of Representatives with a message intimating that it had made the amendment requested by the Senate in this bill.

Third Reading

Bill (on motion by Senator Henry) read a third time.

page 1616

TARIFF BOARD

Reports on Items.

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

– I present reports by the Tariff Board on the following items: -

Parts for refrigerating appliances.

Television receiver components.

Vinyl acetate nonomer.

Glycerine, fatty acids, soaps and other detergents.

Floor and wall coverings (linoleum, vinyl, &c.)

Engraving blocks, &c.

Linen fabrics.

Printing of silk piece goods.

Motor vehicle propeller shaft assemblies.

page 1616

SUPERANNUATION BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 29th October (vide page 1565), on motion by Senator Paltridge) -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia

– The purpose of the Superannuation Bill is to restore to the pensions of public servants who have retired from the service some of the purchasing power they have lost through inflation. The bill highlights the extraordinary degree of inflation that has occurred. In referring to inflation, I do not want to embark on a discussion of exports, competition for foreign markets, and matters of that kind. During the last fourteen years it has become apparent that. while prices have been galloping ahead, fixed incomes such as pensions and superannuation payments have been losing their purchasing power. The main purpose of the bill is to restore a measure of that loss.

In 1961, the Government increased its share of contributions to the Superannuation Fund with a view to restoring to superannuation payments the value they had in 1954. Honorable senators will appreciate that in most superannuation schemes the pensions arc related to the salaries of the individuals concerned. The Government decided that because superannuation payments had lost some of their purchasing power due to inflation between 1954 and 1961, the value of the unit of superannuation should be increased. The concept that superannuation payments should bear a degree of relativity to salaries has been recognized for a long time. It was for that reason that in 1961 the Government tried to restore the value of superannuation payments to the 1954 level. I suppose that this is a problem which will remain with us until a different approach is made to the operation of superannuation schemes.

If this bill had been introduced at a more appropriate time, Mr. Deputy President, a closer examination of the superannuation scheme since its inception in 1922 could have been made and, I suggest, would have been helpful. If time permitted, and if the atmosphere of the Parliament were to encourage it - I am afraid it does not do so - I certainly would suggest that a detailed examination of the scheme would be worth while. The Minister for Civil Aviation (Senator Paltridge) commented in his second-reading speech on the fact that the bill had come before the Parliament at a late stage of the session and suggested that this was due to the fact that an election was forthcoming. However, I point out that on previous occasions bills dealing with superannuation matters have been introduced at a similarly late stage in the sittings of the Parliament. In fact, when we last discussed such a bill I remember stating that on yet another occasion a bil! dealing with superannuation matters had come before the Parliament at a late stage of the session. It is obvious that in the dying hours of the Parliament it is not possible to make a detailed examination of the bill. I suggest that legislation of this kind is eminently suited to consideration by a committee.

I am indebted to a colleague in another place for bringing to my attention a statement made by Mr. Littleton Groom, who was Attorney-General in 1922, when the first Superannuation Bill was introduced. In outlining the scheme, Mr. Littleton Groom said -

The object of the scheme submitted is to provide payments for those who have given a life long service to the State, so that when they reach the age limit for .retirement ‘.hey will not find themselves in a position of pecuniary embarrassment. Moreover, should they, during their term of service, become permanently incapacitated, they will not be altogether without means of support, neither will their widows or dependants, should death overtake the breadwinners, be penniless.

Whenever I think of superannuation schemes, the 1938 proposals for a national insurance scheme come to my mind. It has been impossible to forecast the position in 20, 30 or 40 years time because of inflation. So we find the Commonwealth is contributing five-sevenths to the fund and the contributors are contributing two-sevenths. I mention that to show rather broadly how far we have moved away from the original concept of this scheme and to emphasize that unless we have greater stabilization of prices than we have had since 1950 we shall have a succession of these bills before us for some time to come.

Another amendment provides for a change in the investment operations of the fund, and I greatly regret that it is moved in the present atmosphere in the late hours of the Parliament. Up to the present it has not been profitable for the fund to invest in government bonds because the attraction of this investment lies in the taxation concession attached to it which is not available to the fund. In his secondreading speech the Minister explained that the provision of the act in relation to investment by the fund in loans on mortgage is to be widened to cover a greater variety of investments. Up to the present there has been provision for investment in semi-government bonds and others and these provisions have attracted some criticism. Dealing with this provision in the bill the Minister stated -

The most important administrative amendment clarifies the provisions of the act in relation to the investment of the fund in loans on mortgage and widens the powers of investment of the Superannuation Board to authorize the investment of not more than 23 per cent, of the fund in debentures of companies. This will be supplemented by regulations prescribing the safeguards adopted, in respect of similar investments, in the Trustee Investments Act 1961 of the United Kingdom, with the further safeguard that two expert opinions will be required before any investment in debentures is made by the board.

I suppose that at this period in Australia’s history it is unfortunate to suggest that any solid fund should start to widen its speculations, in view of some of the company crashes that we have had in Australia over the past few years. Many schemes have been before the Superannuation Board but most of theme have revolved about the investors themselves. It has been suggested that they lend out their funds on such solid investments as housing. Up to the present, the board has not seen fit to adopt this practice. I direct attention to this matter and I for one will watch the regulations with much interest because I feel that, with the best of intentions, the Superannuation Board could easily be embarking on investments in a new area. Because of the ramifications of government and the systems of government -departments the tight control which is necessary on this type of investment might be lacking. . I hope that will not be so, but it is an interesting proposition which should attract considerable debate in this place. The time is long overdue for a thorough investigation of the funds of the Superannuation Board, which stand at £102,000,000. There are at the moment about 20,000 beneficiaries. Other things should be examined. What started off as covering a rather narrow field in 1922 has grown to cover a wide field, and now any consideration of the problems of this fund impinges- on another matter - the abolition of the means test - because people who contribute all their lives to superannuation are prevented by the means test from receiving the age pension. That may be a good thing in that it helps the Government financially but because the present scale of social services was not envisaged in 1922 some adjustment of the position has become necessary. There are many other facets of the Superannuation Boards’ functions which should be examined. Then there is the question, now we have got to the five-sevenths Government contribution level whether that in itself has not altered the whole concept under which the scheme was initiated. 1 should like to see a comparison between the Commonwealth’ scheme and similar funds outside, because one of the great problems of the Commonwealth Public Service is how to hold capable and well-trained officers who can get higher salaries outside the Public Service. We cannot have a salaries race, but it is common in great companies and cartels to bind employees to the service by superannuation and what the Americans call fringe benefits. That aspect requires examination.

I have never been satisfied - and particularly over the past seven or eight years - with the policy of the Superannuation Board on the question of demanding the return to service in Commonwealth departments of persons who have been superannuated because of ill-health. Naturally, the Superannuation Board keeps a check on these things, as well it should, because it is paying out superannuation, and if a person becomes fit for work, he should go back to the service. But I have not been satisfied with the way officers have been treated when the department has been asked to bring back those persons. A cold-blooded approach is shown. Some of these people have been seriously ill - ill enough to be superannuated - and then they are required to return to a job. They have not been treated sympathetically enough to determine whether they should be retrained or transferred to another section or another department.

All these things should be examined by the Parliament, but we have never had the chance to do so and I am not satisfied with the reasons given by the Minister for the late introduction of this bill. Legislation dealing with superannuation generally comes into the Senate late in the session. It is unfair to the Senate to give it this responsibility in such circumstances. In years to come, observers can look back and say that this bill was passed unanimously by the Parliament when in actual fact - the Parliament has not had an opportunity to give to important bills of this kind the close and undivided attention they merit. The Labour Party supports the bill because the Opposition realizes that it provides benefits which are probably overdue to a body of people who have given faithful service to Australia and to the Commonwealth Government whatever its political colour. But I hope this protest is recorded and noted and that when we next have a superannuation bill before us we shall have ample time to consider it when the atmosphere is conducive to a non-partisan approach. I hope that we shall then have a critical look at the Commonwealth Superannuation Act.

Senator WRIGHT:
Tasmania

.- In view of my personal arrangements, I shall make my contribution as brief a3 possible, but I join with those who have said it is important that this legislation be extricated from the pressure of the last few days of the session. I cannot find any excuse for the late introduction of this legislation, because the legislation was announced in the Budget in August. It should not be left to the last day of the session for our consideration, and this haste must be looked upon askance. I call attention to the fact that the increases provided in 1961 to bring pensions to the level of 1954 cost £566,000 a year. The proposed increases to make adjustments now to the 1961 level will cost £1,088,000.

I then call attention to the fact that it is proposed to adjust the future variations in value by means of a formula which is written into the bill. But for the document which has been handed to me within the last few minutes, for which I am grateful to the Minister, I should have been trenchant in my remarks as to the formula for ascertaining the number of units which has come to us without adequate explanation. The formula is

To gain an intelligent understanding of that one would require to be a Philadelphia lawyer. I am not out of sympathy with the idea of making some effort to correct the abrupt decline in the proportional value of the top civil service pensions. That formula has been applied, in response to my request, to salaries ranging from £1,000 to £5,000, showing the adjustments to be made. For instance under the existing legislation, a salary of £2,500 would bring an entitlement to a pension of £1,547. Under the bill a person on that salary will be entitled to a pension of £1,729. A person on a salary of £5,000 under the existing legislation would receive a pension of £2,411 10s. Under the bill he will get an additional £360, with a pension of £2,775 10s. With the concurrence of honorable senators I incorporate in “ Hansard “ the following table: -

The only other matter that I wish to mention in the brief time that I have allotted myself in view of other commitments is the change in respect of investments. I am entirely at .a loss to see how it is justifiable for a public service superannuation fund to go out of the field of public securities for investment. I call attention to the fact that authority is sought to invest in any manner for the time being allowed by an act or

State act, or by an ordinance of a Territory of the Commonwealth, for the investment of trust moneys. I believe that that is quite an unsound criterion. More especially I am at a loss to justify investment in debentures issues in Australia by a company incorporated in Australia. 1 ask the Senate particularly to notice sub-section (5.) of proposed new section 12, which provides that the term “ debentures “ does not mean secured debentures. It means notes, secured or unsecured. To my way of thinking, very careful scrutiny is needed before we authorize that category for the investment of public funds.

I notice that in clause 5 (2.) we are asked to validate certain investments which ex hypothesis have unlawfully been made. The secondreading speech does not condescend even to indicate how much is involved or what sort of investments are involved, whether we should validate the investments, or whether the present security is certified by a responsible expert to be good. Insofar as the speech invokes reference to the Trustee Investment Act 1961 of the United Kingdom Parliament, I suggest that the Senate should very closely consider before it can be assured that the safeguards that that statute provides surround the investment of public service superannuation funds in debentures. With these brief comments, I must leave my contribution to the bill, but of course that will not preclude a pursuing interest in this matter in the new year.

Sitting suspended from 5.59 to 8 p.m.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

The bill.

Senator KENNELLY:
Victoria

.- I am concerned about how the moneys of the Commonwealth Superannuation Fund are invested. I was particularly interested in a statement made by Senator Wright. He gave me the impression that some moneys are invested in company shares and stocks that cannot be regarded as giltedged securities. We have had a fair amount of trouble with companies in recent years. If what Senator Wright has said is correct, and I have no reason to believe that it is not, it surprises me that the Government has not made provision to have the funds of the superannuation board properly protected.

In a bill dealing with superannuation moneys belonging to the employees of TransAustralia Airlines the Minister for Civil Aviation (Senator Paltridge) will no doubt recall this the Government inserted a clause which compelled the moneys to be invested in Commonwealth securities. If it is good enough to protect the superannuation fund belonging to the employees of one Government organization, it should be good enough to protect moneys belonging to the employees of other Government concerns. There must be a reason why the superannuation moneys of the employees of T.A.A. have to be invested in Commonwealth securities. Why does not that reason apply in other cases? I think everyone would like to be satisfied that superannuation funds are protected. We may be perfectly happy about what has happened in years gone by, but in view of the number of companies that have run into trouble recently I think we should be careful about the investments made.

I have a recollection of some trouble in relation to a superannuation fund in New South Wales through unwise investment. I cannot recall the particulars at the moment. I think that this bill should make it mandatory that any surplus funds of the Commonwealth Superannuation Board should be invested in either Commonwealth securities, State government securities or local government securities. All I am concerned about is to protect the money. The Government may have had no trouble up to date, but in this sort of business it is no use closing the door after the horse has bolted. I hope that the Minister will tell us why the Government is prepared to take a risk in this case whereas it has not taken that risk in relation to other Government employees, and I have in mind particularly the employees of T.A.A.

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

– In relation to the point raised by Senator Kennelly I wish to quote from the Fortieth Annual Report of the Commonwealth Superannuation Board. It is the last report available, being for the year ended 30th

June, 1962. There is a board which looks after the investment of the funds, which after all are the contributors’ funds. The president of the board is Mr. J. M. Henderson and the other members are Mr. S. W. Caffin, who is in the Commonwealth Actuary, and Mr. C. E. Arnold, M.B.E. who was elected by the contributors. Mr. Arnold is about to retire and there will be an election of another member by the contributors.

The proceeds of the funds are invested in Commonwealth Government securities; electricity authorities; water, sewerage and drainage authorities; city, shire and municipal councils; harbour trusts; transport authorities; gas and fuel authorities; loans on mortgage; primary industry; housing authorities; hospital boards; life assurance policies and others. The “ others “ account for £100,000 out of a total investment of £91,000,000. I think that would suggest that the board is keeping a pretty close eye on its investments.

However, I think that what Senator Kennelly said is quite right. Very often difficulties can arise if the position is not carefully . watched. A desire to obtain a little extra interest can induce people to invest in something that is not secure. From the authorities that I have mentioned to the Senate it would appear that the board has been very careful in its trusteeship of these funds.

Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia

– Two points arise out of the Minister’s reply. The second-reading speech of the Minister makes it quite clear that the Government is widening the powers of investment of the Superannuation Board. The administrative amendment clarifies the position of the board in relation to the investment of funds. I wonder whether the Minister could be a little more explicit as to exactly how these powers arc being widened. That is the point that concerned Senator Kennelly. The honorable senator would be quite happy if the funds were invested in semigovernmental securities or Commonwealth or Slate securities. The position is different in regard to the debentures in companies. As I mentioned previously, the history of companies in Australia over the last few years naturally causes us some concern in this regard.’

Secondly, the Minister, in replying, mentioned that money can be and has been lent on mortgage. I notice that sub-section (2.) (c) of proposed new section 1 2 in clause 5 goes a little further. It refers to a loan secured by a mortgage of an estate in fee simple, or of a leasehold interest in land in Australia. There are some conditions that are attached to that. Was the- Minister incorrect in mentioning only half of the provision and saying that it referred to a loan secured by a mortgage, or did he just not read out the remainder of the provision? I think both the Minister and I have the same clause in mind. Secondly, is this confined to land? If so, why are improvements on land not included? There is another thought that I would raise on the same clause. It was mentioned in the second-reading speech that safeguards will be lifted out of the British act, but apparently the only safeguard mentioned is the requirement that there shall be two opinions. Lawyers will tell you that frequently you are better off with only one opinion; otherwise you may not know where you will finish up. I notice also that the safeguard is to be written into the regulations. Sub-section (4.) of proposed section 12 states -

Moneys of the Fund shall not be invested in debentures unless -

the investment is permitted by, and is in accordance with, the regulations;

Although that may be a proper function of the regulation-making powers, I always resist the tendency to write important matters into the subordinate legislation. In this instance the provision is almost the crux of what shall be the new loan policy of the Superannuation Board. I ask the Minister to look very closely at that, particularly in view of the remarks in the second-reading speech which indicate that the Government already visualizes what the regulations will be. What is wrong with writing that provision into the act? I know that the Government’s advisers are likely to say that that would restrict them, but if the board intends to move into a new field - the field of investment - and if the Government wants to allay the fears that have been expressed in this debate, very close consideration should be given to what I have suggested. If the regulations are to be precise, why is it that the provision cannot be written into the parent act?

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

– The act is being widened to include the word “ debenture “, the definition of which is taken from the Trustee Investment Act 1961 of Great Britain. In that act the word “ debenture “, is defined to mean -

Debenture stock and bonds, whether constituting a charge on the assets of the company or not, and loan stock or notes.

That represents a widening of the act. The honorable senator said that if a mortgage can be obtained on land, why can it not be obtained on the improvements on that land. These matters are left to the judgment of the Superananuation Board which controls the fund. 1 feel that the board is in a position to watch that matter very closely.

Senator Willesee:

– The Minister has overlooked my question about regulations.

Senator HENTY:

– Would you repeat the question?

Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia

– Sub-section (4.) of proposed new section 12 states -

Moneys of the Fund shall not be invested in debentures unless -

the investment is permitted by, and is in accordance wilh, lnc regulations;

The only indication that the Minister has given about what will be contained in the regulations is the suggestion that two opinions will be gathered before an investment is made, that being a provision taken from the United Kingdom act. If the regulation is to be as simple as that, why should not that provision be written into the act? This is a tendency that all parliaments must resist. It is wrong to leave too many powers to the regulations made under any act. When replying to my questions the Minister omitted to mention that point.

Again I should like to refer the Minister to paragraph (c) of proposed new section 12(2.). The Minister has assured us that under this provision loans can be made on land with improvements, such as buildings, &c hut does not think that that provision is sufficiently wide. It reads - in a loan secured by a mortgage nl an estate in Tce simple, or of a leasehold interest, in land in Australia….. i- “.” .i

That does not suggest to me that the board is given power to invest in housing or improvements on land; it suggests that the board is tied to investments in land.

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

– This provision will be supplemented by regulations which will prescribe the safeguards to be adopted in respect of some investments. . The safeguards will be taken from the Trustee Investment Act 1961 of the United Kingdom. There will be the further safeguard that two expert opinions will be required before any investment in debentures is made by the board. In reply to the other question asked by the honorable senator, 1 can say that I am assured that the clause does cover land and improvements on land.

Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia

– Has the Minister any information which will indicate whether the provisions that he says are being taken from the United Kingdom act are in fact from the act or from regulations made under the act? If the provisions arc taken from the parent act in Great Britain. I think we come back to the point that 1 mentioned earlier. If the provisions are good enough to be written into the parent act in the United Kingdom they should bc good enough to be written into our act.

Senator Henty:

– The provisions come . from the parent act.

Senator WILLESEE:

– That comes back to the very point that 1 raised. If the provisions are in the parent act of the United Kingdom, why is it intended to put them into our subordinate legislation? On a few occasions in this chamber we have drawn to the attention of the Government very crucial matters that the Government has attempted to write into regulations. After all, that is the subordinate legislation. I give the Government credit for the fact that on one or two occasions it has accepted our objection and has written the power into the parent act. We are forever on the lookout for that. I suggest that it is not too late to look at the situation in respect of this bill. If something is being taken from the parent act of the United Kingdom, at least let it be included in our act. rather than in the subordinate legislation.

Senator Henty:

– 1 have been advised by tha draftsman that he considers;! that ‘ this provision should be in the regulations rather than in the act. He believes that it is better in that form. I presume that when the regulations come before Parliament they can be scrutinized by the Regulations and Ordinance Committee.

Bill agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Third Reading

Bill (on motion by Senator Henty) read a third time.

page 1623

DEFENCE FORCES RETIREMENT BENEFITS BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 29th October (vide page 1566), on motion by Senator Paltridge -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia

.- This bill is parallel to the Superannuation Bill and, so far as possible, brings retired members of the defence forces into some sort of equality with superannuated public servants. I say “ some sort of equality “ because the normal retiring ages of 60 years or 65 years which obtain in the Public Service do not apply to members of the armed forces. In the defence forces there are varying scales of superannuation because of different ranks, and it is necessary to make adjustments in the defence forces retirement legislation to allow for reduced amounts because a contributor pays into the fund for a short period.

I do not want to bore honorable senators with’ the subject of hasty legislation, but this bill has 43 pages and proposes 63 amendments. The Senate is starting to discuss the measure at 8.20 p.m. Within the next two or three hours this Parliament will have ended. However, as I. have said, it is not unusual for us to be asked to debate superannuation legislation in the dying hours of a parliament.

The provisions of this bill represent about the only protection that contributors have. I hope that on the next occasion when it is proposed to amend the act - and there will be further amendments - we will get away from this system of trying to keep up with inflationary trends. I hope also. that the

Parliment Will have an opportunity of making a more detailed study than time and atmosphere permit to-night.

No doubt the Minister for Civil Aviation (Senator Paltridge) >s aware of the problems which flow from the fact that the men who retire are still in the prime of their industrial lives. I think that some of them are aged about 47 years although some of them are 55 years old. I understand that in the mid-1930’s the age of retirement was 60 years. The earlier retiring ages create all sorts of problems. Although they have been examined with a view to the drafting of appropriate legislation because of resettlement schemes, it seems that those problems still exist. I know that these are problems peculiar to the industry, as it might be called. At the same time they create hardship and industrial waste. Perhaps we may be able to suggest better ways of assisting these people when we have more- time to examine legislation of this nature.

The Australian Labour Party does not oppose the bill. It will give some relief to the people concerned by counteracting the effects of inflation which affects those on fixed incomes, as I said during the second-reading debate on the Superannuation Bill. These people are affected by the continuing and chronic problems which are due to inflation. Under inflationary conditions, their fixed income has no chance of moving upwards. Prices get away from these people and they cannot do much to augment their incomes. Therefore, it is obviously the responsibility of this Parliament to see that they do not fall behind in the economic race. Honorable senators must be worried as to whether we are being generous, or even fair, to these people. We do not know because of the limited opportunity that we have had to examine this measure. The Opposition wishes this bill a speedy passage; we on this side offer no opposition to it.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1623

PRINTING COMMITTEE

Senator Sir WALTER COOPER:
Queensland

– I present the ninth report of the Printing Committee.

Report - by - leave - adopted.

CANNED FRUITS EXPORT MARKETING BILL 1963.

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Sir William Sponner) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER (New South Wales - Vice-President of the

Executive Council and Minister for National Development). - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill is one of four measures which the Government is introducing at the request of the Australian deciduous canning fruit industry, both growers and canners. It is designed to enable the industry to extend its export marketing operations to meet present day competitive conditions.

First, the bill provides that the composition of the Canned Fruits Board will be enlarged and the powers of the reconstituted board will be extended. The bill provides for the collection of a levy on production of deciduous canned fruit sold on the domestic market. The funds collected by the levy will be administered by the Canned Fruits Board to allow it to assist in the marketing of canned fruit.

The canned fruit industry is one of Australia’s great export industries. Production of deciduous canned fruit has been and is increasing at a rapid rate in various parts of Australia. Traditionally, exports have been confined mainly to the United Kingdom. The increased supplies now available for export demand that exports must be stepped up to other countries in the face of increasing competition from other overseas competitors. The board will be permitted to purchase and sell canned deciduous fruits under certain conditions. Provision is also made in the legislation to permit the board, where it desires to finance the purchase of canned deciduous fruits to obtain advances from the Reserve Bank under guarantee from the Government.

The present act has been in force since 1926. and has been amended from time to time. It is now out of line with current drafting practice. In view of the extensive amendments necessary to the existing legislation, it has been decided to repeal the act in its entirety and to introduce new legislation. The only new features in the proposed legislation are those to which I have already referred. The Australian Canned Fruits Board was first set up in 1926, at a time when the canned fruits industry was in its infancy in the export field, and when the industry was limited in size, though none the less important to the Australian economy. Production of deciduous canned fruits in the 1927 canning season totalled the equivalent of some 965,000 cartons, whereas production in the season just concluded totalled 7,280,000 cartons. Exports for the year ended 30th June, 1927, were valued at £224,487, whereas exports for the period ended 30th June, 1963, were in excess of £8.600,000.

Over 60 per cent, of canned deciduous fruit production is now exported. The growth and stability of the industry depend largely on its performance in the export field. It is essential that the industry be in a position to apply modern commercial and promotional practices to enable itto face increasing competition overseas which is resulting from increasing production in South Africa and the United States. The export sales of canned deciduous fruits provide a valuable contribution to our export income. The industry is of major importance in the development of the irrigation areas of New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. Deciduous fruit is, in fact, canned in all States of the Commonwealth, but the three States mentioned are the leading producers in the field.

The existing legislation provides that the board shall comprise one member to represent co-operative canner interests, one member to represent the interests of proprietary canners, one member to represent the growers of deciduous canning fruit, together with one member to represent the interests of canners of pineapple products, with a member to represent the Commonwealth Government. The new legislation proposes to increase the membership of cooperative canners, proprietary canners and growers of deciduous canning fruit from one to three members. As in the present legislation one member will represent canneries engaged inthe productionof canned pineapple and one member will represent the Commonwealth Government. A new feature of the proposed legislation provides for the chairman of the board to be elected by the board instead of being appointed by the Minister as at present. A further provision enables the board, should it feel that special skills and/ or knowledge are required, and subject to approval by the Minister, to appoint a chairman from other than board members. In this case the chairman shall be an additional member of the board.

The accompanying legislation to which I referred earlier provides that a levy will be imposed upon all domestic sales of canned deciduous fruits. The board is authorized to use the funds collected from the industry to assist in marketing deciduous canned fruits in export markets. The need for promotional activity overseas is obvious.

Provision exists in the proposed bill for the board to obtain advances under Government guarantee from the Reserve Bank to finance the purchase of canned deciduous fruits offered by canners to the board. In practice, it is not expected that the board will purchase fruit as one of its normal functions. However, the board may need this power to meet any special or unusual circumstances which may arise. The provision to borrow from the Reserve Bank has been included to enable the board to meet any unexpected but temporary demands upon its financial resources. Provision has been made for the allocation from the funds of the levy for special publicity and promotional activity in export markets. The Commonwealth Government is already supplementing the board’s promotional expenditure in the United Kingdom. It is prepared to consider granting similar support to the board’s promotional activities in other markets.

The proposals leading to the reconstitution of the present Australian Canned Fruits Board, the extension of the powers of the board, and the export development plan, were submitted to the Government after the fullest investigation and consultation between all sections of the industry. They were sponsored by the Australian Canning Fruit-growers Association. This is the central organization of growers of canning apricots,, peaches, and pears, which represent about 90 per cent, of the members of the industry in the three main producing States of Victoria, South Australia and New South Wales. These growers produce 95 per cent, of these fruits used in canning in Australia. In addition, the scheme is supported by the substantial majority of the members of the central organization of fruit canners - the Australian Canners Association. It is supported also by some deciduous fruit canners of substance who are not members of the Australian Canners Association.

It is now a well established practice for primary industries engaged in exports to request the imposition of a levy to provide funds to assist their industries. Already this has been done with apples and pears, dried fruit, wine grapes, wool, beef, butter and cheese and honey. I would emphasize that the proposals advanced by the industry have the majority support of the industry, both growers and canners. Their action in formulating these proposals is regarded by the Government as an excellent example of action by an important primary industry in an endeavour to meet the problems confronting the industry. The Government has been glad to respond to this commendable move on the part of the deciduous canning fruit-growing industry and the bill J am now presenting is purely for the purpose of giving legislative expression to the industry’s own scheme. I therefore commend the bill to honorable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator Kennelly) adjourned.

page 1625

CANNED FRUITS EXPORT CHARGES BILL 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Sir William Spooner) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:
Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for National Development · New South Wales · LP

[8.38]. - I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is to amend the Canned Fruits Export Charges Act. 1926- 1952. The amendments are necessary to record correctly the title of the legislation under which control is exercised in the export of canned fruit. Honorable senators will observe in the preceding measure that it is proposed to repeal the Canned Fruits Export Control Act 1926-1959 and to replace it with the Canned Fruits Export Marketing Act 1963.

I commend the bill to honorable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator Kennelly) adjourned.

page 1626

QUESTION

TARIFF BOARD

(Question No. 117.)

Senator MURPHY:

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

  1. What are the reasons for the time lag between dates of references and dates of reports by the Tariff Board which, according to the annual report of the Tariff Board for 1962-63, has been, on the average, more than ten months during the last three years?
  2. What steps have been taken by the Government to enable the board to expedite the reports on applications by industries for new or increased protection?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER.The Minister for Trade has advised me as follows: -

  1. The reasons for the average time lag of ten months between dates of references and dates of reports by the Tariff Board are -

    1. A period of three months is allowed from the time the reference is received by the board before the commencement of public hearings for the preparation of evidence for submission to the board. This period has been agreed upon with Britain as being appropriate to discharge Australia’s obligations under Article 9(l)(d) of the United KingdomAustralia Trade Agreement.
    2. Public hearings are usually spread over a period of some weeks, primarily to give time for preparation of comments on evidence submitted at the first hearings.
    3. The remainder of the time is taken up with analysing, collating and, in many cases, supplementing information received in evidence, in coming to a decision on the recommendations and in preparation and submission of the report.

The Government has done much to facilitate the work of the board and to reduce delays to the practicable minimum. Attention is directed also the answer to question No. 2.

  1. In recent years, the Government has introduced a number of measures designed to expedite the reports on applications by. industry for new or increased protection. Brief outlines of these measures are as follows: - 1958: Board membership temporarily increased from seven to eight, enabling the board to work in three rather than two “ divisions “. 1960: Board membership permanently increased to eight. 1960: Temporary protection legislation, providing “ holding action “ to industry suffering damaging competition while case under review by Tariff Board. 1960: Legislation to enable tariff changes to be made by Gazette notice while Parliament not in session. 1962: Special Advisory Authority created to handle temporary protection inquiries, thereby decreasing work load on board. 1962: Board authorized to accept written evidence from witnesses. 1962: Chairman given more flexibility in administration.

During recent years, the staff of the board has been considerably increased to enable it to deal with themuch greater amount of work it now has to do. Despite a substantial increase in the number of references annually, the average time between date of reference and date of report has been less in the last three years than previously.

page 1626

QUESTION

COMMEMORATION OF WORLD WAR I. BATTLES

(Question No. 140.) .

Senator SANDFORD:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Is thePrime Minister aware that celebrations will be held in Britain next year to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the World War I. battles of Mons, Marne, Aisne and Ypres?
  2. Have any representations been made to the Government to send some of the veterans of the “Old Contemptible “ now living in Australia to these celebrations?
  3. If not, or in any case, will the Government give this matter consideration?

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER.The Prime Minister has supplied the following answers to the honorable senator’s questions: -

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.
  3. The Government has considered these requests and in accordance with long established policy has been obliged to refuse them.

page 1626

QUESTION

HOUSING OF DEFENCE PERSONNEL

(Question No. 145.)

Senator COLE:
TASMANIA

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

  1. Is it a fact that married members of the permanent defence forces are required to pay up to 15 per cent of their pay as rent for their quarters or an economic rent, whichever is the lower?
  2. Where garages are provided, is it a fact that they arc required to pay 12s. per week over and above this rental?
  3. Is not a garage an integral part of the modern home? Why should a charge belevied over and above the statutory 15 per centof their pay?
  4. Is it not a fact that 50 per cent, of the wages of married servicemen are taken up by rent for homes, rent for garages and the Defence Forces Retirement Benefit Fund contributions, and that this factor is causing members of the forces to reconsider making the Army a full-time career?
Senator HENTY:
LP

– The Minister for the Army has provided the following answers: -

  1. Yes.
  2. Army married quarters are not normally provided with garages but where a garage is provided this has to be taken into account. Where a garage is provided its rental is included in the assessed economic rent. The determination provides that, where a member’s rent is on the 15 per cent, basis, additional rent will be. charged for the garage provided the economic rental is not exceeded. The rental varies according to the garage and is not fixed at a flat rale of 12s. per week.
  3. As indicated in the previous answer, the present system ensures that members are not charged more than the economic rental of the house and garage. Members who pay 15 per cent, of their pay plus the economic rental of the garage may still be paying less than the economic rental of the complete quarter, including the garage.
  4. No. The amounts paid by members of the Army as contributions to the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Fund vary, with a maximum of 51 per cent, of salary for other ranks and a maximum of 12 per cent, of salary for officers. Therefore, the amounts paid in rental and Retirement Benefits Fund contributions by members of the Army occupying married quarters normally would not exceed 201/2 per cent, of salary for other ranks and 27 per cent, of salary for officers. These figures could be higher for members occupying quarters provided with garages and for members who were contributing to the Retirements Benefits Fund before 14th December, 1959, and who now contribute in excess of the above figure to qualify for the higher pension rates approved since that date. There is no evidence to suggest that these factors are causing members to reconsider making the Army a full-time career.

page 1627

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH DEVELOPMENT BANK

(Question No. 146.)

Senator SHERRINGTON:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. How many individual loans for livestock have been approved by the Development Bank?
  2. What is the total amount of such advances?
  3. What was the date of the first approved loan?
  4. What arc (a) the number of loans made, (b) the amount of advances, and (c) the amount outstanding on such loans in each State as at 30th June, 1963?
Senator HENTY:
LP

– The Treasurer has furnished the following information which has been provided by the managing director of the Commonwealth Banking Corporation: -

  1. In the majority of cases where the Commonwealth Development Bank has lent for the purchase of livestock, the amount requested for this purpose is only part of the total amount of a loan for several developmental purposes. Thus it is not possible for the bank to state how many individual loans for livestock have been approved.
  2. See 1 above. The total amount approved specifically for the purchase of livestock in the period from 14th January,1960, to 18th September, 1963, was £3,858,000.
  3. The first loan for the purchase of livestock approved by the Development Bank in Sydney was on 9th February, I960. Information in respect of other branches is not readily available.
  4. For the reason explained in 1 above, information is not available in respect of the numbers of loans approved for the purchase of livestock or of advances actually made for this purpose and balances outstanding. However the following figures can be given in. respect of the net amounts approved in each State for livestock loans during the period 14th January, 1960, to 30th June, 1963:-

page 1627

QUESTION

OVERSEAS BORROWINGS

(Question No. 153.)

Senator COHEN:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister rep resenting the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. Did the Treasurer say in a press interview on his return from overseas on Sunday. 13th October, that Australia might have to took to Europe for future overseas loans?
  2. Will the Treasurer indicate what are the prospects of raising future loan moneys in Europe, and what European countries are currently offering encouragement to Australia in this regard?
Senator HENTY:
LP

– The Treasurer has furnished the following reply: -

  1. On 13th October I said that Australia would adopt a “ wait and see “ approach to the New York market until it was clear what the effects of the proposed interest equalization tax would be. However, as approximately onehalf of the subscriptions to Australian loans in New York since 1958-59 have come from Europe and other sources outside the United States, I commented that it might be possible to arrange continued support for Australian loans from European sources.
  2. The prospects for raising loans in any market depend upon the state of that market at the time and the number of borrowers wishing to approach it. It is not usual for a borrowing country to disclose details of its expectations in relation to any individual market, as confidential discussions arc necessary with underwriters and government authorities before an issue can be made. However, it is well known to the authorities and financial institutions in the European countries concerned that Australia has adopted a general policy of financing some part of its government works programmes by borrowing overseas when reasonable terms and conditions are available.

page 1628

EXCISE TARIFF BILL (No. 2) 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Henty) read a first time.

Second Reading

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

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this tariff bill is to impose an excise duty at the rates specified in the schedule on canned peaches, pears and apricots, and certain mixtures thereof, for the purpose of financing an export development scheme for the canned fruit industry. The provision in the schedule of separate rates for the varying groupings of sizes of packs takes into account normal industry practices regarding the sizes of containers and weights of fruit content used in the canning of peaches, pears, apricots and mixtures thereof. I commend the bill to honorable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator Kennedy) adjourned.

page 1628

CANNED FRUIT EXCISE BILL 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Henty) read a first time.

Second Reading

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

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

I am presenting this bill to honorable senators as a complementary measure to the

Excise Tariff Bill introduced previously. The purpose of the Canned Fruit Excise Bill is to enable officers of the Department of Customs and Excise to exercise the necessary controls over the canned fruit industry with a view to collecting the excise duty due on canned fruit. The reasons for the duty have been outlined by my colleague, the Minister for National Development (Senator Sir William Spooner).

In drafting the Canned Fruit Excise Bill, recognition has been made of the type of industry involved insofar as its production and marketing methods are concerned. Honorable senators will note from clause 23 that canned fruit may be removed from canneries to approved storage points for subsequent sale on the home market. The removals may be made on a continuing written authority of a collector of customs. This provision takes account of the situation in the industry where agents operate on behalf of the producer in areas away from canneries. This means that the canner does not have to outlay the duty while goods are stored at these approved places. The bill also takes account of the principles of the industry scheme in that the incidence of the excise duty is applied only to canned fruit which is entered for use on the home market. If canned fruit is exported, it is exempted from the duty in terms of clause 26.

The basic documentary controls proposed are that canned fruit will be entered either for home consumption or exportation by use of those entry forms already in use in respect of other excisable goods, and that canners will submit to the Collector of Customs summarized returns of monthly operations as detailed in their normal business records. The bill further provides that a collector may, subject to certain conditions, refund duty in cases where canned fruit becomes unfit for human consumption, and that repayment of duty may be made to a person who exports canned fruit on which the duty has already been paid. In order to simplify drafting arrangements, certain sections of the Excise Act 1901- 1963 which apply to excisable goods and licensed premises generally have been incorporated in this bill. I commend the bill to honorable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator Kennedy) adjourned.

page 1629

UNWROUGHT COPPER

Tariff Board Report

Senator HENTY (Tasmania - Minister for

Customs and Excise). -I present a report by the Tariff Board on the following subject: -

Unwrought copper.

page 1629

COPPER BOUNTY BILL 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Henty) read a first time.

Second Reading

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

. -I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The Copper Bounty Act 1958-60 expires on 3 1st December, 1963. In its report dated 14th October, 1963, the Tariff Board, which has completed a further inquiry into the industry, has recommended that this act should be extended in its present form for a period of two years from 1 st January, 1 964, except that small producers should be paid, in future, bounty on up to 100 tons over two years instead of on 50 tons in any one year, as at present. These recommendations of the board have been accepted by the Government and the bill now before the Senate is designed to implement them. In fact, the board has made its recommendation for continuation of the existing rate of bounty as a holding action for the next two years. By that time, the position in regard to the potential new mine in Cobar, New South Wales, and its effect as a new major producer on domestic and export sales of the present mines, will be clearer and easier to assess.

The difficulties experienced by small producers, in that their production can vary greatly from year to year because of such factors as the necessity for developmental work to provide for future production, good or bad weather, and favorable or unfavorable areas, influenced the board to recommend that small producers should be paid bounty on up to 100 tons over the two-year period instead of on 50 tons in any one year, as at present. It is not possible to estimate precisely the cost of continuing the present bounty scheme for a further two years, but in the three years to 30th June, 1963 the annual bounty payments varied between £405,000 and £699,000.

The bill provides me with authority to delegate my powers and functions under the act. Administration of the increasing number of bounty acts in recent years has made a considerable increase in my personal work. It is considered neither desirable nor possible for me personally to make each and every decision required to be made in the course of administering the various bounties. In accordance with its terms of reference, the Tariff Board has limited its examination and recommendations to existing copper producers. It ‘is, however, proposed to extend the act in its present form, apart from the change in respect of small producers, and to refer the matter to the board for review within the next two years. I commend the bill to honorable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator O’Byrne) adjourned.

page 1629

CUSTOMS TARIFF VALIDATION BILL 1963

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Henty) read a first time.

Second Reading

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

– I move -

That the bill be now read a secondtime.

The bill now before the Senate provides for the validation until 30th June, 1964, of the collection of customs duties under the following customs tariff proposals: -

Customs Tariff Proposals Nos. 84 to 100.

Customs Tariff (Canada Preference) Proposals Nos. 10 and 11.

Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) Proposals Nos. 18 and 19.

The proposals which the Senate is asked to validate comprise the proposals which were moved in the Parliament earlier to-day, and those which have been moved since 14th August last. Honorable senators will appreciate that time will not permit these proposals to be debated before the close of the session, but they will be re-introduced early next year and an opportunity to debate them will be made available to honorable senators in the next Parliament. The bill therefore validates the collection of duties until 30th June, 1964. I commend the bill to honorable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator O’Byrne) adjourned.

page 1630

ADVANCE TO THE TREASURER 1962-63

Statement of Expenditure

In committee:

Motion (by Senator Henty) agreed to -

That the committee approves the statement for the year 1962-63 of Heads of Expenditure and the Amounts charged thereto pursuant to section 36a of the Audit Act 1901-1962.

Resolution reported; report adopted.

page 1630

WESTERN AUSTRALIA (NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT) AGREEMENT BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed (vide page 1611).

Senator WILLESEE:
Western Australia

– This bill is to grant moneys to further the Ord River project and the building of a new jetty at Broome. This is part of the development of the north which at long last has come into focus. These specific projects were advanced by the Western Australian Government after a comprehensive survey was made about 1951. The Western Australian Government made that survey of the north and in great particularity showed the projects that ought to be undertaken at an early date. Some of these have come to fruition. I have in mind the tarred road from Perth to Carnarvon. At that time the tarred portion went only to Geraldton, lt has now been taken the remaining 300 miles. Another was to build a deep-water port at Broome, the project that is now being undertaken. Other projects were the development of the Ord River and the construction of a jetty at Derby.

It is a pity it has taken so long to bring some of this about. I think this is due to a lack of drive. This Government has rejected a dynamic approach to the development of the north. The Minister for National Development (Senator Sir William Spooner), as he himself said, would rather look at specific projects and then make up his mind what projects should be undertaken. Unfortunately, so many projects have been suggested that, because of the Government’s timorous approach, many of them have gone without assistance. Among the propositions lo which this Government would hot listen iri 1951 were the Ord >.. . ‘/ 0 ‘.v a>

River experimental station and the building of a dam and the setting up of a township. We find the Government accepting this proposition some thirteen years later and it is heartening to see the Government now turning its attention to the north.

The great difference between the Government and the Australian Labour Party is in the approach to northern Australian development. The Government has rejected such things as special taxation concessions in the north. It has looked at this need for development in a piecemeal way whereas the Opposition has said, “ Here is an area which must be developed, not by normal means but by a dynamic approach and by putting all our effort into it “. We earmark part of the revenue for social service benefits, bounties to primary industry and other purposes. It is just as desirable, and far more urgent, that we earmark portion of this revenue for the development of this area.

Whenever a bill for the development of the northern part of Australia comes before the Parliament, I always have an uneasy feeling about the priority accorded to it. Much has been written about the development of the Ord River. In the words of the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Menzies) it has become the most exciting place in Australia but when you look at the tremendous effort that is being put into this project it is a shock to realize that the ultimate objective is 25 farms and that there are only about seven there now. When Senator Arnold was speaking about the irrigation development in the Tumut area, he spoke of 700 farms to be opened up. So we have to maintain our perspective and keep our feet on the ground. The Ord River has been in the news because of trenchant criticism of the economics of the proposal by an expert who visited the area.. I do not mind such criticism. One always gets the uneasy feeling when considering projects such as this that we might not have gone into it with our feet on the ground.

The Ord River is not the only river in the north of Western Australia which arouses excitement. Nobody could look at the Gascoyne River in flood, flowing majestically to the sea, without wondering what could be done to develop the area through which it passes if the waters could be harnessed. I do not wish to bc carping in my criticism of development in this area, but I think future Commonwealth Governments should realize that it is their duty and responsibility to spend some of the national income on the development of the area. This is the one tropical area in the world where man is not assailed by diseases which have held settlement back in other tropical regions and even have prevented men getting inland from the coast. Bills such as that before the Senate have not only an immediate value but they indicate that slowly we are encouraging people who were not interested in this development a few years ago to come round to this proposition.

It will not be long before we realize that this is an atea with special problems. We want the young engineers, the planners and agriculturalists to apply themselves to this development. Of course, the Commonwealth Government has to give the green light. We are taking a further step in the development of the Ord River. It is a place where we can expect disappointment. Unavoidably, crops are tested in what are virtually hothouse conditions, however much one tries to expose them to the rigours of normal farming conditions. We cannot expect the results produced in that way to be reproduced in large scale farming.

We shall have to overcome the problems of transport. A lot of courage, strength of mind and loyalty will be needed to achieve large scale development. Provision is being made for expenditure of up to £1,500,000 on the jetty at Broome. Any person who has lived in the north, as I did for so many years, can only say, “Thank God for small mercies “. If ever a town needed a new jetty, it is Broome. The provision of a deep water port is one of the major problems, particularly to Japanese buyers of our raw materials. In the export of iron ore and bauxite, one of the chief problems is to get material cheaply to the ship’s side. If we can provide at Broome a modern deep water port which will be able to withstand typhoons, it will be most welcome.

The Australian Labour Party welcomes the bill. We do not intend to oppose it or to propose amendments to it. I make these few passing remarks in the dying hours of the Parliament in the hope that, whatever the complexion of the new government, the development of the north” of

Western Australia will not be pushed into the background. We must face up to this tremendous challenge, appreciating that the steps we are taking to-day are not sufficient. We must turn the minds of all Australians towards the north and allocate a substantial share of the Commonwealth’s revenues for its development.

Senator SCOTT:
Western Australia

– 1 rise to support the measure. I am very pleased that my colleague from Western Australia, speaking on behalf of the Opposition, also supports the measure, which is to provide £3,500,000 - part to be repayable, the balance to be a gift - for the development of the northern section of Western Australia. In the last three years the Commonwealth has provided for this purpose an amount of £3,900,000, or an average of £1,300,000 a year. It is proposed to increase the annual provision to almost £2,100,000, and the total provision in the next three years to £6,250,000.

The north of Western Australia has received particular attention from this Government. Probably the time was not ripe previously, but no previous government approached the subject of developing this area. In the last ten years the Menzies Government has made a gift of over £900,000 for the construction of a new twoberth jetty at Darwin for the shipment of beef. It has provided £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 for the development of the Ord river scheme. It has provided finance for the construction of the Derby jetty. About £1,500,000 will be provided towards a deep water port at Broome. Half of that amount will be a gift to the Western Australian Government and the balance will be repayable over fifteen years.

A government is at last accepting its share of responsibility for the development of northern Australia. We are providing money for the development of ports, for beef roads and other roads, and for water conservation for irrigation purposes. I do not believe that the Government can do more than that. If we provide those things, it is up to private enterprise - companies from the south and companies from the north - to prove that it can develop the area. The State Government is throwing open for development about 6,000,000 acres, in six or -seven blocks, .The; diversion. .dam .at Bandicoot Bar on the Ord River has been constructed. Some farms have already been opened up; others will follow. It is up to the people to prove to us and to the Western Australian Government that the money that we have provided has been wisely spent.

The provision of a deep water port at Broome will enable meat exports to go direct to consumers from the south-west Kimberleys. I am pleased that Senator Willesee, who lived for many years of his younger life in the north of Western Australia, supports the Government’s proposals for further development of the area. He says that it is vital that we should go ahead with this development and I have no doubt that that is so. But governments can go only so far. It is then up to private enterprise to come in and do the rest. The Commonwealth and State Governments are doing a marvellous job in the north. I sincerely hope that private enterprise will prove to the taxpayers of the south that the expenditure of their money in the north is fully justified. I am sure that farmers and station owners will prove that it is justified.

Senator WADE:
Minister lor Health · Victoria · CP

– in reply - I am grateful once again for the unanimity displayed by both sides of the chamber over the measure, but I was surprised to hear Senator Willesee express the view that in 1950 the Labour Opposition suggested with some force that these undertakings should have been tackled before that point of time. I would have the honorable senator know that since Australia has been Australia any thinking person in this land has realized that the north has to be developed.

Senator Willesee:

– I did not say that. I said that the State Government had put up this proposal in documentary evidence in 1951.

Senator WADE:

– Having heard the honorable senator’s explanation I will transfer my comment from the Labour Party to the State Government. I understood that the honorable senator made the allegation that these proposals had been put to the Government and that it had turned a deaf ear to them. Now I am informed that it was not the Labour Party but the State Government that made the approach according to the honorable senator. I repeat that since Australia has. been Australia anyone who has stopped to think has realized that this vast continent, and particularly the northern areas of it, must be developed. That has been the point of view of this Government, which has always put first things first. I suppose that that remark could well start a debate on the subject of what are the first things needed in the development of Australia.

It matters not what one’s final conclusion might be after one had ended such a debate, it all boils down to a matter of economics. Any responsible government most, in the long run, justify on an economic basis the actions it takes. s everybody well knows, this Government, during the fourteen years it has been responsible for the development of Australia, has adopted a planned system of getting the best results in the shortest possible time from both our secondary and primary industries. It had to pursue a policy of that nature for Australia to become one of the largest trading nations, as it is at present.

Everybody knows also that in recent years this Government has used every man and every shilling it could use to develop our export markets That has been the objective of the Government in developing primary and secondary industries. For the simple reason that we have only limited resources the Government has had to divert its attention and energies into fields that could produce the quickest returns. I would remind Senator Willesee, who has had some criticism to offer, that if he wants a monument to what this Government has done in the development of the northern areas I can point to the Mount Isa railway.

Senator O’Byrne:

– The Government took fourteen years to take that action, and them it was only on the eve of an election.

Senator WADE:

– The Mount Isa railway project was commenced two elections ago. The people endorsed us in those elections and they will endorse us again. The Mount Isa railway was a project directed towards developing a primary industry. The beef roads scheme is another practical example of what the Government has done. The Government has been successful, too, in the brigalow scheme and in its oil search programme. When anybody suggests that it should have taken-

Senator O’Byrne:

– The roads are breaking up under heavy loads. The Government has wasted money. ‘

Senator WADE:

– I will not interrupt the honorable senator. Will any one suggest that the Government should have turned its back on the oil search project and switched to some other project? Honorable senators opposite can argue till doomstay but the simple fact remains that the Government has directed all its energy and money towards developing Australia as quickly as it can be developed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1633

VINYL RESIN BOUNTY BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed (vide page 1611).

Senator O’BYRNE:
Tasmania

– The bill before the Senate provides, for the payment of a bounty on the production of certain resins used, or sold for use, in Australia. These resins, as has been pointed out in the second-reading speech of the Minister for Customs and Excise (Senator Henty), are uncompounded vinyl chloride polymers and copolymers, including latex. The bill is designed to implement decisions made by the Tariff Board which are contained in a report of the board of 24th May, which was presented to the Senate on 14th August last.

The bill provides for a bounty of 4d. per lb. which will be paid on vinyl resins which are produced and sold for use in Australia, or used by a producer in the production of other goods. The bounty is subject to the usual provision that it will be reduced or eliminated when the profits of companies producing these resins exceed 10 per cent, before tax.

The story of the manufacture of these vinyl chloride polymers in Australia is interesting. This is a relatively new industry and it illustrates the importance of our tariff policy in building self-reliance and confidence in our economy and in encouraging secondary industries to grow up to a stage where they can become self-supporting.

The Tariff Board directed attention in its report to the fact that there was only one company - Imperial Chemical Industries of Australia and New Zealand Limited - operating during .the war. lt had ils factory at Botany in New South Wales.

It began production during the 1939-45 war, and in 1954 introduced new plant built with technical assistance from ils British principals. The capacity of this new plant has been progressively increased in recent years. Since the first report, and the assistance given to the industry, another company has entered the manufacturing field. B. F. Goodrich- C.S.R. Chemicals Proprietary Limited began production at Altona, Victoria, shortly after the board’s report of June, 1961. It is interesting to note that even though there are only two producers of vinyl chloride polymers and copolymers and compounded resins different techniques have been introduced. This demonstrates the benefit that can come to industry from science and the laboratory.

I think perhaps I should refer to the fact that the I.C.I. A.N.Z. organization follows what is known as the acetylene method to produce these resins. Vinyl chloride monomer is thereby polymerised to produce various resins. Chlorine and hydrogen, produced by the. electrolysis of brine, are combined and then reacted with acetylene gas, resulting from the action of water on calcium carbide, to produce vinyl chloride monomer. The other company, Goodrich-C.S.R.C. follows a different method of manufacture. It uses ethylene dichloride, which is purchased from the neighbouring plant of C.S.R.C.-Dow and which is thermally cracked to produce the same resins. This is of great interest because, evidently, the products are of equal quality yet are produced by entirely different methods.

It is of interest to know that more than 200 people are engaged in this local production. The resins are used in the manufacture of a wide range of goods, including electrical installations, motor vehicles, furniture, apparel, packages and floor coverings. It is also of interest to know that another by-product, which is an extension of this process, is used in the biscuit from which gramophone records are stamped. As we all know, that is a big and growing industry. The assistance of this industry to the extent of 4d. per lb. bounty, which is given with limitations, is instrumental in the establishment on a fairly competitive level of a most important secondary industry.

The Tariff Board made a searching inquiry into the background of the industry,’ the history of which is of great interest. In July, 1960, the price of granular resins for general purposes was 216. a lb.; in September, 1960, the price was 276.; in October, 1961, it was 26d.; and in May, 1962, it was 27d. That shows that the price has been stable, which is of great importance. It indicates also that there is a nice balance between our price and the cost of imported products from Japan, where there is greater productive capacity and lower production costs, lt appears from the price indexes that the amount of assistance given the industry is maintaining a balance. It is of interest to know also that the Tariff Board will keep its eye on this industry and examine it again before the expiration of the bounty period.

Both companies to which I referred are gradually increasing their production and, naturally, the demand for their products is growing. This bill is completely in accord with the Australian Labour Party’s policy, which is to assist Australian industries and to give greater security to our people, whether they are Australian-born or new arrivals. Our policy is to afford the opportunity of full employment, to establish a balance between our primary and secondary industries, and to build up industries which may become exporters. Those are the things to which we subscribe. For that reason, we support the measure.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1634

CANNED FRUITS EXPORT MARKETING BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed (vide page 1625).

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator McKellar). - There being no objection, that course will be followed.

Senator KENNELLY:
Victoria

.- I am amazed that in the dying minutes of this session we have to look at a bill which contains about fifteen pages and about 38 clauses. ( Still, I suppose one has to dp the best ong can in “the circumstances.

The Canned Fruits Export Marketing Bill provides for the repeal of other legislation on this subject which was first passed in 1926 after which year eight amending bills were introduced, the last of them in 1959. The canned fruits industry is a very important one. To-day, it is in some economic trouble. No doubt it will continue to be in economic trouble for a number of reasons. One reason is that there is no planned production. There is planned production in the sugar industry. But no matter how many people undertake the growing of fruit for canning, until production is planned, the industry will strike trouble. I believe that it strikes trouble now because Californian fruit is being sold on British markets. Therefore, we are losing some of our market in the United Kingdom. Another problem is presented by the high price of land which has been brought about by years of inflation. There is also the cost of production, both on the farm and in the canning factory.

This is one of the most beneficial industries for country centres because it keeps families in those centres. It gives a small number of employees a full year’s work. It gives their wives and other womenfolk three or four months work during the height of the season. It has built great towns in Victoria such as Shepparton, Kyabram and Ardmona. These are very flourishing districts. Over the years, State governments have helped the industry in Victoria. All the farms in that State are irrigated and there is very little chance of having trouble in a dry season unless the dry weather lasts for a whole year. Unfortunately, the industry is subject to pests. In the last two or three years I think that salt has caused a lot of damage in Victoria and a great loss of money by the growers.

Senator Hannaford:

– Floods had a similar effect in South Australia by raising the water tables.

Senator KENNELLY:

– I suppose so. I would not say that the industry was more extensive in Victoria than in New South Wales which has large fruit-growing districts around Leeton and other places. I know that there are also such areas in South Australia. Then there are the tropical fruits which are canned in Queensland. When one examines this legislation one marvels at it. We have not had much time to examine it. The Government has provided that the Australian Canned Fruits Board shall be able to draw funds from the Reserve Bank of Australia if necessary. The Canned Fruits Export Marketing Bill provides that the board shall open and maintain an account with an approved bank. The definition of “ approved bank “ is as follows: - “ approved bank “ means the Reserve Bank of Australia or another bank approved by the Treasurer . . .

I sincerely hope that the Minister will give an undertaking, as he has in respect of previous bills over the years, that the “ approved bank “ will be the people’s bank - the Commonwealth Bank - as long as a branch of the bank is convenient to a cannery. That request . should not be hard to meet.

The Canned Fruits Export Marketing Bill provides for a new board to be set up. In this industry there is a very large component of labour which is engaged in picking the fruit and in canning it. Apparently, the Government has never thought of putting an employees’ representative on this board. Members of the Government should not imagine that they live in the year 1900. To-day, the working people deserve recognition. I cannot remember that there has ever been a hold-up in this industry, caused by a strike. In reconstituting the board the Government should have appointed at least one member as an employee’s representative. An employee’s representative has been appointed to other boards such as the Australian Dairy Produce Board. I think that a board connected with the wool industry had an employee’s representative. I believe that the appointment to a board of representatives both of employers and employees tends to result in better personal relationships in the industry. As a result of discussion, there is less chance of friction in the industry.

It is not the Opposition’s intention to move an amendment to the bill. In fact, we support the bill. However, this debate gives us an opportunity to examine this entire legislation in the few minutes at our disposal. Let us see who is to appoint the chairman of the Canned Fruits Board. It is no wonder that the Government. finds itself in trouble with people outside the Parliament. It changes its mind continually.

Senator Henty:

– We do not.

Senator KENNELLY:

– You do. I think it was the Dairy Produce Export Control Bill which was passed yesterday which provided that a Minister should appoint a chairman to a board. Under the Canned Fruits Export Marketing Bill there is a provision with which I agree that members of the board shall appoint the chairman. Why does the Government change its mind so much? One wonders at this. Under clause 9 sub-clause (1.) of the bill the board shall appoint a member, to be deputy chairman of the board. In his second-reading speech on the Dairy Produce Export Control Bill, the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr. Adermann) indicated that he proposed to appoint Mr. J. P. Norton, O.B.E., as deputy chairman of the Australian Dairy Produce Board. The Government does one thing on one day and something else on the next day.

Senator Hannaford:

– Do not forget that the Government is paying a subsidy of approximately £14,000,0000 to the dairy industry.

Senator KENNELLY:

– I will come to that. The honorable senator is saying, in effect, that nobody on the board is competent.

Senator Hannaford:

– I am not saying that.

Senator KENNELLY:

– Well, what is the honorable senator saying? One thing that will happen after the passing of this legislation will be a rise in the price of canned fruit in Australia.” However, I shall deal” with that later. Another innovation in the bill is contained in clause 11 (1.), which provides -

A member, other than the additional member, may appoint a person approved by the Minister to bc his deputy.

The Australian Canned Fruits Board is to consist of a member to represent the Commonwealth, three members elected in the prescribed manner to represent the cooperative canneries, three members elected in the prescribed manner to represent canneries other than co-operative canneries, one member elected in the ‘ prescribed’ manner to, represent canneries engaged in the production of canned pineapples or canned pineapple juice, and three members appointed by the Minister on the nomination of the Australian Canning Fruitgrowers Association to represent growers. Rather than providing that one of the elected members shall be able to recommend to the Minister who should act as his deputy, would it not have been better to provide that four members should be elected to represent each group, that three of them should be present, and that in the event of one of them not being able to sit the fourth person should act as his deputy?

What right have I, if I am elected by the growers or the canners, to go to the Minister and say: “I regret that for three months I shall not be able to attend board meetings. 1 am going overseas. Will you elect Jim Brown? “ If the Minister says “ Yes “, Jim Brown is duly elected. The bill does not even provide that Jim Brown must be a member of the particular group which the member in question represents. To rush this legislation through in the dying hours of the Parliament without directing attention to such details does not reflect great credit on the Government.

The bill provides also for the appointment of an executive committee of the board. Nobody will quarrel with that, except that there is no provision for definite meeting times. Apparently this will be a Kathleen Mavourneen committee which may meet now or may never meet. It is interesting to note the provisions of the bill in relation to casting votes. Clause 10 (7.) provides, in regard to meetings of the board

A question arising at a meeting of the Board shall be determined by a majority of votes of the members present and voting.

Sub-clause (8.) provides -

The member presiding at a meeting of the Board has a deliberative vote and, in the event of an equality of votes, also has a casting vole.

But, in relation to meetings of the executive committee, clause 13 provides that where there is an equality of votes the question shall be deemed to have been decided in the negative. Why should there be this difference? If it is good enough for the chairman of the boardto have a casting vote I do not subscribe to that idea why is not the chairman of the executive committee given a casting vote?

Clause 13 (6.) (d) provides, in relation to the executive committee, that the member presiding shall have a deliberative vote only.

The bill provides that the Australian Canned Fruits Board may accept control of any canned fruits placed under its control for export from Australia. 1 am sure that such a proposal must cause the Minister for Civil Aviation (Senator Paltridge), who is now sitting at the table, to bristle. The bill further provides that the board shall not trade in canned fruits. Does that mean that it is not to trade in canned fruits for home consumption? No doubt the Minister will enlighten us on that point later. Claim 13 provides - (I.) For the purpose of enabling the Board effectively to control the export, and the sale and distribution after export, of canned fruits, the regulations may prohibit the export from Australia of canned fruits by a person other than the Board unless -

  1. the person holds a licence to export canned fruits issued, on the recommendation of the Board, bythe Minister or by a person authorized by the Minister;
  2. the Board has issued a permit to the person to export the canned fruits and any conditions contained in the permit are complied with; and
  3. the export is in accordance with such conditions and restrictions as are prescribed.

I do not think that the Minister for National Development (Senator Sir William Spooner) has had any more time than I have had to consider the bill, but perhaps he may be able to explain that provision.

The bill provides for the making of contracts for the carriage of canned fruits by sea to places beyond Australia. The relevant provision is to be found in clause 24. As honorable senators know, Australian primary producers are facing terrific competition on overseas markets. No doubt the competition will become stronger because of the European Common Market arrangements. The door to markets in European countries may be closed to us. The greatest competition for our canned fruits comes from the Californian canned fruits. Australia does not import a great deal of canned fruit. From memory, imports are valued at about £150,000 a year. In view of the difficult position of the Australian canned fruits industry, however, I wonder whether it is wise to allow even that volume of imports to come in. I fail to see the wisdom in trying to keep the Australian canned fruits industry and other primary industries on their feet if we continue to allow countries with lower costs of production to send their products to Australia. Of course, in the case of canned fruits which come from California the cost of production probably would not be lower than that of Australia.

Great Britain is not a member of the European Economic Community at the moment, but we do not know for how long she will remain outside it. As I have said, our canned fruits industry may encounter even greater difficulties than it is experiencing at present, because of the European Common Market arrangements. The conference line has a habit of increasing freight charges every now and then. Some day we shall have our own ships, but I recognize that the position is not a simple one because problems such as back-loading enter into it.

I am most concerned about clause 27, which provides - (1.) The Board shall establish a fund under the name of the Canned Fruits Excise Fund.

I think that the industry should be assisted, but why should the people who eat canned fruits have to meet all the costs of the assistance? The Minister, in his secondreading speech, referred to many primary products in respect of which subsidies and bounties are paid. For instance, he referred to butter. As we know, the dairy industry is subsidized to the extent of £13,500,000 a year. I think that the production of apples and pears, to which the Minister referred also, is the subject of a bounty, but if I am wrong in this respect I hope he will tell me so. I believe that the imposition of excise duty on canned fruits will result in an increase of 2d. or 3d. in the price of each tin of canned fruit that is sold. We should not make the mistake that the Victorian Government has made in the field of transport. Many people in the State are worried because fewer passengers are travelling on trams and trains. The reason, of course, is that fares are being increased all the time. I admit that the overall financial position of the transport authority has improved a little, but the result of each increase of fares is that fewer people travel by trams and trains.

I shall not ask the Minister at this time to provide, me. with the information I seek, but perhaps, his advisers may be able to ascertain it and let me have it in writing. I should like to know the amount that it would cost the Consolidated Revenue Fund if a bounty were to be provided for the canned fruits industry. After all, it is a most important industry in country areas. We are worried about the congestion in the cities of Australia, and we all would like to see more decentralization of industry. The payment of a bounty in this respect would assist in decentralization I have visited areas of Victoria where canning fruits are grown and I know the industry fairly well.

Why should not all the people of Australia help to support this industry instead of only those who eat canned fruits? The Government will not encourage the consumption of canned fruits by means of this bill.

Clause 29 provides in sub-clause (1.) -

The Board shall open and maintain an account or accounts with an approved bank or approved banks and shall maintain at all times at least one such account.

I hope that the account will be maintained with the Commonwealth Bank. This Government does some really remarkable things. Approximately a quarter of an hour ago the Senate discussed a bill relating to investments by the Superannuation Fund. The Government has allowed the fund to invest moneys in other than government securities. I shall be fair to the Government and admit that the securities in which the fund may invest are pretty well hemmed in, but of course even the companies concerned could get into difficulties. In clause 30 of this bill, however, the Government has provided that -

Moneys of the Board not immediately required for the purposes of the Board may be invested on fixed deposit with an approved bank or in securities of or guaranteed by the Commonwealth or a State.

Is there any reason why the board should be exempt from the payment of income tax when persons in receipt of superannuation are forced to pay tax? Clause 34 (1.) of the bill states -

Subject to this section, the Board is subject to taxation (other than taxes on income)…..

Of course, Trans-Australia Airlines and other government undertakings must pay taxes. I do not disagree with that so much; they are entitled to be as efficient and to earn money as is any organization.

Senator Wright:

– Are we dealing with the canned fruits legislation?

Senator KENNELLY:

– Yes. The Australian Canned Fruits Board will not pay income tax. What does the Government think it is doing? I know that we are to have an election on 30th November. The Government does one thing and within five minutes it has changed its mind and decided to do something else. I cannot see that the Government has a case for exempting the board from certain taxes but not exempting other official bodies. The Government seems to change its mind as often as a nice lady changes her frock, and that is pretty often. It is hard to keep up with the Government.

This legislation is important because it will help to keep people out of the cities. I trust that whoever is in a position to look into this legislation next year will not be satisfied to let the legislation stand as it is. If we can do anything to keep industries in country towns we are doing something worth while. In my opinion too much is said about decentralization and too little is done. The problem is purely an economic one. If an industry can establish itself in a country town without suffering a hardship by reason of its remoteness from ports, the industry will stay there and other industries will be encouraged to establish themselves in country towns. But you cannot handicap an industry in a country town by making its costs of production higher than those of an industry in a metropolitan area.

The other bills that are before us are consequential on the Canned Fruits Export Marketing Bill and the Opposition does not raise any objection to them. Quite candidly I do not think anybody has had an opportunity to look at them. However, I take it that they are complementary to the main bill and therefore we support them.

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:
Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for National Development · New South Wales · LP

[10.4]. - in reply - The Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Senator Kennelly) concluded his remarks by saying that the Opposition would support the bill. For that I thank him. But for his critical remarks earlier in his speech I am not so thankful. I point out that this is an important bill which has been introduced late on the last day of the sittings. But two other things must bc remembered. First the bill is the culmination of a great deal of negotiation and work. That negotiation has been spread over very many months. The plan to which the bill gives effect is the product of the wish of the industry itself. This is not a bill the provisions of which have been worked out by the Government. Maybe the Government has taken a benevolent interest in it and has lent a helping hand, but the whole scheme of this bill, down to the details of the voting rights of members of the board, has been worked out by the industry itself. The industry is able to say: “This is our scheme. We aim to make this industry self-supporting and to do within our own ranks the things that should be done to make this industry more prosperous than it was before.” The industry has brought its proposal to the Government and the Government has agreed to give it a helping hand.

This is not a set of circumstances which wc should examine in detail. These people are running one of the big industries of Australia. This is the way they want to run this industry themselves, and we say that we will help them to do so. There is another reason why it is necessary to bring the bill in so late in the session. The industry wants it to operate for this fruit season, and the fruit season begins from about the middle of December onwards.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1638

CANNED FRUITS EXPORT CHARGES BILL 1963

Second Reading

Consideration resumed (vide page 1626).

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without requests or debate.

page 1638

EXCISE TARIFF BILL 1963

Second Reading

Consideration resumed (vide page 1628).

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without requests or debate. ‘ ‘ ‘

page 1639

CANNED FRUIT EXCISE BILL 1963

Second Reading

Consideration resumed (vide page 1628).

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1639

COPPER BOUNTY BILL 1963

Second Reading

Debate resumed (vide page 1629).

Senator O’BYRNE:
Tasmania

.- The bill before the Senate seeks to amend the Copper Bounty Act 1958-1960 which expires on 31st December, 1963. The Tariff Board has now completed an investigation of the industry and in its report has recommended that the act should be extended in its present form for a further period of two years from 1st January, 1964. It has also recommended that in future small producers should be paid bounty on up to 100 tons over two years instead pf on 50 tons in any one year as at present.

The act now provides for payment of a bounty in respect of refined copper produced from copper ore or copper concentrates smelted at smelting works registered for purposes of the act and sold for use in New South Wales. There has been quite an alteration in the trend of the disposal of copper subject to bounty. As all honorable senators know, the Mount Isa mining company has found some very rich deposits of copper. This organization, and others, have found that the amount of copper that they are smelting has fallen.

Reference is made in the Minister’s second-reading speech to the Tariff Board’s recommendation for continuation of the existing rate of bounty which is, in effect, a holding action for the next two years. The Minister went on -

By that time, the position in regard to the potential new mine at Cobar, New South Wales, and its effect as a new major producer on domestic and export sales .of the present mines will be clearer and easier to assess.

This means that an important section of the copper refining industry, which has been carried on by the Electrolytic Refining and Smelting Company of Australia Proprietary Limited has its main interest in the success Of Cobar Mines Proprietary Limited. It, is hoped that by 1965 the company will have an output of 40,000 tons of concentrates and by 1966, if plans materialize, an output of 80,000 tons. It is of interest to note that in the three years to 30th June, 1963, the annual bounty payments on copper varied between £405,000 and £699,000. Therefore, this is a substantial measure, involving the expenditure of a considerable amount of Commonwealth money. At present the rate of bounty is £35 a ton of refined copper, reducing by £1 for each £1 by which the determined price exceeds £290 a ton. There is a proviso that where the annual net profit’ of a producer exceeds 10 per cent, the bounty is reduced by the amount of the excess except where the quantity of refined copper obtained is less than the prescribed quantity.

Copper production is of great importance to the State of Tasmania, which I have the honour to represent. I am very pleased indeed that this bounty will assist in the operations of the Mount Lyell Mining and Railway Company Limited. There have been great improvements in the operation and administration of the company and a higher rate of efficiency has been achieved. The company has reduced trucking costs a ton by 39 per cent., and the quantity of material moved a man-shift has increased from 34.3 tons in. 1959 to 36.4 tons in 1962. The company’s recovery of copper from milling and treatment has increased by about 720 tons a year, representing an increase in net revenue of £140,000 a year. The company has consolidated its activities. It recently ceased its railway operations and is now relying on road transport for haulage to and from Strahan, the port on the west coast. Queenstown on the west coast of Tasmania is almost entirely dependent on the activities of the Mount Lyell mine. The saving in costs of road haulage, amounting to about £120,000 per annum, will increase the general prosperity of the mine.

The matter of the sale of copper within Australia should be given very close attention, because there is a tendency for monopoly to build up in this industry, as in other industries. It operates in Tasmania, in Queensland at Mount Isa and Mount Morgan, and in New South Wales at Cobar. It is an important factor in decentralization and many family units and whole townships rely on the continuation of the activities of mines in these areas. It would be a great pity to see a repetition of what happened in respect of the Peko mine in the Northern Territory, practically the whole output of which is being exported. The copper industry is a most important secondary industry, not only in refining and smelting but also in the manufacture of copper wire and other wire products. A close watch should be kept on the industry to ensure that it is kept at the most economic and yet the most expansive level.

The Minister mentioned that the act is being extended in its present form, but the matter will be referred to the Tariff Board for review again within the next two years. The copper industry is winning great wealth from the ground. The Mount Lyell mining company, in particular, is operating on the lowest grade ore that is being mined almost anywhere in the world, but it is still producing very high quality copper and is rendering fine service to Tasmania.

The Minister has found it necessary to make provision in this bill for the delegation of powers and functions. He said that there has been a considerable increase in his work on departmental matters concerning bounties, and he finds it necessary to -delegate some of the administrative authority. The bill makes provision for the Comptroller-General of Customs to make some of the final decisions and to accept responsibilities that previously resided exclusively in the Minister. Because the bill helps to maintain the very important copper mining industry which, up to the present, has been responsible for the employment of many Australians and the maintenance of the welfare of many Australian families associated with the industry, the Opposition supports the measure and will give it a speedy passage.

Senator SCOTT:
Western Australia

– I am pleased to hear Senator O’Byrne say, on behalf of the Opposition, that the Labour Party has decided to support this measure. I believe that it is a very important one and is in the interests of the Australian copper mining industry. The industry has continued to expand over a number of years -to such an extent that Australia now is a net exporter of copper, whereas a few years ago it was an importer of copper. The Tariff Board has had the problems of this industry before it on two or three occasions. It has endeavoured to bring before the Government recommendations which will have the effect of getting some of the copper that is produced in Australia refined in Australia. Unfortunately, copper mining companies which have been established recently - when I say “ recently “ I mean over the last five or six years - despite the fact that a copper bounty operates in Australia in conjunction with a tariff on the importation of copper, have been able to obtain higher prices for copper concentrate overseas than they can obtain in Australia. I refer in particular to a company that Senator O’Byrne mentioned, Peko (Tennant Creek) Gold Mines (N.L.) in central Australia, which a couple of years ago contracted to sell the whole of its production outside Australia. We find also that in Western Australia Ravensthorpe Copper Mines (N.L.) entered into an agreement with overseas producers to export, under certain conditions, the whole of its production in the form of concentrates, notwithstanding that the Electrolytic Refining and Smelling Company of Australia Proprietary Limited at Port Kembla was short of supplies, and notwithstanding that because of its shortage of supplies it had problems in regard to labour. It had to put mcn off.

I have no doubt that the Tariff Board has taken these things into consideration in its recommendation to the Government. I would have thought that in relation to the ensuing two years it would have made the recommendation that whilst we arc waiting for the production of copper from Cobar to come forward the refining industry at Port Kembla should be supplied. However, the board has no doubt gone into the matter and has made a recommendation similar to that which it made some two years ago. There is going to be a stayput period for a further two years until the Cobar mine in New South Wales comes into production.

I notice that the Government is paying by way of bounty an amount varying between £405,000 and £699,000 per annum. It is intended that this amount shall continue to be paid for the next two years during the stayput period when we arc waiting for the production of- the Cobar, mine.

It is interesting also to note from the secondreading speech of the Minister that an alteration has-been recommended by the board in the payment of bounties to small producers. In future they arc to be paid bounty on up to 100 tons over a two-year period instead of on 50 tons in any one year as at present. 1 should like the Minister to explain the difference between paying a bounty on up to 100 tons over a two-year period and paying it on 50 tons in any one-year period. J would bc interested to know what benefit this will be to the small producer. The Government has always been anxious to look after the small producer, or the gouger, and the Tariff Board would not have made this recommendation to the Government without having some reason for it.

I am pleased that the Opposition is not opposing the bill. 1 have much pleasure in supporting it.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– I address myself very briefly to this measure lo record my appreciation of the fact that the bounty is to be extended for two years. I direct attention to the copper-producing mine at Mount Lyell, in Tasmania, and to the fact that the Tariff Board in its report - upon which the bill is based - commended the company very strongly for the efficiency of its activities. It might interest the Senate if I directed attention to the fact that the recovery of copper from that mine is .7 per cent, compared with the recovery from the much richer mine at Mount lsa of 3 per cent. Making a comparison in terms of ore produced, at Mount Isa about 2,000,000 tons of ore is extracted in a year, giving a yield of 52,000 tons of copper. The Mount Lyell company also extracts about 2,000,000 tons of ore, but the yield is only about one-quarter of the Mount Isa yield, being some 13,000 tons. Yet the Mount Lyell company is viable on the market.

Senator Hannaford:

– And it made a good profit last year.

Sector McKENNA.- That is an indication of the extraordinary efficiency of the mine, to which attention was particularly directed by the Tariff Board. The company faces a great difficulty in that it has to remove an overburden of 1,500,000 tons before it can get at 1,000,000 tons of ore. Its success is a tribute not only to the management, under Mr. Murray, but also to the excellent industrial relations that exist. In this isolated area, with difficulties of climate and almost continuous rain, the management and the labour force work together so well that the resultant efficiency gives a remarkable yield from this very low-grade ore. Within the last week the various unions have come together with the management and reached an agreement covering all the unions involved. This is a trouble-free centre, and it is a very good example of the industrial relations that we would like to see in all parts of Australia.

The company, of course, is forced into every expedient to economize so that it can remain in a position to treat this very lowgrade ore. lt is a matter of great regret not only to Tasmanians but also to many other people throughout Australia who enjoyed the run in the Mount Lyell railway from Queenstown to Strahan, the Abt railway, which was built to take the British product down to the port of Strahan and which was used by tourists from all over Australia, that the company had to close that railway down. In doing so it saved £120,000 a year. It was unfortunate that the company was forced into that economy, lt abandoned the railway with very great reluctance, lt was a source of great regret to Tasmanians that one of their great scenic tours is now no longer generally available.

This bounty is based on copper sold in Australia. The Copper Producers Association, the Mount Lyell company and the Mount Morgan campany, “put to the Tariff Board that it should bc on copper produced in Australia. Some years ago the Mount Lyell company produced all the copper sold in Australia, but about four years ago, when Mount Isa came into the picture, the production at Mount lsa was 40,000 tons. To-day it is running at about 53,000 tons a year, and it is estimated that in 1966-67 it will be about 100,000 tons. That is an excellent result. It is estimated that by 1965 total production in Ausralia will be about 130,000 tons. Only half of that can be used in Australia. The other half will bc exported. Accordingly there will be no bounty on at least half of the total production, since the bounty ls based on copper sold in Australia. I hope that in the further consideration of the request from the producers of copper in Australia regard will be paid to the value of the industry, particularly from an export viewpoint, and that the bounty will be based not merely on copper sold in Australia, which represents only one-half of the potential for the next few years, but upon all copper produced in Australia. The Senate will appreciate that the copper mining industry in Queensland is in an isolated area. It is the sole support of a population of about 6,000 people. The mine is working on the finest of margins and exhibiting the greatest economy and efficiency in its production. We in Tasmania, in particular, would like to see that industry given every encouragement. In the years that lie ahead it will need every encouragement, which can be given at the instance of the Commonwealth Government by a bounty upon copper produced in Australia, rather than upon copper sold in Australia.

There are two aspects: A community like the one at Queenstown will be kept going, and, further, copper will be won for export, thus adding to the balance of payments position of Australia. That is quite important from the viewpoint of every level of our economy. I hope that in the further consideration of this matter the Minister will use his influence, if it is within his sphere to exert any influence at that time, in favour of a bounty based upon copper produced in Australia and not, as at present, on copper sold in Australia.

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

– in reply. - I should Mike to make one or two comments on matters raised by honorable senators. I refer, first, to the small producers, a matter which was raised by Senator Scott. Because of the difficulties of weather sometimes experienced by the small producers, and because in working their little mines they have sometimes to remove a great deal of overburden to get their lodes, they find sometimes that they are unable to produce 50 tons of copper in one year. If their production for one year was 40 tons, and for the next year 60 tons, they would have a total of 100 tons in two years, only 90 tons of which would be eligible for bounty. Under the provisions of this bill, they will be able to produce 40 tons in one year and 60 tons in the next year and receive a bounty on the 100 tons. This provison has been introduced at the request of the small producers. The Government has accepted the recommendation of the Tariff Board that the gougers, as they are called, should be helped.

There has been some comment on the fact that one mine, Peko (Tennant Creek), Gold Mines (N.L.), exports its copper. There were two mines that did this, but - now there is only one. I have been to the Peko mine, where I heard the complaint that the only, place where the mine could sell its product was at the nearest smelter. The price paid by the smelter company did not satisfy the managers of the mine. They were then presented with the opportunity to get an increased price for their product by selling it directly overseas. Naturally, they accepted that price and are now selling directly to Japan. This was a blow to the smelters because they had spent quite a lot of money to install equipment at Port Kembla. Apparently that was a case in which the mine was unable to obtain a reasonable price agreement so it took the opportunity to get a better price overseas.

The bounty proposed in this bill is of great interest. It will not only have economic effects but also will be of social benefit to areas such as Mount Morgan and Mount Lyell. I agree with what Senator McKenna said about the efficiency of the Mount Lyell company at Queenstown. Over the years the copper bounty has played a great part in keeping this mine in existence. In an isolated community such as this, where some 7,000 or 8,000 souls are congregated about the mine, continuity of production at the mine is a most important factor in the life of the community. They are a wonderful people. They work together very well indeed and it is this great understanding and co-operation between the management and the people, who have a love for the community, that enable the mine to carry on without labour troubles. All the people concerned understand that the mine is working on ore of a very low copper content. In order to continue, the mine must operate with the greatest efficiency. The management and workers realize that in carrying out this efficient work which is of great benefit to their area.

You must’ never say lo a west coaster anything critical of the west coast. No matter where a former west coaster now lives, he remembers that community and will not stand anything said to its detriment.

Senator Vincent:

– Did you say “ wet coast “?

Senator HENTY:

– It is a wet coast. This community is a great community on its own. I appreciate what Senator McKenna has said about copper produced in Australia. The Tariff Board has recommended that the bounty be paid on copper used in Australia because of the average price scheme which is designed to assist users of copper in Australia. Talking off the cuff, I do not know how a bounty on exports of copper would meet the conditions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. It is something which could be examined.

I am glad that the Tariff Board has recommended the extension of the bounty for another two years. It is most necessary for the areas I have mentioned. The position will again be examined at the end of the two-year period.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1643

CUSTOMS TARIFF VALIDATION BILL 1963

Second Reading

Consideration resumed (vide page 1629).

Senator O’BYRNE:
Tasmania

.- The bill provides for the validation of a number of Customs tariff proposals, some of which have been introduced into the Senate to-day, and those that have been introduced since 1 4th August last. It is pleasing, although perhaps a rare thing, to hear a Minister state that he appreciates that time will not permit these proposals to be debated before the close of the session, but that they will be re-introduced early next year. An opportunity to debate them will be made available to honorable senators in the next Parliament. We can guarantee that will be done. Many other measures also will come up for review in the new year, as. the Minister foi Customs and Excise (Senator Henty) has promised in relation to the Broadcasting and Television Bill. However, the legislation now before us is a machinery measure and has the approval of honorable senators on this side of the chamber.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without requests or debate.

page 1643

QUESTION

SHIPPING FREIGHTS

(Question No. 121.)

Senator O’BYRNE:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice -

  1. In view of the announcement in the press that freight rates on cargoes between Australia and the United States of America are to rise by 10 per cent, but that similar rates will not apply lo cargoes from New Zealand lo the United States, will the Minister advise the Senate why Australia has been singled out for this treatment?
  2. In view of the critical point being reached in the volume of beef being shipped to the United’ Slates and the possibility of a breakdown in this trade, will the Minister have a report prepared for the Senate on this subject so vital to the beet producing section of the Australian primary producing industry?
Senator WADE:
CP

– The Minister for Primary Industry has supplied the following answers: -

  1. The recent decision to increase the shipping freight rates on cargoes from Australia to North America was taken unilaterally by shipowners. I am given to understand that the New Zealand Meat Board has a contract with the shipping lines concerned which fixes the freight rale for meat shipments until September, 1964. Discussions are at present proceeding between the Australian Meat Board and shipping companies on the proposed freight increase on Australian meat shipments to North America.
  2. Substantial Australian beef shipments have been made to the United States over the last five years and at the present time exports to that country are at very high levels. However, prices received in that market for Australian boneless cow beef over the last eighteen months have shown little variation on the current price of 34.4 cents per lb. ci.f. New York. The Government is fully aware of the sensitive nature of the American market lo meat imports and of the need to ensure that this price stability which has obtained over the last eighteen months is maintained and to this end it has encouraged Australian producer representatives to co-operate with producer representatives in America to work together on any problems affecting the market. It has also encouraged the Australian Meat Board to take steps tj ir.su re that everything is done to preserve the American market for Australian beef exports.

page 1644

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

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

That leave of absence be granted to every member of the Senate from the termination of the sitting this day to the day on winch the Senate next meets.

page 1644

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion (by Senator Sir William Spooner) agreed to -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn till a day and hour to be fixed by the President, which time of meeting shall be notified to each senator by telegram or letter.

page 1644

VALEDICTORY

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sir Alister McMullin). - Honorable senators, I should like to draw your attention to the fact that Mr. Dale, Principal Parliamentary Reporter, will retire from the service of the Parliament on 5th February, 1964. I may be a little premature in making this reference to Mr. Dale - but I do it in a spirit of goodwill towards him - because there may even be a meeting of the Parliament before Mr. Dale does retire. Should that not happen I think it would be unfortunate to have let this occasion pass without making some reference to the work that Mr. Dale has done. Mr. Dale belongs to a generation that is past. He belongs to a generation that served the Commonwealth Parliament in Melbourne and later at Canberra. He has been in the Commonwealth Public Service for approximately 45 years, far 36 of which he has been with “ Hansard “. I think you will all agree with me that Mr. Dale has lived up to the high standards of “ Hansard “. I do not want to say very much more than that about Mr. Dale on this occasion, because there may be another opportunity to do so. At the same time, I should like to pay my tribute to the work that “ Hansard “ has done during the years he has been associated with it.

I should like to mention also the work of the officers of the Senate. As honorable senators know, we have had a very busy time this year. Mr. Bullock, the Second Clerk-assistant, has spent a considerable part of this year assisting me in the preparation of a report on the proposal for a new

Parliament House, which I hoped would have been presented during this session. However, it will now keep and will be presented at an appropriate time next yearMr. Bullock has also been abroad attending a conference of the Inter-Parliamentary Union and has done splendid work in connexion with that conference.

Mr. Bullock’s absence has meant that much more work has fallen on Mr. Loof and Mr. Odgers. A considerable amount of work has been involved in connexion with the report of the Select Committee on the Encouragement of Australian Productions for Television, and this has meant that all the officers of the Senate and their staff have been extremely busy over the last six months. To their very great credit, they have worked as a solid team. Although they have been quite over-loaded with work, they have functioned in the way that we all would ,.like them to function, and we have known always that they would do their work as efficiently as ever. There is no doubt that in recent months a very considerable strain has been put on the officers and their staff as a whole, and I give them full recognition and compliment them on their splendid efforts.

I direct the attention of honorable senators also to the work that has been going on in connexion with the parliamentary Library, which comes under my direction as chairman of the Library Committee. Naturally, I take a considerable interest in this work. I am sure that you all see considerable and steady improvement in the facilities of the Library: With the passage of a year or so, we shall have a very complete reference section there. That is most desirable and most necessary for the use of senators and members of the other place. The work that has been done in the Library this year represents a great step forward.

We have greatly appreciated the work of the attendants and others associated with this chamber. They have been at all times willing and anxious, to serve and their efforts have made the work of the Senate very much easier. We remember also the work of the other people in Parliament House associated with the Parliamentary Refreshment Rooms and the boiler room, the cleaners and all others who work in this building. They perform a tremendous task that wc do not always see at first hand. Nevertheless, it goes on, and thereby the entire establishment is enabled to function effectively. When one looks at the whole establishment calmly and notes the number of people who enter this building and whose requirements are attended to each day, one realizes the magnitude of the work that is done here. We think with gratitude of the efforts of all those people unseen in the Library, the Joint House Department and elsewhere. I see at first hand the results of their work and realize the magnitude of their task. Considerable strain is put on all these people, but they respond well. We have come through this year without the slightest suggestion of a break-down anywhere.

I pay tribute to the Chairman of Committees and the panel of Temporary Chairmen. They have been a great help to me this year and have made my task very much easier. Sometimes, outside activities cause mc to bc absent from the chamber-, and the Chairman of Committees and the members of the panel of Temporary Chairmen have willingly turned to and helped mc to overcome many problems.

I suppose that it is a little early yet to speak to senators of Christmas and the New Year, but I extend to all my very best wishes for the festive season, even so far in advance. This year has been a pleasant and successful one. The Senate has functioned in a way that has been interesting. We have made some history and I think we can feel that our efforts have been well worth while. Some things that may not at the time have appeared to be quite so pleasant, as we now look back on them, seem to have faded into the distance and become smaller with the passage of time.

Wc have conducted ourselves as a worthwhile group of people who believe that the rights and privileges of the Parliament- must always be upheld. I thank all honorable senators for their co-operation in the chamber, and members of the various staffs for having assisted to make this a very good year. ‘

page 1645

ADJOURNMENT

Valedictory

Senator Sir WILLIAM SPOONER:
Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for National Development · New South Wales · LP

[10.55]. - I move -

That the Senate do now adjourn.

My first reaction as I rise to speak is one of astonishment that the last twelve months should have passed so quickly. I am astonished also when I recall that two years have elapsed since I wished honorable senators a happy Christmas in a spirit of expectation or apprehension, depending upon one’s point of view, as we faced an election. Whatever the outcome of the forthcoming election might be, I believe we can all look back on the year’s work with a good deal of satisfaction.

I thank the Opposition for helping the Government over the last few weeks to clear a rather heavy legislative programme. Even though we have had the goodwill of the Opposition, we would not have been able to dispose of the business of the Senate but for the method of dealing with the estimates that we adopted a couple of years ago. If wc had not adopted that approach to the estimates, we would never have been able to do as we have done in the last few days.

I should like to pass one comment about our consideration of the estimates this year. I always think that consideration of the estimates is one of the most important parts of the work of honorable senators. This year I was rather disappointed to note a very great trend towards speaking about policy matters during the estimates debate. Of course, this is a matter upon which each senator must make up his own mind. In the past we had more or less established the procedure of inquiring into the administration of departments and of taking items in the estimates and seeking an explanation of them rather than of dealing with wider matters of policy. I do not know what my ministerial colleagues will think about my voicing such sentiments. The need to deal with estimates in that way and to offer explanations of particular items of expenditure is one of the most difficult tasks that a Minister, has. I always believed that honorable ‘senator’s did well in approaching the estimates in that way. I repeat that I regret to note a trend towards delving more into matters of policy than the cost of administration.

I thank you, Mr. President, for your contribution to the year’s work of- the Senate. I believe I can say without any reservation at all that honorable senators on both sides have confidence in your impartiality. Impartiality is the greatest attribute that is to be desired in the occupant of that office. I say “ Thank you “ to the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Senator Kennelly). Although we differ politically, we rub along together, and we are able to work together to sort out the business of the Senate to the advantage of the honorable senators who sit behind us. I say “ Thank you “ to my colleagues who sit behind me - my Deputy Leader, the Whip, my ministerial colleagues and honorable senators. We have been a good team together. I appreciate very much indeed the way in which they have overlooked my sins of omission and my sins of commission and given me the support which is absolutely needed to carry the job through in the way in which it should be carried through.

I say “ Thank you “ to Mr. Loof, Clerk of the Senate, and Mr. Odgers, ClerkAssistant, and the staff of the Senate. In the words of Tennyson, “ each day brings forth a noble deed “. Each year there is always some substantial question that arises with relation to an interpretation of the procedures and the Standing Orders of the Senate. One particular horror I have is that the Leader of the Opposition has developed the habit of always bringing his* copy of the Standing Orders with him when he comes to the table at each sitting of the Senate, and I fear the worst. I fear that he proposes to take a point of order. We have these problems and we are always indebted to the Clerks at the table for the advice we get from them. We are indebted to them, too, for the training they are giving the younger members of the Senate staff as they are making their way up.

It gives us a good deal of satisfaction to hear from the members of the Senate Select Committee on television their words of commendation Of- the assistance’ they have received from Mr. Bradshaw, Usher of the Black Rod, whose services were made available to them by Mr. Loof.

I say “ Thank you and a Merry Christmas “ to members of the “ Hansard “ who always look after us and put in “ Hansard “ the things we really mean to say rather than the things that we actually do say. In other words, they trim the rough edges off our speeches and present the finished product to us. We wish the Principal Parliamentary Reporter, Mr. Dale, a very happy retirement.

I come now to the press. We thank them for the work they have done and hope the general experience they are gaining will stand them in good stead later.

Mr, President, there is an election to be held. We have to go through that, but tonight is rather an occasion when we should put the election on one side and think of the year’s work and the fact that we are breaking up for the holiday season which comes after the election. This is an occasion on which I am sure each side of the Senate says to the other side, “ Merty Christmas and a Happy New Year “.

Senator McKENNA:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– I address myself briefly to the motion. I would like to support and endorse what you yourself have said, Sir, in relation to the officers of the Senate, the staff, “ Hansard “ and the others who function round about us. I subscribe entirely, warmly and cordially to the remarks of the Leader of the Government in relation to some people. I do not name these persons not because I am lacking in any cordiality towards them and the good wishes I express for the Opposition arc no less sincere because I do not name them, but you, Mr. President, and the Leader of the Government have already done so.

I take the opportunity to convey to Mr. Dale the respect, good wishes and high regard in which he is held by the Opposition. I trust that we shall have an opportunity to see him functioning in this place again before he finally takes his departure.

I would agree for once with the Leader of the Government that this year was a very fruitful year for the Senate. We have had debates on many important matters. 1 think’ I can safely say that most of them, when they were important, were very close and very objective debates. I would think that that enhanced the prestige of this chamber during the past year.

I would like to thank the Leader of the Government and his ministerial colleagues for the common sense co-operation that they have extended to the leadership on the Opposition side in arranging the flow of business in the chamber. Without it, I think the backbench members would 1’?d great discomfort and there may even be chaos. The business of the Senate does ran smoothly, and that is due, I repeat, to the common sense cooperation between the Government and the Opposition at the leadership level. This does help not only to make the business flow freely but also to maintain the standing of the chamber.

We leave to resume hostilities on a wider platform before the people of Australia. I am cheered by the thought that, with one exception, the seats of senators are riot in jeopardy. We can carry our close and objective arguments with us from the chamber into that wider sphere as we go. One Opposition senator is in jeopardy. Senator Whiteside, filling a casual vacancy, has to go before the people. I think the Government members will pardon me if I say here that we on this side wish him success. He has been a most worthy representative of his State and from every personal viewpoint wc of the Opposition, and I am sure on personal grounds at least, if not political grounds, even Government members would like to see him back with us. The Senate will come back, I hope, undisturbed in personnel. That is rather a cheerful thought in a way, having regard to personal associations. 1 would like in particular to thank my colleagues for their hard work and their support throughout the past year, and for the sterling debating that they have produced throughout the period. They have certainly eased my burden and made life very much easier for me. I would like them to know that that is appreciated. I am certain it will be continued. I think that they have distinguished themselves very particularly throughout the past year. 1 feel reluctant, Mr. President, to say Happy Christmas, at this stage so far, away from Christmas. It does seem premature, as the Leader of the Government has said. More than that, I would have a faint hope - at least a hope; whether it is faint or not remains to be seen - that I and my colleagues may have occasion to be back here before Christmas for a very pleasant and happy occasion. I say to the Leader of the Government, who talked about the Estimates: I am not to be drawn on the subject of whether it is a correct procedure or not. It is the way we have handled it. We have had that argument before. It is the decision of the chamber that that is the correct procedure and I acknowledge that it has been of great convenience. We would have been gravely embarrassed on this occa-sion if it had not applied. I undertake that if Senator Spooner moves over to this side of the chamber in the near or the distant future, he will modify his thinking about raising policy matters on the Estimates. I venture to say that the moment he moves to the Opposition side he will see great virtue in this procedure. For the sake cf his education I hope it will be in the near future and not the distant future that he will gravitate to the Opposition side when he will enjoy teasing the Government on matters of policy during the debate on the Estimates. I appreciate what you, Mr. President, and the Leader of the Government have said.

Senator WADE:
Minister for Health · Victoria · CP

– Speaking for the Australian Country Party I can do no better than to support the good wishes and expressions of appreciation that have been so eloquently put by the Leader of the Opposition (Senator McKenna) and the Leader of the Government (Senator Sir William Spooner). I do this with the greatest goodwill.

Senator GORTON:
Minister for the Navy · Victoria · LP

– All I want to do now that we, as members of the body corporate of Parliament, are trembling on the edge of temporal dissolution, is to take two or three minutes in which to indulge in the luxury of expressing an opinion on a matter which perhaps will be of some interest to the Parliament in the future. In doing so, I do not speak on behalf of a ministry, on behalf of a government, or on behalf of a party; I just speak on my, .own. behalf , as a bloke who likes to watch television and, I hope. on behalf of some members of the Australian community who share my choice of television programmes. I make one plea. Do not make me look at any more culture than I want to look at. I am perfectly happy for those who want to look at “Swan Lake”, the Edinburgh Festival, or interviews with the Right Reverend Bishop of Bongo Bongo, to have a channel on which they can watch those programmes. But I want to have a chance to watch men walking down the streets of little western towns, reaching for their guns and saying, “ Ah wouldn’ do thet if ah wuz yew, Toledo”. I want to have a chance to watch a programme about a private eye who gets bashed over the head with beer bottles and telegraph poles, but two minutes later is perfectly capable of taking on anything that he may be requited to take on.

If *I want to watch that, why should 1 not be able to watch it without having it reduced in percentage by some superimposed body? ft At this last moment before the interregnum between the time when we sit here as a government and when we will again sit here as a government, that is the simple human plea that 1 want to make. I conclude - it is apt that I should conclude on this note - with another quotation from Tennyson; not one which will take the place of that attempted by my esteemed leader; but one which might be applied to me and perhaps to a lot of unspecified members of this chamber. It is-

I chatter, chatter as I flow,

To join the brimming river

For mcn may come and men may go

But I go on forever.

I just wish to make that plea. Thank you, Mr. President.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 11.15 p.m. till a da and hour to be fixed by the President

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 30 October 1963, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1963/19631030_senate_24_s24/>.