26th Parliament · 2nd Session
The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sir Alister McMullin) took the chair at 1 1 a.m., and read prayers.
– by leave - I wish to make a statement on behalf of the Prime Minister (Mr Gorton) regarding the death of the Prime Minister of Israel. A few moments ago in another place the Prime Minister said:
We learned with the deepest regret yesterday of the sudden death of the Prime Minister of Israel, Mr Eshkol. I inform honourable members-
And I now inform honourable senators - . . that the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Honourable W. J. Aston, M.P., will represent the Australian Parliament and the people of Australia at the funeral service for the Prime Minister. Mr Speaker will be leaving Australia later today. Last night 1 sent a message of sympathy to the Acting Prime Minister of Israel, extending to the Israeli people the condolences of the Government and people of Australia. The message was in these terms:
It is with deep regret that I received the news of the death of Mr Eshkol. He has led his country with great distinction during critical times and I extend to you and the people of Israel the condolences of the Government and people of Australia.
– by leaveI desire to associate the Opposition with the sentiments expressed by the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Anderson) and to say how much we regret the passing of the distinguished Prime Minister of Israel. The late Mr Eshkol was one of the founding fathers of the State of Israel and made a magnificent contribution to the building of that country’s security and its stature as a living democracy in the Middle East. It was with a sense of great loss that we heard of his death. In the troubled conditions of recent times he demonstrated great courage and resourcefulness in the leadership of his country. He will be very greatly missed. We join with the Leader of the Government in expressing our deep sympathy to the land and the people to whom he meant so much.
Senator COTTON presented a petition from persons interested in the banana industry in New South Wales referring to the depressed condition of the industry, and praying that the Senate will request the Federal Government to take immediate action to alleviate the plight of banana growers, subsidise the cost of production of bananas, and establish an all-party Senate select committee to inquire into costs of production, marketing arrangements, retail prices and potential export markets.
Petition received and read.
– I direct a question to the Minister for Customs and Excise. I refer to the matters which were raised yesterday on the Hoffmann affair. Has the Minister now made a full investigation into all the aspects of this Hoffmann affair concerning himself and his Department? Will he now tell the Senate whether or not he saw Mr Hoffmann prior to Mr Hoffmann’s resignation? Will he also tell the Senate whether he - the Minister - was aware that Mrs Hoffmann was threatening to reveal her activities on behalf of the Government in stealing commercial information from the Japanese Embassy unless her husband was given better treatment than dismissal from the Department of Customs and Excise?
– I did see Mr Hoffmann, but I saw him about 10 days after he resigned. As to the other part of the question that the honourable senator asks, that matter does not come under my jurisdiction.
– I address a question to the Minister representing the Treasurer. As a new 12-sided 50c coin is to be issued, can the Minister tell me whether the existing 50c coin will be withdrawn from circulation? If it is to be withdrawn, will a date be fixed after which it will no longer be legal tender?
– I am not informed of the time factor in relation to the new 50c coin but I shall seek the information for the honourable senator and the Senate.
– Will the Leader of the Government inform the Senate whether the fact is - and is known to the Government - that towards the end of last year Mrs Hoffmann was threatening to reveal her activities on behalf of the Government in stealing commercial information while she was in the employ of the Japanese Embassy unless her husband was given better treatment than being dismissed from the Department of Customs and Excise and whether this information became known not only to the Government but to the Public Service Board?
– Quite obviously that question would need to be on notice, and I request that it be put on notice.
– I direct a question to the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral. Reference has been made in today’s ‘Australian’ to the intended introduction of colour television in about 19 months time. Will such introduction in any way prejudice the expansion of standard television services to areas now seeking this facility?
– I could not give a detailed answer to that question, but I shall take the matter up with the Postmaster-General and get for the honourable senator the information which he seeks.
– My question is directed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate. I remind him that there have been articles in newspapers circulated throughout the country, an adjournment debate in the Senate the night before last, questions yesterday and an adjournment debate last night, all devoted to the Hoffmann affair. Is the Government not aware that a charge of a most serious nature - that it employed a person to steal commercial information from the Japanese Embassy - has been made against it? Does the Leader of the Government seriously suggest that he is not in a position to answer this charge and is not ready to inform the nation whether or not the charge is true? After all these warnings, the matter having been aired again and again in this chamber, can he not stand up now and inform the Senate that it is not true that the Government employed someone in the Japanese Embassy to steal commercial information? Has the Government sunk to such a standard that it is not prepared to deny that charge?
- Mr President, the Leader of the Opposition’s emotion is quite out of character. Indeed, he has shifted ground with his question. He admits that this matter was the subject of an adjournment debate on Tuesday night, that it was the subject of questions yesterday and that it was the subject of another adjournment debate for about 2i hours late last night and early this morning. He is committed to his admissions. It is well known - and it appears in Hansard - that these references are all linked with the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation. On every occasion I have pointed out that this matter is the responsibility of ASIO and that it would be referred to the Attorney-General. But this morning the Leader of the Opposition tries to shift his ground. Indeed, honourable senators opposite did the same thing on at least 50 occasions during the debate last night. My answer is still the same as it was on Tuesday night, Wednesday morning and Wednesday night.
– My question is directed to the Minister for Customs and Excise. When the Minister interviewed Mr Hoffmann 10 days after he had resigned was it at the request of Mr Hoffmann or of the Minister? What was the purpose of and the reason for the discussion, in view of the fact that Mr Hoffmann was no longer a member of the Department of Customs and Excise at the time of the interview?
– The interview with Mr Hoffmann was at his instigation. The reason for the interview was because he had offered his resignation.
– This was 10 days afterwards.
– The interview occurred about 10 days afterwards. I did not have anything to do with his resignation. It is customary to do it this way. If honourable senators want any further information I ask them to put their questions on the notice paper and I will reply fully.
– I address a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. Can he inform the Senate in due course of the Government’s policy with regard to the export of merino rams from Australia? If there is to be any relaxation of the present policy, will the Minister consider recommending a total embargo on the export of fine wool merino rams?
– If I remember correctly, the Minister for Primary Industry issued a statement on this subject a few days ago. J thought I had some information on it in my files, but I cannot find it at the moment. I am aware of the honourable senator’s question. I will let him have this information at a later stage. As the honourable senator is well aware, there have been conflicting ideas on the export of merino rams. We have had the sheep breeders, of course, asking that the export of merino rams overseas be allowed. We have had certain primary producer organisations objecting to it. So I will go through the file and see what information I can get for the honourable senator.
– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Science. In view of the statement by the Minister for Education and Science that student fees at the Australian National University constituted only 1.7% of the university’s income in 1966 as compared with 7% to 14% at other universities, could the Minister supply honourable senators with copies of the orientation pamphlet supplied to new students at the Australian National University this year containing recommendations on sex and abortion, so that honourable senators can estimate what value we get from the student body for our money?
– I shall certainly take steps to provide honourable senators with a copy of that pamphlet. My own impression - not having perused it in full1 - is that undue distortion has been given to excerpts from the pamphlet but I shall take every step to see that the pamphlet is available for complete perusal by every honourable senator.
– Has the Minister in Charge of Tourist Activities seen a recent statement by Mr Eric Will’is that tourists are having a great deal of difficulty in obtaining visas for travel around the Pacific? Since any check to tourism in this area has an adverse effect on Australia could the Minister explain what the position is and say whether he has made any study or any approach to ease the situation?
– I did take immediate notice of the statement that the Honourable Eric Willis, Minister for Tourism in New South Wales, made on his return from the recent Pacific area conference in Bangkok, to the effect that some places in the Pacific were experiencing difficulty in regard to tourists coming to Australia by reason of the unavailability of visas. I wish to inform the Senate that the conditions upon which visas are available, their issue and their necessity, are under current consideration and have been for some months by the Department of External Affairs and the Prime Minister’s Department. Consideration is being given not only to those matters but also to the establishment of consular posts in other areas that will facilitate tourism - particularly Los Angeles - but it will be satisfactory in the meantime if the Senate is informed that there are no less than 28 posts around the Pacific that are available for the issue of visas to tourists and others.
– Can the Minister representing the Attorney-General inform the Senate of the total amount of fines which have been imposed by the Commonwealth Industrial Court for breaching an injunction order or for contempt of court against bans clauses on strikes and which have remained unpaid by the unions in any recent period?
– It will foe recalled that the metal trades unions indulged in what is called a campaign against the resistance to the flow-on of the work value judgment of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission in about December 1967. For the following half year until the matter was adjusted by the Commission there were several strikes and orders by the court. Considerable fines were imposed in the aggregate. All that I feel it is appropriate to say at the moment is that by arrangement with the Australian Council of Trade Unions progressive advances are being made in the payment of these fines. Possibly some specific reference should be made to the Tramways Union which received special mention in the Press within recent weeks. I think it would satisfy the Senate and my colleague Senator Bull if I simply stated that in that case I am satisfied that proper and quite purposeful steps are being taken to obtain payment of the fines by that union.
– I ask the Leader of the Government a question arising from other questions asked this morning. Will he advise the Senate of the date on which the Minister for Customs and Excise assumed responsibility in the Senate for the activities of the Public Service Board?
– Quite obviously, in terms of ministerial responsibility, the Public Service Board is within the portfolio of the Prime Minister. Equally obviously any Minister, no matter who he is, who has Commonwealth public servants on his staff is answerable to the Public Service Board. We all know that as general knowledge. Questions in relation to the Public Service Board should not be directed to individual Ministers but should be addressed to me as the representative in this place of the Prime Minister.
– I preface my question to the Leader of the Government in the Senate by referring to the answer he gave me on Tuesday last relating to certain land on the foreshores of Sydney Harbour which has been released from Commonwealth Government occupancy, and I couple my question with the reply given by the Minister for Defence in another place yesterday to a question on the same subject. Since some of the remaining Commonwealth occupied land is not strictly a defence area - I have in mind the North Head Quarantine Station - was the Minister for Defence speaking for the Minister for Health yesterday when he replied to the question?
– I have not had the advantage of reading the report of what was said in another place yesterday but quite clearly the Quarantine Station would come within the portfolio of the Minister for Health. It may well be that the Minister for Defence had discussions with the Minister for Health. There is an overlap and I think I should try to sort it out after I have read the report of what was said yesterday and have had a discussion with the Minister for Defence. I will inform the Senate later of the position.
– I direct my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. What is the Government’s attitude on the much discussed question of restricting the planting of wheat in the 1969-70 season? If the Government has any attitude how does it propose to put that attitude into effect?
– To the best of my knowledge the Commonwealth Government has no power to curtail the planting of wheat in Australia. As I mentioned in reply to a question yesterday, the wheat growers themselves are concerned about the possibility of disposing of next year’s crop, if it is another large one, and are examining means of overcoming this problem.
– Can the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Industry advise what progress has been made by the Tariff Board in its inquiry into chemical costs which was ordered by the Minister for Trade and Industry 2 months ago? When is the inquiry expected to be finalised and a report made to the Parliament?
– I will seek the information. I hope the Senate appreciates that once a reference is made to the Tariff
Board certain procedures have to be followed. A time is set for the taking of evidence and evidence is taken probably in every Slate. If it is a big reference, as this one is. 1 do not think a period of 2 months has any real significance because, having taken evidence probably all over the Commonwealth, the Board then has to make a studied examination of the evidence and prepare a report for the Government. I should not think there would be a precise timetable at this early stage, but I will find out what the position is and will let the honourable senator know.
– My quest ion to the Minister for Supply relates to the Apollo 9 space flight scheduled for next Saturday. What part is Australia playing in this very vital project?
– I have issued a Press statement on this matter. I do not know whether it yet has reached honourable senators or the Press gallery but the matter is of real interest and I propose to read the statement to the Senate, lt is in these terms:
Three Australian I racking stations will support NASA’s Apollo 9 10-day manned earth-orbital mission scheduled to start at 2 a.m. (Aust. E.S.T.) on March t.
The Minister for Supply, Senator Ken Anderson, said this in Canberra today (February 27). . .
Carnarvon (w.A) will be the prime Australian station for the mission: the two others are Honeysuckle Creek and Tidbinbilla (both A.C.T.).
Together, these three stations will track the spacecraft and relay commands, telemetry and voice communications between the spacecraft and the Mission Control Center at Houston, Texas.
Apollo 9 is a vital step in the Apollo programme as the mission involves the first manned space test of the lunar module in which two astronauts will land on the moon. On behalf of the Australian Government and people, and especially on behalf nf the Australian space tracking teams involved in the mission, I wish the Apollo 9 crew the best of luck. I know that all honourable senators will join with me in wishing good luck to the men involved in this historical event that is to take place. Carnarvon will support 70 of the 151 orbits planned for Apollo 9. Hawaii is the only land based station to support more orbits, lt will support 71.
The Solar Particle Alert Network Group at Carnarvon will again report any excessive radiation from solar events, so that the network and the astronauts can be warned. Equipment at Carnarvon will bc manned 16 to 18 hours a day. Actual tracking periods will be contained in slots of from 8 to 10 hours, each slot containing 4 to 8 passes. About an hour after launch, Honeysuckle Creek will track the spacecraft on its fir-t orbit. On succeeding days the station will track about five passes a day, similar to the Apollo 7 mission. During the separation of the lunar module from the command service module, Honeysuckle Creek will support one or both spacecraft four times, lt is expected that Tidbinbilla will also provide support in this period.
– I ask the Minister for Education and Science: ls it a fact that Queensland is the only State in which not one school - government or non-government - teaches Indonesian or Malay, whereas a combined total of 2,400 students study these languages in other Stales? Is any special form of assistance given by the Commonwealth to those schools which provide tuition in Asian languages?
– I am nol able to confirm that the situation is as outlined by the Leader of the Democratic Labor Party. However, my recollection of figures is that the number of schools teaching Indonesian and Malay in Queensland was relatively much less than some of the other States. I am not aware that any special assistance is given by the Commonwealth for teaching those languages, although encouragement from the point of view of policy has been quite prominently made known to those schools which give assistance in the teaching of the Indonesian and Malay language;.
– I ask the Minister for Customs and Excise: Apart from seeing Mr Hoffmann on the occasion mentioned by htm this morning in answer to a question by the Leader of the Opposition, when did he first have any knowledge of the Hoffmann affair? Was it before or after the dis.mi-.sal?
– lt was before the resignation of Mr Hoffmann.
– Will the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry inform the Australian wheat industry as soon as he can of the first advance payment on wheat for the coming season, so that wheat growers and financial institutions will have sufficient time to make the necessary financial arrangements?
– As the honourable senator is aware, it is not possible for an announcement regarding the advance payment on wheat to be made until relatively late in the season, for a variety of reasons that will1 be known to the honourable senator. While I quite agree with him that it is in the interests of wheat growers and organisations to have this information as soon as possible, in the past it has not been found practicable to provide it any earlier than has been done. This is something we will keep in mind and I will direct the attention of the Minister for Primary Industry to the matter.
– Is the Minister representing the Attorney-General aware that his answer to me yesterday on the subject of marriage following the answer given to Senator Cohen on human rights lays him open to the charge of hypocrisy? Will he expedite action-
– Order! That is not parliamentary language.
– With respect, Mr President-
– Order! If the honourable senator does not frame his question differently I will have to ask him to sit down.
– With respect, Mr President, may I complete the question?
– No, the honourable senator may not complete the question unless he withdraws that word. If he does not withdraw that, word he will not be permitted to go on with the question.
– 1 withdraw the word ‘hypocrisy’.
– I suggest that the honourable senator sit down and redraft his question, and then I will give him the call again presently.
– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Shipping and Transport. Are Commonwealth Railways locomotives equipped with safety devices to stop the train immediately it passes a danger signal or in the event of any other emergency?
– I understand that there are. but in order to be absolutely sure I would like the honourable senator to place his question on the notice paper.
– My question, which is directed to the Leader of the Government, refers to the statement made in the Senate by the Minister representing the Attorney-General during last night’s adjournment debate, to the effect that the relevant regulations and general orders are interpreted by the Government so as to permit a public servant who has been dismissed to resign from the Public Service at any time up to the expiration of the date from which his dismissal is to take effect. Will the Government take steps to make all public servants aware of this interpretation so that any public servant who is dismissed may exercise the right to resign and thereby not suffer the pecuniary loss resulting from dismissal? Will the Government take steps to compensate those public servants who in the past have been dismissed from the Service and who, through ignorance or otherwise, did not exercise the right to resign which apparently is available to them by the Government’s interpretation of the relevant regulations and general orders?
– I will refer the honourable senator’s question and the comments made by the Minister representing the Attorney-General to the Prime Minister’s Department, which is the department responsible for the Public Service Board.
– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Treasurer. Has it come to the notice of the Treasury that considerable savings in time to both the private sector and the public sector of the community could be achieved by the issue by the Treasury of a $50 currency note? Will the Minister convey a request for the printing of such a note to the Treasurer?
– I will refer the matter to the Treasurer.
– ls the Minister representing the Attorney-General aware that his answer to me yesterday on the subject of marriage, following the answer given to Senator Cohen on human rights, lays him open to the charge of inconsistency? Will he expedite action to provide justice to humanists and so avoid this unfortunate conclusion?
– The answer to the first part of the question is no. The second part of the question was inaudible to me.
– Has the Minister for Supply anything to report on the recent period of unserviceability in Antarctic regions of the Danish ship on charter to the Australian Government? What inconvenience resulted to Australian personnel and to his Department’s activities in Antarctica? Does not the Minister consider that the time has arrived for the Government to procure and commission an Australian ship for servicing the important work in which his Department is engaged in Antarctica?
– I must acknowledge that I am not completely informed as to the unserviceability of one of the charter ships. I am aware that our personnel were ice bound and that as a result of some magnificent co-operation with the American Government an ice breaker came to help get the ship to the station. Relating to the overall question as to whether or not we should have title to some ships, as distinct from chartering them, for Antarctica, that matter is currently under consideration. At this point of time I am not in a position to make any comment other than that that matter and other questions relating to Antarctica are currently under examination.
– My question is addressed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Are he and the Minister for Customs and Excise having all questions on the Hoffmann affair placed on the notice paper to prevent the questions and answers being rebroadcast this evening by the Australian Broadcasting Commission and to ensure that they will not appear in the official records of Hansard?
– That is an unworthy implication. I do not think the question requires an answer.
– 1 address a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Health. With regard to the recent relaxation of the ban on the import of cattle from New Zealand to Australia, can the Minister inform the Senate whether there are any plans for relaxation of the quarantine ban that is currently in force on the import of sheep from New Zealand to Australia?
– I could not give the honourable senator a detailed answer to the question he has asked, but I shall obtain the information for him from the Minister for Health.
– Can the Minister for Customs and Excise inform the Senate of the actual charge laid by his Department against Mr Hoffmann? What was the estimated loss to the Commonwealth in the evasion of customs duty as a result of the commission of the offence of which Mr Hoffmann was found guilty? Was it hundreds of thousands of dollars, millions of dollars or tens of millions of dollars?
- Mr Hoffmann was found guilty of improper conduct in that he approved the by-law admission of 5,000 pairs of turtle skins, knowing that approval should not be given.
– 1 address a question to the Leader of the Government in the Senate, or to the Minister representing the Minister for National Development, whichever Minister considers this matter of sufficient importance to his portfolio. My question relates to the granting of oil exploration permits by a designated authority under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1967 and the associated agreements. Is it a fact that a designated authority, in granting an exploration permit, grants the approval of both the State and the Federal governments?
Is it known to the Federal authorities, and is it a fact that the Queensland Government is likely within the next few days to announce the successful applicants for exploration permits over a considerable area of the Great Barrier Reef? Will the granting of such permits indicate the Commonwealth’s acquiescence in exploratory drilling for oil in the Great Barrier Reef area? Is the Minister or Ministry aware that oil exploration companies are at this point of time unable to give an assurance that no damage will occur to the various interests of the Great Barrier Reef should an oil leak occur such as happened in the Santa Barbara Channel in the Stale of California, United States of America? Will the Minister consider that wisdom might suggest that an announcement of successful applicants for exploration permits in this particular area should be delayed until such an assurance can be given?
– 1 am very pleased indeed to hear that the honourable senator from Victoria is taking such a keen interest in oil exploration in Australia. He has asked so many important questions about it that 1 would suggest that he place them on notice and 1 shall get a detailed answer to each of them from the Minister for National Development.
– I desire to ask the Minister for Customs and Excise a question. In view of the peculiar circumstances surrounding the departure of Mr Hoffmann from the Department of Customs and Excise, will the Minister inform the Senate which officer of his Department, or other person, was present at the interview the Minister stated he had with Mr Hoffmann 10 days after the latter’s dismissal from the Department?
– I mentioned in answer to an earlier question that I had had an interview with Mr Hoffmann about 10 days after he had put in his resignation. He put in his resignation on the 14th November 1968. From memory, I saw him on the 26th November 1968. I am not prepared to state who was with me when we had the interview. The interview was of a personal nature. This is the same courtesy that I would extend to Senator Kennelly if he wished to interview me. If he or anybody else on the Opposition side wishes to interview me on any occasion I will not disclose details of personal interviews wilh them.
– Has the attention of the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry been drawn to a newspaper article in the last few days in which it was pointed out that Australia has once again missed out on a substantial contract to supply prime lamb cuts to United States military forces stationed throughout the world?
– Does that include Vietnam?
– This is throughout the world. That includes Vietnam. The newspaper cutting further states that the contract has once again gone to New Zealand because of the ability of that country to supply lamb in a cut and packaged form. Will the Minister inform the Senate in due course whether the Department of Primary Industry has any plans to encourage the production of Australian lamb for export in a cut and packaged form?
– No, I did not see the article to which the honourable senator has referred. I was wondering whether this would be a matter for the meat exporting section of the industry rather than the Department of Primary Industry. I am sure that the Minister for Primary Industry will be quite happy to take this aspect up with the meat exporting section of the industry.
– I desire to ask a question of the Minister for Customs and Excise. I ask: Did the Minister have an interview with Mrs Hoffmann last year regarding her husband’s termination of service with the Department of Customs and Excise?
– The answer to th* honourable senator’s question is no.
– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. By way of preface I wish to say that during a recent visit to the
River Murray irrigation areas of South Australia the Minister for Primary Industry made the observation, as reported in the Murray Pioneer’, that most sections of the fruit industry appeared to be just making a living. In view of the accentuation of adverse conditions through the onslaughts on fruit by the Rutherglen bug and brown rot, constituting a natural disaster to growers generally, I ask: Will the Government have a survey conducted of the fruit industry in these areas to ascertain whether some form of assistance may be provided?
– I shall refer (he honourable senator’s question to the Minister for Primary Industry.
– I desire to ask a question of the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. I ask: Could the Minister obtain and make available information in regard to the very heavy losses portended to the dried fruits industry, particularly in northern Victoria, as a result of the excessive rain over the last 3 weeks?
– I have seen references to the losses sustained by Victorian growers because of excessive rain. I shall refer the honourable senator’s request to the Minister for Primary Industry.
– My question is directed to the Minister for Supply, ls it a fact that fifty Mirage aircraft are to be converted from interceptors to attack aircraft? Is it also a fact that these modifications involve approximately 6,000 man hours per aircraft to complete? Are these aircraft being modified two at a time at the Government Aircraft Factory at Avalon, Victoria? On the present basis will it take 15 to 20 years for the modifications programme to be completed? If so, will the Minister undertake to step up this programme and to reinstate the skilled aircraft tradesmen who were recently dismissed at Avalon?
– It is true that the Royal Australian Air Force has requested the Department of Supply to modify some of its Mirage aircraft. The work will be undertaken at the Government Aircraft Factory at Avalon in Victoria. In fact, the first aircraft is being modified at present. These aircraft will be delivered progressively to Avalon by the RAAF. The work will be completed in the shortest possible time, having regard to the limitation of hangar space at Avalon. The project will certainly assist my Department to stabilise the employment level at this factory. 1 think I have covered the questions asked by Senator Poyser. It should be appreciated that this work is an integral part of the operational capacity of the RAAF and therefore cannot be spoken of in detail.
– Has the Minister representing the Minister for Health seen a Press report relating to precautions taken in connection with the arrival of two Indonesian aircraft last week-end? Can the Minister comment on the report that a veil of secrecy has been thrown over the health precautions taken after the planes’ arrival, and can the Minister give any information on the precautions that were taken and the reasons for these steps?
– I did see the report in the ‘Courier Mail’ yesterday, and because of this I made inquiries and obtained some information from the Minister for Health. There was certainly no veil of secrecy as is suggested there. Two Indonesian aircraft arrived at Darwin on 22nd February and were subjected to a routine quarantine inspection. In the course of the inspection infestations of cockroaches were noted in both planes. Both planes were heavily sprayed with a generally used insecticide to destroy the cockroaches and a clearance was given to both planes to continue their flight in Australia. However, as an additional precaution to make certain that all cockroaches had been destroyed in the process of spraying at Darwin, arrangements were made for a further inspection to be made at the planes’ next port of landing, which at that stage was expected to be Nowra. However, one aircraft was diverted to Camooweal because of engine trouble. The other landed at Mount Isa. Arrangements were made with Mount Isa health authorities to inspect both planes and to carry out further spraying if necessary. However, inspections at both Mount Isa and Camooweal showed no cockroaches.
The whole exercise was a normal quarantine procedure and, as f said, certainly no secrecy was involved. As a matter of routine, and in accordance with general instructions, quarantine officers do not give information of this kind.
– Mr President. I rise to order. The point which 1 raise is. I believe, a legitimate one. The purpose of question time is to allow honourable senators to ask questions. The honourable senator is not asking a question but is trying to provide information to the Senate.
– I shall pass on these comments to the Postmaster-General and provide the honourable senator with an answer when it becomes available.
Reports on Items
I ask for leave to continue my remarks at a later date.
Leave granted; debate adjourned.
Debate (on motion by Senator Cohen) adjourned.
Debate resumed from 26 February (vide page 100), on motion by Senator Dame Annabelle Rankin:
That the Bill be now read a second time.
– This is a comparatively simple measure. As outlined in the second reading speech of the Minister for Housing (Senator Dame Annabelle Rankin), by and large it converts the terms ‘pounds, shillings and pence’ into decimal currency. It also increases the penalty provisions to bring them more into line with the money values of today. As honourable senators are aware, the value of money has deteriorated substantially because of the ineffectiveness of successive Liberal and Country Party governments and their inability to control inflationary trends in this country in recent years. As a consequence the value of money has deteriorated substantially and people have suffered accordingly.
All credit should be given to people associated with quarantine measures and their administration in this country. We have been particularly fortunate in avoiding outbreaks of diseases associated with human beings, and exotic diseases that occur in animals. This Bill provides that the penalty for knowingly introducing disease into this country will be increased from $500 to S2.000, or 5 years imprisonment. If a disease such as foot and mouth disease were introduced into this country it could have tremendous economic repercussions and could dislocate economically particular industries. To do so knowingly is an extremely severe crime. No penalty can properly meet the damage that would be done. Perhaps at a later date the Opposition may move an amendment to increase substantially the amount of penalty, but we really feel that there can be no adequate penalty for the crime.
We give credit to the Commonwealth Government for agreeing to meet the cost of incinerators at various places in Australia for the destruction of goods that could have been associated with the introduction of disease. However, we also say that the
Queensland Government has failed miserably to face up to its responsibility. 1 understand that no incinerators for this purpose have yet been constructed anywhere in Queensland. In many cases a Queensland port is the first port of call of vessels coming to Australia. In recent months ships have touched illegally at Australian shores, but the Commonwealth has done nothing yet - or not very much. Certain patrol vessels have been built but their allocation has not yet been determined in detail, lt is probable that an insufficient number has been built or is contemplated to be built to meet the demands of vessels and people coming to northern Australia. It is inevitable that disease, either human or animal, will be introduced into this country.
Queensland has about 12,000 miles of coastline. It is not unreasonable to assume that half of it is in the north and half in the south. Yet the Commonwealth Government does not seem particularly concerned about the dangers associated with visits of foreign vessels and foreigners in the north. Recently three Chinese were found to have landed illegally. A lot of mystery was associated with their arrival on the coast of north Queensland. It was said that they were fishermen from a vessel that had foundered but subsequently this was proved to be false. It appears probable that they were illegal immigrants. They could have brought in any disease. They were accidentally discovered, because in seeking to be picked up they landed in the wrong place. Such people could land and go to places like Portland Roads where they could buy a passenger ticket on an aircraft. No-one would inquire about them. There are no facilities to determine whether they are illegal immigrants or people who have been in this country for some time.
We have been extremely fortunate over the years in relation to the introduction of human and animal disease into this country. In the light of this good fortune, the Government is required to take all possible precautions in the future. We commend the Government for amending the legislation and we do not intend to oppose it.
– 1 support the Bill because I believe it is of great importance to human health as well as to animal health. The purpose of this Bill is to revise the penalties imposed for offences under the Quarantine Act. The increases in penalties are necessary, if only to keep pace with the depreciation of money. I am sure that all honourable senators recognise the importance of excluding from Australia such exotic diseases as foot and mouth disease and blue tongue. The Bill also provides for a relaxation of the procedures governing the entry of ships from overseas into Australian waters, by permitting an inspection for the granting of pratique inside the quarantine line, so that the inspection can be carried out much more quickly. With modern shipping trends this is a necessary move, but I hope it does not mean that this part of the quarantine regulations will not be watched very carefully. Some dangers could be involved in this easing of procedures.
The Bill provides further safeguards against the introduction of dreaded diseases from Asian countries. I refer to such diseases as cholera, smallpox, yellow fever and many others that are prevalent to a degree in Asian countries. There is no need for me to tell honourable senators of the dangers involved and the consequences of the introduction of the exotic diseases to which I have referred. In 1967 in the United Kingdom hundreds of thousands of beasts had to be destroyed because of an outbreak of foot and mouth disease. The United Kingdom was involved in enormous expense and I have no doubt that important economic consequences followed, probably including the stoppage of the export of stud stock, particularly cattle, from the United Kingdom. On that occasion the outbreak occurred in a confined area in a country which is well equipped with veterinary and other health officers who were able to control it in a reasonably short time.
A different situation would apply in Australia. If the disease was discovered in the southern areas of Australia where the population is reasonably thickly spread, it could be more easily controlled than if it broke out in our northern areas, where the population is sparsely settled. It could be fairly well spread over parts of, say, Queensland before we were aware of it. Foot and mouth disease could be contracted by our wildlife, including pigs. There would be tremendous difficulty in controlling such an outbreak. Even if the disease were controlled in a reasonably short period, the economic consequences could be very serious. If we failed to control an outbreak, because of our enormous areas the position could be absolutely disastrous, with economic and social consequences in many directions. One consequence would be a complete ban by the USA on imports of our meat. There is no doubt about that. In view of the fact that 50% of our exports of meat go to that country, it is unnecessary to say how very important that would be in every way. Even if we brought the outbreak under control, no doubt for a considerable time we would have great difficulty in getting the American Administration and authorities to allow our meat free entry into their country. We know that the American Administration is under great pressure from organisations such as the American cattlemen’s association to stop imports at the present time in order to safeguard their interests.
However, my main reason for entering this debate concerns another matter. I refer to the fairly lengthy question that 1 asked the Minister for Housing (Senator Dame Annabelle Rankin), who represents the Minister for Health, yesterday. Honourable senators may remember that I asked a question about a statement made by the President of the Graziers Association of Victoria on what has happened in that State regarding the installation of incinerators at ports and taking the necessary measures to destroy the refuse or garbage that comes in on ships entering Victorian ports. The President of the Graziers Association was very critical of the Commonwealth’s inaction in this regard. I understand that the position in Victoria and Queensland in particular and in Western Australia to a lesser degree is not satisfactory and that at this stage those States have done little or nothing to make the necessary installations.
My understanding of the Commonwealth’s responsibility in this regard, as outlined in 1965, is that the Commonwealth offered to pay the cost of the incinerators and ancillary- buildings and to pay half the cost of the access roads to the incinerators. The States were required to find suitable land adjacent to the wharves on which to install the incinerators and were required to operate and maintain the incinerators. The Commonwealth believed that the States should impose a charge - in Melbourne, for example, it would be imposed through the
Melbourne Harbour Trust - to cover the cost of the operation and maintenance of the incinerators. In Victoria little progress has been made towards building the incinerators. I understand that land has been acquired adjacent to the wharves. In my opinion the States I have mentioned have failed to take adequate steps to safeguard the livestock industries of this country. In the past there have been many instances of these very disastrous exotic diseases being introduced to countries such as the United States because of a lack of facilities and a failure to take steps adequately to dispose of the refuse from ships.
I understand that in Western Australia the disposal of ships’ refuse well out to sea has been found to be not very satisfactory. My information is that in that State steps are now being taken in this direction. In Queensland, which has 12 or 13 ports, the position is very bad.
– 1 agree with the sentiments expressed by both Senator Dittmer and Senator Bull. Anyone who has had any dealings with the officers of the Commonwealth Department of Health knows that they form a highly dedicated section of our Public Service and attach very great importance to safeguarding Australia against the many diseases that have been enumerated by earlier speakers. Sometimes they come under very unfair criticism. Senator Sim, who I believe is a keen reader of fiction, may have read books by Gwyn Griffin, who wrote a very stupid book the last chapter of which dealt with the situation of a Hungarian woman who arrived at Fremantle with a dog and considered it a slight that Australia should apply quarantine regulations to her dog. She did not think of the Australian dog owners. That is an example of the subtle propaganda that is often used.
The only criticism I have is that it seems that the accent is on the dangers that may be presented by travellers who come to Australia by ship. I believe that we have to keep a much closer watch on breaches committed by the air travelling public. I remember putting to Senator Scott a question about an incident in Sydney, when Miss Argentine arrived at Sydney (KingsfordSmith) Airport without having had any needles. There was a great display of tantrums at the airport. She did not want to have the needle in her arm because the mark would show when she was wearing an evening frock. But that problem was overcome satisfactorily.
This is a Bill to tidy up some loose ends in our quarantine laws. The Australian Democratic Labor Party is in favour of the Bill. There has been a suggestion that some amendments may be introduced to increase the penalties in certain cases. We have had a look at the amendments proposed, but our feeling is that the penalties provided in the Bill have been determined, presumably, by an expert committee which has borne in mind similar penalties in other fields and we feel that we ought not to interfere with the decisions of the Committee unless some very powerful arguments are put forward.
We agree that the offences concerned are very serious ones, but we also feel that there has not been a sufficiently strong case put as to why the penalties in certain instances should be made particularly large, and for that reason the Democratic Labor Party will not vote in favour of the amendments upon those lines.
Quarantine is a question which has interested many of us, particularly in recent years. One of Australia’s safeguards used to be the incubation period that occurred when people or animals were being brought to this country on board ship. Much of that has been swept away and there has been a good deal of uneasiness among some Australians who have the feeling that possibly diseases could be brought into this country by people who have been recently in an overseas country, who had come here quickly by air and obtained entry before the signs of a particular disease had manifested itself. I, for one, would be very interested to learn - I hope the Minister can give us some information on this - the degree to which the quarantine service is concerning itself to deal with this particular problem of the rapid entry of people into this country when certain diseases which they may have contracted when abroad may not yet have manifested themselves.
I have been abroad recently and, on coming home, I have seen some of the precautions that are taken against, for example, foot and mouth disease, which can be a very serious disease if brought into this country. I believe that we cannot be too careful or too strict in our precautions in this particular area and I hope that our quarantine authorities will continue to be very strict and to take every possible precaution against the introduction of this very deadly disease. Generally, this is a Bill to be approved of, and we see no reason to increase the penalties beyond those proposed in the Bill. Therefore, we will not support the amendments designed to increase the penalties. I commend the Bill to the Senate.
– Prior to coming here, I had some personal association with the Department of Health, particularly in connection with quarantine problems relating to the export of animals from Australia to New Zealand, in which I have been involved. I regard the Department as a very good one indeed. I regard its work in connection with animal quarantine and the observance of Australian quarantine regulations and requirements as being first class. The officials are scrupulous in their work, they are extremely careful, they are quite rigorous and, in many ways, quite unbending in their attitude that they will protect Australia, its livestock, its plants and its people against all comers. They do not relax the regulations without extreme care, very thorough examination and very careful scrutiny over some time.
The person I knew best in this Department was the Director of Quarantine, Mr Mcintosh. There is a very interesting story told of Mr Mcintosh and the attitude he adopted when somebody discovered that someone was going to bring haggis into Australia direct from Scotland. This caused great alarm. I think haggis is a fairly indeterminate article of unknown content. Senator Cormack will undoubtedly object to this. 1 am told it contains all sorts of things from old bicycle tyres, to felt hats and glass jars. Nobody quite knows what is in it. Mr Mcintosh was very disturbed about the proposition that haggis might come in.
– Cattle to the value ot S30.000 had to bc destroyed. The authorities moved straight away.
– We have been told that there is too much noise in this corner.
– I support the Bill. Quarantine means much to Australia as a nation. As has been staled, our insular position helps and has helped in the past, but speedier travel has changed the picture. We are now only a few hours away from the rest of the world. Even the northern parts of Australia and the areas adjacent thereto have become much closer to the south through speedier internal travel and through the development of the north. Possibly at one time many people in the southern areas of Australia would not have known, and possibly in those days would not have cared so much, if diseases had been introduced into the northern part of
Australia through people coming to the area. But the position has now changed completely. We must have quarantine laws, we must support them and we must give every help to the officers who are charged with the responsibility of enforcing those laws. In introducing the Bill the Minister for Housing (Senator Dame Annabelle Rankin) said:
The main purpose of (be Bill is to revise the maximum penalties that may be imposed upon persons convicted of quarantine offences.
But the Bill relates also to other matters which 1 shall mention a little later. One matter to which we should give very careful consideration is the granting of pratique for ships to cross the quarantine line. The Minister went on to speak of breaches of quarantine laws and she said that they should be regarded as particularly serious. She mentioned the great suffering and loss of life that could occur as a result of Asiatic diseases being introduced to people in Australia, and she mentioned also many diseases overseas which could affect our flora and fauna and, consequently, much of our economic life. I do not think there is a full understanding of what the implications would be if foot and mouth disease were to break out in Australia. Reference has been made to the export of meat, but I have been informed that practically every product produced on the land would be affected because of our inability to export to areas which are free of foot and mouth disease. Our wheat and wool industries and many other big Australian exporting industries could find their products completely barred from countries which are free of this deadly disease in livestock.
The Minister stated that it is proposed to increase the maximum penalty from SI, 000 to $2,000. I remind honourable senators of a case that has been partly referred to, an instance where someone near Brisbane brought in cattle semen from Canada, as a result of which in that area cattle to the value of many thousands of dollars had to be destroyed. At that time the penalty was so low that it was completely out of proportion to the damage which was done.
– rs that now 28?
– Do any of the United Nations agencies assist Indonesia to combat those diseases?
– I am very pleased to see that my friend and colleague, Senator Cotton, has returned to the chamber because I join with Senator Cormack in being rather critical of the honourable senators comments concerning haggis. I always believed that his estimable qualities were due to some vague Scottish ancestry but now 1 am afraid I will have to revise my opinion of him. In debating a Bill of this kind it is very difficult not to repeat something that has been said earlier, but I must state that in my view animal and human quarantine are two of the most important problems that Australia has to face. lt is true that over the years we have been very successful in preventing the introduction of some of the human diseases that ravage other parts of the world. 1 have in mind cholera, yellow fever and plague. Our quarantine regulations regarding human health have been very strict. For the past 12 or 14 years I have been interested in the effect of quarantine on the health of our animals. Until recent times there have been many loopholes in the regulations, and although in the main we have escaped the ravages that occur following the introduction of exotic animal diseases into Australia, we should not be complacent and think that our restrictions have been entirely responsible. Because of slow means of communication between Australia and countries where those diseases are endemic we have been able to escape many of the dangers which exist today because of rapid developments in the means of communication, not only by sea but also by air. We must be constantly on the alert to ensure not only that our regulations are sufficient but also that there is no laxity in their administration because, after all, it does not matter how stringent regulations may be, if their administration is lax the dangers are as great as if there were no regulations.
The Bill before us is concerned mainly with provisions to increase the penalties for breaches of the quarantine regulations to a more realistic sum taking into account today’s money values and the risk of people trying to escape restrictions by breaching the law and bringing in plants, seeds or, as in the case of Queensland, semen which could cause an outbreak of many of these most dangerous diseases. The Bill also deals with the removal of some anomalies. Senator Lawrie commented on a change in administrative procedures in order to lessen inconvenience to importers and travellers. I am not always in sympathy with the view that we should not inconvenience travellers in matters concerning animal quarantine. We have never hesitated to inconvenience travellers over the years in matters involving human health, but when T have made representations about our animal quarantine laws I have been told that we must not inconvenience travellers too much. I am afraid that I have never been convinced.
– I rise to add my concern to that of Senator Sim and the other honourable senators who have spoken this afternoon. As a Queenslander I appreciate the dangers that are presented by faulty quarantine regulations and faulty administration of them. The increased activity to the north of Australia leads to a greater risk of the introduction of these exotic diseases, lt is for that reason that we members of the Opposition support even sterner penalties to deter the individuals and small concerns operating to the north of Australia and off the coast of Queensland. The matter has been well represented this afternoon. 1 merely wish to add that we must seek protection from the actions of not only other people but also our own people and our own departments, such as the Department of the Navy.
In September last year the Navy, in conjunction with the Army, carried out extensive exercises off the coast of Queensland in the Shoalwater Bay area. More than 50 ships and 18,000 men from Britain, Australia, New Zealand and the United States took part in the exercises. They included an amphibious landing in Shoalwater Bay on the central Queensland coast by 2,500 Royal Marines who were opposed on shore by an enemy force of 900 British Army Gurkha troops. The fleet included twenty-five Royal Navy ships. What concerns me greatly are the reports that came out of that area after the exercises were completed to the effect that the shore for many miles was littered with debris; that under the waterline there were 44-gallon drums; and that among the debris were cases marked ‘Produce of Portugal’ and such items as grapefruit and offal obviously of meat origin. This is the most serious aspect of the matter and the one that concerns us when we consider quarantine.
I ask whether the authorities take any measures to see that international exercises of this kind are subject to quarantine supervision. It seems to me from the reports that have come from the area that they are not. We can imagine how the Queensland coast is exposed to disease - perhaps even foot and mouth disease - from the vessels of other nations which are stocked with provisions overseas. It is possible that the cases that were marked ‘Produce of Portugal’ had some type of insect or borer which may have seriously affected the Queensland timber industry. Some of the articles that Senator Cotton mentioned may even have been aboard one of the vessels, although the season was not quite right for that. I say in all seriousness that if departments are to engage in exercises they should be subjected to the strictures of quarantine. I ask whoever is responsible to look into this matter, especially if operations of this nature are contemplated in the future.
– What about the Australian cockroaches?
– Are you suggesting you cannot eradicate cockroaches by spraying?
– They were sprayed again.
– By the health people.
– I think they come from Mount Isa.
– They came from Mount lsa to Camooweal according to my information.
– Are you satisfied with the liberalisations in this Bill with relation to the new types of vessels?
– 1 rise to relate very quickly some remarks to what Senator Cormack said about the problems that could be encountered with the introduction of new methods of handling goods for shipment and with the coming of containerisation, f propose to put to the Minister a number of questions which I ask her to consider. They will relate to problems that could arise with new methods of transport and new methods of handling goods on the waterfront.
As 1 understood Senator Cormack, after examining the Bill, he was satisfied that the proposed amendments did provide for some of the new practices which will be adopted. It seems to me, however, that the Bill does not do this. Some of the proposed relaxations and liberalisations do not seem to have taken into account the need for very strict supervision at points where, in future, it will be customary to handle goods to be transported by container ships. If the Minister is unable to answer my questions when she is replying, I submit that the matters I shall raise are of sufficient importance to warrant consideration by the Department and call for advice from it as to what it is proposed to do with relation to containerisation and so on.
In her speech, the Minister representing the Minister for Shipping and Transport (Dame Annabelle Rankin) said that vessels could pass the quarantine line before pratique had been given. She says that this is necessary as there are new types of vessels, such as tankers and ore carriers, and that some goods are coming in by new types of handling vessels. She also said that in fact goods could be stored at places other than in quarantine. I agree that the new shipping practices are leading to the introduction of new methods. I should like to know whether any new methods have been adopted by the Department to ensure adequate safeguards in connection with goods coming in on roll-on-roll-off ships, container ships and so on. Senator Cormack, Senator Gair and all the other honourable senators who were members of the Senate Select Committee on the Container Method of Handling Cargoes are well aware of the coming introduction of new methods of shipping and of handling goods for shipping. Senator Cormack spoke, for example, about the difficulty of destroying cockroach eggs. Cockroaches could be in a container coming f,-om another country. I wish to know whether the new amendments to the Act will in fact encompass the changes in shipping and stevedoring operations which are occurring or whether it is proposed to amend the Act further at some later stage to cover these changes.
– I shall be very brief with my remarks. I wish to draw the Government’s attention to the serious consequences of the entry of diseases into Australia. I am sure that everyone will agree that any person who knowingly introduces a disease into the country should be severely dealt with. But I question whether the penalties suggested by the Government fit the offence. I believe that more appropriate penalties are provided for in Senator Dittmer’s amendment. I believe that it may be necessary to examine other legislation to determine whether the proposed legislation provides for sufficient penalties to be imposed on those who wilfully ignore the laws of our land.
Iiic ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Bull) - Order! I point out that you will have an opportunity to discuss that aspect at the Committee stage if you wish, Senator Milliner, although it is quite in order for you to continue along those lines at this stage.
– I referred to the Mexican wetbacks and asked whether a similar situation could exist in Australia.
– Who determines that?
– How about the eggs?
– Once a year is enough.
– And Senator Cormack.
There is only one amendment that the Opposition wishes to move. Many Government supporters have spoken of the lightness of the penalty in certain cases in relation to the terrible nature of the crime. The Opposition feels that it is a terrible crime knowingly to introduce some of these wretched diseases into the country. Many honourable senators have emphasised the tremendous economic dislocation and damage that could result from animal diseases. Many of us know the havoc wrought by many diseases that human beings carry. Consequently, so as not to prolong the discussion too much, I simply move:
Leave out -
Section 67 (1 . ) - Omit “Five hundred pounds”, insert “Two thousand dollars or imprisonment for 5 years”.’, insert -
Section 67 (1.) - Omit “Five hundred pounds”, insert “Punishable upon conviction by a fine not exceeding One hundred thousand dollars or imprisonment for a period not exceeding 10 years”.’.
– Do you realise the seriousness of the offence?
The Committee divided. (The Chairman - Senator T. C. Drake-Brockman)
Majority . . . . 4
Question so resolved in the negative.
Schedule agreed to.
Clause 1 8 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.
Bill (on motion by Senator Dame Annabelle Rankin) read a third time.
Mail Services: Australian Security Intelligence Organisation
Motion (by Senator Dame Annabelle Rankin) proposed:
That the Senate do now adjourn.
I mentioned at question time today to the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Anderson), who I thought was the appropriate Minister, and the Minister for Housing (Senator Dame Annabelle Rankin) who is now present would have heard my statement, that because 1 have not received any satisfaction on a question that I raised during the adjournment debate 2 days ago I proposed to bring the matter before the Senate again on the adjournment today. I am perturbed that an item of correspondence can be opened by a Government department when it is addressed to a foreign embassy. Although the Department of External Affairs has had nearly 2 days in which to carry out some sort of investigation and to advise me of what is taking place, it has failed to do so. This could be indicative of only two factors: Firstly, that the Department, and perhaps the Government, is not interested in what goes on in this regard and. secondly, that the duties are beyond the capabilities of the Minister for External Affairs (Mr Freeth) and his Department. Consequently, I now request that the Minister for Housing, who represents the Postmaster-General (Mr Hulme) in this place, take up on my behalf a thorough inquiry into why the letter to whichI have referred was opened in these circumstances. I do not believe that the Department of Externa) Affairs intends to take any action in Che matter.
I was always under the impression that there were regulations governing the PostmasterGeneral’s Department which completely forbid the opening of mail, except in the special circumstance when a letter has gone to the Dead Letter Office. I understand also that people who open letters in these circumstances are bound by an oath of secrecy not to disclose the contents of letters. Probably the letter in question was not very important in the strict sense and it could have been a communi cation of any type addressed to some place other than the Bulgarian Embassy, but it might have been read by half a dozen or more people. 1 believe the situation demands a serious explanation and demands also that an investigation be carried out as expediously as possible. I ask now that the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral take the appropriate action with all expedition and, if possible, have an explanation before the Senate next Tuesday.
– Mr Deputy President
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Drake-Brockman) - Does the honourable senator wish to speak to the adjournment motion?
– He only wants to incorporate something.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT- Leave is not granted.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 27 February 1969, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1969/19690227_senate_26_s40/>.