Senate
26 October 1971

27th Parliament · 2nd Session

  1. Senate
  2. 27th Parliament
  3. 1971

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

page 1441

QUESTION

SENATORS FITZGERALD AND NEGUS

The PRESIDENT:

-I thinkI should direct the attention of honourable senators to the fact that Senators Fitzgerald and Negus, about whom we had a momentary feeling of despair, are both in their places in the Senate this afternoon.

Honourable senators - Hear, hear!

page 1441

PETITIONS

Aid to India and East Pakistan

Senator GUILFOYLE:
VICTORIA

– I present the following petition:

To the Honourable the President and members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of citizens of the Commonwealth respectfully showeth:

That we express our deepest concern for our fellow men suffering in the refugee camps in India. While we recognize India’s outstanding contribution in providing as far as possible, for their -immediate needs, we consider that this is a prob- lem for all mankind to help solve, as there are 8 million people, many of them helpless children, affected.

We have matched our words by deeds with contributions to our own special appeal in the Diamond Valley, Victoria.

Now’we ask the Government to:

. Give immediate aid of at least $10m to help relieve the suffering.

Take the necessary diplomatic steps to seek a political solution.

Urge the United Nations to make a more effective effort to intervene on behalf of these stricken people.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray,.

Petition received and read.

Adelaide Airport

Senator JESSOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I present the following petition:

To the Honourable the President and members of the Senate, in Parliament assembled. The humble Petition of the undersigned Citizens of the Commonwealth, respectfully sheweth:

That being concerned withthe environment of Adelaide in the State of South Australia and the growing noise nuisance of the Adelaide Airport the petitioners pray that no action will be taken whereby the Department of Civil Aviation will be permitted to extend runways at the Adelaide Airport at its existing location or over other adjacent land.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.

Petition received and read.

page 1441

NOTICE OF MOTION

Senator MURPHY (New South Wales-

Leader of the Opposition) - I give notice that contingent on the Senate in Committee of the Whole considering the vote in the Appropriation Bill 1971-72 for the Department of Foreign Affairs I shall move:

That the House of Representatives be requested to amend the Bill in respect of the Department of Foreign Affairs so as to provide that Australian aid relief of Pakistani refugees be at least the equivalent of $1 for each person in Australia.

page 1441

QUESTION

PERSONAL STATEMENT

Senator NEGUS:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I ask for leave to make a personal statement.

The PRESIDENT:

– Is leave granted? There being no objection, leave is granted.

Senator NEGUS (Western Australia) - I wish to express my deep appreciation to you, Mr President, and to the Senate for the expressions of sympathy on the occasion of the death of my wife in such tragic circumstances and my own personal illness. I assure you that the misfortune was made easier for my family and me to bear by your sincere wishes.

page 1441

QUESTION

CHINA

Senator MURPHY:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Is it a fact that the Australian Government for many years has contended that there is only one lawful government of all China? Is it a fact that this day the United Nations has overwhelmingly recognised the People’s Republic of China as the one lawful government of all China? Will the Government now cease its foolish course of claiming that the Chiang Kai-shek regime in Taiwan is the one lawful government of all China, including mainland China, and will it give immediate recognition to the People’s Republic of China as the lawful government of China?

Senator WRIGHT:
Minister for Works · TASMANIA · LP

– It is the fact, as reported to me, that the United Nations has agreed to the Albanian resolution by 76 votes to 35, with 17 abstentions. I quote the figures from memory; there may be a slight inaccuracy. With regard to the latter part of the honourable senator’s question, I take objection to the form of it. In any case, I would refrain from giving an expression of the Government’s attitude on such a matter in response to any impromptu suggestion, even if it were in proper form.

page 1442

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY HOUSING

Senator DONALD CAMERON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Is the

Minister representing the Minister for the Interior aware of an acute shortage of housing throughout the Northern Territory and that on current indications the waiting times for accommodation will increase, particularly in Darwin? Does the Minister regard suitable housing with a minimum waiting time as necessary to ensure that the development growth of the Northern Territory is not impeded? Can the people in the Northern Territory expect any Government assistance that will alleviate the present housing situation?

Senator COTTON:
Minister for Civil Aviation · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– It is my understanding that this matter is being investigated at the present time. There has been some housing problem in the Territory, compounded by 2 particular factors - a rather rapid growth of population because of activities of the mining industry and governments themselves, and equally the very high cost of constructing in the Territory. I understand this is the fact. I know that the investigation is proceeding. If I receive further information which will aid the honourable senator on the matter, I will see that he receives it.

page 1442

QUESTION

NURSING HOMES

Senator CARRICK:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Minister for Health. It refers to the current public discussion regarding conditions in nursing homes. Firstly, will the Minister outline the areas of responsibility and supervision of the States and the Commonwealth on this matter? Secondly, will he ensure by cooperation with the States, with whom the basic responsibility lies, that the State health authorities and the Commonwealth are thoroughly vigilant in their regular inspections of all such nursing homes so as to ensure the highest possible standards of care and treatment?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSONI respond to the honourable senator’s question by saying initially that the question of setting and maintaining the standards of nursing homes, which is most important, is primarily a State area of responsibility. That is the fundamental thing which has to be understood. Legislation exists in each State for the registration or licensing of nursing homes and the supervision of the minimum standards of such homes. Each State has its own inspection team which carries out inspections of homes directed to their standards. It follows that any criticism of the standards of a particular home should be directed in the first instance to the State authorities.

The Commonwealth supervision is concerned with the payment of nursing home benefits. Of course close co-ordination between the Commonwealth and the State authorities is maintained. Where unsatisfactory features are disclosed by Commonwealth inspectors the State authorities are immediately informed. I see a need for even greater co-ordination in this area. I plan to talk with the State Ministers regarding the intensification of efforts by the State authorities to ensure that ali nursing homes provide the proper standards of care. That is in fact a brief summary of the situation as I see it. If any honourable senator has evidence of a nursing home being below standard, I feel that he has an obligation to make that information available either direct to the State authorities or to myself. If it is made available to me it will be treated in confidence and the States will be informed of it. Because there is a Commonwealth subvention in respect of nursing homes the Government has an obligation not only to inform the States of any unsatisfactory situation but also to make an examination of the payments it makes in respect of that nursing home.

page 1442

QUESTION

WOOL

Senator POKE:
TASMANIA

– My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. Is it a fact that under the Wool (Deficiency Payments) Act payments go to the mortgagee or the holder of a bill of sale, namely, the wool broker, for the wool involved? If so, does this mean that money allegedly paid to help the wool growers and to resuscitate dying country towns will not in fact reach either the wool grower or the local trader?

Does the Government agree that this massive subsidy to wool brokers is a classic case of misrepresentation both to the taxpayers and the wool growers who were expecting relief from the Government?

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
Minister for Air · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · CP

– 1 think I answered a similar question earlier in this sessional period along the lines that the deficiency payments would be paid through the broker to the producer.

Senator Donald Cameron:

– Without any charge or commission?

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:

– Yes. I also said that if there was a lien against the clip or something like that the broker would pay himself and the remaining money would be sent out with the sales accounts. 1 understand that that is the position. I will read the honourable senators question to see whether there is anything further to add.

page 1443

QUESTION

APPLES AND PEARS

Senator WILKINSON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. Can he give any reason why the Australian Apple and Pear Board is not prepared to consider and act on the carefully prepared submission presented to it by the West Australian industry regarding freight and other matters of vital concern to the growers? Will the Minister request the Minister for Primary Industry to examine immediately the submission that is at present in the hands of the Board, which claims that it would put the industry in each State on a much more satisfactory financial basis, and if necessary make a recommendation to the Board? *

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– I understand the reason behind the honourable senator’s question. The Western Australians attended a meeting that was held recently in Melbourne and put their case to the Board. I believe that they had 3 different proposals to put in the way of shipping and shipping freights, but that the Board adopted the view that as it is at the present time negotiating with the shippers on this matter it should not look at the Western Australian submission until it had thoroughly completed its negotiations. I understand also that the Western Australians want to bring representatives of the shippers into the meeting, but this was not accepted by the meeting and unfortunately the Western Australian delegates walked out of the meeting.

page 1443

QUESTION

AID TO OVERSEAS COUNTRIES

Senator KEEFFE:
QUEENSLAND

– I ask the Minister representing the Treasurer: What proportion of the first Si. 5m made available by the Australian Government for Indian refugee aid was expended on freight and what proportion was expended on other administrative charges?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

– I will obtain the information for the honourable senator and let him have it as quickly as I can.

page 1443

QUESTION

SEAT BELTS

Senator CANT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Minister representing the Treasurer whether sales tax ls payable on seat belts to be installed in motor vehicles. If so, will the Treasurer give favourable consideration to its abolition in view of the fact that the wearing of seat belts is now compulsory in many States?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

– It is true that most of the States are introducing legislation to make compulsory the use of seat belts in motor vehicles. On reflection I recall that the compulsory use of seat belts was recommended by the Senate select committee of which I had the great honour to be chairman some years ago. It is my understanding, subject to correction, that the purchase of safety belts for use in motor vehicles attracts sales tax. If that is true, as I suspect it is, I will refer the honourable senator’s question to the Treasurer together with the views he has expressed.

page 1443

QUESTION

QUEENSLAND MINES LIMITED

Senator RAE:
TASMANIA

– Has the attention of the Attorney-General been drawn to Press reports of statements of various directors of Queensland Mines Ltd relating to the introduction to the board of that company of Mr R. J. Searls, who is the Australian managing director for Newmont, a large United States mining company?

The PRESIDENT:

– Order! I have been studying this matter of questions being asked that relate to newspaper reports and I wish to address myself once more to the

Senate on this subject. I remind the Senate that it has been ruled on many occasions that while questions may be based on newspaper or other reports, quotations arc not in order. The purpose of questions is to obtain information. Questions should bc brief so that as many as possible may be asked within the time allotted. I therefore reaffirm that senators must frame their questions in such a way as not to contain quotations. In elaboration 1 point out that no honourable senator asking a question based on newspaper reports can verify or give an undertaking that the reports are accurate. I call Senator Rae.

Senator RAE:

– I ask the AttorneyGeneral whether he is aware that the directors of Queensland Mines Ltd have by a majority decision introduced to the board of that company Mr R. J. Searls, who is the Australian managing director for Newmont. a large United States mining company, and also have decided by a majority that the offer of a group called Newaim Pty Ltd, which includes Newmont and another overseas company, has been accepted. That offer is to carry out certain evaluation and development programmes in relation to the Nabarlek deposits of Queensland Mines Ltd.

Can the Attorney-General tell the Senate whether the present provisions of the Companies (Uranium Mining Companies) Ordinance are intended to prevent the actual control of the development of the Nabarlek uranium deposit and the sale of its produce from falling into the hands of overseas companies by contract as opposed to Australia’s losing control by shareholding of such overseas companies. If so, are the present terms of the ordinance adequate to carry out that intention?

Senator GREENWOOD:
Attorney-General · VICTORIA · LP

– I have read in the newspapers reports attributed to existing or past directors of Queensland Mines Ltd - I am not sure of the precise details of the reports I have read - suggesting that a representative of the American firm Newmont has been appointed a member of the board of, I think, Queensland Mines Ltd. I have also read in the same Press reports that there has been some arrangement contemplated between Queensland Mines and other overseas companies. As far as the substantive part of the honourable senator’s question is concerned, the Companies (Uranium Mining Companies)

Ordinance was concerned to ensure that there was a limit placed upon the foreign shareholdings in those companies. The policy behind such a restriction is obviously to limit the amount of foreign shareholding. If it would appear that by other means the purposes of those ordinances are to be frustrated or nullified, then a question of policy arises for the Government. I shall investigate this matter carefully in the light of the question which the honourable senator has asked and give consideration to the matters which have been raised.

page 1444

QUESTION

HOSPITAL BENEFITS ASSOCIATIONS

Senator WILLESEE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Minister for Health: Has any hospital benefits association been investing on the speculative market? Does the Government exercise any control over the investment of moneys by health funds?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

–

I am not aware of the methods of investment of the reserves of the health funds. I would like to take the question on notice to give a more comprehensive answer to it. My clear understanding at the moment is that the Commonwealth would be concerned to ensure that the reserves of a fund are so protected as to enable that fund at all times be able to pay the claims that are made upon it. Nevertheless, this is a matter that perhaps could be enlarged upon. Tomorrow I shall give a considered further answer to the honourable senator’s question.

page 1444

QUESTION

RURAL RECONSTRUCTION SCHEME

Senator LAUCKE:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I ask a question of the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. In the rural community there appears to be widespread uncertainty as to whether those producers who qualify for assistance under the terms of the rural reconstruction scheme will continue to have their financial affairs directed through their usual bank or stock firm, or whether there will be direct government-to-producer provisions of funds. Can the Minister clarify this position for me?

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– I am quite sure that the honourable senator will be aware of the fact that under the rural reconstruction scheme the Commonwealth and each of the States agreed that moneys should be paid to eligible producers engaged in the rural industries. The scheme stipulated that each State had to set up its rural reconstruction authority, and that authority was to make available to the eligible producers the money that had been provided to it by the Commonwealth. I understand that if the authority sees fit it may require that the moneys received on account of the property be received by the authority, by its agent or by some other authority or body nominated by the authority. I understand that under this plan payments within the approved budget are made through normal channels.

page 1445

QUESTION

HIGHER SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATIONS

Senator DOUGLAS McCLELLANDIs the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Science aware that today in New South Wales tens of thousands of teenagers are going through the perspiratory, nerve racking and indeed traumatic experience of sitting for their higher school certificate examinations? Will the Minister be prepared not only to wish them the best of success in theexaminations but also to give them an assurance that, when successful, they all will be able to obtain enrolment at and admission to a university, a college of advanced education, a teachers college or other institution of higher education to enable them to fulfil completely their tertiary and professional desires and to equip themselves to the utmost educationally to serve the best interests of Australia as a nation?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

-I hardly perceive in the honourable senator’s question a content upon which a reliable and useful answer could be based. Suffice it to say that the honourable senator will be well aware, both from debates in this place and from information available, that in Australia the educational opportunities afforded to today’s youth are tremendous.

page 1445

QUESTION

COMPULSORY UNIONISM

Senator YOUNG:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Can the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service say whether it is the policy of Commonwealth departments and instrumentalities, including the Reserve Bank, to have compulsory unionism for staff members including those who are employed as cleaners? If there is no policy supporting compulsory unionism, can the Minister say whether pressures are being exerted by trade union leaders to force people to join a trade union?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– It would be well known that neither the Commonwealth Government nor any of its instrumentalities effectuates a policy of compulsory unionism. I would need to have more particulars about whether any pressure is at present being exerted in any instrumentality before I would be ableto give a useful answer.

page 1445

QUESTION

CIVIL AVIATION

Senator POYSER:
VICTORIA

– My question is addressed to the Minister for Civil Aviation. Earlier this session I asked him a question about the replacement of the Qantas Airways Ltd DC4 aircraft which currently services Norfolk Island. On that occasion he indicated that a replacement aircraft was being examined and that a decision as to a suitable replacement would be made in the ‘reasonable future’. Has he any further information as to when a suitable modern aircraft will replace the one now operating between Australia, Norfolk Island and New Zealand?

Senator COTTON:
LP

– I remember the question and the answer because about a week or so before the question was askedI had been studying the possibility of obtaining a replacement aircraft. The aircraft I mentioned as the one being studied was the Boeing 737 which has some capacity to serve Norfolk Island and possibly Wellington, New Zealand, as well on a 3-cornered operation. That study is still taking place. I have not heard from Qantas Airways Ltd the final results of the study, but the question will be a reminder to me to ask Qantas how far it has progressed.

page 1445

QUESTION

EARTHQUAKES

Senator MAUNSELL:
QUEENSLAND

– Is the Minister for Works aware that recently 2 large earthquakes were reported in the Solomon Sea area, between New Britain and Bougainville? Will the Minister inform the Senate of the precautions taken by his Department in the design and construction of buildings in earthquake areas?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– I am aware of the serious concern occasioned by the earthquakes referred to by the honourable senator. The Department of Works takes special precautions in regard to the likelihood of such events in that area and makes a special study of all recent information that would apply to buildings which might be subjected to the risk of earthquakes. However, no absolute guarantee can be given that any method yet devised can withstand an earthquake of the character referred to by the honourable senator.

page 1446

QUESTION

HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL BENEFITS

Senator BROWN:
VICTORIA

– Is the Minister for Health aware that recent changes to the national health scheme affecting the hospital and medical benefit entitlements of many insured pensioners are causing great confusion and hardship? Will the Minister ascertain whether fund organisations are accepting contributions from pensioners for hospital benefits which cover them for public ward treatment only? . If they are, what benefits can the funds provide for a pensioner that he or she is not already entitled to? Is it a fact that pensioners who insure themselves for intermediate and private ward hospital benefits have to pay all fees charged for medical treatment while in either ward? Will the Minister, as a matter of urgency, make a comprehensive statement to clarify the position for pensioners, who are eligible for the pensioner medical service and who belong to fund organisations for hospital and/or medical benefits, as to their entitlement under the pensioner medical service scheme and their entitlement to the payment of benefits from a fund organisation?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

I shall provide a comprehensive answer to this comprehensive question which contains many implications, particularly as to conditions which may apply in the various States. As a general rule in New South Wales a condition of the treatment of a pensioner in a hospital is that no charge shall be made. It is a consideration in regard to payments by the Commonwealth to the States for this purpose that no charge shall be made in respect of pensioners who are treated in public wards of hospitals. Insofar as pensioners are insured and would attract a refund in respect of intermediate wards, there are implications as to the position in one State vis-a-vis another. I would not like to give an answer on that point during question time, but tomorrow I shall give a comprehensive answer which will cover the position in all States. Bearing in mind that the honourable senator and I are from different States, I would not like there to be any confusion as to what I said and in which State it applied.

page 1446

QUESTION

GRASS SEED

Senator WEBSTER:
VICTORIA

– My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Industry. Is the Minister aware of the growing concern among Australian producers of grass seed that importations of seed into Australia are creating a depressed market for local production? Is the Minister aware that grass seed is basically unrestricted in its volume of imports into Australia and that in general no duty applies to its importation, the only restriction being that seed must receive a certification by officers of the Department of Primary Industry? Will the Minister investigate allegations of the dumping of seed, particularly of perennial rye grass, from the 3 main exporters of seed to Australia, and will he assure Australian producers that the Government will not countenance them being harmed in this way?

Senator COTTON:
LP

– It was my impression that most of the grass seed that came to Australia came from New Zealand, particularly from the North Island in the case of rye grass and from the South Island in the case of clovers. I understand that there is quite a substantial production of grass seed in Australia. I am not aware of the impact that imports have had on that Australian production, but I shall certainly take the matter up and speak to the Minister about it to see what the situation is and what can be done to make sure that there is adequate protection for the local seed producers. However, I must make the comment that under the New ZealandAustralia Free Trade Agreement, I imagine, there is some right of entry for New Zealand grass seed, but I shall need to check the matter out in detail. I think the honourable senator would understand that.

page 1447

QUESTION

RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

Senator James McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Has the Minister’s attention been Irawn to a statement reported in the ‘Sydney Morning Herald’ of 22nd October and attributed to Senator Young, in which the honourable senator is alleged to have said that there is no more racial discrimination in Rhodesia than there is in Australia? Is the Minister aware also that the former Prime Minister, Mr Gorton, before the 1969 election, promised that all discriminatory laws against Aborigines would be abolished in the life of the present Parliament, and that the then Minister-in-Charge of Aboriginal Affairs. Mr Wentworth, had his Department prepare a list of State laws discriminatory against Aborigines which comprised 6 foolscap pages, many of which laws have nol yet been repealed? Will the Minister consider sending an apology to the Rhodesian Government for the insult implicit in Senator Young’s equation of that Government’s, discriminatory laws and practices with those of Australia?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– There is.no part of the honourable senator’s question to which I would think it appropriate to reply.

page 1447

QUESTION

VACCINATION

Senator MULVIHILL:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– 1 direct a question to the Minister for Health. In the light of the current policy of rather rigid vaccination procedures applying to all air travellers entering Australia, what were the reasons for the apparent favouritism accorded to the United States vocalist Bobbie Gentry who apparently was able to avoid these procedures? In particular, did she specifically refuse to accept the needle vaccination procedure?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

I have had some inquiries made about this matter. Australia reserves the right in respect of arrivals by air from areas not specially exempt under provisions of the Quarantine Act 1908-1969 to isolate any persons who do not have a current valid international certificate of vaccination against smallpox and who refuse or are unable to be vaccinated against this disease. In September 1969 the vaccination certificate requirements for travel by air from the United States and Canada were modified for persons who are not vaccinated against smallpox and who are subject to medical conditions or treatment which would make vaccination medically inadvisable. The quarantine officer must satisfy himself that the passenger is suffering from a condition or undergoing treatment which contra-indicates vaccination or is suffering from certain specific conditions. Further, the person must make a statutory declaration that he or she has not been outside the United States. Canada or intermediate countries situated in the direct trans-Pacific air route between Australia and North America or an exempt area for at least 14 days immediately prior to departure for Australia. Finally, he or she must apply for release under surveillance and undertake to observe the conditions set out in a permit or release issued by the quarantine officer. Surveillance entails attendance at an office of the Department of Health or at a specific place to be seen by a doctor for a period of up to 14 days, usually at second daily intervals. Miss Gentry was permitted to enter Australia after Commonwealth medical officers had determined that she was receiving medical treatment preventing vaccination against smallpox. She was released under quarantine surveillance subject to the conditions which I have indicated in my reply.

page 1447

QUESTION

ADELAIDE AIRPORT

Senator BISHOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Minister for Civil Aviation. It relates to the possible extension of the runways at Adelaide Airport and also to whether there is substitute land, now owned by the Department of Civil Aviation, which would be made available in the event of the trust lands being required for runway extensions. Since the meeting of the relevant Estimates Committee, has the Minister had a chance to examine the issue as to whether the vacant land might be a fair substitute for the reserve trust lands? When is the Minister likely to visit the area to examine conditions for himself?

Senator COTTON:
LP

– The examination is going on at present. I am obtaining some help from the Department. I hoped to be able to visit the airport on my way to Perth on Thursday but I was unable to do so because of other problems. I had to cut the trip a day short. I still hope to visit the airport in November.

page 1448

QUESTION

DEFENCE: AMERICAN INSTALLATIONS IN AUSTRALIA

Senator CAVANAGH:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Leader of the Government in the Senate whether the authoritative journal ‘Janes All the World’s Aircraft’ has reported that American spy photographs of Russian and Chinese missile tests are now being relayed from satellites to a secret United States base in Australia? Does the report say that the base is 300 miles north of Adelaide and is believed to be at Narrungar, Woomera? As the report also claims that Narrungar is controlled by the Pine Gap base will the Government now reveal the role of Pine Gap and Narrungar, or are Australians to be kept in the dark forever about foreign military installations which will ensure that this country is an essential early target in any nuclear war? Further, I ask the Minister: As China is now to become a member of the community of nations, will the Government as a member of that community ensure that Australiansited bases are not used to spy on another friendly member country?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

I have not had the advantage of seeing the document to which the honourable senator has referred; therefore, I cannot answer the preliminary part of his question. As to the balance of his question, I recall that the Leader of the Opposition early in these sittings asked me a question on Pine Gap. I replied to that question. The final points in the question asked by Senator Cavanagh clearly relate to matters of Government policy. It would be quite improper and inappropriate for me to respond on those points at question time.

page 1448

QUESTION

INSURANCE COMPANIES

Senator MURPHY:

– My question is directed to the Attorney-General and, perhaps, to the Minister representing the Treasurer. Is the Attorney-General aware that the Fire and All Risks Insurance Group which consists of the Fire and All Risks Insurance Co. Ltd, the Car Owners Mutual Insurance Co. Ltd, Falkirk Insurance Co. and Australian and International Insurance Ltd has come to the attention of the Workers Compensation Commission of New South Wales and that a few days ago after evidence given by a number of the judges permission to operate as a compensation insurance company was surrendered by the Fire and All Risks Insurance Co. Ltd and a motion, again instituted from the Commission, has been made similarly in regard to Australian and International Insurance Ltd, and that this action is based on the unsound financial structure of the companies? If the Attorney-General is not aware of these matters, is he aware that a series of incidents concerning insurance companies has occurred which suggests that tens of thousands of people who have paid premiums in good faith have only dubious protection because they are insured with unsound companies? I ask the Minister: How much longer will it be before legislation will be introduced under the insurance power of the Commonwealth to regulate and to supervise fire, accident and other insurance companies including particularly those dealing with motor vehicle insurance, in the same way as is done with life assurance companies by Commonwealth law?

Senator GREENWOOD:
LP

– I was not aware of the particular instances to which the Leader of the Opposition has referred; nor am 1 aware that there is a situation in this country whereby tens of thousands of persons may have dubious insurance policies. I would hope that any currency would not be given to any such suggestions because I fear that in certain circumstances what is adequate and proper security might cease to be adequate and proper security simply because of a fear which becomes widespread and which, whilst not promoting a ‘run on the banks’, creates great uncertainty in people’s minds as to whether or not they might change their insurance companies and thereby create a problem which is not in existence.

Senator Murphy:

– I am rather understating the position, am I not?

Senator GREENWOOD:

– I am quite conscious that Senator Murphy did not advert to that possibility. All I will say is that it is a matter which has had some publicity given to it in recent months. As I recall the position, certain statements have been made by my predecessor. The general question as to what the Commonwealth Government might do and when it might be done is a matter of policy which I do not take further at this point of time.

page 1449

QUESTION

SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT

Senator WILLESEE:

– I ask the Minister for Civil Aviation: On what date does Qantas Airways Ltd’s recently renewed option on the Concorde aircraft expire? Has the Government or Qantas commissioned any investigation by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation or any other body into the effects of supersonic transport planes on the upper atmosphere?

Senator COTTON:
LP

– I cannot give the precise date of the Concorde option that Qantas holds at the present time but I am under the impression that it is March or a bit later next year. The Department of Civil Aviation has undertaken to give all its material to the Academy of Science with a request that it look at all the scientific data available from us or anywhere else to make a calculated and careful judgment of any effect that supersonic aircraft might have on the upper atmosphere. I would hope to see that concluded about March next year but I cannot guarantee it. That is the situation we are in. The economic evaluation is being made by Qantas with help from time to time from my Department. The Concorde situation of course rests very much upon other option holders, much further up the option table than Qantas, taking up their options.

page 1449

QUESTION

AIRPORT SECURITY

Senator McAULIFFE:
QUEENSLAND

– My question is directed to the Minister for Civil Aviation. Is the formation of airport security committees at major airports in Queensland completed? If so, are the measures that are being developed to combat aircraft hijacking and sabotage sufficient to enable adequate law enforcement at these airports?

Senator COTTON:
LP

– I think it will be understood that for very good reasons I do not wish to elaborate particularly on airport security measures. I shall be happy to talk to Senator McAuliffe privately about this; I think that would aid him. I can tell him then what he would like to know.I would prefer not to develop the matter any further now.

page 1449

COMMUNIST CHINA

Senator GIETZELT:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Leader of the Government in the Senate draw to the attention of the Prime Minister the following statement attributed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs while recently in Tokyo:

We have found that they-

That is the Chinese - do not mix politics with trade.

Has the Minister also been informed, as reported in the ‘Australian Financial Review’ of 14th instant, that Japanese businessmen were greatly puzzled by this statement as Japanese companies are reported not to be allowed-

The PRESIDENT:

– Order! Senator, did you hear me address the Senate earlier about quoting from newspapers while asking questions?

Senator GIETZELT:

– Yes, Sir.

The PRESIDENT:

– Well, pay heed.

Senator GIETZELT:

– I will rephrase the question.

The PRESIDENT:

– I would be delighted if you did that.

Senator GIETZELT:

– Has the Minister been informed also that the ‘Australian Financial Review’ of 14th instant states that Japanese businessmen were greatly puzzled by the statement that Japanese companies are not allowed into the Chinese market unless they publicly announce that they are not aiding theChiang Kaishek regime in Taiwan or South Korea against North Korea, and are not supplying arms or goods to the United States for use in Indo-China? Will the Minister ask the Prime Minister to dissociate his Government publicly from this latest example of naivety by the Minister for Foreign Affairs?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSONFirstly I have not been informed, to use the honourable senator’s expression, about some conclusion he draws from some article he read in some newspaper.

Senator Georges:

– Did Mr Bowen make a statement?

Senator Sir Kenneth Anderson:

– Sir, if there is a supplementary question, perhaps I should hear it before I answer the first question.

The PRESIDENT:

– I would much prefer Senator Georges to remain silent.

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

– I go back to where I started. It is quite incongruous to suggest that a Minister for Foreign Affairs would not inform the Prime Minister, or that his Prime Minister would not be aware, of statements he makes particularly while overseas. The second point 1 would make for the benefit of the questioner is this: Do not take too seriously some interpretations that certain political writers and certain newspapers wish to make in relation to statements made by Ministers for Foreign Affairs, other Ministers, or sometimes even by senators.

page 1450

QUESTION

WOOL

Senator POKE:

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. What answer has the Government to the growing criticism from a wide variety of informed sources that the measures to assist the wool industry have failed to make any real impact on the rural crisis? How does the Government reconcile its open-ended commitment to boost the price of wool for one year - a decision which could cost the taxpayers $l60m - with the decision to pay only $lm over a period of 4 years for rural reconstruction? Will the Government consider a major rationalisation of the wool subsidy scheme to allow more money to be channelled into the rural reconstruction scheme instead of pouring millions of dollars into the wool industry - much of it to wealthy brokers and big grazing companies?

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– I think the honourable senator is a little astray when he says that we are pouring money into the wool industry. I would like to remind him that, if the Australian Wool Commission had not come into being and used its reserve price scheme to protect the growers from receiving even lower prices, it is quite possible that the total return from the wool clip could have been down by 20 per cent. I think that is borne out by the prices received for those wools that are not under the protection of the Commission. In regard to the remainder of the question, I think the honourable senator meant SI 00m in his reference to the rural reconstruction scheme. All these schemes are brought in to play a part in the overall reconstruction of the rural industries. Each one of them cannot be taken separately and criticised; they must all be fitted into an overall picture. I will have a look at the question again and, if I have anything to add, I will do so on the next day of sitting.

page 1450

QUESTION

NORTHERN IRELAND

Senator MULVIHILL:

– I ask the Attorney-General: Has the Commonwealth Government received a request from the British Government for the release of a High Court judge to be. a member of a tribunal of eminent Commonwealth jurists to examine the cases of Northern Ireland internees, besides the general civil disorders there? Does he see any similarity between such a course and that followed in 1939 when the Moyne Commission investigated similar disorders in the British West Indies?

Senator GREENWOOD:
LP

– I am not aware of any such request having been received.

page 1450

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY: HOUSING

Senator CAVANAGH:

– I ask the Minister for Air a question which is supplementary to the one asked by Senator Donald Cameron of the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior. Could the Minister for Air hand over the 100 empty homes and the recreation area at the now closed air unit at Tindal near Katherine, Northern Territory, to the Northern Territory housing authority and thus release homes which are deteriorating through vacancy to assist in relieving the acute housing shortage at Katherine? If the close proximity of a defence area now prevents the use of these unused homes by civilians, could not the housing area be separated from the defence area to permit their use?

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– The

Royal Australian Air Force has further plans for the houses in that area. However, I will have a look at the suggestion made by the honourable senator and, if 1 can do anything along the. lines he has suggested, I will do so.

page 1450

QUESTION

CHINA

Senator POKE:

– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs aware that the Broken Hill Pty Co. Ltd has sent one of its senior executives to

Questions

China to sell Australian pig iron? Why does the Government not use the same initiative in quickly establishing diplomatic relations with Peking and severing our ties with Taiwan now that the United Nations has voted for reason and justice by admitting that Peking is the true Government of China?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– The logic of the statement that came in the form of a question from the honourable senator is a little difficult to follow. But I will say that BHP has to our knowledge been engaged in trading transactions with the People’s Republic of China to advantage. With regard to that aspect of the honourable senator’s question relating to the Government’s initiative, it is well known that this Government has been taking purposeful initiatives over many months now with the object of establishing diplomatic relations with China.

page 1451

QUESTION

INTEREST RATES

Senator WEBSTER:

– My question, which is directed to the Minister representing the Treasurer, relates to the interest rate charged by Australian trading banks. I ask: Is the Government satisfied that what is known as the classical method of exerting a measure of control over the bank funds available for loan is to charge a relatively high bank interest rate? Can the Government refer to any achievement, either by way of control of the cost of goods sold, a lower, inflation rate or limitation of the demand for funds, which is generated by a relatively high bank interest rate? Is the Minister aware that within the last 10 days the governments of both Germany and Italy have cut the going bank rate of interest to 4i per cent from an existing 5 per cent? Will the Government give consideration to reducing the present high rate of interest of Si per cent?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

I am very delighted to learn that the honourable senator now recognises that there is such a thing as a classical method. The honourable senator has posed many questions to me on this matter and each time I have responded by referring to what he has described as the classical method. But I do not agree that the classical method relates only to higher bank interest rates. It is my understanding that the classical

Questions 1451 method involves pitching the interest rate to the problems of the economy and1 using the interest rate as a vehicle to adjust the economy. To that extent it may well be - as was the case in the United Kingdom - that it is not a higher interest rate which is used in the classical method but, in certain instances, a lower interest rate. The balance of the honourable senator’s question relates clearly to a matter of policy. It would therefore be a decision for the Treasurer to make as to whether he wishes to respond to it. I will direct the honourable senator’s question to the Treasurer and see whether he wishes to respond to it.

page 1451

QUESTION

AID TO PAKISTANI REFUGEES

Senator KEEFFE:

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Has the Australian Government taken steps to have an observation team stationed in India to report continuously on the refugee problem and to supervise the Australian aid that is given? If not, why not?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– My understanding of the honourable senator’s question is that he has asked me whether the Australian Government has taken steps to have observation teams stationed in India to supervise the refugee problem. The Australian Government is constantly in touch with other governments and with the United Nations with regard to this matter. It is a fact that the United Nations suggested the stationing of supervisory teams in this area but that suggestion was unacceptable to India.

The PRESIDENT:

– I will accept one more question without notice.

page 1451

QUESTION

ARBITRATION

Senator GIETZELT:

– My question is addressed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Is the fact, as reported in the ‘Australian Financial Review’ of 22nd October 1971, that the Government recently brought pressure to bear on the Metal Trades Industry Association to resist moves to have collective bargaining agreements with unions? If so, is such an action a contribution to industrial peace or an unwarranted interference with the rights of employers and unions to negotiate freely in the spirit of conciliation for the fixation of just wage rates? 26 October 1971

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSON:

– Again a question by an honourable senator is related to a newspaper report.I think the obvious thing for me to do is to refer the question to the Minister for Labour and National Service. Disregarding the source of the question, it clearly relates to an industrial situation in Australia. In fairness to the honourable senator, I will direct his question to the relevant Minister.

page 1452

QUESTION

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

The PRESIDENT:

– In explanation to honourable senators of my last observation, I point out that a great number of answers have been received to questions on notice. A number of senators are desirous of getting answers to their questions today.

page 1452

QUESTION

MERGERS

(Question No. 1066)

Senator POYSER:

asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice:

  1. Has the Commonwealth Government any control over the merger of large companies, including banks and other commercial institutions and mining companies.
  2. Can the Government veto decisions of industrial unions to merge together in the common interests of its members; if so, under what legislation does this right of veto exist.
Senator GREENWOOD:
LP

– The answer to the honourable senators question is as follows:

  1. It would not be appropriate for me to express a view on the constitutional power of the Commonwealth Parliament. As far as statutory powers are concerned, there is no general provision for the control of mergers. However, controls are provided in particular areas, as in the Broadcasting and Television Act 1942-1971, the Banking Act 1959-1967 and the Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations thereunder, the Life Insurance Act 1945-1965 and in the Companies (Life Insurance Holding Companies) Ordinance 1968-1970 and the Companies (Uranium Mining Companies) Ordinance 1970 of the Australian Capital Territory.
  2. Under existing legislation the Government cannot veto decisions of industrial unions to merge together.

page 1452

QUESTION

MERGERS

(Question No. 1067)

Senator POYSER:

asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice:

  1. Are there any cases where mergers of commercial banks, other commercial or manufacturing interests, or mining companies have been vetoed by the Commonwealth Government.
  2. Are there any cases where the Commonwealth Government has vetoed mergers agreed upon between industrial unions after a ballot of rank and file members has been held and carried in favour of such mergers.
Senator GREENWOOD:
LP

– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:

  1. There have been several cases where persons submitting proposals involving the takeover of a bank or the merger of a bank with other interests have been advised that the proposals were unacceptable to the Commonwealth Government. Also, under the Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations, approval is not normally given to proposals involving the acquisition of Australian shares by an overseas company which do not provide for the shares to be paid for in full with overseas funds at the time of acquisition. Such proposals are confidential and they have not been publicly disclosed. Apart from such cases, and the effect of the Broadcasting and Television Act 1942-1971, the Life Insurance Act 1945-1965, the Companies (Life Insurance Holding Companies) Ordinance 1968-1970 and the Companies (Uranium Mining Companies) Ordinance 1970 of the Australian Capital Territory, the Commonwealth Government has not vetoed any company mergers.
  2. No.

page 1452

QUESTION

OIL SEARCH

(Question No. 1363)

Senator CANT:

asked the Minister repre senting the Minister for the Interior, upon notice:

  1. Was an oil strike made in the Northern Territory in the area adjacent to Petrel No. 1 on 6th August 1969.
  2. Is Petrel No. 1 regarded as a commercial strike, and has it been declared a commercial find.
  3. Does the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1967-1968 provide that an operator, having made a find of commercial oil, is required to declare a location within 2 years of the find; if so, has a location yet been declaredin respect of the Petrel No. 1 find.
  4. Does the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1967-1968 provide that the Designated Authority may extend the period for declaration of a location by a further 2 years; if so, has such an extension been granted in respect of the Petrel No. 1 find.
  5. Is the area referred to open for other persons to make application for a location, if a location has not yet been applied for.
Senator COTTON:
LP

– The Minister for the Interior has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. No. Natural gas was discovered at Petrel No. 1 which blew out and was subsequently controlled by a relief well No. 1a.
  2. Because of the blow-out incomplete data is available on Petrel No. 1. However, that data coupled with data’ on Petrel No. 2 subsequently drilled nearby, does not provide evidence of a commercial strike.
  3. , (4) and (5) The legislation provisions referred to in the question relate only to finds of commercial petroleum.

page 1453

QUESTION

VAMPIRE JETS

(Question No. 1405)

Senator KEEFFE:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Supply the following question, upon notice:

  1. Were 14 ex-Royal Australian Air Force Vampire aircraft sold to Westair International lnc. of Denver, United States of America, for a total sum of $11,000
  2. Have these aircraft been resold or are they about to be resold for a sum well in excess of their purchase price?
  3. Why ate obsolete Royal Australian Air Force aircraft always sold at bargain prices when the firms buying such aircraft in job lots are then able to make enormous profits at the expense of the Australian Government?
Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– The

Minister for Supply has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

See Hansard, pages 1014-1015 of 30th September 1971 for my reply to this question.

page 1453

QUESTION

AUSTRALIA-UNITED STATES RELATIONS

(Question No. 1412)

Senator POKE:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice:

  1. Has the Prime Minister written to President Nixon, protesting at his failure to give Mr McMahon advance warning of the announcement of his proposed visit to Peking? If so does this indicate that the Government is working against the United States of America alliance and has been seriously embarrassed by President Nixon’s failure to take the Prime Minister into his confidence on such a vital matter?
  2. Does this situation confirm wide public suspicion that there has been a fundamental change in relations between the Governments of the United States of America and Australia?

Senator Sir KENNETH ANDERSONThe Prime Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. and (2) I refer the honourable senator to my replies to questions without notice by Mr James on 29th September 1971 (Hansard, House of Representatives, page 1622) and by Mr Whitlam on 7th October 1971 (Hansard, House of Representatives, pages 2014-2015).

page 1453

QUESTION

NAVAL DOCKYARDS: EMPLOYMENT

(Question No. 1436)

Senator KANE:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Navy, upon notice:

  1. What unions have demanded the right to place persons in employment in naval dockyards without management having an.y right of decision in such matters?
  2. Are any officials of these unions members of the Communist Parlies of Australia?
  3. What will be done to ensure the expeditious building in Australian shipyards of the six light destroyers planned for the Royal Australian Navy?
Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– The

Minister for the Navy has provided the following answers to the honourable senator’s questions:

  1. The Federated Ship Painters and Dockers Union operates a daily ‘pick-up* system for the supply of labour to waterfront employers and demands that the naval dockyards fill their requirements for Painter and Docker labour from this source. The Federated Shipwrights and Ship Constructors’ Association also operates a ‘pick-up’ system but more flexibly than docs the Painters and Dockers Union. Occasionally the dockyards engage shipwrights through their normal recruiting processes and inform the Association afterwards.

Dockyard managements do insist on their right to refuse employment to a person who is known to be unsatisfactory, but an undesirable feature of the ‘pick-up’ arrangement is that where nothing is known of him, management is unable to check a person’s background before he starts work.

Other Unions occasionally attempt to force dockyard managements to employ their members and sometimes exert direct industrial pressure to achieve this objective. The most recent case concerned the Federal Engine Drivers & Firemen’s Association.

  1. At least one official of the Federated Ship Painters and Dockers Union, Mr Terry Gordon, is known to be a member of the Communist Party. It is believed that some of the officials of the Federated Engine Drivers and Firemen’s Association are communists.

Although no official of the Shipwrights Association is known to be a Communist, there are indications that there is some communist influence active within the rank and file; this could also be said of many of the Unions with members employed in the dockyards whether Naval or otherwise.

  1. The honourable senator can be assured that the Minister and the Department of the Navy will take every step to ensure that problems such as these do not interfere with any shipbuilding programme allocated to Australian yards.

page 1454

QUESTION

NATIONAL SERVICEMEN: MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS

(Question No. 1207)

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

What has been the cost in each of the years since 1963 of providing medical examinations for persons called up for national service.

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– The Minister for Labour and National Service has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

All national service registrants selected by ballot for consideration for call-up who are not otherwise eligible for exemption or indefinite deferment of their liability are medically examined at the earliest practicable stage after registration. Expenditure in each financial year since 1965-66 in connection with national service medical examinations (including some examinations for men who opt for service in the Citizen Forces as an alternative to full-time national service) is listed below:

These figures quoted cover in addition to normal fees associated with medical examinations the cost of X-rays and other ancillary examinations and travelling expenses of doctors, registrants and officials,

page 1454

QUESTION

MINERALS

(Question No. 1271)

Senator MILLINER:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development, upon notice:

  1. What was the quantity and value of Queensland production of (a) gold, (b) copper, (c) lead, (d) zinc, (e) tin, (f) bauxite, (g) manganese, (h) limestone, (i) monazite, (j) coal, (k) silver and (1) rutile for the 12 months ended 31st July 1971.
  2. What quantities and values of these minerals were exported for the 12 months ended 31st July 1971.
Senator COTTON:
LP

– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. The latest comprehensive data for mineral production in Queensland (both quantity and value) is available only for the calendar year 1970 and is that published in the Queensland Government Mining Journal for July 1971. This information is provided in the attached Table1.
  2. Export data (Table 11 attached) has been supplied to cover the calendar year 1970 in order to be comparable with production data in Table1.

page 1455

QUESTION

ABORIGINALS

(Question No. 1286)

Senator KEEFFE:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

Are young men of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islands descent required to register for national service? If not, why is a young Aboriginal currently being threatened with legal action by the Department of Labour and National Service for failure to register for national service?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– The Minister for Labour and National Service has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The National Service Act imposes on young men in the 20-year old age group who are ordinarily resident in Australia the liability both to register and to render service. Exempted from the liability to register are serving members of the Australian permanent forces and persons who have served for not less than 18 months and been discharged from those forces, certain diplomatic personnel as described in the National Service Act and certain Aboriginal natives of Australia as defined in the National Service Regulations.

A man required to register who fails to do so renders himself liable to prosecution and to be called-up for service regardless of the result of the ballot for his age group. The first step in such cases is to determine whether or not the person is in fact liable to register, and those who come to notice as not having registered as required may be requested by letter to answer certain questions intended to assist in establishing whether they are in fact so liable. In no case are proceedings initiated or the likelihood of legal action communicated to the individual concerned whilst any doubt remains as to his liability to register.

On the same day that his question was placed on the notice paper, the honourable senator wrote to me on the particular case. I have already explained to him that the man in question furnished the preliminary information requested of him and further inquiries on the basis of that information established that as an Aboriginal he was not liable to register. He was in no way threatened with legal action and has been advised formally to the effect that he has no liability.

page 1455

QUESTION

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

(Question No. 1310)

Senator CAVANAGH:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services, upon notice:

  1. Is Mr H. Simpson employed by the Department of Social Services at St Margaret’s Rehabilitation Centre, Adelaide, to make artificial limbs, and has he been employed by the Department for the past 7 years.
  2. Was Mr Simpson granted leave by the Department to study the making of artificial limbs overseas as a Churchill Fellow; if so, did he study in the United States of America for 12 months.
  3. Prior to his employment by the Department was Mr Simpson an artificial limb maker with the Repatriation Department in Adelaide.
  4. Has the Public Service Board denied Mr Simpson the status of prosthetistorthotist because of his place of employment; if so, (a) does this mean that the Board refuses to recognise the right of Repatriation Department to engage in the making and fitting of artificial limbs; and (b) has such refusal denied Mr Simpson his true professional status and salary.
Senator GREENWOOD:
LP

– The Minister for Social Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. Mr F. Simson has been employed by the Department of Social Services at the St Margaret’s Rehabilitation Centre, Adelaide, since March 1962 in a position of Trade Instructor. Because of his particular skills and ability, Mr Simson’s services have been utilised in the making of temporary prostheses as part of the amputee rehabilitation programme. The final prostheses are usually obtained from the Repatriation Artificial Limb and Appliance Centre.
  2. Mr Simson applied for and was awarded a Churchill Fellowship in 1967 to enable him to study the making of artificial limbs in the United States of America. He was overseas from September 1967 to August 1968 during which period he was granted leave by the Department.
  3. The Repatriation Department advises that Mr Simson was employed as a surgical fitter, mainly engaged in manufacturing surgical aids and appliances (such as splints, corsets, leatherwork, etc.) and limb finishing, but with limited experience on limb manufacturing and fitting.
  4. It is the practice for positions, appropriate to the type of work being performed by Mr Simson, to be provided only on the establishment of the Repatriation Department. The Public Service Board has recently indicated, however, that, as a basis for appropriate recognition of the duties actually performed by Mr Simson, it would be prepared to consider the introduction of an arrangement whereby a position would be created on the Repatriation Department establishment and outposted to the St Margaret’s Rehabilitation Centre of the Department of Social Services. The practicability of such an arrangement is currently under consideration.

page 1455

QUESTION

IMPORTED MACHINERY: SAFETY TESTS

(Question No. 1318)

Senator MULVIHILL:

asked the Minis ter representingthe Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

  1. What liaison docs the Minister have with other Ministers regarding safety tests for imported machinery before it is allowed to operate in Australia.
  2. How would Australian safety codes apply in the case of the mobile street crane produced by Unic Corporation of Tokyo, which has been exhibited at several eastern States’ industrial shows.
  3. What form of liaison is there between officers of the Department of Labour and National Service and officers of the State Government Departments who control safety codes appertaining to crane operations.
Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– The Minister for Labour and National Service has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. Control over the operation of imported machinery is a matter for the State or Territory into which it is introduced. Liaison between the Commonwealth and States on general problems concerning the safe use of machinery is provided through the Departments of Labour Advisory Committee (DOLAC).
  2. All States and Territories have legislation covering safety requirements for cranes. The Standards Association of Australia has issued a Grane and Hoist Code, but this does not have the force of legislation.
  3. Stale and Commonwealth authorities responsible for the use of equipment such as cranes, lifts, and scaffolding have a standing arrangement for the regular exchange of information on approvals given by the authority concerned for the use of particular items of equipment.

page 1456

QUESTION

ARMY: MUSICAL DRUMS

(Question No.1325)

Senator LITTLE:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Supply, upon notice:

  1. Did the Department of Supply recently accept a tender to provide 300 musical drums for the Royal Australian Army at$54 per instrument.
  2. Was a tender of $44.75 per drum submitted by a company which has previously supplied such instruments to the Royal Australian Army and which also exports drums.
  3. Why were drums purchased at a cost nearly 25 per cent higher than the tender mentioned in (2).
  4. How does the cost of an additional $3,000 on one contract assist the Government’s economy drive and help to control inflation.
Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– The Minister for Supply has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.
  3. Although the lower priced drum conformed generally with the specified requirements, it had been found to have certain deficiencies in use. For example, the tensile strength of the head had not proved to be sufficient for the tensioning required for pipe band use. The selected drum which had also been purchased previously, had proved to be technically superior and longer lasting in Service conditions.
  4. The additional expenditure was regarded as justified in view of the technical superiority and greater durability of the drums purchased.

page 1456

QUESTION

COAL

(Question No. 1325)

Senator MULVIHILL:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development, upon notice:

  1. Did the recent survey of black coal reserves cover all States, and what is the extent of reserves in the States surveyed.
  2. Did State Ministers for Mines co-operate in the carrying out of the survey.
  3. What are the reserves of black coal in New South Wales, excluding those involved with Clutha Development Pty Ltd projects at Burragorang Valley and in the Blue Mountains.
Senator COTTON:
LP

– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. Yes. See Attachment.
  2. Yes. The States Departments of Mines have co-operated.
  3. The information on reserves held by companies was provided on a confidential basis on the understanding that figures for individual companies would not be made public. It is regretted therefore that an answer cannot be provided to this part of the question.

page 1457

QUESTION

LIMESTONE

(Question No. 1354)

Senator MULVIHILL:

asked the Minis ter representing the Minister for National Development, upon notice:

  1. Will the Bureau of Mineral Resources conduct a survey of limestone reserves in New South Wales.
  2. Has the Bureau carried out a survey of kaolin reserves in New South Wales and can any information on kaolin reserves in that State be made available.
Senator COTTON:
LP

– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. In 1965 the Bureau of Mineral Resources published a summary account of limestone occurrences in New South Wales in its Bulletin No. 72. This was compiled, in consultation with the New South Wales would be a matter for the New and unpublished reports then available.

A field survey of limestone reservesin New South Wales would be a matter or the New South Wales Mines Department.

  1. A summary account of kaolin occurrences in New South Wales was also published in BMR Bulletin No. 72. It was compiled in the same way as the account of limestone deposits. BMR has not made any field surveys of kaolin reserves in

New South Wales and understands that no recent surveys have been made. The account of occurrences given in Bulletin No. 72 does not state a figure of kaolin reserves in New South Wales and information is not available.

page 1458

QUESTION

ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE DAKOTA: CRASH

(Question No. 1366)

Senator KEEFFE:

asked the Minister for

Air, upon notice:

  1. Did a Royal Australian Air Force Dakota aircraft crash on landing at Garbutt Airfield on 6th September 1971; if so, (a) what was the cause of the mishap, (b) were crew members injured, and (c) what was the cost of damage to the aircraft.
  2. Why did the minister not make a public statement at the time of the crash.
Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.

    1. The cause of the accident was the failure of the undercarriage to lock down properly.
    2. No.
    3. The exact cost of repairing the damage to the aircraft is not yet known but it has been assessed as in excess of$1, 000.

  2. A public statement on this type of accident was not considered necessary particularly as none of the crew members was injured.

page 1458

QUESTION

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL INFORMATION SERVICES

(Question No. 1369)

Senator WILLESEE:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment, Aborigines and the Arts, upon notice:

What is the composition of the Committee of Inquiry, appointed to investigate the adequacy of scientific and technological information services in Australia, which was announced in the Press statement of the Vice-President of the Executive Council on 7th May 1971, and when is this Committee expected to present its report.

Senator GREENWOOD:
LP

– The Minister for the Environment, Aborigines and the Arts has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The composition of the Committee is as follows:

The Committee has met 5 times so far and hopes to complete a major part of its work this year. It is expected to present its report in 1972, possibly in the first half of 1972.

page 1458

QUESTION

TELEPHONES

(Question No.1371)

Senator WILLESEE:

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

  1. How many applications for the installation of telephones in Mount Isa are still outstanding.
  2. Has the Australian Post Office informed shopowners in the East Street shopping centre of Mount Isa that, due to a lack of funds for cable laying, they must wait until March 1973 for the installation of telephones.
  3. Is the Australian Post Office currently laying cables at the Mount Isa Mines owned satellite town of Hilton, which is thirteen miles north of the city, if so, are the telephone needs of Hilton residents more pressing than those of Mount Isa city residents.
Senator GREENWOOD:
LP

– The PostmasterGeneral has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. No. Present indications arethat applications for service in the East Street shopping centre will be satisfied about March 1972.
  2. No. However, Mount Isa Mines Ltd has installed cable at its own cost at the Hilton mine site.

page 1459

QUESTION

AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY

(Question No. 1378)

Senator POKE:

asked the Minister repre senting the Minister for Supply, upon notice:

  1. Why has the Government rejected a suggestion that it should guarantee a workload for a merger between the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation and the Government Aircraft Factory.
  2. Would a statement by the Government on its intentions for the aircraft industry, and the inclusion of the industry in the five-year rolling defence programme, allow the aircraft industry to plan for the future and so eliminate employment troughs which occur between major production runs.
Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– The Minister for Supply has supplied the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. As requirements fluctuate it would not be practicable to guarantee any specific level of activity in respect of Government orders for defence equipment. This is particularly true in the defence aircraftindustry which suffers from troughs in demand between major production runs.

It is recognised bythe Government that the present Australian aircraft industry relies on defence contracts for its basic workload, and a good deal of effort has been put into the development of projects for the industry in order to reduce the present troughin requirements. At the same time the industry is being encouraged to diversify its activities so asto broaden the workload base. The main purpose of the rationalisation studies now in hand at Fishermen’s Bend is to achieve a more economic and effective industry. This course is considered to be in the best interests of the industry and those who work in it.

  1. It is stated policy to maintain a small viable defence aircraft industry in Australia and to support the ‘industry with the available defence work which can be appropriately allocated to it: this is well known in the industry.

The requirements of the Services which will result in workload for the industry are included in the Defence Programme. The industry, however, is normally aware of these requirements in advance of the Programme.

Early knowledge of forward projects and their timing does not of itself permit elimination of employment troughs. The problem is a complex one. The aim is to reduce the troughs in activity by a combination of rendering the industry more flexible, economic and effective; broadening the workload base; limiting production peaks on major projects: and developing projects for attention between major production runs.

page 1459

QUESTION

NAVAL DOCKYARDS: SECURITY

(Question No. 1417)

Senator CAVANAGH:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Navy, upon notice:

Has the Australian Security Intelligence Orga. nisation or the Naval Security Service made any report on security failure in Australian dockyards, and did either Service make any recommendations to overcome security weaknesses; if so, when were such reports made, and what action has been taken as a result.

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– -The Minister for the Navy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation has, over a long period of years, tendered advice and made recommendations concerning security in naval establishments,In1967 a Civilian Security section was established in the Department of the Navy, to reinforce the existing Service Security Organisation and a regular review of security measures is carried out and action (as may be practicable) taken to overcome such weaknesses as are revealed.

It would be contrary to the national interest, for disclosure to be made of the contentsof security reports relating to naval establishments, or the times when such reports were made, or of action as a result thereof.

page 1459

QUESTION

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

(Question No. 1429)

Senator GEORGES:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

In view of the debt owed by Australians to the late Sir Alexander Fleming, the discoverer of penicillin will the Government, through the Australian Embassy in Athens, seek clemency for his widow, Lady Fleming, who, at 62 years of age, has been imprisoned for 15 months by a Greek military court?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– The Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs has furnished the following reply:

Lady Fleming, who has dual Greek and British nationality, was sentenced to 16 months imprisonment after pleading guilty to charges connected with assisting a prisonerto escape which carry a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. In the circumstances, the Government does not consider that intervention by Australia would be approporiate.

page 1459

QUESTION

MR WILFRED BURCHETT

(Question No. 1441)

Senator GAIR:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister repre senting the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice:

  1. Is the Minister aware of the testimony of Mr Yuri Krotkov, otherwise known as George

Karlin a high ranking officer of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’ K.G.B. before” his defection in England in 1963, to the Internal Security Sub-Committee of the United States of America Senate Standing Committee on the Judiciary on 6th and 10th November 1969, which was released publicly on 28th December 1970?

  1. Is the Minister also aware that Krotkov fully identified Wilfred Burchett, an Australian journalist, as not only a paid agent of the Chinese and Vietnamese Communist Parties, but also as a Soviet K.G.B. operative, to which position Burchett was appointed in 1958 in the K.G.B.’s Special Department, which was responsible for all foreign correspondents in Moscow?
  2. Is it a fact that in the Melbourne Age of 20th February 1970, Burchett said in an interview with Mr Ron Saw, ‘I tried again, tried to get an Australian passport in Moscow when Keith Waller was there. Keith was very sympathetic and he tried hard for me, but Canberra still said no’; and further ‘Arthur Calwell and Jim Cairns have both tried to help. Jim asked nine questions in the House asking if the Government intended to make any charges against me but he didn’t get anywhere’.
  3. What position did Sir Keith Waller occupy at the time of Burchett’s admission to Australia?
  4. If the Government was aware of these matters, could the Minister state what officer or officers of the Department of Foreign Affairs were responsible for facilitating Burchett’s return to Australia on 1st March 1970 and his unhindered departure from Australia in the same month?
Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– The Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs has furnished the following reply:

  1. and (2) I am aware that the testimony cited by the Honourable Senator made reference to Mr Burchett.
  2. Yes.
  3. At the time of Mr Burchett’s admission Sir Keith Waller was Australian Ambassador to the United States.
  4. Mr Burchett’s return to and subsequent departure from Australia were not facilitated by any officer of the Department of Foreign Affairs. Mr Burchett’s case was decided by the Government, which took into account all the circumstances, including the advice of its senior advisers in the several Departments concerned.

page 1460

QUESTION

HOLSWORTHY MILITARY CORRECTIVE ESTABLISHMENT

(Question No. 1453)

Senator POYSER:

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

How many prisoners at the Military Corrective Establishment at Holsworthy are (a) members of the Royal Australian Army (b) the Royal Australian Navy and, (c) the Royal Australian Air Force.

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
CP

– The Minister for the Army has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

As at 7th October 1971 there were:

29 members of the Royal Australian Army

16 members of the Royal Australian Navy

No members of the Royal Australian Air Force. being held at 1 Military Corrective Establishment, Holsworthy.

page 1460

QUESTION

RIVER MURRAY

(Question No. 1462)

Senator WEBSTER:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development, upon notice:

  1. What is the current situation with regard to the work required to control the salinity of the Murray River system waters, and what proposals for such control are before the River Murray Commission.
  2. What Authority will assess the proposals put forward by interested States to reduce salinity in the River Murray system.
  3. Are the professional advisers to the Murray River Commission to be consulted in regard to work proposed to be carried out.
Senator COTTON:
LP

– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. The River Murray Commission and appropriate authorities of the Contracting Governments have been examining the report of the Commission’s consultants on salinity in the River Murray system. To that extent it might be said that all proposals contained in that report have been before the River Murray Commission. Suggestions for the handling of proposals for salinity mitigation works have been forwarded by the Commission to the Governments for consideration. Until these suggestions have been considered I cannot deal with them in detail, but I can indicate that they are designed to provide for appropriate liaison in the extensive study programmes that will be needed.

  2. Except where salinity reduction works are directly associated with River Murray Commission works, the States have the primary, concern for investigation and implementation, and I do not consider that any special Authority is required to assess such proposals. However, as I have mentioned above, I expect that provision will be made for liaison between the Authorities investigating these matters. In addition, it has been indicated that projects for salinity mitigation in the Murray valley will be regarded as eligible for consideration for Commonwealth financial assistance under the National Water Resources Development Programme, and any such submissions will be examined in the usual way by Commonwealth authorities.

    1. It will be for the Commission and the responsible authorities in the State and Commonwealth Governments to decide whether the professional advisers who compiled the report on salinity for the River Murray Commission are to be consulted in regard to any proposed work.

page 1461

QUESTION

INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANISATION CONFERENCE

(Question No. 1480)

Senator MULVIHILL:

asked the Minister for Civil Aviation, upon notice:

  1. Which countries attended the International Civil Aviation Organisation Conference held at The Hague from the 1st to 16th December 1970.
  2. Which countries have subsequently declined to sign the Conference Convention.
Senator COTTON:
LP

– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:

  1. The following 77 States attended the International Conference held at The Hague in December last to consider the Draft Convention on the Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, namely:

Afghanistan,

Algeria,

Argentine Republic,

Australia,

Austria,

Barbados,

Belgium,

Brazil,

Bulgaria,

Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic,

Cambodia,

Cameroon,

Canada,

Ceylon,

Chile,

China,

Colombia,

The People’s Republic of Congo,

Costa Rica,

Czechoslovak Socialist Republic,

Denmark,

El Salvador,

Ethiopia,

Finland,

France,

Gabonese Republic,

The Federal Republic of Germany,

Ghana,

Greece,

Guatemala,

Holy See,

Hungarian People’s Republic,

India,

Indonesia,

Iran,

Ireland,

Israel,

Italy,

Jamaica,

Japan,

Kenya,

Korea,

Kuwait,

Lebanon,

Lesotho,

Libyan Arab Republic,

Luxembourg,

Malaysia,

Mexico,

Netherlands,

New Zealand,

Norway,

Panama,

Paraguay,

Philippines,

Polish People’s Republic,

Portugal,

Romania,

Rwanda,

South Africa,

Spain,

Sweden,

Switzerland,

Tanzania,

Thailand,

Trinidad and Tobago,

Tunisia,

Turkey,

Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic,

Uganda,

Union of Soviet Socialist Republic,

United Arab Republic,

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,

United Stales of America,

Venezuela,

Yugoslavia,

Zambia.

  1. So far as I am aware no countries have indicated that they will decline to sign the Convention drawn up by the Conference. On the information which I have, 74 States have already signed the Convention, 10 States have ratified it and the Convention came into force as between those States on 14th October 1971.

page 1461

QUESTION

TASMANIA AIR SERVICES

(Question No. 1501)

Senator DEVITT:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister for

Civil Aviation, upon notice:

  1. Because of the growing interest and concern of all sections of opinion in the region, will the Minister provide a comprehensive statement of the Department of Civil Aviation’s present position and future proposals in regard to the airport needs of north-west Tasmania.
Senator COTTON:
LP

– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:

  1. The Department has recently joined with the airlines in reviewing the major airport developments throughout the Commonwealth and Papua New Guinea on which planning should start within the next, say. 5 years. It is a review which is undertaken with the airlines at least annually and this usually leads to some quite significant changes, both in the contents of the list as a whole and in respect of individual project priorities.

However, the airlines advised that they are not planning to introduce jet services through northwest Tasmania, at say Wynyard or Devonport, within the readily foreseeable future and, as such, neither of those airports are currently listed for major developments.

page 1462

QUESTION

ACRYLIC TOW

Senator COTTON:
LP

– On 18th August Senator Little asked the following question: ls the Minister aware of the enormous increase in the flow of acrylic tow crude materials into Australia in the last 10 years?

Has the increase been from 1,827,817 lb in 1959-60 to 13,221,455 lb in 1970-71?

Is it a fact that 1 lb of acrylic tow can be spun into the equivalent quantity of yarn that comes from 2 lb of greasy wool?

As most acrylic tow is imported from the United States of America and is duty free, whilst the United States has a duly of 25ic per lb on wool, will the Government give consideration to the imposition of protective duty against this strong competitor of our wool?

Will the Minister explain why the duty on yarn manufactured from acrylic tow was reduced from 40 per cent to 20 per cent?

What increases have occurred in the inflow of this yarn since the duty reduction?

Why is the raw material allowed in free of duty whilst even the 20 per cent duty applies to the manufactured product?

The Minister for Trade and Industry has provided the following reply:

Acrylic tow and staple are relatively newly developed products. They are not produced in Australia and have always been admitted dutyfree. This fibre came within the scope of a recent Tariff Board inquiry but, as the Board received no request for duties on acrylic low and staple, it recommended continuation of the duty-free treatment. Under normal procedures, consideration would not be given to imposing duties on this fibre unless in the context of a further inquiry and report by the Tariff Board.

Imports of acrylic tow and staple have increased from about 2.3 million lb in 1961-62, the first year for which official statistics are available, to about 14.6 million lb in 1970-71. In this latter year, the major sources of imports were Japan, followed by United States of America, United Kingdom and the Netherlands.

In the case of acrylic yarns, the Board in the same report recommended a reduction in duty from 40 per cent to 20’ per cent. It considered that as spinners obtain their basic fibre free of duty they should be able to continue to operate profitably under the same level of duties found appropriate for other discontinuous yarns. No request was received at this inquiry that duties be imposed to protect the Australian wool industry.

Imports of wholly man-made yarn predominantly of acrylic fibre rose from about 0.23 million lbs in 1969-70 to some 2.27 million lbs in 1970-71. Local yarn spinners, however, supplied more than 82 per cent of the market acrylic yarn in 1970-71. A proportion of local usage of this yarn is in carpet production where it competes against imported wool.

The relationship between the weight of raw wool and acrylic fibre varies but 1 lb of acrylic staple or tow is equivalent to about 1 lb of scoured or carbonised wool.

page 1462

QUESTION

ABORIGINALS

Senator COTTON:
LP

– On 16th September 1971, Senator Bonner asked the following question, without notice:

  1. Is he aware of a report by a union official in Darwin that Aboriginal stockmen in the Northern Territory are living in shocking hovels.
  2. Will the Minister ask his colleague to examine that allegation and, if it is correct, ensure that early action is taken to improve their living conditions.

The Minister for the Interior has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. I have seen several newspaper reports of comments attributed to Mr P. Carroll, Secretary of the North Australian Workers Union about unsatisfactory living conditions for Aboriginal stockmen in the Northern Territory.
  2. I am aware that accommodation provided for stockmen on some properties in the Northern Territory is unsatisfactory. In the case of employees who are members of the North Australian Workers Union the provisions of the Cattle Station Industry (Northern Territory) Award apply and questions of standards of accommodation provided in relation to that award are matters for the Department of Labour and National Service.

A number of pastoral owners have made substantial improvements in accommodation for employees in recent years and others have firm plans to do so. Discussions are continuing with pastoral organisations to overcome existing deficiencies as soon as possible. The Committee under Professor Gibb which the Government appointed to review the general situation of Aborigines on pastoral properties is expected to report soon and it is understood that the Committee has given attention to accommodation needs and problems.

page 1462

ATOMIC WEAPONS TESTS SAFETY COMMITTEE

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
Minister for Air · Western Australia · CP

– For the information of honourable senators, I present Report No. 2 of the Atomic Weapons Tests Safety Committee entitled, ‘Strontium 90 and Caesium 137 in the Australian environment during 1969 and some results for 1970.*

page 1463

BANKRUPTCY

Senator GREENWOOD:
VictoriaAttorneyGeneral · LP

– Pursuant to section 314 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966-1970,I present the fourth annual report on the operation of the Act for the year ended 30th June 1971.

page 1463

COMMONWEALTH POLICE FORCE

Senator GREENWOOD:
VictoriaAttorneyGeneral · LP

– Pursuant to section 11 of the Commonwealth Police Act 1957- 1966, I present the annual report of the Commissioner of Police on the operation of the Commonwealth Police Force and summary of its activities for the year ended 30th June 1971.

page 1463

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following Bills reported:

Apple and Pear Stabilization Bill 1971.

Apple and Pear Stabilization Export Duty Bill

Apple and Pear Stabilization Export Duty Collection Bill 1971.

Apple andPear Organization Bill 1971.

National Health Bill 1971.

page 1463

PLACING OF BUSINESS

Motion (by Senator Sir Kenneth Anderson) agreed to:

That followingtheintroduction of a Bill from the House of Representatives the sitting of the Senate be suspended until the ringing of the bells at approximately 10.15 p.m. this day to enable Estimates Committees A and B to meet.

page 1463

BUSINESS OF THE SENATE

Motion (by Senator Byrne) agreed to:

That notice of motion No. 1, Business of the Senate, be postponed until the next day of sitting.

page 1463

WOOL (DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS) BILL 1971

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Drake-Brock- man) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator DRAKE-BROCKMAN:
Minister for Air · Western Australia · CP

– I move:

The purpose of this Bill isto provide parliamentary approval for a scheme of deficiency payments to give wool growers an assured return during the 1971-72 season and to appropriate funds accordingly. The broad details of the scheme were provided in my statement to the Senate on 24th August last. This is not a short Bill and in order that honourable senators may be aware of its provisions it will be necessary to recapitulate on the earlier statement. It is common knowledge that wool growers’ incomes have fallen markedly. Gross returns from wool declined from $839m in 1968-69 to $547m in 1970-71. During 1970-71 more than half of all wool growers were estimated to have less than $2,000 on which to live after servicing their debts. For a significant section of the Australian community this situation will be reflected in reduced standards of living; indeed it has been estimated that approximately one million persons are wholly or partly dependent upon the wool industry for their living.

In these circumstances the Government decided to supplement market returns on wool for a period of one year. This will provide a much needed breathing space to enable adjustments to take place with a minimum of economic and social disruption. In addition the scheme will allow some payment of unsecured debts in the rural communities which are so dependent upon servicing the wool industry. During the course of the year it is anticipated that there will be a settlement of the international currency situation and other factors bearing on the price of wool, so that the market outlook will be seen with more clarity. So that there shall be no confusion I shall set out again the method for the determination of entitlement for deficiency payments. There will be a notional price schedule for all wool types constituting the Australian clip which would give an average price as near as possible to 79.37c per kilo greasy over the whole season for the full clip. This price is the metric equivalent of 36c per lb.

Certain inferior wool types, making up about 10 per cent of the clip, will not receive deficiency payments. At the end of each auction week the Australian Wool Commission will calculate the difference between total proceeds realised for eligible wools ottered at all selling centres at which the Commission operated in that week and the total proceeds which would have resulted if the notional prices had been received for the same wool types. This difference will be calculated as a percentage and applied to the gross value of the eligible wool sold by a producer to determine the amount of the deficiency payment for each grower. For all wool sold during a week the same deficiency percentage will apply but the actual amount of deficiency payment received by each grower will depend on the market price of his wool.

The scheme will cover wool sold and delivered by a producer in the period 2nd July 1971 to 30th June 1972. Wool which was delivered to brokers but not sold on 2nd July 1971 will be eligible for a deficiency payment when it is sold. Unsold wool on hand at close of business on 30th June 1972, will not be eligible. Wool purchased outside the auction system before 2nd July 1971, to be paid for before that date but not delivered until after that date, will not be eligible for a deficiency payment. However, where there was an agreement made before shearing to sell wool but payment did not become due until after 2nd July 1971 the wool will be eligible for a deficiency payment when it is delivered and full payment is made. For private sales made in the period 2nd July to 31st August 1971 the deficiency rate will be that established by the first week of auctions.

For wool sold at auction brokers will forward to the Australian Wool Commission a list of their clients who sold wool at auction showing the amount of deficiency money payable. This will be calculated on the deficiency percentage for the auction week and applied to the sale value of the eligible wool sold on behalf of each client. The excluded wools will be identified during the normal pre-sale appraisement by the Australian Wool Commission. Before the prompt date the Commission, acting as an agent of the Commonwealth will make the payment to the broker for disbursement to his individual clients. Eligible wool owned by a producer which has been included in a price averaging plan pool during the period of this Act, that is pools 3 and 4, shall receive a deficiency payment. There will be a common deficiency percentage applied to the pool proceeds for each lot of wool sold from a pool, based on the average deficiency payments on wool sold from the pool. There is also provision in the Bill that the Commission may take interim deficiency payments on wool in a PAP pool.

Merchants willing to make deficiency payments will be registered. A first sale to a merchant will attract a payment on the basis of the price in the wool shed on the property. At the time of sale the merchant and grower will sign a document attesting the sale. Registered merchants will claim on the Commission for a deficiency payment and then transmit it to the grower. In the case of an unregistered merchant, when the wool is delivered for resale either to a registered dealer, or at auction through a registered broker, the documents will accompany the wool and will be retained by the registered dealer or broker who will make the claim on the Commission and subsequently pass the deficiency payment directly to the producer. The whole of the Government’s deficiency payments scheme and the market support by the Commission is based on the auction system. The calculation of deficiency payments for private sales on an ‘on farm’ basis as against deficiency payments calculated on a gross value basis for wool sold at auction should have the effect of encouraging merchants to increase the prices they are prepared to pay to growers which in turn will reinforce the auction floor prices.

For privately sold wool it would not be practicable to have a Commission appraisement to determine for each sale the amount of inferior wool excluded from deficiency payments. Much of this wool loses its identity before it reaches a capital city. The only practicable means of estimating the amount of such excluded wools is by taking account of the average price paid to a producer by a wool merchant. The proportion of the sale proceeds on which the deficiency payment will be calculated for private sales will be progressively reduced as the average price falls below the market price for eligible wools. When the price of any private sale falls below the average market price of wools excluded from deficiency payments it will be regarded as containing only excluded wools and there will be no deficiency payment. The adjustment to take account of excluded wools will be made in accordance with a conversion table contained in the Second Schedule to the Bill which is calculated to have the same average effect as if the wool were appraised by the Commission. Provision is made to vary the conversion table by regulation to take account of changes in the market price on which the table is based.

Where wool is exported by a producer, sold by tender or used by the producer in manufacture the value for such wool for the calculation of deficiency payment will be the current market value as determined by the Commission on an Australian auction floor basis and the inferior wools will be excluded on the basis of the appraisement. I referred earlier to the inferior wool types which make up approximately 10 per cent of the clip. The aim in excluding these wools was to withdraw support from wools which do not bear the full cost of the disproportionately high sale and handling costs they involve. The Government considered that it would be undesirable to encourage delivery of such wools by increasing their value through the mechanism of deficiency payments.

It will be seen from the First Schedule to the Bill that the excluded wools are primarily locks, crutchings and similar wools which are common to the whole clip and the incidence should be equitable as between growers. Honourable senators will note that some change from the list tabled in the Senate on 24th August last has been made in the wools to be excluded, to ensure that in the present apparent over supply situation of wool, all growers would share in the exclusion. These wools are easily identifiable by growers and are difficult to mix with eligible woo! without being readily detected. Growers who fail to class out these types of wool will be penalised either by having their wool re-classed at their expense or by the lower price received.

In general, the intention is that the deficiency payment will be paid along with the proceeds of the wool and there will be the same legal rights in the deficiency payment as in the sale proceeds unless there is a separate agreement between a producer and a creditor covering the direction of a deficiency payment. Accordingly it is necessary for the legislation to provide who is to get the payment and what are the rights of persons for the payments. This is set out in Clause 9 of the Bill. In my earlier statement reference was made to the exclusion of wool on sheepskins from deficiency payments. In this situation the scheme may provide some inducement for shearing of sheep before slaughter. Such a practice could interfere with the local fellmongering of skins and Australia’s overseas trade in sheepskins. Accordingly the Bill provides that wool received from butchers, who purchased the sheep for slaughter, will not be eligible for a deficiency payment. This whole matter will be kept under review.

The payments mechanism will depend upon the active co-operation of persons carrying on business as brokers, registered classing houses, wool merchants and agents who export wool, or who sell wool by tender on behalf of producers. Such persons will be registered on application to the Department of Primary Industry and will undertake certain responsibilities in the documentation of sales, the provision of information and calculations relating to deficiency payments and the passing on of such payments from the Commission to eligible producers. It is not intended that such persons will be paid for their services as all sectors of the wool industry will benefit directly or indirectly from the scheme. However the wool industry has in recent years become increasingly geared to computers in the calculation of accounts and where the Government is satisfied that a significant cost has been incurred in reprogramming these facilities for the purpose of the scheme it may make some reimbursement. The Government will also meet the costs incurred by the Commission in the administration of the scheme.

The Bill contains the necessary provisions to protect public moneys by way of penalties for fraudulent activities and the recovery of moneys. The measures provided in this Bill give effect to a scheme which is as fair to all growers as can be devised, having in mind the objective of lifting the average price of the Australian clip of wool and the need to preserve equity between growers. At the same time the Government has been mindful to ensure that, as far as practicable, the position of the various persons who service the industry has been protected. Coming at a time when the Commonwealth and the States are deeply involved in rural reconstruction this is a most appropriate measure. While substantial restructuring and readjustments in the industry are inevitable the scheme now before the Senate will provide some cushioning of these effects and will be a steadying influence on those lenders who are concerned to realise on their security. It will allow necessary changes to take place in a more orderly manner.

The Government recognises that the present crisis in the wool industry calls for a number of measures which in aggregate represent a concerted approach to the urgent problems affecting wool growers. The deficiency payments scheme should be viewed in the context of this total approach. While marketing, research into industry problems and farm reconstruction are being pursued with all urgency, these are essentially longer term in their effects. Immediate assistance is clearly needed in the present situation. The combined effect of the Commission’s marketing activities and the deficiency payments scheme will be to lift wool growers’ returns by some $100m over last year’s market place realisations. This will go far towards preserving the wool industry’s viability and the beneficial effects will be widely felt throughout the whole Australian community of people, particularly in the rural areas.I commend the Bill to honourable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator Wilkinson) adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 4.32 to 10.15 p.m.

page 1466

ADJOURNMENT

Refugee Seamen’s Convention

Motion (by Senator Sir Kenneth Anderson) proposed:

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Senator MULVIHILL:
New South Wales

– I rise at the behest of the Seamen’s Union of Australia and Mr Souter of the Australian Council of Trade Unions to speak about the undue delay by the Government in signing the Refugee Seamen’s Convention. On the last occasion that I raised this matter I pointed out that during the last parliamentary recess I had received from the Minister for Works (Senator Wright), who represented the Minister for Foreign Affairs, a reply to my question in which I was informed that the initial impediments to Australia becoming a signatory to the Convention had been removed. I pointed out also that since 1957, when the Convention came into being, the Australian Government has been extremely dilatory in ratifying it.In raising this matter I was prompted to some extent by the fact that not so long ago when I asked Senator Wright a question on this subjectI received in reply a curt ‘no’.

I had an opportunity at a Legacy dinner this week to listen to the Reverend Colin Craven-Sands, a leading seamen’s chaplain in Sydney, who made a plea on behalf of refugee seamen. He said that it was time that removed impediments to the Convention having legislative application to seamen from various countries. He pointed out that today, with a quicker turn-round, ships seldom were in port for more than 3 days. He mentioned also that today a 200,000- ton tanker might be manned by a crew of only about 22 men. The point he was emphasising was that surely with the small number required to operate ships it was necessary to find sonic means of avoiding irritation between masters and crews.

Relating that aspect to the Australian scene, Senator Wright, who represents also the Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr Lynch), will know that the South Coast and Newcastle trades and labour council on frequent occasions has been brought into disputes between crews and masters of foreign ships. I refer particularly now to Greek ships and those sailing under the Philippines flag. These are not ordinary industrial disputes. In many cases the men involved find that they could have to answer serious charges under the criminal code of their homelands. I suggest to the Minister that foreign seamen should have some alternative to action of that kind. Perhaps some travel document could be provided. I do not suggest that these men regard themselves as potential migrants to Australia. They want to continue with their careers as seamen. They should not be put in the position where they may lose their means of livelihood because they have protested about some victimisation or exploitation, nor should they be told simply that if they do not toe the line Australia will not help them. They should not be in the position where the Australian authorities are saying to them: ‘You are a prohibited immigrant and, therefore, when you get back to your own country you may face a serious industrial or even criminal charge’.

It is against that background that many of us have advocated that the Commonwealth Government should take the plunge and become a signatory to the Refugee Seamen’s Convention. An earlier reply that I received on this subject could be interpreted as meaning that the Australian Government feared there could be some complications if seamen attempted to desert a ship in New Guinea. Quite apart from that aspect, since receiving the last reply from the Minister I have spoken to Mr John Benson, secretary of (he Seamen’s Union in Sydney, to Mr Souter and to chaplains of various denominations, all of whom have urged that the double penalty which could apply to foreign seamen should be removed. In making these remarks I do not indict tankers sailing under the Scandinavian flags or ships belonging to the British or American lines; I refer mainly to some of the lesser maritime services.

I suggest strongly that Australia should join the 14 nations which signed the Convention in 1957. Quite apart from the aspect of civil rights of seamen, I suggest to Senator Wright that a check with the provincial labour councils in the major States of Australia will reveal that seamen who have been fined have been unduly harrassed. Someone should be able to say to them: With the aid of the Australian Government we will get you alternative documents so that you can pursue your career as seamen without being subjected to the fierce penalties applying under the industrial code of your own country’. It is with that plea that 1 leave the matter with the Minister.

Senator WRIGHT:
Minister for Works · LP

-I am grateful to Senator Mulvihill for showing a continuing energy in keeping our attention focused upon the acceptance of the Refugee Seamen’s Convention. On 18th August in this place I replied to the honourable senator to the effect that acceptance by Australia was dependent upon our ironing out conditions in relation to Australian territories. The application of conventions is a matter of serious concern. It is a complicated business, especially in this case. Difficulties arise because of the necessary exchange of communications between us and the Government of Papua New Guinea.

Our acceptance of the Convention must have regard to the contingency of independence in that Territory and, naturally, we wish to be entirely in agreement with the Government of the Territory. We would not wish to take any action without the agreement of the Administrator’s Executive Council in Papua New Guinea or until the difficulties have been finally hammered out. However, I can give the honourable senator an assurance that the matter has been proceeding through discussions since I gave him an answer on 18th August and that the matter is currently under active consideration. I do not wish to detail the matters that are under discussion between us and Papua New Guinea, but with that assurance I am sure that we both will be calm in the interval until the matter is mentioned again.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 10.22 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 26 October 1971, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1971/19711026_senate_27_s50/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant