Senate
15 February 1977

30th Parliament · 1st Session



The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Condor Laucke) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 1

DEATH OF JOHN PERCIVAL TATE AND THE RIGHT HONOURABLE EARL OF AVON

The PRESIDENT:

– Honourable senators, it is with deep regret that I inform the Senate of the death on 2 1 January 1 977 of John Percival Tate, a senator for the State of New South Wales from 1949 to 1953, and of the death on 14 January 1977 of the Right Honourable Earl of Avon, Prime Minister of Great Britain from April 1955 to January 1957 .

page 1

DEATH OF FAKHRUDDIN ALI AHMED

Senator WITHERS:
Minister for Administrative Services · Western AustraliaLeader of the Government in the Senate · LP

- Mr President, I rise to inform the Senate of the death of Mr Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, the President of the Republic of India, who died on Friday, 1 1 February, and to pay tribute to his memory. Shortly after the news of his death was announced the Governor-General and the Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser) sent messages of condolence to the Acting President of India and to the Prime Minister of India. Our High Commissioner to India attended the President’s funeral in New Delhi on behalf of the Australian Government.

The late President had a long and distinguished career in Indian politics and government. He was the second Moslem of India’s 5 Presidents- a widely respected figure in India and practising law in the Punjab and Assam. In 1931 he joined the Indian National Congress which was then engaged in the quest for independence, and was arrested twice for political activities before Indian independence. In 1958 he became Finance and Law Minister in Assam where he remained until 1965, when he was made Irrigation and Power Minister in the Indian Government. In 1967 he became Minister for Industrial Development and Company Affairs and, 3 years later, Food Minister, which he remained until elected President in August 1974. He is survived by his wife, Begum Abida Ahmed, 2 sons and a daughter.

The late President brought the greatest distinction to his high office. His passing is deeply mourned. It is fitting that we in the Commonwealth Parliament should record our sorrow and convey our sympathy to the people of India.

Senator WRIEDT:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

-Mr President, on behalf of the Opposition I rise to support the motion of condolence moved by Senator Withers. The late

President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed was undoubtedly one of the outstanding figures of Indian politics, especially in the post-war years. As Senator Withers has pointed out, the late President was one of those who early in his career was detained by the British. He was involved in the very long struggle for independence in India, and the general development of that country. There is no question of the very great contribution that he made to Indian politics in the years after the War. I did have the good fortune to meet him when he was Minister for Agriculture in the Indian Government and I held a similar position in the Australian Government. I can recall the very great gentility of the man and his humanity in grappling with problems which were even worse than the problems with which I was struggling at the time. The Indian nation and, I am sure, the world as a whole regret the passing of a very great person.

Senator WITHERS (Western AustraliaLeader of the Government in the Senate)- Mr President, I ask that you convey to His Excellency the High Commissioner for India for transmission to his Government the remarks which have been made here this day.

The PRESIDENT:

– I shall do that. I invite honourable senators to stand in silence as a mark of respect to the memory of the deceased.

Honourable senators having stood in their places-

The PRESIDENT:

– I thank honourable senators.

page 2

PETITIONS

Australian Broadcasting Commission

Senator SIBRAA:
NEW SOUTH WALES

-I present the following petitions from 28 citizens of Australia:

To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned citizens of the Commonwealth, do humbly pray that the Commonwealth Government:

Subscribe to the view that the Australian Broadcasting Commission belongs to the people and not to the government of the day whatever political party.

Eschew all means, direct or indirect, of diminishing the independence of the Australian Broadcasting Commission.

Reject all proposals for the introduction of advertising into ABC programs.

Develop methods for publicly funding the Commission which will prevent the granting or witholding of funds being used as a method of diminishing its independence.

Ensure that any general enquiries into broadcasting in Australia which may seem desirable from time to time shall be conducted publicly and that strong representation of the public shall be included within the body conducting the enquiry.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.

Petition received and read.

Molonglo Freeway

Senator RYAN:
ACT

– I present the following petition from 163 citizens of Australia:

To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned respectively showeth:

The previous public inquiries into the Molonglo Arterial-Western Distributor have not considered Canberra ‘s total transport needs;

That construction of the proposed Molonglo Freeway will divert scarce public resources away from Canberra s public transport system;

That Canberra’s high unemployment problems will only be solved satisfactorily, both socially and environmentally, by the construction of urgently needed public transport facilities;

That massive environmental degradation of Lake Burley Griffin’s foreshores will occur if the proposed Molonglo Freeway is constructed;

That Canberra’s air pollution levels are already dangerously high as a direct result of over-dependence on the motor car for private transport and this situation will not be rectified in the foreseeable future by vehicle exhaust emission controls;

Than many Canberra residents, particularly in the young and elderly age groups, do not have unfettered access to a car and therefore will be substantially disadvantaged if the money proposed for the construction of the freeway is not channelled into public transport facilities which will benefit these groups.

We your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Molonglo Arterial and Western Distributor be deferred until a full public enquiry has been carried out investigating Canberra s total transport needs.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.

Petition received and read.

Torres Strait Islands

Senator ROBERTSON:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

– I present two petitions from 23 and 87 citizens respectively as follows:

To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned respectfully showeth:

That we the undersigned citizens of the Commonwealth of Australia express grave concern at the proposal to divide the Torres Strait Islands and its people by proposing a seabed boundary between Papua and Australia, south of Saibai Dauan and Boigu.

Respectfully requests that any international boundaries between Australia and Papua be set in such a way that the traditional life style and rights of the Torres Strait Islands people can be continued without interruption and unimpeded.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.

Petitions received and first petition read.

The Clerk:

-A petition has been lodged for presentation as follows:

Australian Roads

To the honourable the President and members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned concerned citizens respectfully showeth:

  1. Australia’s extensive road system is a national asset wasting because of inadequate Federal and State funding.
  2. Commonwealth Government funding of roads has fallen over the last six years from 2.9 per cent of all Commonwealth outlays to 2.3 per cent.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Senate in Parliament assembled, should ensure:

That the Commonwealth Government’s long-term policy should be to provide 50 per cent of all funding for Australia’ s roads.

That at a minimum the Commonwealth Government adopts the recommendations by the Australian Council of Local Government Associations for the allocation of $5, 903m of Commonwealth, State and Local Government funds to roads over the five years ending 1980-81, of which the Commonwealth share would be 41 per cent as recommended by the Bureau of Roads.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Senator Martin.

Petition received.

page 3

DAYS AND TIMES OF SITTING

Notice of Motion

Senator WITHERS:
Western AustraliaLeader of the Government in the Senate · LP

– I give notice that on the next day of sitting I shall move:

  1. That unless otherwise ordered the days and times of meeting of the Senate for the remainder of the session be as follows:

Tuesday, 2.30 p.m. to 6 p.m. 8 p.m. to 10.30 p.m.

Wednesday, 2.30 p.m. to 6 p.m. 8 p.m. to 1 1 p.m.

Thursday, 1 1 a.m. to 1 p.m. 2.15 p.m. to 6 p.m. 8 p.m. to 10.30 p.m.

  1. That unless otherwise ordered the sessional order relating to the adjournment of the Senate have effect at the terminating time each day.
  2. That unless otherwise ordered general business take precedence of Government business after 8 p.m. on Thursdays.

page 3

QUESTION

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

page 3

QUESTION

THE ECONOMY

Senator WRIEDT:

-I direct my question to Senator Withers, the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Will the Government concede that throughout all sections of the Australian community there is deep concern at the worsening situation in the Australian economy? Irrespective of whether the Government believes this to be a result of its own economic policies, will it take the steps which are being urged by all sections of the community to arrest the drift to a major depression in Australia in 1977?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

– Firstly, I should say that the Government does not concede that there is deep concern in the community about the matters to which the Leader of the Opposition adverted although there is in some areas and certainly there are spreaders of gloom amongst us. I do not know whether the Leader of the Opposition read a letter in today’s Canberra Times signed by one Chris Hurford, MHR for Adelaide, the shadow Treasurer. I quote the first paragraph, which states:

I can sympathise with the criticisms made in the editorial of 9 February of Labor’s alternative economic package. In current circumstances, any set of policies will have dangers as well as benefits.

I hope that members of the Opposition listen to this next part, Mr President. It states:

The danger in Labor’s approach is the possibility of intensified pressure of demand leading to further prolonging of inflation.

The Labor Party is on record as saying that it realises that its policies will lead to further and further inflation. I should have thought that the whole community is aware that the greatest enemy we have to attack is inflation.

Senator O’Byrne:

-But inflation -

Senator WITHERS:

-I think, Senator O ‘Byrne, that a former Treasurer in your party, the Honourable Frank Crean, is on record as having coined the phrase ‘one man’s wage rise is another man ‘s job’ .

Senator Walsh:

– You have got that wrong.

Senator WITHERS:

-What was the phrase? It was a phrase to that effect. We on the Government side believe that the greatest thing we can do for the community is to bring down inflation, to restore confidence and to create more job opportunities. That is what we are doing and what we will continue to do.

page 3

QUESTION

RAIL STANDARDISATION

Senator DAVIDSON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question, which is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Transport, refers to the rail standardisation project in South Australia. Is the Minister aware that Adelaide is the only mainland capital not connected with the standard gauge link in Australia? Does the Minister acknowledge South Australia’s rights as far as standardisation is concerned? Is it a fact that the Commonwealth Government has asked the South Australian Government to prepare a compromise plan which will embrace standardisation for South

Australia? Can the Minister give any information on that proposed compromise plan? Will he give an assurance that any plan will receive sympathetic consideration? Indeed, will he give a further assurance that the Adelaide connection to the Australian standard gauge system will not be jeopardised?

Senator CARRICK I am aware of the situation regarding South Australia and the standard gauge system. I am advised that the committee of inquiry which was set up to look specifically at the Crystal Brook link in the standard gauge system reported on, I think, 7 February. That report which has gone to the Minister for Transport and is available, I understand, indicated that there was no economic justification now nor will there be economic justification in the foreseeable future for the construction of the standard gauge rail link on the basis of the Maunsell plan. But it also evoked several options. The first option, of course, is not to proceed; the second option involves improvements. There have been a number of discussions. The Commonwealth Minister for Transport met the South Australian Minister, Mr Virgo, I think on 14 February. A number” of honourable senators, including Senator Jessop and Senator Bishop, were present at that meeting. I understand from my colleague the Minister for Transport that the aim at this moment is to look at the plan to see whether it can be modified in any practical way. The Commonwealth Government is very well aware of the keen interest of the people of South Australia in a form of standardised gauge railway. The Commonwealth Government, of course, is looking in a co-operative sense with the State Government towards reaching a practical solution.

page 4

QUESTION

MAREEBA MINING N.L

Senator KEEFFE:
QUEENSLAND

– I preface my question, which is addressed to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, reminding him that I wrote to the Prime Minister on 9 December 1976 regarding the impending liquidation of Mareeba Mining N.L. I ask the Minister: Since it is late February and I have not been advised by the Prime Minister of the intentions of the Government regarding this wholly Australian owned company, what is the present financial and personnel situation with Mareeba Mining N.L.? Have any geologists and /or directors been laid off or retired? Has the Government resolved the financial and legal problems with which it is associated in connection with the company?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-As the question arises out of a letter which the honourable senator wrote to the Prime Minister, I shall seek the information from the Prime Minister.

page 4

QUESTION

DESIGN WORK IN TASMANIA

Senator TOWNLEY:
TASMANIA

– I ask a question of the Minister representing the Minister for Construction. No doubt the Minister is aware that the detailed design work for many Commonwealth buildings which are to be constructed in Tasmania is done by the Department of Construction in Melbourne. I cite as examples the new Campbell Street mail exchange, the new telephone exchange in Hobart and also a telephone engineering centre which is to be built in Burnie- a total cost of some $8m. Does the Minister agree that the Tasmanian work force would benefit if the design work were done in Tasmania? Will he ask the Minister for Construction to take action so that design work for Tasmanian projects is done in Tasmania whenever that is possible?

Senator WEBSTER:
Minister for Science · VICTORIA · NCP/NP

– I understand the interest of Senator Townley in seeing that the work force of Tasmania is fully utilised, and I am sure that that is the wish of the Government at this time. In relation to work done by the Department of Construction, the head office of the Department has been located in Victoria for a number of years and I understand that work which is done in Tasmania and in other States is handled by the sub-branches of the Department. However, if a volume of work is being done in Tasmania, as the honourable senator indicatesI know it is- and there is a likelihood of that continuing, I shall put the honourable senator ‘s proposition to the Minister for Construction to see whether something can be done to raise the level of the work of the Department of Construction, particularly its architectural work, in Tasmania.

page 4

QUESTION

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS BUREAU

Senator BUTTON:
VICTORIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations. I refer to the Government’s proposal to establish a so-called industrial relations bureau and I ask: Will the functions of the proposed bureau be consistent with the functions suggested for it in the Liberal Party’s policy announced during the last election campaign? What is the reaction of national employer bodies to the establishment of the proposed industrial relations bureau? Where will the staff of the proposed bureau be recruited? Is there any truth in the story that Norman Gunston is to be asked to be the first director?

Senator DURACK:
Minister for Veterans’ Affairs · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

-Dealing firstly with the last part of the question, that is about as likely as an invitation to Senator Button to fill the position, although it may well be that they would have a lot in common in that and other respects. As far as the industrial relations bureau is concerned, the Minister whom I represent has already announced the decision of the Government in principle to establish the bureau and has referred to the employment and industrial relations policy on which the Government was elected in 1975, which set out in some detail the nature of the industrial relations bureau.

As the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations pointed out, that policy received extensive publicity during the election campaign and there is a clear mandate for the establishment of the bureau. As far as the particulars of the question are concerned, the legislation is in the course of preparation and will be introduced shortly into the Parliament. I should also draw the Senate’s attention to the fact that the Minister has said the Government will permit the legislation to lie on the table of the House to enable detailed consultations and discussions and to permit informed public comment.

Senator BUTTON:

-I wish to ask a supplementary question, Mr President. Do I take it that the last part of the Minister’s answer purports to be an answer to that part of my question which asked for the attitude of national employer bodies to the proposed legislation?

Senator DURACK:

– Presumably they have a view which will be expressed, along with that of the trade unions, in the course of the debate.

Senator Button:

– You do not know their view?

Senator DURACK:

– I do not know what thenview is at the moment.

page 5

QUESTION

SMOKING IN AIRCRAFT

Senator WOOD:
QUEENSLAND

– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Transport aware that Ansett Airlines of Australia has eliminated any designated area for non-smokers in its first class passenger compartments? Is he aware that the trend today is to prohibit smoking in public buses and even on some railways? In view of this trend, and in view of the fact that Qantas, our own international airline, reserves the whole of one side of the aircraft for non-smokers, will the Minister take up with Ansett Airlines its reason for taking this retrograde step? Is it an indication that Ansett has no regard for the comfort of nonsmokers? Will the Minister take up the matter and ask Ansett to restore this comfort to people who are non-smokers in order to protect them against pollution and the annoyance of smokers?

Senator CARRICK:
Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in Federal Affairs · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– I am aware of the trend throughout public areas, whether in transport, public buildings or other places, for nonsmoking areas to be prescribed. As I understand it, there is a growing public demand for that prescription. I am equally aware that on all airlines areas have been designated for non-smoking purposes. Indeed, in various journeys of my own on Ansett aircraft I request a seat in a nonsmoking area, which I get, and I believe that I get it whether I am travelling first or second class. I am not aware that Ansett has failed to provide non-smoking areas in the first class section. My observation on those rare occasions when as a Minister I am allowed to travel first class is that I can get a non-smoking seat, and I normally ask for one. Some months ago in the Senate I answered a question regarding the percentage of seats made available by various airlines for nonsmokers. If there is substance in what the honourable senator has said I shall refer the matter to my colleague, have it examined and, if necessary, bring it to the attention of Ansett. However, my own observation is that Ansett, with which I travel extensively, makes provision for non-smoking passengers.

Senator WOOD:

– I ask a supplementary question. I ask the Minister whether, when travelling with Ansett, he has been given what is called a non-smoking seat in an area which is not designated as non-smoking, as happened to me this morning, and the passenger sitting next to him has been able to smoke. In what way is this a provision for the comfort of non-smokers? Is the Minister aware that Ansett personnel indicate that although a passenger may have a nonsmoking seat, the passenger in the seat next to him may smoke?

Senator CARRICK:

– I am not aware of that. However, I am aware that in non-smoking areas there is a sign indicating the seats which are so designated. Lest confusion continue to reign, I shall have the matter investigated and get the information for the honourable senator.

page 5

QUESTION

RUGBY LEAGUE BROADCASTS

Senator McAULIFFE:
QUEENSLAND

-My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications. Is the Minister aware that a practice has developed in the broadcasting industry in Queensland where one radio station, namely 4BK, is conducting football broadcasts without the permission of the Queensland and Brisbane Rugby Leagues? Is the Minister aware that the Queensland and

Brisbane Rugby Leagues have entered into a contractual relationship with radio station 4IP enabling that station to provide football broadcasts? Will the Minister agree that station 4BK is making football broadcasts on a pirate basis and that if this is allowed to continue a very serious and unethical business precedent will be established? Will the Minister therefore refer the matter to the recently established Australian Broadcasting Tribunal for public investigation and report to this Parliament?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– I can understand the keen desire of all broadcasting stations in Queensland to have the opportunity to broadcast rugby league matches and I fully understand Senator McAuliffe’s declared interest in the matter. I am not aware that station 4BK is broadcasting without permission, but I will accept that the situation is as suggested by the honourable senator. I am not aware of a contractual arrangement with another radio station and I cannot therefore adjudicate on the legality of broadcasts by station 4BK. I am happy that the honourable senator has suggested that the matter be referred to the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal and I shall ask my colleague to do so.

page 6

QUESTION

ABORIGINAL EDUCATION IN THE NORTHERN TERRITORY

Senator KILGARIFF:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

– My question is directed to the Minister for Education. The media release of the Australian Teachers’ Federation of 9 February 1977 titled ‘Crisis in Aboriginal Education’ charges the Government with broken promises in regard to the withdrawal of moneys and the upgrading of schools in Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. Concern is also expressed with regard to the Elcho Island school that through years of neglect toilet facilities have been reduced to an unacceptable standard. There are also complaints regarding the drainage system and staff toilets and suggestions that plans for the improvement and upgrading of these standards have been set aside. Will the Minister indicate the present situation with regard to the upgrading of schools in Aboriginal communities? What are the facts and plans with regard to the Elcho Island Aboriginal school?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

-In general terms, happily throughout Australia and in the 2 Territories the education year has opened with relatively few problems; indeed, it could be said, with many fewer than in recent years. Let me relate something of the background of Elcho Island so that the Senate will know it. In 1973 an inquiry was made for the previous Government. It was recommended that for the Sheperdson College on Elcho Island a new toilet system should be constructed. The previous Government declined to accept that advice; so no construction took place. Until 1976 the college was a mission school- as the honourable senator would know, with his close interest in and sympathy for Aborigines- and it was transferred to the Government in 1976. Two things occurred: In June 1976 there was a severe fire in this collegeagain, as the honourable senator would knowand a substantial amount of the teaching capacity was destroyed. The Government of the day duly inherited a problem that had become chronic and of course a serious situation.

Proposals to upgrade the educational facilities at Elcho Island are included in the current Department of Education civil works program; that is, the one for 1976-77. They include a major building project to provide the school with new facilities to replace those destroyed by fire, and repairs and maintenance. In addition to that, and because due to flooding there have been some difficulties with the toilets- I appreciate the difficulties there- action has been taken with some immediacy. The sum of $2,500 has been made available to the Galiwinku Council to repair the school toilets. Also, 2 transportable toilet-ablution units will be moved by barge to Elcho Island this Friday. It is planned to have them operating within 3 weeks, at a cost of some $50,000. A Department of Education officer from Darwin has been at Elcho Island since last week. The school will reopen next Monday. I personally regret that there should have been such delays. Of course, one of the difficulties in the whole of the Northern Territory is that, because of the cyclone, in recent years priority has been given to the reconstruction of Darwin. This has meant delays in construction for other purposes. We are acting on the situation at Elcho Island.

page 6

QUESTION

ELECTORAL REDISTRIBUTION

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I ask the Minister for Administrative Services: Following the handing down of the High Court judgment in the McKellar case and now that the Government has had time to consider the implications of the High Court judgment, does the Government intend taking early initiatives to enable a general redistribution of House of Representatives electorates to be carried out?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-The honourable senator would know that arising from the judgments in both the McKinlay case and the McKellar case there will need to be some legislation before a redistribution can proceed. I hope to have that legislation before the Parliament at an early date.

page 7

QUESTION

SOLAR ENERGY

Senator JESSOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

-I direct a question to the Minister for Science. I refer to the announced breakthrough in high temperature solar energy research at the Sydney University. Can the Minister give the Senate any information on this technique? Is it a fact that funds for this research project have been reduced? If so, in view of the importance of the development of this alternative energy source, can the Minister say why this expenditure has been cut back?

Senator WEBSTER:
NCP/NP

-The honourable senator has a keen interest in solar research. He has written to me on a number of occasions in relation to this matter. I imagine that the interest in this instance relates to an announcement by Professor Messel during his visit to England that there had been a breakthrough in solar power by a Sydney team. That team has been working at the Energy Research Centre of the School of Physics at the University of Sydney. I am not sure exactly of the breakthrough that has occurred. I have questioned officers of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation about it. As honourable senators know, that body has a great interest in this matter and has quite a connection with the University of Sydney. The officers are unable to describe to me exactly the proven breakthrough that has occurred.

The honourable senator asks also about the funds. That is an important issue that was raised in news reports. It was announced that the members of this group- Doctors Window, Harding, McKenzie and Horwitz- had been receiving approximately $250,000 for research during each of the past 3 years. There was some suggestion that those funds might be cut back. Of course, the University has those funds under its control and it is purely for the University to decide its priorities. However, I state for the benefit of the honourable senator that the Department of Science certainly is involved as he would know in a sizable contribution towards solar research, as is CSIRO. I can mention to him 2 areas in which the people associated with this development have received the benefit of Commonwealth funds. One is in relation to assistance to Doctor Window to participate in an activity under the United States-Australia scientific agreement. Quite sizable amounts of money have been provided for that activity. A grant also has been made by the Austraiian Research

Grants Committee of which the honourable senator would be well aware.

I can tell the honourable senator that such grants are made for excellence in research and that Doctor Window has been successful in gaining contributions under the Australian Research Grants scheme of $3,000 in 1975, $4,000 in 1976 and $5,010 in 1977. The Commonwealth has displayed a real interest in solar energy research. Of course, I am unable to say what the priorities of the University of Sydney may be.

page 7

QUESTION

SOLAR ENERGY

Senator WRIEDT:

– My question, which is directed to Senator Webster, the Minister for Science, follows the question that has just been asked. In view of the obvious public interest in the great significance of solar research in Australia, is the Senate to understand that if some discovery is made at a university there is no automatic reference to the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation of the work that is being done or of the alleged breakthrough that has been made? Is it not a matter of concern to the Minister, in view of the fact that the Commonwealth finances so much of this research, that his own statutory authority apparently is not made aware of the position or that there is insufficient liaison with the work that is being funded by the Commonwealth taking place in the universities? If he is concerned about this situation, will he ensure that he will not have to answer a question again in the manner in which he has just answered the previous question, that is, that he is unable to find out from CSIRO just exactly what had been done at the university level?

Senator WEBSTER:
NCP/NP

– The question of the Leader of the Opposition appears to me at least to be rather foolish. The fact is that I have established on a number of occasions in the Senate the great interest that the Commonwealth is showing in energy research generally and in particular in solar energy research. The honourable senator may recognise that the expenditure of the Scientific and Industrial and Research Organisation during this year is in excess of $750,000.

Senator Wriedt:

– That is not the question.

Senator WEBSTER:

– If the honourable senator had listened to the answer that I gave he would have heard me say that I had established from CSIRO that quite a degree of discussion and interrelationship had taken place in regard to the work that is being done in this field at the

University of Sydney. There is a very strong relationship. CSIRO is aware of the work that is being done.

I used words to the effect that CSIRO was not aware of any proven result that has come from this discovery. I do not think it is appropriate that when a university believes it has made a discovery I take it that the situation is that Professor Harry Messel believes he has made a discovery which is very noteworthy- it should be called upon immediately to transfer its complete results to CSIRO. Undoubtedly the university will work on those results for the time being. I again assure the honourable senator that the CSIRO is aware of energy research and in particular solar energy research that is being carried on in Australia.

I do not think the honourable senator’s question is in proper order. There is a great deal of interest in solar energy research. Indeed, a major unit at the Adelaide University is doing work in this field, and it should be encouraged in what it is doing. The honourable senator’s original question referred to an allocation of funds. I believe that the Commonwealth is contributing particularly well to this type of research at present. Again I instance the fact that if the University of Sydney intends to restructure its allocation of funds, I certainly believe that that is a matter for the University of Sydney and not for my portfolio.

page 8

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN UNION OF STUDENTS CONFERENCE

Senator WALTERS:
TASMANIA

-Has the Minister for Education seen reports of physical violence and intimidation by left wing elements at the conference of the Australian Union of Students? Considering that this body is financed by Commonwealth money, can the Minister say what measures exist to control this type of behaviour? Is the alleged statement by students attending the conference correct that they were told that universities are Commonwealth property and that State police cannot enter the grounds without special permission?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

-I have seen fairly lengthy and continuing publicity arising out of the recent annual meeting of the Australian Union of Students. I have seen substantial allegations made of intimidation and violence. There have been some denials, but in essence they were denials in degree and largely not in substance. If the allegations are true one must very much regret that student body organisations and activities should contain within them threats of violence, intimidation and even worse. I have not seen the statements that the AUS is financed by the Commonwealth. This is simply not true. The funds for the AUS are raised through per capita fees paid by student bodies of affiliated organisations- universities and colleges. Each student body at a university or college has the right to decide whether or not it will be affiliated with the AUS. The honourable senator may know that some have decided not to be affiliated. I think that some said that unless the AUS modified its rules they would not become affiliated. So membership or otherwise with the AUS rests within the student bodies themselves.

It is not true to say that virtually all university grounds, except one, are Commonwealth property and are therefore not accessible to police. Universities and colleges established in the States are established under a State constitutional power. They are State property and not Commonwealth property as such. Obviously the Australian National University is within Commonwealth territory. Nevertheless it is a false idea that police do not have access to university or college grounds or that there is any special privilege for anyone, student or otherwise, in tampering with the law on those grounds. A student or any other person on college or university grounds has no more rights than anyone else. They are all equal before the law.

While I am on my feet, let me say: Basically the question of the establishment and management of student bodies, whether they be for sporting or recreational purposes or for student unions, on the campuses of universities and colleges is the responsibility of the autonomous institutions as expressed in their by-laws. I have invited the individual universities to look to their by-laws to ensure that they contain full democratic provisions to enable students to conduct their affairs with full democracy and I have suggested that, if some practice is obnoxious, the universities might see whether some kind of opting out can be made available as there is in some trade unions.

page 8

QUESTION

RANGER URANIUM ENVIRONMENTAL INQUIRY

Senator MELZER:
VICTORIA

– My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for National Resources. By way of preface, may I remind the Minister that the final recommendation of the Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry’s first report was that no decision be taken in relation to the mining and milling of uranium until a reasonable time had elapsed and there had been an opportunity for the usual democratic processes to function. This was, the

Inquiry understood, the policy of the Act under which the Inquiry was instituted. Simply, it meant ample time for public consideration of the report and for debate on it. Will the Minister inform the Senate of the steps his Government has taken to reach as many people in the community as possible with the facts on all aspects of the mining, milling and use of uranium?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I thought the report was fairly freely available for interested people in the community to read. From my cursory reading of the media I understand that there is quite a large debate going on in the community regarding the pros and cons of this issue. That debate is organised by varying groups throughout the community. I do not know of any other suggestion which the honourable senator may have as to how the Government could further promote public debate on this matter within the community. I hope that before long we will have sufficient opportunity in this chamber of the Parliament to devote time to a full debate on the Fox Committee’s report and the implications arising therefrom. If the honourable senator has any positive suggestions to make as to how the deate in the community may be stimulated, I shall be pleased to receive her suggestions and pass them on to my colleague.

page 9

QUESTION

VICTORIAN FIRES

Senator LEWIS:
VICTORIA

– I preface my question, which I direct to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry, by referring to the disastrous fires in the western district of Victoria last weekend in which many thousands of stud sheep and cattle were burnt, and many hectares of grass were totally destroyed. I wish to pay a tribute to the tremendous work of the fire fighters in that area who saved so many homesteads. Can the Minister give us any details of assistance available to the victims and in particular whether materials for fencing, miles and miles of which were destroyed, will be made available to those who suffered this loss?

Senator COTTON:
Minister for Industry and Commerce · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

-I think all of us are most upset by the horrible and disastrous fires in Victoria and the losses of stock, fodder, fencing and human lives as we are upset, equally, by the great problems which will face many people in the reconstruction phase that lies ahead of them. The Prime Minister and the Premier of Victoria have had a good look at the whole of the areas concerned. Certain towns have been declared disaster areas. I understand that the Premier of Victoria will take up with the Commonwealth the matter of providing necessary funds, areas which may be considered available for taxation adjustment or time to pay concessions, and other similar matters.

I understand that one grave problem is that of stock losses and, in some cases, not just commercial stock but very valuable stud stock. One’s natural sympathy goes out to people in that position. There are many people in that category who have lost in effect their lifetime’s work. I wonder whether around Australia we might not think in some cases of asking people in other parts of Australia who are more fortunately placed whether they would be prepared to donate livestock to help people in those circumstances. It might be a case of a little from a lot of people helping some people who are in trouble.

The problem of fencing is one that is more direct and more immediate. The moment I heard about this disaster I tried to find out as best I could the total area of fencing damaged or lost. At the moment it is very hard to get a true picture of the actual volume of loss. Yesterday morning we started checking throughout Australia, particularly in Victoria, on the stocks of fencing material available and the capacity of manufacturers to supply fencing material, if necessary, to replace fencing losses. That information is available within my Department and is available to the Victorian Government and to any producer who would like to have it. We are prepared to help with any inquiries and, if necessary, to direct to the attention of the manufacturers the expressed wish that they try to do more if that is shown to be necessary. The honourable senator might like to say to those fire fighters and others he may meet that the Senate as a whole has great sympathy for them with their problems and, indeed, owes a lot of thanks to them for the tremendous part that they played.

page 9

QUESTION

PRICES OF DOMESTIC COMMODITIES

Senator DEVITT:
TASMANIA

-I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs. It concerns a matter which I think is of growing concern to every family in the community and which I believe has special relevance to the Tasmanian consumer. Can the Minister give any reason for the fact that, despite freight subsidies, commodity price equalisation and the tight wage restraints and other forms of restraint that are now being applied, the prices of groceries and a whole range of other essential domestic commodities continue to rise week by week in such a way as to make family budgeting impossible? Does he not agree that while these trends persist attempts to dampen inflation cannot possibly succeed and demands for wage adjustments must surely be both inevitable and justified? Is this a matter that comes within the ambit of the Prices Justification Tribunal? If so, can action be taken through that agency, as with motor vehicle and farm machinery components, to check the justification for these seemingly unwarranted increases which affect every household in the Australian community and which I believe are of far greater concern than either of the other two references that I have mentioned?

SenatorDURACK- Of course, the essential problem raised by Senator Devitt is the ravages of the inflation which have been occurring in Australia for the last few years and which occurred during the term of office of, and was fanned by the policies of, the Government of which he was a supporter. This Government inherited the task of tackling, and tackling vigorously, this grave and fundamental problem affecting the social and economic life of the nation. It has been accepted by this Government as being its prime responsibility and it is still accepted by it as being its prime responsibility to endeavour to reduce the level of inflation. The Government will persist with the policies that it has been pursuing in the last 12 months. It has noted that the underlying rate of inflation was moderating. It is still confident that by its policies inflation will be brought under reasonable control during the course of this year.

As to the specific question that Senator Devitt asked in relation to the Prices Justification Tribunal, let me say that the Government has retained the Prices Justification Tribunal. Senator Devitt will recall that the Government made some amendments to its functions at the end of last year, converting it to a large extent into a prices surveillance organisation. I understand- I do not have the details at my fingertips, but I can get them- that the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs has details of a number of complaints that have been made to that Tribunal about unjustifiable increases in the prices of certain lines. I do not know whether they are grocery lines; but he certainly has such details. I will ask him to give me full details of the complaints that have been made and the investigations that have been carried out by that Tribunal. I certainly want to emphasise the fact that the Tribunal does exist and in fact is receiving and dealing with complaints of that kind.

page 10

QUESTION

RURAL HOUSING SCHEME

Senator THOMAS:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

-I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development. Last year the Western Australian Government introduced a rural housing scheme which provides cheaper and more readily available housing for country people and which brings the financing of country housing more into line with the availability and cost of housing finance in the cities. Is the Minister aware of that major initiative? If so, will he comment on the feasibility of extending that scheme to other States of the Commonwealth?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

-I think Senator Thomas refers to what is known as the rural housing scheme. My advice is that the Court Government of Western Australia introduced that scheme last year. My understanding is that the rural housing authority set up under the Rural Housing Assistance Act provides assistance to farmers who are unable to obtain housing finance from commercial lending institutions. I take it that this is the scheme referred to by Senator Thomas. I have some notes here. This assistance takes a number of forms, including the guarantee of security.

I also understand that the authority has the power to provide short to medium term assistance with housing loan repayments to farmers who can be expected to be able to service a housing loan at normal interest rates in the longer term. In terms of my existing brief I would agree with Senator Thomas that the scheme has very considerable merit. It ought to be brought to the attention of other States because it has very considerable value, particularly to people on the land.

page 10

QUESTION

WEAPONS RESEARCH ESTABLISHMENT

Senator BISHOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question, which is addressed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate as the representative of the Minister for Defence, refers to questionnaires and notices sent to members in Adelaide of the Weapons Research Establishment of the Department of Defence concerning employment either at Salisbury or Woomera, and to a newspaper report that 300 people are to be sacked during the year. I suggest to the Minister that last year when he answered a question by me natural wastage was greater than the target set for the year. I now ask the Minister whether the proposed figure of 300 is correct. If it is correct, will he take up with the Minister for Defence the question of requesting a stay in the notices sent to employees, officers and other skilled men? As he well knows, the employment position is worse now than it was earlier; that is, in the first year affected by the redundancy target for the area.

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-The honourable senator will recall that last year I said that the Woomera establishment was required to lose 700 personnel over 3 years. The plan for the first year, 1975-76, was to lose 172. When I answered that question there had been a loss of 2 12. The latest information I have is that the current situation is that against the planned reduction of 700 over 3 years, from mid- 1975 to 31 January this year a reduction of 348 had been achieved. Therefore, if my mathematics are correct, a further reduction of 352 will be required to meet the target for the end of the 3-year period. As for the suggestions made by the honourable senator, I shall pass them on to my colleague the Minister for Defence.

page 11

QUESTION

INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

Senator MISSEN:
VICTORIA

– I direct my question to the Minister representing the Attorney-General. Is it a fact that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1966, that it came into operation with the required ratifications in 1976, that it has been ratified by 38 nations and that it has been signed but not ratified by Australia? Is there any substantial reason why the covenant should not now be ratified by Australia and brought into effect in this country? Has the Government any early plans to ratify the covenant? Does the Minister not agree that ratification by Australia would contribute to the international struggle against the widening world threats to basic human rights and personal liberties and against the growing use of torture throughout the world?

Senator DURACK:
LP

– I cannot answer specifically the question raised by Senator Missen. It is a fact that the covenant has not been ratified although it was signed by the Australian Government. I would have to ask the AttorneyGeneral, whom I represent, whether the Government has plans to ratify the covenant. However, I would like to point out to the Senate that the Attorney-General has been giving very close consideration to the question of human rights and has proposed, with the approval of the Government, the establishment of a human rights commission. I understand that one of the major objects of that commission would be to have regard to many of the principles contained in the international covenant to which Senator Missen referred. I believe that one of the problems facing the Commonwealth Government in regard to ratification of the covenant is the fact that the implementation of a great many of the principles of the covenant is a matter for State law rather than for laws passed by this Parliament.

It will be remembered that some effort was made by a previous government to establish a human rights law throughout the nation. There was such difficulty in the path of that legislation that it seemed to falter even in the hands of former Senator Murphy with his enthusiasm for getting such legislation through the Parliament. The present Attorney-General, Mr Ellicott, is tackling the matter in a different way. As I have said, he has proposed the establishment of a human rights commission the object of which would be to look at Commonwealth and State laws to see whether they accord with the principles of that covenant and to make reports to the several governments in Australia on these matters. Nevertheless, as I have said, a fundamental problem facing the Commonwealth Government is the fact that it does not have the powers under the Constitution to carry out, by any means fully, the principles contained in this covenant. However, I shall refer the specific question raised by Senator Missen to the Attorney-General and endeavour to obtain an answer as soon as possible.

page 11

QUESTION

RADIOACTIVE WASTE

Senator MULVIHILL:
NEW SOUTH WALES

-I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Defence: Has the Australian Government made overtures to the British Government in regard to the latter ‘s responsibility for long term safety measures to protect 8000 tonnes of radioactive waste left over from earlier weapons experiments in Australia which, I understand, is buried in several sites around the continent?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I do not know whether it is 8000 tonnes or 800 tonnes, but it is a fair bit of waste. I am informed by my colleague in the other place that the Australian Government was informed by the British Government as to the conditions under which radioactive material was buried. This information has been in the hands of all governments, including the last administration. It may be useful to the honourable senator if I point out, firstly, that the Minister for Defence has detailed the main facts of this matter in a letter to Mr Uren dated 4 February and, secondly, that no government has ever pretended that Maralinga is not a contaminated area. It is precisely because it is contaminated that precautions are taken. But no government, including the last, has so far found it necessary to introduce additional control and safety measures. However, the Australian Ionising Radiation Advisory Council recommended in December 1 976 that a further survey be made, and the Government is taking steps to arrange that survey. As a matter of long term environmental management it is important, and it is intended, that the situation at Maralinga be kept under regular and close review. At this time, however, the available evidence indicates that safety control measures are adequate and that there is no cause for public anxiety. The handling of this matter is not being served by attempts to sensationalise it in the media with rumours and misleading accounts. I think that information would satisfy the honourable senator’s question.

page 12

QUESTION

SPECIFIC LEARNING DIFFICULTIES

Senator RAE:
TASMANIA

– Does the Minister for Education agree that the report of the House of Representatives Select Committee on Specific Learning Difficulties makes some excellent suggestions for action in what has been a relatively neglected area? What steps have been taken by the Minister and his Department to implement any of the recommendations? Further, will the Minister indicate which, if any, of the members of the reconstituted Schools Commission has any particular expertise in this field to replace the expertise previously available through one of the outgoing members, namely, Mr Desmond Wood?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

-I acknowledge that the Select Committee of the House of Representatives on Specific Learning Difficulties has done a very skilful and important job. I acknowledge that the problems it has tackled have a much wider impact on the community than people generally know, when one takes into account not only mental and physical handicaps but also the difficulties that apply to people in the normal intellectual brackets. Having said that, I should point out that a number of steps are now in process. I was pleased to attend a meeting of the Australian Education Council in Hobart last week. This matter was on the agenda and there was some initial discussion. The honourable senator would know that a primary recommendation of the Committee was that there was a need in early childhood, at the first instance of impact between teacher and child, for recognition of the problem by the teacher and for remedy within the classroom. The second important recommendation of the Committee was that all teachers should be remedial teachers. Those 2 recommendations, taken together, were the profound recommendations throughout the report, quite apart from the special recommendations. Attention was drawn to the recommendations at the meeting of the Australian Education Council, where considerable discussion occurred.

I shall be inviting the newly constituted coordinating commission to look at the whole question of teacher training, including pre-service and in-service training for the future. Towards that end this particular report is under study by each of the commissions associated with my Department, by the Department itself, by the Education Research and Development Committee and the Curriculum Development Centre. So the matter is under major study. Primarily it will be a State matter to provide teachers with both preservice and in-service training.

I acknowledge the special experience of Mr Wood, a former member of the Schools Commission, on which body he played a useful part. There are 8 part time members, and it is vital that they have a wide expertise. The representation on the Schools Commission now, both in a general sense and in a widespread sense, is in accordance with the previous guidelines laid down by the Australian Education Council and has the active support of the 6 State education Ministers as well as of the Commonwealth. I regret that at this moment we cannot find a place for a special person, but each of the 12 persons on the Schools Commission has a vital responsibility to equip himself with this knowledge and to express it when the policies are evolved.

page 12

QUESTION

HELICOPTERS: SUB-STANDARD PARTS

Senator O’BYRNE:

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence and relates to allegations in the United States of America, particularly in the Washington Post, that sub-standard parts have been sold to foreign military forces which use United States parts in their helicopter fleets. I ask the Minister whether he has any information for the Senate which would confirm or deny that any of these sub-standard parts were used by our defence forces and were responsible for 2 Royal Australian Navy Sea King helicopter crashes in recent times. Have investigations been initiated to ascertain whether there is any link between the sub-standard parts and those crashes? If not, will the Defence Department take some action to institute an inquiry into the matter?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I shall seek the information for the honourable senator.

page 12

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH AND STATE HOUSING AGREEMENT

Senator ARCHER:
TASMANIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister, for Environment, Housing and Community

Development. Can the Minister advise what steps will now be taken by the Government to ensure that changes can be made to the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement to enable funds to go first to those in greatest need, even though it is reported that there are States endeavouring to prevent this from happening?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– All honourable senators will have heard or read statements by my colleague, the Minister, on this matter. As I understand it, the Commonwealth has invited the States to have discussions in the immediate future to ascertain the ways in which a future Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement could be drawn up so that anomalies that have existed in the past, such as the ability of some not in need to have housing at sub-economic rentals, can be eliminated, so enabling a full concentration of available funds on those in greatest need. The primary objective of the invitation to the States is for them to come together in good will and work out around the table a program to direct funds to areas of greatest need. I take it that this will have the full support of all honourable senators.

page 13

QUESTION

CONSUMER PRICE INDEX

Senator GIETZELT:
NEW SOUTH WALES

-My question is directed to Senator Withers in his capacity as Minister for Administrative Services as well as in his capacity as Minister representing the Prime Minister, and to some extent it relates to his answer to the opening question by Senator Wriedt today. Will the Minister indicate why the consumer price index figures for the December 1976 quarter have not been announced? Does the Minister acknowledge that the rates of inflation in the previous 3 quarters of 1976- September, June and March- were 2.2 per cent, 2.5 per cent and 3 per cent respectively, and that if the December quarter rate exceeds 5 per cent, as has been suggested, this means that the rise in the consumer price index during 1976 was 1 per cent higher than in 1975 or that it is running now at the rate of 12.7 per cent? Does this indicate that the Government’s economic policy is not working? How can the Government therefore claim that it is not losing the fight against inflation?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I understand that the consumer price index figures are issued by the Government Statistician when he sees fit to issue them. I further understand that he is an independent statutory officer and is not subject to the direction or control of any Minister of the Crown. Any honourable senator who makes allegations about an independent statutory officer such as the honourable senator was making ought to be ashamed of himself. That is the least that can be said.

Senator Gietzelt:

– I did not make any allegations.

Senator WITHERS:

-The whole inference of the honourable senator’s question was that somehow something is happening to prevent the issue of the CPI figures.

Senator Walsh:

– You will see what will happen on Saturday.

Senator WITHERS:

-It is no use Senator Walsh interrupting because what will happen on Saturday is that the Leader of the Opposition in Western Australia, who has the support of 6.7 per cent of the population, will get a vote of about that size.

Senator McLaren:

– That is what you said about the Tasmanian election.

Senator WITHERS:

– Yes, but that Government started with a majority of seven and finished with a majority of one. Honourable senators opposite are trying to beat something up because the Leader of the Opposition in Western Australia is so hopeless that he has to rely on people such as Senator Walsh to try to promote his election campaign. That shows how bad he is.

Senator McLaren:

– You should not reflect on another politician.

Senator WITHERS:

-That is no reflection; that is praise. I cannot inform the honourable senator why the Statistician, an independent statutory officer, has not issued the December quarter consumer price index figures. I know of no reason. I shall ask the Treasurer whether he has any knowledge of the matter and whether he can obtain the information from that statutory officer. As for the mathematical juggling in which the honourable senator indulged, I do not think it requires answering at this stage.

page 13

QUESTION

QUESTION TIME

The PRESIDENT:

– I point out to honourable senators that today 23 senators were able to ask questions. Two supplementary questions also were asked. Questions should be worded as briefly as possible and replied to as briefly as possible to enable more honourable senators to ask questions.

page 13

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following Bills reported:

Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Amendment Bill 1976.

United States Naval Communication Station (Civilian Employees) Amendment Bill 1976.

Seamen’s Compensation Amendment Bill 1976.

Estate Duty Assessment Amendment Bill 1 976.

Remuneration and Allowances Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1976.

States Grants ( Water Resources Assessment ) Bill 1 976.

Pay-roll Tax (Territories) Assessment Amendment Bill 1976.

Roads Acts Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1976.

Customs Amendment Bill ( No. 2 ) 1 976.

Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Amendment Bill 1976.

Narcotic Drugs Amendment Bill 1976.

National Health Amendment Bill (No. 4) 1976.

Stevedoring Industry Amendment Bill 1976.

Stevedoring Industry (Temporary Provisions) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1976.

Stevedoring Industry Charge Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1976.

Defence Service Homes Amendment Bill 1 976.

Ombudsman Bill 1976.

Prices Justification Amendment Bill 1 976.

Homes Savings Grant Bill 1976.

States Grants (Aboriginal Assistance) Bill 1976.

Aboriginal Councils and Associations Bill 1976.

Broadcasting and Television Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1976.

Broadcasting Stations Licence Fees Amendment Bill 1976.

Television Stations Licence Fees Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1976.

Historic Shipwrecks Bill 1976.

Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Bill 1976.

Long Service Leave (Commonwealth Employees) Bill 1976.

Public Service Amendment Bill 1976.

Public Service Amendment Bill (No. 2 ) 1 976.

Apple and Pear Levy Bill 1976.

Apple and Pear Levy Collection Bill 1 976.

Apple and Pear Export Charge Bill 1 976.

Apple and Pear Export Charge Collection Bill 1 976.

Australian Apple and Pear Corporation Amendment Bill 1976.

Dairying Industry Research and Promotion Levy Amendment Bill 1976.

States Grants (Rural Adjustment) Bill 1976.

Foreign Proceedings (Prohibition of Certain Evidence) Amendment Bill 1976.

Customs Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1 976.

Customs TariffValidation Bill (No. 2) 1976.

Income Tax Assessment Amendment Bill (No. 3) 1976.

Loan (Income Equalization Deposits) Bill 1976.

Loan (Drought Bonds) Amendment Bill 1976.

Income Tax (Companies and Superannuation Funds) Bill 1976.

Marriage Amendment Bill 1976.

page 14

ROYAL ASSENT TO A BILL

The PRESIDENT:

– I inform the Senate that I have received the following message from His Excellency the Governor-General.

Message No. 68

Proposed law intituled:

States Grants (Aboriginal Assistance) Act 1976 as finally passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth, having been presented to the Governor-General for the Royal Assent, His Excellency has, in the name of Her Majesty, assented to the said law.

Being acquainted by communication from the Speaker and the Clerk of the House of Representatives that contrary to previous advice a Bill with the same title that was assented to by the Governor-General, in the name of Her Majesty, on 13 December 1976, as Act No. 184 of 1976 had not been passed by both Houses and being acquainted by communication from the Attorney-General that the advice given by him dated 13 December 1976 in relation to a Bill entitled States Grants (Aboriginal Assistance) Act 1976’ was intended when signed by him to relate to the Bill of that title which had then in fact been passed by both Houses and being advised that the Governor-General’s assent given on 13 December 1976 to the Bill that had not been passed in both Houses was and is of no effect in law and that it is proper for the Governor-General so to do His Excellency has cancelled his signature by which he purported to assent to the same.

Government House,

Canberra 2600 11 February 1977

Senator Keeffe:

- Mr President, I seek leave to make a short statement.

The PRESIDENT:

-Is leave granted?

Senator Wright:

– No.

The PRESIDENT:

– Leave is not granted.

Senator WRIEDT:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

- Mr President, I seek leave to make a statement.

The PRESIDENT:

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

Senator WRIEDT:

- Mr President, I feel that I should place on record on behalf of the Opposition our very deep concern at the statement that you have just read relating to the States Grants (Aboriginal Assistance) Bill 1976.I am sure that in listening to your statement it must strike all of us as a matter of very great concern that this event should have taken place. I do not intend to enter into a lengthy debate on the matter, but it is quite obvious that a repetition of what took place is to be avoided. I do not suggest that I lay the blame at the feet of any individual, but the fact is that the Government ultimately must take responsibility for legislation that goes through the Parliament. This is a matter of concern to all of us. I am quite sure that, if we were to see a repetition of this, it would need to be fully debated in both Houses of the Parliament. However, as I think we all are aware, there has been a substantive debate on the matter in the House of Representatives this afternoon, setting out the Opposition’s case and its views. Of course we in the Senate stand by the views that were expressed there.

Senator WITHERS:
Western AustraliaMinister for Administrative Services · LP

- Mr President, I seek leave to make a statement on the same matter.

The PRESIDENT:

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

Senator WITHERS:

-I am well aware of what happened over this matter. I am surprised that the Leader of the Opposition (Senator Wriedt) should attempt to attach the blame to the Executive Government. I am not attempting to attach the blame to anybody, but I think the honourable senator and honourable senators generally ought to be aware of the procedures in the passage of legislation through this Parliament. I intend to read a statement made in the House of Representatives by Mr Speaker this afternoon. I shall read it because I think it is very interesting and it sets out the facts as to what happened.

Senator Georges:

– You were not about to give those facts before.

Senator WITHERS I ask Senator Georges to wait a minute. This is what Mr Speaker in the other place had to say:

Honourable members will have been made aware of a mistake which occurred in the Department of the House of Representatives and which resulted in an incorrect Bill being presented to the Governor-General for his assent. Two Bills of precisely the same title, namely, the States Grants (Aboriginal Assistance) Act 1976 were before the Parliament at the same time last year. One Bill was introduced into this House -

That is the House of Representatives- on 19 May 1976 and passed on 3 June 1976. The Senate received that Bill on 18 August 1976. Debate on the Bill was adjourned at the second reading stage. That Bill is still on the Senate notice paper.

I think it is now Order of the Day No. 29. Mr Speaker continued:

The second Bill was introduced into this House -

That is the House of Representatives- on 3 November and finally passed on 17 November. It was finally passed by the Senate on 9 December 1976. Standing order 265 -

That is a House of Representatives standing order- requires that every Bill which originates in the House of Representatives and which has finally passed both Houses shall be presented by the Speaker to the Governor-General for royal assent after certification by the Clerk that the Bill originated in the House and as having finally passed both Houses. An error made in the Department led to the Clerk’s certificate being placed on the wrong Bill- that is the Bill which had not finally passed both Houses. That Bill, together with others, was presented by me -

That is the Speaker- to the Governor-General on 13 December. His Excellency gave his assent the same day by signing that Bill which was Act No. 184 of 1976. The mistake came to notice about 3 weeks ago and action has been taken to correct the position. The Governor-General has now cancelled his signature on the incorrect Bill and has given his assent to the Bill which was finally passed by both Houses and which is numbered Act No. 1 of 1977.

The checking procedure in the House of Representatives Department has not failed before in all the years of its operation. Nevertheless, it has been reviewed by the Clerk and some additional safeguards have been incorporated. I am confident that these extra precautions will prevent any reoccurrence.

I read that as a definitive statement by Mr Speaker. In fact, at the time this all blew up in the media the facts were well presented, as I understood it, by the Attorney-General (Mr Ellicott). I recall what the Attorney-General told me at the time. I have here the correspondence which passed between him and the Governor-General. I remind honourable senators that under section 58 of the Commonwealth Constitution of Australia Act there are 2 things which the Governor-General must do before he assents to an Act. Firstly, he has a power or discretion to reserve a law at the Queen’s pleasure. Secondly, and this is important, the Governor-General may return to the House in which it originated any proposed law so presented to him and may transmit therewith any amendments which he may recommend, and the House may deal with the recommendation. That is a constitutional power which the Governor-General has.

Calling on memory, I believe that in the life of the previous Government an error was made in a piece of legislation which passed both Houses. I recall its coming into the Senate and its being reported that His Excellency had amended the legislation. I cannot recall whether there was any motion put in this place in regard to the matter or whether we were just notified that, in fact, the Bill had been amended before it had been assented to. I thought at the time that that was a strange procedure, that Parliament having passed a Bill for an Act containing certain words, when it was to receive royal assent the GovernorGeneral had the power to make amendments. Quite obviously under section 58 of the Constitution he certainly has power to recommend amendments. Admittedly, I think that the amendment which he so made and which was reported to the Senate concerned a typographical error or an error of that nature. The action was taken to make the Bill read sense. The word and’ instead of the word ‘an’ was inserted, or something of that nature. It was a printer’s error and it was corrected. Attorneys-General since Federation have felt an obligation upon them to advise the Governor-General as to the 2 matters within section 58 of the Constitution. The Attorney-General’s letter to the GovernorGeneral stated:

As requested by Your Excellency, I have carefully perused the Bill, and I cannot suggest any amendments that, in my opinion, Your Excellency should recommend, . . .

That is the first obligation. The second is:

  1. . and I am also of opinion that the Constitution does not require Your Excellency to reserve the Bill for Her Majesty’s pleasure to be made known.

That is the only responsibility placed upon the Attorney-General and the executive in respect of a Bill. I have always felt that whilst a Bill might be sponsored by the executive arm, once it comes into the Parliament, the Parliament is in control of the Bill and not the executive. I think the fact that the executive may have the numbers or hopes that it has the numbers in both Houses of the Parliament is another matter. Honourable senators opposite who were Ministers in the Senate would know that when a Bill is introduced into this place there is an obligation on the Minister to sign 2 copies and to give them to the Clerk. From there on the Bill is in the control of the Parliament; it is not in the control of the executive as such. Honourable senators well know that when messages come from the other place they are addressed to Mr President and signed by Mr Speaker. The communication is between the Presiding Officers; it is not between Ministers of the Crown. Ministers of the Crown may move the necessary formal motions for the passage of the Bills through the Parliament. At the time of this occurrence there was an attack on the AttorneyGeneral, Mr Ellicott, which was ill founded, and anybody who still believes that the AttorneyGeneral himself had any sort of personal responsibility in this matter neither understands the Constitution nor the parliamentary procedures and practices of this place. It was an unfortunate occurrence. It is a matter completely within the jurisdiction of Mr Speaker and his Department. I am quite happy that the procedures which Mr Speaker will institute within his own area of responsibility should be sufficient to prevent this from happening again.

Senator KEEFFE:
Queensland

-by leavePerhaps the Minister for Administrative Services (Senator Withers) might give a little bit more detail. One of the things that disturbed me when the facts became known that the wrong Bill had been signed into law was whether or not payments to the State had been suspended. In other words, did the Aboriginal people themselves have to pay for what appeared to have been a mistake at government level? I wonder whether the Minister might also explain why there was a conflict in statements made at the time that the mistake was discovered. The Attorney-General (Mr Ellicott) was making one statement and a spokesman on behalf of the Attorney-General was making another statement. I also seek information from the Minister, if he is able to give it to the Parliament, as to how the cancellation of the signature was carried out by the GovernorGeneral. Was this done on his own initiative?

Senator Cavanagh:

– He has a rubber.

Senator KEEFFE:

– I repeat: Was this done on his own initiative or was he directed by the executive to cancel the signature on the wrong Bill so that he might then append his signature to the correct Bill? In addition, because of the mix up over the respective Bills will it be necessary for the Parliament to take any further action at any point? Perhaps the Minister might be able to oblige me in supplying those few relevant details which I think are pertinent to the discussion before this chamber.

Senator WITHERS (Western AustraliaMinister for Administrative Services)- by leave- I have consulted with my colleague the Minister for Social Security, Senator Guilfoyle, who in this place represents the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs. Her understanding is that no moneys were paid under the Bill which was signed incorrectly, nor was the payment of any moneys delayed. We will seek information as to whether or not they were paid out of the Treasurer’s Advance and have been recouped.

Senator Keeffe:

– Will you make a statement later on that?

Senator WITHERS:

– Yes, we will seek information on that point. As to how the GovernorGeneral cancelled his signature, I do not know. I shall take a guess. I should not take a guess, should I? If somebody signs something which is a nullity -

Senator Keeffe:

– Did he use the rubber, as Senator Cavanagh suggested?

Senator WITHERS:

-No. A rubber was not used. I think most likely the signature was quite irrelevant as the Bill could not come into law if it was not the right Bill. In fact, the whole operation was a nullity. I imagine that nothing positive can arise out of a nullity. As I understand it, Mr President, in his letter to you the GovernorGeneral said that he had cancelled his signature. I am not aware, nor can I find in my brief details, of what the actual operation is or how the Governor-General did that. I will ask my colleague, Senator Durack, to seek further information from the Attorney-General if in fact the Attorney-General has any information as to how that operation was carried out.

page 16

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE

The PRESIDENT:

– I bring up the report of the Standing Orders Committee relating to the Fifth Edition of Australian Senate Practice, as referred to that Committee by the Senate on 10 November 1976.

Ordered that the report be printed.

Motion (by Senator Withers) agreed to:

That consideration of the report in Committee of the Whole be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting.

page 17

AUSTRALIAN FIRE BOARD

Senator WITHERS:
Western AustraliaMinister for Administrative Services · LP

– For the information of honourable senators I present the annual report of the Australian Fire Board for the year 1975-76.

page 17

NATIONAL LIBRARY OF AUSTRALIA

Senator WITHERS:
Western AustraliaMinister for Administrative Services · LP

– Pursuant to section 27 of the National Library Act 1960 I present the annual report of the Council of the National Library of Australia for the year 1975-76.

page 17

AUSTRALIAN MEAT BOARD

Senator COTTON:
New South WalesMinister for Industry and Commerce · LP

– Pursuant to section 41 of the Meat Industry Act 1964 I present the annual report of the Australian Meat Board for the year ended 30 June 1 976.

Senator McLAREN:
South Australia

-by leave- I move:

That the Senate take note of the paper.

I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later stage.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 17

SERVICES TRUST FUND

Senator COTTON:
New South WalesMinister for Industry and Commerce · LP

– Pursuant to section 34 of the Services Trust Fund Act 1947 I present the annual reports of the Royal Australian Air Force Welfare Trust Fund, the Australian Military Forces Relief Trust Fund and the Royal Australian Navy Relief Trust Fund for the calendaryear 1975.

page 17

INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS (LOANS GUARANTEE) ACT

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesMinister for Education · LP

– Pursuant to section 8 of the Independent Schools (Loans Guarantee) Act 1969 I present a statement of payments made during the year ended 30 June 1976 in respect of all guarantees given under that Act.

page 17

URBAN AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE) ACT

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesMinister for Education · LP

– Pursuant to section 8 of the Urban and Regional Development (Financial Assistance) Act 1974 1 present 3 agreements between the Commonwealth and the States of New South Wales and Victoria made under the provisions of that Act.

page 17

DARWIN CYCLONE TRACY RELIEF TRUST FUND

Senator WEBSTER:
Minister for Science · Victoria · NCP/NP

– For the information of honourable senators I present the monthly reports on the Darwin Cyclone Tracy Relief Trust Fund for July, August and September 1976. Due to the limited number available reference copies of these papers have been placed in the Senate Records Office and the Parliamentary Library.

Senator ROBERTSON (Northern Territory) by leave- I move:

That the Senate take note of the papers.

I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later stage.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 17

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY FIRE BRIGADE

Senator WEBSTER:
Minister for Science · Victoria · NCP/NP

– For the information of honourable senators I present the annual report of the Australian Capital Territory Fire Brigade for the year ended 30 June 1976.

page 17

AUSTRALIAN STEVEDORING INDUSTRY AUTHORITY

Senator DURACK:
Western AustraliaMinister for Veterans’ Affairs · LP

– Pursuant to section 58 of the Stevedoring Industry Act 1956 I resent the annual report of the Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority for the year ended 30 June 1976.

page 17

LAW REFORM COMMISSION OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Senator DURACK:
Western AustraliaMinister for Veterans’ Affairs · LP

– Pursuant to section 13 of the Law Reform Commission Ordinance 1971, I present a report by the Law Reform Commission of the Australian Capital Territory on the law relating to conveyancing.

page 18

INDUSTRIES ASSISTANCE COMMISSION REPORTS

Senator DURACK:
Western AustraliaMinister for Veterans ‘ Affairs · LP

– For the information of honourable senators I present a report by the Industries Assistance Commission entitled Multi-lateral Trade Negotiations- General Rates of Duty- First Report, a report by the Industries Assistance Commission on agricultural tractors; an interim report of the Industries Assistance Commission on fabrics for use as bed sheeting, pillow casing or bolster casing; and a report by the Textiles Authority on sheets, curtains, etc.

page 18

PLACING OF BUSINESS

Suspension of Standing Orders

Motion (by Senator Withers)- by leaveagreed to:

That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent the questions with regard to the remaining stages of the passage through the Senate of the Crimes (Aircraft) Amendment Bill, the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill, the Extradition (Commonwealth Countries) Amendment Bill and the Extradition (Foreign States) Amendment Bill, being put in one motion at each stage of the consideration of such Bills together in Committee of the Whole.

page 18

NAVIGATION AMENDMENT BILL 1976

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Ordered that the Bill may be taken through all its stages without delay.

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

Second Reading

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesMinister for Education · LP

– I move:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

With the acquiescence of the Opposition, I seek leave to have the text of the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

The PRESIDENT:

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

The speech read as follows-

This Bill has many of its origins in the Navigation Bill 1975, which was introduced into the Senate but lapsed with the termination of the 29th Parliament. Because of the Government’s recognition of the rights of the States, however, provisions of the 1975 Bill relating to the offshore industry and the International Collision Regulations have been excluded from this Bill. The States have indicated that they have a substantial interest in both the off-shore industry and the collision regulations. It was the Government ‘s view that in accordance with our policy the States should be able to discuss their interests with the Commonwealth before any legislation on these matters was introduced. The States have therefore been given the opportunity to do this, principally through the forum of the Marine and Ports Council of Australia.

The Bill contains groups of amendments for several specific purposes, with which I shall deal briefly, and a number of miscellaneous amendments. Because of the complexity of the subject matter, explanatory notes on the clauses are being circulated for the information of honourable senators.

The first group of amendments to which I would refer concern the limitation of shipowners’ liability. Clause 34 of the Bill gives effect to the International Convention relating to the Limitation of the Liability of Owners of Seagoing Ships, 1957. This Convention came into force internationally in 1968, but the relevant law in Australia still consists of Part VIII of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 of the United Kingdom.

One of the main practical effects of this group of amendments is to increase the amounts to which a shipowner will be able to limit his liability, unless he is held to be actually at fault himself, in respect of claims arising out of specified occurrences to which the Convention applies. The existing very low limits of about $24 per ton for personal claims and $13 per ton for property claims provided for in the Merchant Shipping Acts are to be increased to the equivalent of the Convention limits- about $189 and $61 per ton respectively. Even these limits are quite low and the Australian Government has recently participated in a conference convened by the InterGovernmental Maritime Consultative Organisation (IMCO) which negotiated a new convention, with increased limits, which is expected to ultimately replace the 1957 Convention.

In giving effect to the 1957 Convention Australia, like a number of the European shipping countries, will, at the request of the Australian States, exercise the option provided for in the Protocol of Signature to exclude the application of sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph (1) of Article 1 of the Convention. This means that shipowners will not be able to limit their liability in respect of damage to harbour works, or for wreck removal. In order to give effect to the Convention, Clause 50 of the Bill repeals Part VIII of the United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Act. However the exclusion of liability in respect of certain property claims which is presently provided by Part VIII will be continued by the new Section 338 to be inserted in the Navigation Act. New section 59b, will prevent shipowners from limiting their liability in respect of claims by crew members serving under Commonwealth articles of agreement. This was sought by the unions, and is also a practice followed by many maritime nations.

Another of the main groups of amendments relates to ‘visiting British ships ‘. Part II of the Act deals with crewing matters, and until recently was in line with similar provisions in the United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Act, with both laws applying to a British ship whilst visiting ports in Australia. The United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Act has recently been very substantially changed and it would create administrative problems for the master and crew of a ship and the staffs of mercantile marine offices, who administer the relevant provisions of the Navigation Act, if those provisions were to continue to apply to such ships. The Bill makes the necessary adjustments in this regard. These are explained in the notes on clause 5 that have been circulated.

An important feature of the Bill, because of the positive contribution it makes to safety of life and property at sea, is that it gives legal effect to the ship movement reporting scheme that was introduced following the loss of the Blythe Star. This scheme has been operating on a voluntary basis for some time. It ensures that positive action is taken to search for a ship in the Australian search and rescue area if more than 24 hours have elapsed since the ship last indicated that all was well. It will also, in the event of a ship being in distress, enable the Marine Operations Centre of the Department of Transport to know immediately what ships are in the area and which of these would be best suited to assist in the emergency. In addition to improved safety, the system brings about significant economies in the use of search and rescue resources by providing a datum on which to concentrate a search in the event of a ship becoming overdue. It appears that no such legislation exists anywhere else in the world. Australia is therefore leading the world in this important development. Information about the system has been circulated to members of IMCO, where it has aroused considerable interest. In addition, Australia has proposed to IMCO that a uniform ship movement reporting system should be an integral part of any internationally-agreed search and rescue plan. Details of how the scheme works in practice are given in the explanatory notes on clause 23.

The other subject involving a group of amendments is that of historic shipwrecks. Honourable senators will recall the Historic Shipwrecks Act which came into force on 15 December last year and which makes provision for the protection of shipwrecks of historic significance in Australian waters and waters above the continental shelf of Australia. In respect of proclaimed waters it empowers the Minister for Administrative Services to declare particular shipwrecks and related relics of historic significance to be ‘historic shipwrecks or historic relics’, thus bringing them under the protection provisions of the legislation. This Act necessitates related amendments of Part VII of the Navigation Act dealing with wrecks and salvage which have been drafted to ensure compatibility between the two Acts.

The Historic Shipwrecks Act requires a finder of a wreck to give notice of his discovery and does not prohibit salvage operations until the wreck is declared historic, when strict controls come into effect. The finder may acquire salvage rights under the Navigation Act, the United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Acts, or at common law before the wreck is declared historic. Clause 26 of the Navigation Amendment Bill therefore provides that various provisions of the Navigation Act that deal with wreck and salvage matters do not apply to a wreck from the time that it is declared historic and while it remains so declared. As salvage rights or liabilities under the Navigation Act acquired before a wreck is declared historic are to be preserved, clause 26 also makes express provision for this purpose. It will be open to a person whose proprietary rights are affected in any way by the operation of the Historic Shipwrecks Act to claim under the compensation provisions of that Act. Clause 29 ensures that, for reasons of safety of life and of navigation, the provisions of the Navigation Act giving the Minister powers regarding the removal of wreck will still apply to any wreck, whether declared historic or not. The Minister is not to exercise any of those powers unless it is necessary to do so for purposes of safety or environmental emergency. Another clause ensures that his powers to deal with oil pollution threats arising from damaged ships continue unrestricted.

The remaining amendments can best be classified as ‘ miscellaneous ‘. Some of them are of a purely drafting or machinery nature and are set out principally in Schedule 5. Others of more importance are explained in some detail in the notes that have been circulated. One amendment extends the references in the Act to the owner of a ship to include a reference to the operator, except in a few special circumstances. This is to ensure that where a duty or liability is imposed by the Act on the owner in cases where the owner is only remotely concerned with the operations of the ship- for example, if he has executed a bareboat charter- responsibility for ensuring that that duty or liability is discharged is imposed on the person who is directly concerned with the relevant operations, as well as on the owner. Conversely, a benefit conferred on the owner will also, in appropriate cases, be available to the operator. Another amendment is to provide a regulation-making power enabling the Minister to make orders in relation to detailed technical requirements to be applied under the Act, so that such requirements can be quickly implemented, or varied without delay, in the light of ship casualties, equipment failure investigations, or technical developments.

The Bill also includes a number of provisions relating to the engagement and discharge of seamen and certain of the conditions of their employment, mainly to cater for the use of modern accounting techniques. Apart from prescribing penalties at appropriate levels for newly-created offences, the opportunity has been taken, where sections are otherwise being amended, to update some maximum monetary penalties for existing offences against provisions of the Act and regulations and to increase some general penalties. Other penalties will need to be brought into line later.

I might point out that this Bill does not purport to effect a general revision of the Navigation Act, which is a matter for consideration in the light of the report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Maritime Industry which was tabled late last year. As I indicated at the beginning of this speech, the Bill now before honourable senators brings up much that was in the Navigation Bill 1975 but omits two important aspects- aspects, however, which are rightly omitted until such time as the Minister for Transport has fully discussed with his State counterparts how these matters are to be covered legislatively. I commend the Bill to the Senate.

Debate (on motion by Senator Wriedt) adjourned.

page 20

DISTINGUISHED VISITOR

The PRESIDENT:

– Honourable senators, before the next item of business is called on, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of our colleague the former Senator

Kennelly who is accompanied by his wife. To you, Mr Kennelly, and to your good lady, we extend a warm welcome to the chamber.

page 20

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY ELECTRICITY SUPPLY AMENDMENT BILL 1976

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 18 August 1976, on motion by Senator Webster:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

Senator GEORGES:
Queensland

-The purpose of this Bill is to amend the Australian Capital Territory Electricity Supply Act 1962-1973 for the following purposes: First, to replace the references to the Australian Capital Territory Advisory Council with references to the Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly; secondly, to amend the provisions of the principal Act dealing with the remuneration and allowances of the members of the Australian Capital Territory Electricity Authority; and, thirdly, to bring the language of the principal Act into line with current drafting practices. It is evident that the purpose of the Bill is purely formal. There is no opposition to it from this side of the Senate.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 20

INSURANCE (DEPOSITS) AMENDMENT BILL 1976

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 30 November 1976, on motion by Senator Cotton:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

Senator WRIEDT:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– The Opposition will not be opposing this Bill. The amendments proposed by the Bill follow on from a similar Bill which was introduced by the previous Government in 1973. That Government was concerned that the proliferation of small insurance companies and a number of insurance company failures had led to individuals being unprotected in the event of claims being made. Before 1973 the only protection that policy holders had against insolvency on the part of a company was the deposits that had been lodged with the Treasurer prior to the insurer beginning business. The deposits lodged with the Treasurer were used to pay claims by policy holders when the insurer became insolvent. The protection offered by the scheme was of only limited value. In many cases the deposits were insufficient to recompense policy holders at the time of a company failure, and personal hardship often followed as a consequence.

Again, prior to 1973 there was no supervision of the companies after the deposits had been lodged. The Labor Government used the 1973 Insurance Act to ensure that a limited set of standards was adhered to by the companies. This went a long way towards controlling the introduction of what might be called doubtful people into this very important industry. The financial standards set by the 1973 Insurance Act since its inception have proved to be, in the main, satisfactory. It is important to note that since the amendments were introduced by the Labor Government the number of insurers legally entitled to operate in Australia has fallen from 400 to 214. Many of those which have fallen by the wayside were never in any position to provide adequate insurance cover for policy holders who insured with or through them. The continuance of the authorisation and the control by the Insurance Commissioner is a very necessary aspect of the industry and it does not prejudice the ability of the companies to compete for business. For those reasons, the Opposition does not oppose the Bill. The Opposition wishes it a speedy passage.

Senator COTTON:
New South WalesMinister for Industry and Commerce · LP

– in reply- The Leader of the Opposition (Senator Wriedt) has outlined adequately the purpose of the BUI. I thought when this measure was introduced that it was a good one. I think that it does a useful job. There are one or two things that one might say about it. Had anybody asked any questions about what the refunds might be to authorised insurers, I would have been able to say that the maximum amount that could be refunded to authorised insurers in 1976-77 would be $27.3m. If that were to have produced an inquiry in anybody’s mind about the Budget implications of the return of those deposits, I would have been able to say that the moneys lodged with the Treasurer as deposits remain the property of the insurers concerned and are held in trust by the Treasurer. Repayment of the deposit moneys would have no Budget implications. I thank the Opposition for the speedy passage of the Bill. As I have said, I think that it is a good measure.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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

page 21

AUSTRALIAN ECONOMY

Ministerial Statement

Senator COTTON:
New South WalesMinister for Industry and Commerce · LP

– by leave- At this moment in the House of Representatives the Treasurer (Mr Lynch) is making a statement on the economy. I wish to make that statement in the Senate on behalf of the Treasurer and the Government.

The year 1976 was a year of considerable progress towards the 3-year goals we have set ourselves in bringing Australia’s economic problems under control. That progress was all the more notable when viewed against the background of the mess that we inherited. I no not however propose today to go over the record of our predecessors. My purpose rather is to review briefly the economic developments of 1976 and to spell out the Government’s continuing economic strategy for 1 977.

The Senate will recall that the strategy on which we embarked at the end of 1975 began from the fundamental recognition that renewed economic growth could occur only if the long campaign of business-bashing stopped and the private sector began to expand again. Control of inflation was a pre-requisite for an environment in which the private sector would slowly emerge from its state of shock. The strategy for recovery required measures aimed directly at boosting the private sector and cutting back on big government. We have carried through that strategy and we have already begun to see its fruits. Above all, the rate of inflation has moderated substantially.

In the first 3 quarters of 1976 the consumer price index rose by 3 per cent, 2.5 per cent and 2.2 per cent respectively, compared with average quarterly increases of about 4 per cent in 1974 and 1975. Understandably, considerable emphasis is placed on movements in the CPI as the measure of inflation. In fact, of course, that index merely records price movements for a specifically confined set of goods and services. The flattening trend in the CPI is present, often even more markedly, in other price indicators. In the first 3 quarters of 1976 the deflator for the major components of gross national expenditurethe sum of all domestic final expenditure, private and government- rose by 4 per cent, 2.7 per cent and 2.2 per cent respectively, compared with an average quarterly rise of over 4 per cent in the 2 preceding years.

The price indexes for materials used in and articles produced by manufacturing industry corroborate this downward trend. So do the price indexes for materials used in building, both dwellings and non-dwellings. We know, of course, that the effects of our changed arrangements for health insurance will produce a higher December quarter CPI increase than in any quarter since the 5.6 per cent increase of the December quarter of 1975. However, that ‘once for all’ statistical effect should not be allowed to obscure the steady and considerable underlying improvement in the rate of inflation. We can see this point more clearly if we recognise that the broadly based deflators will not be affected by the changes made to Medibank last year, just as they were not affected by the introduction of Medibank in 1975. This is because inherent in their construction is the proposition that the community has always paid in one way or another for its health care. Health insurance did not suddenly become free on 1 July 1975, nor did it suddenly become more costly on account of our changes effective on 1 October 1976. In other words, the underlying rate of inflation in the latter part of 1975 was not diminished by the previous Government’s decision to fund the costs of health care out of taxation; and the underlying rate of inflation in the December quarter 1976 has not been increased by the change in that arrangement.

Our steady progress in the fight against inflation has been slowly re-establishing the preconditions for sustainable growth. In particular, the disastrous distortions to key economic relationships during 1974-75 began to be corrected during 1976. For example, the recovery in business profitability is evidenced by the increase in the profit share as measured in the national accounts- from 12.4 per cent in the final quarter of 1 975 to 14.4 per cent in the September quarter of 1976. But apart from such dry technicalities as that, every reader of the daily Press is aware of the stream of improved company profits emerging in all sectors of the economy. In the September quarter of 1976 company profits were up 39.4 per cent on a year earlier. This partial climb back from the extremely depressed level to which profits were driven in 1974 and 1975 is central to the revival of business confidence, business investment and, of course, the creation of new job opportunities. However, although the profit share is still below its longer run norm, during 1976 a basis was laid for corporate expansion during 1 977.

As to activity, aggregate expenditures and national production began to grow again in 1976. Most striking has been the VA per cent rise in real gross non-farm product between the December quarter of 1975 and the September quarter of 1976. Even if there were to be no further growth in non-farm gross domestic product during the remainder of 1976-77 from the level provisionally estimated to have been attained in the September quarter, the financial year as a whole would show a growth of over 5 per cent in real non-farm GDP compared with 1975-76. Industrial production has been expanding overall in recent months following a short period of little change around mid 1976. In December the ANZ Bank’s index was 9 per cent above its low point in mid 1 975.

I am certainly not suggesting that at every turn one finds economic activity booming. The rise in activity has been uneven- as usual in the early stages of economic recovery. This is quite to be expected. As expected, exports, private expenditure on dwellings and stock building have all made strong and consistent contributions to that growth. An increase in private consumption- 4.2 per cent as an annual rate- was also recorded over the first three quarters of 1976. This occurred even though there was actually a slight fall in real household disposable income in the three quarters to June 1976. Indicators currently available for the December quarter suggest continuing moderate growth in private domestic final demand. Retail sales statistics, and motor vehicle registrations also, for November and December indicate that private consumption ended 1976 on a more buoyant note. However, I am not suggesting continued buoyancy but rather, as I said, continuing moderate growth in the economy taken as a whole.

Businesses have indicated that they expect new capital expenditure in the December quarter to be well above its September quarter level. With the exception of New South Wales, conditions in the dwelling industry remain generally strong, and, happily, even in New South Wales signs of improvement in that sector have been emerging.

A most heartening and impressive, but little appreciated, feature of the growth recorded in 1976 is that it occurred despite a reduced level of real government spending. The momentum for growth lay entirely in the private sector. Regrettably, but hardly surprisingly, this lift in demand and production has not yet been translated into a decline in unemployment. In the early stages of past recoveries also employers have begun by making fuller use of their existing workforce. At today’s much higher levels of wage and salary costs, there is an even stronger incentive than before for employers to seek out every alternative means of increasing output before hiring additional full-time workers. We all recall that dictum of a former Labor Treasurer that in conditions of high inflation ‘one man’s wage increase is another man’s job’. Yet this process whereby trade union leaders have been energetically pricing their members out of jobs is still continuing.

One reason for any failure to recognise the clear progress that has been made in 1976 in getting the economy back onto a path of sustainable growth lies, I believe, in the widespread tendency to see that process only in terms of the statistics of those registered for employment. Clearly, the provision of jobs for all those who wish to work is central to this Government’s objectives. But, as is well known, unemployment data are never among the leading indicators of economic recovery. In this as in other areas of the economic debate there are those who think they stand to benefit from ‘talking down’ the progress that has been made. The Opposition, in this as in other respects, does not wish to be confused by the facts. Those however who pursue this course pay little heed to the effects their actions have on confidence in the community and, particularly, on those who would most benefit from increased confidence- the unemployed. Those who, following last August’s Budget and more recently, have been peddling their alarmist forecasts of 500 000 unemployed in January are now demonstrably in that category.

Much progress has also been made in dealing with the bloated public sector we inherited. Much more remains to be done. Our objectives in this area have been twofold. We want to see a smaller public sector. We also want to make room, by reducing public spending, to move forward with our proposed initiatives for reducing the level of taxation. We have already made a solid start in both respects. The 1976-77 Budget provided for outlays to grow by 11.3 per cent compared with 1975-76. This was in stark contrast with rates of increase of 22.5 per cent in 1975-76 and 45.9 per cent in 1974-75. In the first 7 months of this financial year Budget outlays have been held to 1 1.2 per cent above the corresponding period of 1 975-76.

As to tax reduction, we have already made solid progress. Prospective tax reductions in 1977-78 already amount to over $2 billion- or over $3 billion compared with the situation as we found it. Personal income tax reductions in excess of $1 billion will automatically come into effect as from 1 July next. This will be a direct consequence of the indexation of personal income tax, introduced last year at an estimated cost to the Budget of $ 1,050m in 1976-77. The Government has also eased the distribution requirements for private companies under Division 7 of the Income Tax Assessment Act and taken a number of steps to reduce taxation in the mining area.

The estate duty provisions were substantially eased and the new system of income equalisation deposits now gives farmers the opportunity to protect themselves from the effects of fluctuating income on their tax liabilities. Productive investment of all industries is now eligible for a generous investment allowance- which, I see, the official spokesman for the Opposition on Treasury matters now says should be abolished. More generally, the Government is committed to a scheme, to be introduced from 1 July this year, of trading stock valuation adjustments to relieve 1976-77 business incomes of some of the burden of taxation resulting from inflation.

The Government has not merely talked about taxation reform and taxation reduction; in accordance with its commitment to ongoing reform of the taxation system, it has acted. This record, achieved within the space of a mere 12 months, contrasts with the massive tax increases imposed by the previous Government. Within the ambit of fiscal responsibility open to it up to this time, this Government has acted decisively to lighten the community’s taxation burdens. But, as any thoughtful person knows, worthwhile tax reforms must inevitably forgo revenue. In the public statement of the Treasurer of 19 January while the Parliament was in recess he canvassed the 4 possible ways of financing the revenue reductions involved: Firstly, increasing other forms of taxation; secondly, sharply increasing interest rates in order to step up government borrowings from the non-bank public; thirdly, cutting back hard on government expenditures; and, finally, printing money. We have ruled out the first 2 alternatives. We have said before, and I say again, that we will not finance tax reform via the fourth alternative- printing money. In current circumstances tax cuts can therefore only be implemented responsibly if they are accompanied by corresponding cut-backs in the growth of expenditure, so that their resultant impact on the deficit is offset and our whole antiinflation strategy is not jeopardised.

In summary, then, the economic strategy put into effect and coherently applied through 1 976 has been demonstrably successful. Some have claimed that the decision to devalue in late 1976 connotes an abandonment of this strategy- an admission that it was not achieving results. Nothing could be further from the truth. In the circumstances of that time devaluation was inevitable and no responsible government could have acted otherwise. The immediate background to that decision was the persistent speculation against the Australian dollar over previous months and prospectively. This was not, of course, a new development; it was one of the first problems we encountered upon coming into office.

Speculation both then and later was based on the fact that under the previous Government, Australian costs and prices had been allowedindeed encouraged- to run wild. As a result, as I said earlier, confidence in our currency at that time was steadily declining both at home and abroad. Against that background one notes the cynicism of the Opposition’s criticism of devaluation last November. Of course, the genesis of that decision lay in the profligacy of 1974 and 1975. What this Government did succeed in doing was to stave off for almost 12 months the consequences for our currency of that profligacy. We recognised that there were costs in maintaining the exchange rate in such circumstances. Nevertheless, we decided to do so throughout most of 1976 to allow time for our basic antiinflationary policies to begin slowly to clean up the economic shambles we had inherited. Against the background of inevitability I have referred to, our decision at the end of November to vary the exchange rate also reflected a judgment that, valuable though an unchanged exchange rate had been throughout 1976 in cementing the totality of our anti-inflationary measures, the costs of retaining it in that role for any longer were becoming too high to be endured by those sectors of the economy on whom the brunt of those costs was falling. I cannot emphasise too strongly that this change does not mean that our objective of braking inflation is in any way altered- still less that it has been abandoned.

The task now before us is to ensure that the solid progress already made in reducing inflation is not unduly interrupted by the inflationary consequences of devaluation. The direct impact of devaluation is likely to show up principally in our major price indexes in the March and June quarters of this year. The key need is to ensure that the various forms of indexation operating within the Australian economy today do not result in those direct price effects flowing on into further second round effects. Only if this can be achieved will the potential benefits of devaluation materialise into providing new job opportunities and reducing unemployment. Those benefits are considerable.

The competitive positions of our export and import-competing sectors have been restored and investor confidence in those areas renewed, With a view to preserving these real and important gains, we have taken a number of steps directed at limiting the second round effects of devaluation and ensuring the maintenance of our basic strategy. In doing so we have, as always, had to strike a balance between actions in the different areas of policy. For example, the Government could have sought to deal with the impact of devaluation on domestic liquidity by placing a total embargo on the entry of funds from overseas. But this would have choked off investment and damaged recovery. Again, it clearly was not possible to cut budgetary expenditures overnight in the amounts that would have been required. As I have said, we chose a more balanced approach.

In the exchange rate field itself, we had first to achieve the desired initial impact on short-term capital flows by the large depreciation of 17.5 per cent. We did achieve that desired result and ended the speculation. Subsequently, under the new arrangements for management of the rate which now obtains, we have made a series of upward adjustments to the rate which have now reduced the effective devaluation from the 26 November level to 12.45 per cent. While maintaining the fundamental purpose of our original decision, these adjustments have had the effect of minimising the extent of the tightening needed in the other arms of policy. We have none the less also moved to tighten up those other policy instruments.

After devaluation, with prospects for easier domestic financial conditions flowing from the unwinding of the previous build-up in leads and lags and the renewed inflow of other forms of capital, there has been a continuing need to carefully re-attune the monetary instruments. The objectives of the Government’s monetary policy remain- namely, to ensure that adequate finance is available to underwrite the recovery while, at the same time, financial conditions bear down on inflation. Since the devaluation we have moved, in a measured way, to maintain that appropriate degree of monetary restraint without which overabundant liquidity would both stimulate expectations of accelerating inflation and provide the wherewithal to validate those expectations. A number of steps have been taken to limit the inflow of funds from abroad which, unrestrained, would have added excessively to domestic monetary expansion. The appreciation of the exchange rate of the Australian dollar in a number of small adjustments in December, to which I have already referred, was itself in accord with that.

On 14 January the Treasurer announced new and strengthened restrictions on overseas borrowings, designed to permit the continuation of borrowings for high priority capital purposes and to bear less heavily on longer-term borrowings for other purposes but essentially directed to choke off excessive additions to private sector liquidity. These measures are designed to bear less heavily on some sectors than on others. A key element in preventing the development of too easy financial conditions is to attract more funds from the non-bank private sector into Commonwealth Government securities. Accordingly, Government securities were made relatively more attractive. Initially, yields on treasury notes were increased as a further nudge in the direction of preparing for the seasonal liquidity contraction which will commence a month or so from now. Subsequently, in the light of the strong demand for treasury notes, 3 small technical downward revisions in yields were effected.

It is a universal objective to reduce the level of interest rates at the earliest opportunity. But no government can achieve that unless it can make sustained progress in bringing inflation under effective long-term control. Measures have also been taken to prevent excess secondary credit creation. To this end, overall domestic financial conditions will continue to be closely monitored by the authorities. Some discussions have been held with, and guidance given to, major financial institutions with regard to their levels of new lending.

In addition, there have been 3 increases of one percentage point each in the statutory reserve deposit ratio since devaluation and another is to be effected on 21 February. These have helped to contain the growth in the margins of free liquidity of the major trading banks- that is, beyond the minimum LGS ratio which they are currently required to observe. In order to aid the effectiveness of monetary management by reducing within-year swings in liquidity, it has been decided to bring back into operation in 1977-78, and fully to restore in 1978-79 the system under which company tax is collected by instalments. The improvement in company profitability, to which I referred earlier, has in any case diminished the need for this kind of interim assistance. These necessary adjustments to the monetary instruments have been executed with care and with close regard to the needs of the community for access to credit.

There is of course no substance in the tired old claim that these actions will lead to a credit squeeze in the June quarter. On the contrary, the financial system is probably better prepared today for the impending large seasonal drain of funds than it has been for many years. The monetary authorities have been explaining the prospective situation in detail to financial institutions which will be handling the large flows of funds involved. The very substantial non-official holdings of Treasury notes-over $2.6 billionwill serve to smooth the liquidity rundown. The minimum LGS ratio of the trading banks, which in January of last year was temporarily raised from 18 pier cent to 23 per cent, will revert to 1 8 per cent at the end of March as planned. In other words, just as the liquidity downswing is getting under way an amount in the order of $850m which the banking system is now required to maintain in the form of LGS assets will become available to assist the banks in meeting the seasonal drain on their funds.

In short, unlike 1974, there is no reason to doubt that the June quarter will be traversed satisfactorily. For the longer term, the task of policy in containing the growth of the monetary aggregates remains. In the Budget Speech it was suggested that growth in the money supply, broadly defined M3, in the order of 10 per cent to 12 per cent during 1 976-77 could be appropriate in the circumstances as they were then envisaged. The change in circumstances resulting from devaluation has made it necessary to review that estimate in the course of the policy adjustments I have just been describing. There will be timing lags before the effects of those adjustments are reflected in the statistics.

In the light of the somewhat higher real growth rate now in prospect for 1976-77, and the turnaround in Australia’s external account flowing from devaluation, the original 10 per cent to 1 2 per cent range may, depending on how circumstances unfold, in due course have to be revised marginally upwards. What will be important- and what we proposed to ensure- is that the rate of growth of the money supply should continue to come under firm but steady moderation as 1977 wears on.

I turn next to the area of fiscal policy. Although for obvious reasons attention since the devaluation has been chiefly concentrated upon the domestic liquidity effects of the turnaround in the external capital account, the main continuing source of liquidity growth is still the Budget deficit. Monetary management problems in the post-devaluation period thus underline the need for continued and indeed enhanced expenditure restraint. Expenditures are therefore being monitored closely and the Government remains determined to hold the increase in total outlays within the 1 1.3 per cent provided for in the Budget. On 16 December the Treasurer announced that, following a further review of the 1976-77 estimates, the Government had decided upon savings of $250m. These savings are to be achieved mainly by deferring expenditures and by ensuring that expected shortfalls of expenditure on a variety of items are in fact realised and not utilised for other purposes.

The Government is seeking to achieve further savings over the remainder of 1976-77 wherever it is possible to do so. Because of the success of management in the staff ceilings area, the Public Service Board recently advised the Government that total staff in the Public Service Act area of Commonwealth employment is expected to be up to 700 lower than the ceiling earlier determined by the Government. As announced on 14 January, this lower figure has now been taken as the new ceiling objective for end- June 1977. This more disciplined and responsible approach to government expenditures will be continued in our deliberations over the months leading up to the 1977-78 Budget.

We shall bring the same responsible approach to the timing and magnitudes of future reductions in taxation. In this connection I note that the Opposition has recently lent its support to calls for immediate tax cuts as well as, in its case, an increase in public expenditures. This is remarkable. The Opposition appears to have forgotten that there is no automatic nexus between economic activity on the one hand and tax cuts and increased government spending on the other. Britain’s Prime Minister, Mr Callaghan, said in his speech to the British Labour Party Conference on 28 September last:

We used to think that you could just spend your way out of a recession and increase employment by cutting taxes and boosting government spending. I tell you in all candour that that option no longer exists and that insofar as it ever did exist, it worked by injecting inflation into the economy.

We might bear in mind that the problems which now confront Australia are the product of those very same quack remedies now advanced by the Opposition. They are the ‘remedies’ which it applied in 1974 when, in the words of its leader in his recent Current Affair interview, the then Cabinet panicked and so did most members of the Caucus. I assure the Opposition that we have no intention of following that example. Against that historical background, however, calls by the Opposition for a new package of stimulatory measures at this time can be best dismissed as a lurch back into the policy errors of the past. In the terms of the caption to the recent Pickering cartoon, what the Opposition is saying to the Australian people is this: ‘We got you into this mess and, by George, we 11 get you out ‘.

Since devaluation we have thus moved, in a measured and pragmatic way, to adjust both monetary and fiscal policies. But, as I have stressed in the Senate previously, the best settings of monetary and fiscal policies can be thrown off course if developments in the field of wages policy are out of kilter with the antiinflation objective. Since coming to office the Government has, firmly and consistently, pointed to the crucial importance of wage restraint for the speedy winding down of inflation; for the restoration of consumer and business confidence; for the restoration of the profit share; for the safeguarding of our international competitive position; and above all for the provision of jobs for the growing work force. Devaluation has, for the time being, strengthened our international competitive position, to the benefit of our export and import-competing industries. But with external policy now shouldering less of the burden in the fight to get on top of inflation, wages policy, as well as fiscal and monetary policies, must play a greater role than previously in shouldering that burden.

Without tightening up on the wages front, as has been done in the other arms of policy, the inflationary problem will worsen. In that event the very real gains which devaluation has bestowed on our export and import-competing industries will be quickly dissipated and the enhanced job opportunities which that, in turn, would have provided will not materialise. Indeed, if the initial direct price consequences of devaluation are allowed to flow through into higher wages and then back into higher prices and so on, it is not only our export and importcompeting industries that would suffer. The whole economy would feel the effects. The very real progress over the past year to get on top of inflation would be placed in jeopardy.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development survey on Australia recently published said:

It is also essential that the adjustment of wages to increases in the cost of living should be only partial.

The upward thrust to the inflation rate which, for example, fully indexed wage increases now would inevitably involve would again begin to distort the consumer saving ratio and the wageprofit share ratio which, as I have said, we have gone a long way to correcting. Economic recovery would be held back and more people would find themselves out of work- and out of work for longer periods. This is not an attractive prospect. We shall be stating our position on this matter fully in the national wage case which is expected to commence within a few weeks and I do not propose today to foreshadow our submission in detail. I make it clear, however, that in the forthcoming national wage case, in subsequent national wage cases, in individual industry cases, in the area of Commonwealth employment, and in every other way open to it the Government intends, in the period ahead, to press very strongly indeed for a maximum measure of wage restraint.

In these remarks I have set out clearly the real progress made during 1976 in moving Australia back from the precipice with which, little more than a year ago, it was confronted. I have spoken also of the recent process of policy adjustment in the post-devaluation situation. What then of the period ahead? The substantial progress we have made during 1976 in correcting the economy ‘s course has hinged on the success we have had in combating inflation. The correctness of this strategy has become increasingly apparent. Again, the OECD survey on Australia said:

The strategy followed by the authorities was virtually the only possible one in the conditions applying.

Our policy overall- of continuing the fight against inflation- remains unchanged. The future course of wages will be crucial in this regard. Success in preventing the unavoidable direct price effects of devaluation from snowballing into a renewed inflationary cycle would ensure that the growth we have been experiencing would continue to strengthen and consolidate. In that case, the outlook will be for continued growth in demand and employment over the course of 1977. Consumption, private investment, exports and inventory changes should all contribute to that growth.

The need for continued restraint over government expenditure will mean that growth in total public sector spending will remain low. As already announced, the Government has decided that in 1977-78 Budget outlays will be kept within zero ‘real’ growth and that the deficit will be reduced. In addition, actual aggregate staff numbers at end-June 1977 will be the ceiling objective for Public Service Act employment in 1977-78. So far as 1976-77 is concerned, the overall rise in non-farm product seems likely to exceed that foreseen at the time of the Budget. Further ahead, there is every prospect for continued healthy growth provided inflation is controlled. Australia is on the path to restored prosperity and our policies have been central to achieving that. There is still a long way to go. Not merely as a Government but as a nation, what is needed for the period ahead is steadiness and resolution as we give our policies time to work. In 1977 we shall build further upon the real progress already recorded in 1976. 1 ask for leave to move that the Senate take note of the statement.

The PRESIDENT:

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

Senator COTTON:

-I move:

Debate (on motion by Senator Wriedt) adjourned.

page 27

CRIMES (AIRCRAFT) AMENDMENT BILL 1976

Second Readings

Debate resumed from 18 and 24 August 1976, on motion by Senator Durack:

That the Bills be now read a second time.

Senator BUTTON:
Victoria

-The Senate is dealing cognately with 4 Bills which the Opposition does not oppose. Perhaps I should identify the Bills as the Crimes (Aircraft) Amendment Bill, the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill, the Extradition (Commonwealth Countries) Amendment Bill and the Extradition (Foreign States) Amendment Bill. The first of those Bills, of course, deals with the domestic situation within Australia. The Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill is the major one of the other 3 Bills and, in a sense, the 2 extradition Bills are ancillary to the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill. With regard to the Crimes (Aircraft) Amendment Bill, section 1 8 of the present Act makes it an offence to carry, place, deliver or possess dangerous goods on an aircraft, and dangerous goods are defined to cover a number of things, including firearms, ammunition, explosives and substances which endanger the safety of aircraft or people on board. A maximum penalty of imprisonment for 7 years is imposed by the present legislation.

The need for the legislation now before the Senate arises, one assumes, from the fact that there has been a great increase in passenger aircraft traffic. The incidence of the carrying of dangerous goods on aircraft has increased in recent years, and the possibility of serious accident or damage to aircraft or injury to people has also increased in that period. In a sense aircraft accidents through the carrying of dangerous articles on aircraft is a growth industry. One assumes, and I think the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs (Senator Durack) referred to this in his second reading speech, that the purpose of the legislation is to deal with that situation. However, there are at least two classes of dangerous articles that can be carried. There are articles such as firearms which can be carried by passengers, and the carrying of those articles can constitute a very serious offence, and there are other articles which can be carried by passengers in what can be described as an innocent sense which also fall within the provisions of this legislation but the carrying of which clearly should not of necessity be dealt with as an indictable offence as required by the legislation.

The Bill before the Senate introduces a proposed new section 22 (a) which provides for certain exceptions to indictable offences under the Act. In effect, it empowers a magistrate to deal with the matter in his discretion and to impose a summary conviction in the lower court with only the question of sentence being dealt with by the higher court. There are a number of elements which have to be satisfied before the magistrate can exercise jurisdiction and they include the agreement of both the prosecution and the defence and the exercise of discretion by the magistrate. If that discretion is exercised in favour of dealing with the matter summarily, reduced penalties apply in accordance with section 23 (4). The Opposition regards this as a sensible proposal, one which is consistent with changed circumstances since the original legislation was introduced. For that reason it does not oppose the proposed amendments.

Of the three other Bills, the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill is the most important. It arises out of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons adopted in 1973. That Convention was signed by the Government of Australia in 1974 and has been signed by a number of other countries including Canada, the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom. The purpose of that Convention is to provide protection for internationally protected persons and article 1 of the Convention, which is part of the schedule to the Bill, defines the expression ‘internationally protected persons’. It includes a Head of State and any member of a collegial body performing the functions of a Head of State under the Constitution of the State concerned, a Head of Government or a Minister for Foreign Affairs whenever any such person is in a foreign State, as well as members of his family who accompany him. It also includes diplomats, if I can use that expression in the broadest sense. That is to say, it includes any representative or official of a State or any official or other agent of an international organisation of an intergovernmental character. The generic term ‘diplomat’ probably defines the persons who are covered or are intended to be covered by the provisions of the Convention.

At the time the Convention was adopted there was a clear need for it in terms of the international situation and international law. Since it was adopted there have been a number of crimes against heads of State and diplomats who fall within the specification of the Convention. There have been a number of incidents in South America involving United States diplomatic personnel, one incident in Sweden and at least one incident in the Middle East- The Lebanon- involving a United States diplomat. With the increased level of international terrorism of one kind or another and the use of force against individuals as a means of promoting allegedly the interests of minority political groups and the growth of that practice in international affairs, the adoption of this Convention by countries becomes more and more important and the implementation of the signing of the Convention by legislation becomes important to Australia and to this Parliament. The Bill itself is largely in accordance with the provisions of the Convention of the United Nations. In the House of Representatives the honourable member for Kingsford-Smith, representing the Opposition, made a number of comments about the specific terminology of the Bill and pointed to some discrepancies between the terminology of the legislation and the intent of the terminology of the Convention. I again refer to the Government, without taking any specific action in relation to them in the Senate, the suggestions made by the representative of the Opposition in the House of Representatives.

There are two Bills containing amendments to extradition provisions, one dealing with the Commonwealth and one dealing with foreign countries. This legislation again flows from the articles of the Convention on the Prevention and

Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons. It is obvious that it is ancillary legislation designed to give effect to the articles of the Convention and to protect the purpose of the main Bill before the Senate. The Opposition again does not oppose these Bills and regards them as consequential or ancillary to the main legislation. We take the view that the Government has acted wisely, if not as promptly as it might, in introducing this legislation.

There have been some questions raised about the circumstances in which extradition proceedings are taken. There is a very wide discretion in the Attorney-General and we trust that that discretion will be exercised according to the same principles and in the manner adopted by Australian Attorneys-General in the past. If that trust is misplaced it certainly will become a matter of public issue and debate. So I make those brief comments about the legislation. It does have our support in a general sense and we will be voting in support of it.

Senator MULVIHILL:
New South Wales

– I enter the debate only to seek certain information from the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs (Senator Durack). To some degree my suspicions are aroused by what is contained in the second reading speech on the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill 1976. In the second reading speech the Minister spoke about the alleged offender’s rights in respect of prejudice at his trial. What I am trying to ascertain is: If Australia becomes a signatory to this Convention, ultimately will our decision on whether a person is prosecuted be made according to whether he comes from a country that we regard as a goodie or one that we regard as a baddie?

Before I develop that line I want to get back to the present situation. Some years ago there was a Qantas bomb hoax. The perpetrator was not born in Australia. He served 3lA years of his gaol sentence and then he was deported to a country in Europe. I am not getting into any racial hangups about the country involved. Apparently the Australian Attorney-General and the Minister for Immigration felt that if he was deported he would have paid his debt to society for his crime. lt was a hoax; there was not really a bomb. He was deported. That might have been difficult if his wife had been an Australian citizen, but she was not. I would be interested to know whether, before we signed this Convention, we used provisions of the Migration Act or the Crimes Act to deal with a non-Australian who was involved in a crime indirectly involving the safety of an aircraft. Perhaps the Minister can explain the position. I take it that, under the Convention we are going to ratify, an individual charged with hijacking would face trial in Australia. Assuming that he was sentenced to, say, 10 years gaol, would we then have the right to deport him to the country of his birth because he did not have Australian citizenship?

In raising that question I am also a little sceptical as to whether the big powers, after they sign these conventions, really regard them as more than a scrap of paper. Without getting into the pros and cons of the Middle East situation, it seems to me to be remarkable that in the case of a similar sort of crime the French Government justified a certain non-compliance with extradition laws. I have no illusions that countries such as Australia which sign this agreement will endeavour to live up to it, but we might find that if trade is involved- this was the case with France- most of the major powers will look the other way.

To take it a little further, we could get the situation in Australia that a Basque from Spain might want to make some gesture on an aircraft to show what he feels about the present Spanish Government, which I hasten to add is an improvement on the Franco Government. We might decide that that chap should be dealt with here and then deported to Spain. There was a classic case in the United States of America not so long ago in which a small- I emphasise the word ‘small ‘; perhaps it was even minute- group of Croats for a propaganda exercise hijacked a United States aircraft. I do not know what the United States has done in that situation; but I know that if the boot had been on the other foot a different type of government might have taken a different attitude. I do not want to prejudge what an Australian Attorney-General or an Australian Foreign Minister would do. I just make the point that when we talk about trials and what is at the other end we might have to bite on the bullet and prove very definitely that we regard nationals of countries to the far right and to the far left in the same way and apply the law with even handed justice.

I am not indulging in party politics on this issue. I have said publicly, even during the term of my own Government, that I feel that if a person wants to be a political refugee in Australia he has a better chance if he says at an Australian embassy that his country has a left wing government and that if he goes back he will be put in a cell. Of course we say: ‘Righto chum, in you come’. Under my own Government I could not get information on this matter in some cases, although I could in others. By the same token, if a person says that he wants refuge from a right wing government, he has the job in front of him convincing our people that he should be able to live in Australia. I am rather sceptical as to whether this legislation means what it says. I should like some assurance that when we deal with these cases we will not be concerned very much about the country from which the hijacker comes. We should remember some of the terrible things that have happened at overseas airports. We have to be clear that we will have even handed justice. I see Senator Sir Magnus Cormack sitting opposite. He is always abreast of modern literature. There is a book called Rotterdam Connection. It deals with a Dutch tanker and a group of terrorists from various countries who line up to bring off a diplomatic coup. The dialogue between the Dutch Foreign Minister and the leader of the terrorists is quite revealing. I might say that justice did prevail in the end. I have probably destroyed the end of the story. I know that I have captured the imagination of Senator Sir Magnus Cormack.

We have to be crystal clear on this matter. With a very astute lawyer, a hijacker could say that on an impulse he hijacked a Qantas plane but that he has nothing against the Australian people and thinks that they are wonderful people. He could say that he wanted to prove something to ruler X or ruler Y- I am thinking of countries in both the left and the right of the spectrum of modern rulers- and he believed that this action might hasten the establishment of a different form of government. Of course in the process there could be a shooting war. I believe that, with these mad snipers or mad bombers, when we talk about deterrents we have to say that we will have even handed justice.

I do not talk in an academic fashion. About 4 months ago I took a group of people to see Robert Ellicott, our Attorney-General. They raised a mild matter. About last October a Yugoslav soccer team played at the Sydney Sports Ground. A group of people, to push their point, hired an aeroplane. They did not drop any bombs, but they manoeuvred that aeroplane fairly low. They broke regulations. I complained on behalf of the Yugoslav community and asked for action under aviation powers. I was fobbed off by the Minister for Transport (Mr Nixon). His reply was that it was meant to be a bit playful. These people got away with a good propaganda exercise. The next time they might try something stronger, or another group of which I could think could take action. Our Attorney-General, Robert Ellicott, told the delegation that he was looking at the Crimes Act and that he hoped he would be able to do something about it. It is not a very far cry to think of using aircraft in other forms of political crimes. I seek an assurance on behalf of my 4 colleagues on that delegation. They were men of Yugoslav origin. Two had served in World War II and one in Korea, and the fourth had been a conscript in Vietnam. They pointed out to Mr Ellicott that other people in the Yugoslav community were boasting about exerting more pressure. I cite this incident to show that I did not wait for this legislation to be introduced; I took these people to see the Attorney-General. I thought he meant something when he said: ‘We are going to get tough about it’.

I conclude by asking for an assurance that we will be even handed and that in all these political gestures that have extreme danger about them all offenders will be treated in the same way. I hope that if, say, one of the people about whom I am thinking had to face trial in Belgrade and another had to face trial in Madrid we would follow the same policy. The Minister for Veterans’ Affairs has officers with him. I should like an assurance from the Minister that the assurances given to me by the Attorney-General that he was looking at the Crimes Act meant something. Can he give me an assurance not merely in relation to major aircraft but also that if somebody gets in a light aircraft and circles the Sydney Cricket Ground or the Melbourne Cricket Ground in some short term political gesture- largely people from the far right are involved- this legislation will mean that those people can be dealt with? I think I have given the Minister and his advisers plenty to answer.

Senator DURACK:
Western AustraliaMinister for Veterans’ Affairs · LP

– in reply- I thank the Opposition for the support of all 4 measures that are before the Senate this afternoon. Senator Button made reference to some comments that were made by Mr Lionel Bowen in another place in regard to certain provisions of the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill. I am not sure whether the honourable senator intends to raise these points again. I know he said that he will not move an amendment in relation to them.

Senator Button:

– That is right.

Senator DURACK:

– If the honourable senator does not intend to raise them by way of amendment to the clauses of the Bill, I will mention briefly the Government’s attitude as it has been expressed in another place. I have reviewed the comments that were made by Mr Lionel Bowen in another place. I have discussed them with officers of the Department. In view of the fact that Senator Button has raised these points again, I mention that it is the Government’s view that there is ample authority in Australian criminal law for a threat to commit a crime to attract criminal sanctions. There are many precedents in criminal codes of the various States. I will refer in broad terms to the definition of a threat as it is contained in Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary. The definition of a threat reads as follows:

It is the essence of a threat which is made for the purpose of intimidating or overcoming the will of the person to whom it is addressed.

I will not read the definitions but under the criminal codes of the common law States- New South Wales and Victoria- certain threats attract criminal sanctions.

The other matter that has been raised is in relation to the defence that is provided for in clause 9 of the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill. Under that clause, it is a defence to a prosecution for an offence against this Act if the defendant proves that he did not know, and had no reason to suspect, that the person in relation to whom the offence is alleged to be committed is an internationally protected person. It was suggested by Mr Lionel Bowen on behalf of the Opposition in another place that that defence places too solid an obligation on the defence of an accused person. He has to prove that he had no reason to know that an internationally protected person was involved. However, the fact of the matter is that it has been decided by the High Court of Australia that in relation to a special charge of assault against a policeman it was not any defence to say that the accused did not know even that the victim was a policeman, much less for him to say that he had no reason to know. In fact, the provisions of clause 9 of the Bill give an additional defence to a person and are not actually restricting rights as was perhaps suggested in another place. Senator Button and Senator Mulivhill have raised the questions of extradition and deportation. I am a little confused as to whether Senator Mulvihill was concerned about extradition, deportation or both matters.

Senator Mulvihill:

– I was concerned about both.

Senator DURACK:

– Very well. The Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill and the amendments to the extradition Acts provide that in respect of a person for whom an application for extradition has been made, it is not a defence to state that the crime against an internationally protected person was of a political character. That is specifically excluded, admittedly. But I think I should point out to the Senate that the

Attorney-General still has a very wide discretion. One of the matters that he must take into account is that both extradition Acts forbid extradition where there are substantial grounds for believing the alleged offender may be prejudiced at his trial in the foreign state by reason of his race, religion, nationality or political opinions. Even though a person may not be able to oppose an application for extradition in respect of a crime under the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Bill, nevertheless, he can certainly raise the question as to whether his trial in another country could be prejudiced by his political opinions or, indeed, these other matters. I am sure I can give an assurance on behalf of the Attorney that he would be even-handed in his attitude to that matter. But’ he would go further than that because the Extradition Act specifically forbids extradition in those cases and the matter would then be justiciable in a court as well. It would not rely only on the discretion of the Attorney.

Senator Mulvihill spoke mostly about the hijacking of aircraft. The comments that he made there relate more to the Crimes (Aircraft) Amendment Bill. In that case, the extradition provisions are not amended by any of these Bills and the availability of opposing extradition upon the ground that the crime is one of a political character would still be available in its full force as in existing legislation. I am simply pointing out that there is a distinction between the 2 cases in the Bills before the Senate this afternoon. However, I understand that Senator Mulvihill ‘s main concern is that in whatever situation the Attorney-General has to exercise his discretion, he would do it in an even-handed manner and would not be influenced by the political character of the offender or the country to which he may be extradited.

The subject of deportation comes under the control of the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (Mr MacKellar), or if a claim for political asylum were made it would come under the jurisdiction of the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Peacock). I cannot imagine a situation would arise in which any person who had been convicted here of a crime and had paid the penalty for that crime would be deported to a country where he may be under double jeopardy and prosecuted again for that same crime. However, as I said, that would be a matter for discretion. I am only representing the Attorney in this place but I feel confident in saying that it would be the Government’s attitude to be evenhanded in these matters. I am sure that we can rely on Senator Mulvihill and other honourable senators to raise matters if that is not the case in any instance. I am pleased that the Senate is supporting the measures. I do not think there is any need to prolong the debate further.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bills together read a second time, and passed through their remaining stages without amendment or debate.

Senate adjourned at 5.21 p.m.

page 33

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

The following answers to questions were circulated:

Travel Agencies (Question No. 1578)

Senator Colston:
QUEENSLAND

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

Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to the article entided ‘Pre-paid tourist; billed for 20 per cent more’ which appeared in the Australian dated 6 December 1976, in which it is reported that Travel agents said that although they expected payments well in advance for package tours, the money was not immediately forwarded overseas to the people providing accommodation and excursions. If so, can (a) travel agents retain advance payments from clients in trust accounts or in some other similar form, and (b) are travel agents entitled to retain any interest earned on monies retained in the period between the time of receipt from the client to the time of dispatch overseas to those providing accommodation, excursion trips and other incidentals.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

Yes, I have seen the article to which the honourable senator has referred.

In respect of travel agents located in areas other than New South Wales, the answer to parts a and b of the question is yes.

In the case of New South Wales travel agents, I understand that the State Travel Agents Registration Board requires agents to place advance payments received from clients into a trust account. I am informed that the Board has allowed a small number of agents to invest payments subject to certain specified conditions.

Cedar Bay Raid: Report to Police Commissioner (Question No. 1579)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) When and how did the Minister first learn of the existence of the report prepared by Inspector Bob Gray of the Queensland Police Force and forwarded to the former Queensland Police Commissioner on the day following the raid at Cedar Bay.
  2. Has the Minister, officers of his Department, or the Minister’s personal staff seen a copy of the report; if so, (a) who has seen a copy of the report, (b) what action has been taken as a result of the report and (c) does the report make mention of the actions of Federal officers involved in the Cedar Bay raid; if so, what are the details.
  3. When and how did the Minister first learn that the Queensland Minister for Police had destroyed copies of the report.
  4. Have Ministers or officers of the Queensland Government in any way sought to influence the Minister in answering queries about the Cedar Bay raid or about events related since the raid; if so, what are the details.
  5. Did Chief Superintendent Becker and Inspector Atkinson, who were delegated by former Queensland Police Commissioner, Ray Whitrod, to inquire into aspects of the

Cedar Bay raid, at any stage during their inquiries interview, or seek to interview, officers of the Minister’s Department or of statutory bodies under the Minister’s jurisdiction; if so, what are the details.

  1. Does the Minister currently have access to (a) the Gray Report or (b) the Becker Report; if so, what action is the Minister taking as a result of study of the report/reports in question.
Senator Durack:
LP

– The following information is provided in answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) See my reply to question No. 1470.
  2. No.
  3. From press reports on or about 30 November.
  4. No.
  5. A senior Queensland police officer requested the Department’s permission for the three Narcotics Bureau Officers to be interviewed concerning Cedar Bay. Permission was granted and the interviews were conducted (in the presence of a senior departmental officer) by a police officer other than the two nominated in the question Subsequently the officers provided statements detailing their limited role and knowledge of the land based operations.
  6. No.

Cedar Bay Raid: Report to Police Commissioner (Question No. 1581)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister for Administrative Services, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) When and how did the Minister first learn of the existence of the report prepared by Inspector Bob Gray of the Queensland Police Force and forwarded to the former Queensland Police Commissioner on the day following the raid.
  2. Has the Minister, officers of his Department, or the Minister’s personal staff seen a copy of the report; if so (a) who has seen a copy of the report, (b) what action has been taken as a result of the report and (c) does the report make mention of the actions of Federal officers involved in the Cedar Bay raid; if so, what are the details.
  3. When and how did the Minister first learn that the Queensland Minister for Police had destroyed copies of the report.
  4. Have Ministers or officers of the Queensland Government in any way sought to influence the Minister in answering queries about the Cedar Bay raid or about events related since the raid; if so, what are the details.
  5. Did Chief Superintendent Becker and Inspector Atkinson, who were delegated by former Queensland Police Commissioner Ray Whitrod, to inquire into aspects of the Cedar Bay raid, at any stage during their inquiries interview, or seek to interview, officers of the Minister’s Department or of statutory bodies under the Minister’s jurisdiction; if so, what are the details.
  6. Does the Minister currently have access to (a) the Gray Report or (b) the Becker Report; if so, what action is the Minister taking as a result of study of the report/reports in question.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) and (3) from your question on 8 December.
  2. , (4), (5) and (6) No.

Cedar Bay Raid: Report to Police Commissioner (Question No. 1583)

Senator Colston:

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

  1. When and how did the Minister first learn of the existence of the report prepared by Inspector Bob Gray of the Queensland Police Force and forwarded to the former Queensland Police Commissioner on the day following the raid.
  2. Has the Minister, officers of his Department, or the Minister’s personal staff seen a copy of the report; if so (a) who has seen a copy of the report, (b) what action has been taken as a result of the report and (c) does the report make mention of the actions of Federal officers involved in the Cedar Bay raid; if so, what are the details.
  3. When and how did the Minister first learn that the Queensland Minister for Police had destroyed copies of the report
  4. Have Ministers or officers of the Queensland Government in any way sought to influence the Minister in answering queries about the Cedar Bay raid or about events related since the raid; if so, what are the details.
  5. Did Chief Superintendent Becker and Inspector Atkinson, who were delegated by former Queensland Police Commissioner, Ray Whitrod, to inquire into aspects of the Cedar Bay raid, at any stage during their inquiries interview, or seek to interview, officers of the Minister’s Department or of statutory bodies under the Minister’s jurisdiction, if so, what are the details.
  6. Does the Minister currently have access to (a) the Gray Report or (b) the Becker Report; if so, what action is the Minister taking as a result of study of the report/reports in question.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) From Press reports.
  2. No.
  3. 3 ) From Press reports.
  4. No.
  5. No.
  6. No.

Australian Aid to Sri Lanka (Question No. 1585)

Senator Colston:

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

Can the Minister give details of all financial aid, military aid and any other assistance provided either multilaterally or bilaterally by Australia to Sn Lanka since 1970.

Senator Withers:
LP

– The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question in so far as it refers to civil aid.

Australian Multilateral Assistance to Sri Lanka since 1970.

In 1975-76 Australia provided $674,428 to the FAO International Fertilizer Supply Scheme for the supply of S 000 tons of NPK 5- 1 5- 1 5 fertilizer for Sri Lanka.

The sum of $3,167,458 was expended in 1974-75 under the UN Special Program for countries most seriously affected by economic crises caused by rises in the prices of essential imports such as food, fertilizer and oil.

With regard to other multilateral organisations, it is not possible to specify exact amounts of Australian money directed to Sri Lanka because Australian multilateral aid contributions are pooled with those of other donors. It can nevertheless be said that Australian multilateral aid has contributed to the development of Sri Lanka since 1970. This has occurred because of the considerable assistance received by Sri Lanka from multilateral organisations of which it is a member and which are supported by Australia. These include the World Bank Group, the Asian Development Bank, the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific and the Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council. A number of other international organisations such as the UN Development Program and the World Food Program which are supported by Australia are also active in Sri Lanka.

Administrative Services (Question No. 1594)

Senator McAuliffe:

asked the Minister for Administrative Services, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) Is the Training Section of the Bureau of Customs which has been separated for approximately 6 years from the main Departmental office in Brisbane to be moved from the Commercial Union Insurance Building to Australia House.
  2. When will the move occur and how much will the move, partitioning etc., cost.
  3. Will the Department of Environment, Housing and Community Development have to be relocated in Leighton House, before the move can occur.
  4. When will the move occur and how much will the move, partitioning, etc., cost.
  5. Is a new Customs House shortly to be constructed and is the Bureau of Customs Training Section then to be located with the Department of Business and Consumer Affairs.
  6. What is the benefit of locating the Training Section in Australia House when the rest of the Bureau of Customs is located in the Customs House, 1 67 Eagle Street, Brisbane.
  7. Are the moves budgeted for in the Department’s Estimates.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. The proposal is in the planning stage. Costs have not yet been determined but will be kept to a minimum. It is anticipated that the move will be completed by 30 June 1 977.
  3. Yes.
  4. See answer to (2).
  5. It is intended to accommodate the Training Section in the new Customs House when it is completed in several years time.
  6. Space for the Training Section will be available in Australia House ( 145 Eagle Street) when the Department of Environment, Housing and Community Development moves. This will permit the surrender of leased space at the Commercial Union Building and help in the operational efficiency of the Department of Business and Consumer Affairs due to the proximity of the buildings they will occupy.
  7. Funds are available.

Tariff Structure Review (Question No. 1623)

Senator BROWN:
VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice:

With reference to the Government’s recent review of the tariff structure consequent upon the devaluation of the Australian dollar and the subsequent decision in selected areas to either remove temporary assistance or reduce tariff levels where such reductions will not have adverse effects on local industry, has the Government prepared a list for publication of the affected tariff items said to be in excess of 900; if not, will the Government do so at the earliest opportunity.

Senator Durack:
LP

-The following information is provided in answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Yes. Schedules detailing the changes to the Tariff Structure were posted to all members of Parliament on Tuesday 14 December 1976.

Employment in the Australian Capital Territory (Question No. 1637)

Senator Ryan:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice:

  1. How many people in the Australian Capital Territory have been employed as a result of the National Employment and Training System Special Youth Employment Training Program, 1976.
  2. Of these people, how many were males, and how many were females.
  3. Was the employment full or part-time and what was the breakdown as regards numbers and sex.
  4. How many employers in the Territory have taken advantage of the $59 per week subsidy during 1 976.
Senator Durack:
LP

-The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) As at 10. 12.76 the number of young people in training with employers in the Australian Capital Territory under the National Employment and Training System Special Youth Employment Training Program was 56.
  2. Of these 27 are females and 29 males.
  3. Each of the placements is for full-time on-the-job training.
  4. The number of employers in the A.C.T. who had qualified for the $59 per week subsidy up until 10. 1 2.76 was

Australian Capital Territory: Community Youth Support Scheme (Question No. 1638)

Senator Ryan:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) How much financial assistance has been provided to date in the Australian Capital Territory under the Community Youth Support Scheme, announced on 2 1 October 1976.
  2. How many groups and young people have been assisted in the Territory.
  3. How many projects have been funded or partially funded in the Territory.
  4. Could the Minister provide details of these projects.
Senator Durack:
LP

-The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) A total of $19,630 has been approved for financial assistance under the Community Youth Support Scheme in the Australian Capital Territory as at 10.12.76. The Canberra and District YMCA Youth Club’s application for a project grant to operate a Self Improvement Program for young unemployed people was approved for a period of one year under the Scheme.
  2. The organisers envisage that 20 young people will be taking part in the Self Improvement Program each week.
  3. Only one project in the Australian Capital Territory has been funded to date. No projects have been partially funded in the Territory; however, it is understood that other proposals are being prepared.
  4. The Canberra and District YMCA Youth Clubs proposed operating a pilot Self Improvement Program for the young unemployed at its Narabundah YMCA Centre. The program aims to assist unemployed young people in their personal development, feeling of belonging and self worth. The project will be staffed by a trained Supervisor/ Counsellor, a qualified Youth Worker and a number of parttime specialist instructors who will be running short-term courses. Such courses will include the technique of searching for jobs, preparation for job interviews, leadership training, good grooming, motor and motor cycle maintenance and handyman skills. Opportunities will be provided for young people to participate in voluntary community service activities, if they so wish.

Macquarie University: Down’s Syndrome Project (Question No. 1639)

Senator Ryan:

asked the Minister for Education, upon notice:

Is a project at Macquarie University at the School of Education called the Down’s Syndrome Project to be discontinued; if so, why.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

I am advised that the Down’s Syndrome Project in the School of Education, Macquarie University, will continue during 1977.

Cedar Bay Raid: Report to Police Commissioner (Question No. 1647)

Senator Colston:

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

Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to an article by Adrian McGregor entitled ‘Why Whitrod Gave Up $130,000’, which appeared in the National Times dated 22-27 November 1 976, that a report on the Cedar Bay police raid on 29 August 1976 was made available to the then Queensland Police Commissioner, Mr Whitrod, the day following the raid; if so, and if the Minister has received a copy of the report (a) when did the Minister receive the report, (b) from whom did the Minister receive the report and (c) what action did the Minister take on receiving the report

Senator Withers:
LP

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

Yes.

A copy of the report has not been received.

Telecom Australia: Charges in Outback Areas

Senator Collard:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question without notice on 9 September 1976:

Recognising the large increases in the cost of telegrams lately and the efforts of Telecom Australia to get users to use the telephone for all telegram traffic, can the Minister advise whether any special cheap rate is envisaged for those people who do not have a telephone and whose only method of communication is by telegram through outpost radio or through the Royal Flying Doctor Service?

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

The efforts of Telecom Australia to encourage the use of the telephone for telegram traffic are related to its expected $30m loss on the operation of the public telegram service this financial year. Being mindful that the outpost radio telegram service is the only means of communication that many people in outback areas of Australia have with the rest of the community the Minister is pleased to state that the feasibility of a special rate as proposed by the honourable senator has been examined by the Commission and I have recently announced a reduction from 12 cents to 9 cents a word from 1 January 1977.

Telephone Accounts

Senator Carrick:
LP

-On 22 September 1976 Senator Townley asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question without notice:

Will the Minister table a list of the number of complaints received in each State for each of the last 6 months? Is the Minister able to say whether Telecom Australia is planning to introduce a telephone call recording system so that subscribers are able to tell when a long distance call is made, to whom it is made and the duration of the call, as, I believe, is the practice in other countries? Is it correct that Telecom Australia will not install such a system because it realises that if a subscriber could check the account in that way much better supervision of the use of telephones would be possible and revenue could fall off a good deal?

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Telecom Australia maintains statistics on a monthly basis only in respect of metered call charge queries for State capital cities and Canberra. The following table shows the number of accounts in which the metered call charge was queried in each of the last six months.

Of the accounts issued, overall, the number queried in relation to metered calls is quite low and currently the proportion is slightly less than1 per cent.

To introduce an Automatic Message Accounting (AMA) system into the Australian telephone network would require the installation of new equipment, together with the modification of existing equipment, in every automatic telephone exchange. Such a program would cost many millions of dollars and, if undertaken, would necessarily have to be done on a progressive basis over a number of years. STD has been available to Australian subscribers for over15 years and records show a very high level of acceptance of STD with multi-metering, which is the system used in the great majority of countries where subscribers can dial their own trunk and, in many cases, international calls also.

A program of equipment installations and modifications to provide automatic message accounting for international calls has been planned and the first such facility will be available in 1978. The scope and cost of this program is much less than would be required in providing automatic message accounting on trunk calls within Australia, which is a longer term program under study in Telecom.

Telephone Accounts

Senator Carrick:
LP

– On 5 October 1976 Senator Townley asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question without notice:

Does the Minister agree that Telecom Australia has meter readings associated with each telephone service and that the inclusion of these readings on telephone accounts would be of some assistance to subscribers?

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The metering equipment used by Telecom Australia to register automatic telephone service usage on subscribers’ services is manufactured to exceptionally high standards, and the Commission’s maintenance, service assessment and accounting procedures are designed to minimise the risk of incorrect registration or billing. The Commission’s records show that the incidence of metered call charge queries, currently slightly less than 1 per cent of all accounts issued, is lower than in past years, indicating a very high level of customer acceptance of the inherent reliability of the metering system and the accuracy of the accounts they receive.

Periodical readings of each subscriber’s meter are recorded. However the Commission believes the inclusion of meter readings on telephone accounts would be of only marginal benefit to subscribers, and to include them would involve very costly modifications to the computerised accounting system. It is of interest that in the is years since STD with multi-metering was introduced, very few subscribers have requested that meter readings be shown on telephone accounts. In the circumstances, Telecom Australia does not propose to vary the present telephone accounting and billing arrangements.

Telephones

Senator Carrick:
LP

– On 3 November 1976 Senator Townley asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications a question without notice in relation to Telecom Australia’s policy in relation to the barring of subscribers ‘ telephones to trunk service levels.

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following information in response to the honourable senator’s question:

Telecom Australia is anxious to assist customers who desire to control the use of their telephone services. Facilities designed to achieve this end include key control-lock telephones and call count meters suitable for use in either homes or business establishments. In addition, services can be barred access to the STD network only if the exchange has the capability to provide such barring. Where this capability is not available, it is only possible to bar access to both STD and manual trunk services. This limitation is explained carefully to customers who seek to have access from their service barred and, in practice, this total trunk barring facility meets the needs of many customers.

Nevertheless, the Commission is undertaking, as part of its exchange equipment development program, an extension of selective barring facilities to provide a range of barring options in regard to access to one or more of the ISD, STD and trunk operator services as required by the customer. This program which is a large one will take a number of years to complete. In the meantime, the Commission’s experience is that the facilities already available for control of telephone usage reasonably meet the needs of the great majority of its customers.

Australian Postal Commission

Senator Carrick:
LP

– On 4 November 1976 Senator Tehan asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question without notice:

By way of preface I refer to the annual report of the Australian Postal Commission which was released this week. The report indicates that the Commission converted a $65m deficit to a $32m surplus which gives a 597m profit on the year’s operations. Not only did the Commission show this very satisfactory trading surplus but also $5 1.1m was used on capital expenditure, and the Commission funded 100 per cent of its capital expenditure. In view of this very satisfactory position, can the Minister say whether postal charges can be held at their present level for the current financial year and, if there is a suggestion that an increase may be necessary, will the Government investigate the possibility of the Commission’s raising capital funds on the outside money market to finance capital works, as has already been done in the case of the Australian Telecommunications Commission, so that postal charges, if not reduced, can at least be contained at their present level?

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has now provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The trading surplus of the Australian Postal Commission in 1975-76 was $3 1.66m as reported in its Annual Report. The amount of $51. lm of capital expenditure referred to in the Annual Report comprised $22. 5m expenditure on fixed assets and $0.6m additions to stores, together with $28m increase in working capital derived from the trading surplus.

I have announced previously that postage rates will be held stable at least until mid- 1977. The intention is to maintain present postage rates beyond that time if at all possible. Whether any tarin increases are then necessary will depend on the trading results achieved with the possibility that some of the 1975-76 trading surplus may be made available to offset operational costs if this is considered necessary.

The financing of capital works in 1 977-78 should not effect the level of postage rates, as the Commission will, in normal circumstances, find some 70 per cent of this expenditure from internal sources. If it is necessary for the Commission to borrow the balance of its approved capital expenditure in that year the source of the borrowed funds is not likely to effect the tariff levels

Adelaide Telephone Directory

Senator Carrick:
LP

– On 10 November 1976 Senator Donald Cameron asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question without notice:

Will the Minister make inquiries as to when the distribution of the Adelaide telephone directory will be completed and as to what has been the cause of the delay in the distribution which is almost 2 months later than usual?

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Telecom Australia encountered some initial difficulties in distributing the Adelaide telephone directory this year because of problems associated with the introduction of computerbased delivery records. However deliveries were commenced on IS October 1976 and are expected to be completed during the third week of December.

Telephone Services

Senator Carrick:
LP

– On 11 November 1976 Senator Townley asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question without notice:

Can the Minister advise what is the amount of money that is held from would-be subscribers on deferred applications for telephone services? If an application is deferred can a subscriber ask for his deposit and advance rental to be returned? If he does what happens to the priority of such application when the facilities become available to connect the service?

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Deferred applications are those where service cannot be offered pending major extensions of plant and/or availability of equipment. Generally, a delay of at least 3 months can be expected. When applications are deferred, payment as fees in advance is not requested. However, in some instances where advance fees have been collected, provision of service may be delayed because relief works take longer than originally expected. In such cases, the fees paid in advance are refunded if requested by the applicant. A refund of fees has no adverse effect on the priority of the application.

Broadcasting Tribunal

Senator Carrick:
LP

– On 17 November Senator Harradine asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question, without notice:

My question is directed to Senator Carrick. It refers to the Green Committee’s report, one of the recommendations of which is the replacement of the Australian Broadcasting Control Board by the Broadcasting Tribunal. I ask: Is the Minister aware of widespread concern amongst a large number of parents in the community that such replacement will diminish the already inadequate surveillance over program standards, particularly insofar as they affect children? Will the Minister give an unqualified assurance that the Tribunal will not consist of representatives of the broadcasting industry, many of whom are interested only in peddling programs which at best can be described as below standard and at worst destructive so far as children are concerned?

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Those appointed to the Tribunal will be clearly seen as people of integrity who will carry out their licensing and regulatory responsibilities in the best interests of all sections of the general public. I am confident also that they will display full impartiality and objectivity in their dealings with those sectors of the broadcasting system which come within their jurisdiction

It should also be clear from recent announcements I have made that program and advertising standards, and the associated question of a higher degree of industry self regulation as proposed in the Green Report of Inquiry into the Australian broadcasting system, are matters of concern to the Government, and have therefore been the subject of a considerable amount of attention.

In the media release dated 30 November 1976 1 stated:

There is a great deal of misunderstanding about the Green Report recommendations for a degree of selfregulation in the administration of broadcasting standards.

The Government supports the view expressed in that Report that there should be a high level of public involvement in decisions affecting our broadcasting system. Accordingly, it is anxious to ensure that there is ample opportunity for public discussion on this very important question of broadcasting standards.

A staged approach has therefore been adopted to the subject of self-regulation. A reference will be directed to the newly established Australian Broadcasting Tribunal which will require it to hold a public inquiry and report upon the following issues:

the concept of ‘self-regulation’;

if (a) leads to an acceptance of ‘self-regulation’, what the minimum broadcasting standard should be; and

machinery and procedures for the administration of broadcasting standards in the various sectors of the system.

Until such dme as this inquiry has been completed and decisions are taken on future regulatory procedures, the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal will continue to administer the present standards as they apply to commercial and public stations. No decisions will be made about the extent of ABC involvement in such procedures, if at all, pending Government consideration of the report of this inquiry. ‘

As the investigation into the whole question of programming and advertising standards and their administration will be in the form of a public inquiry, every opportunity will be provided for the industry, interested parties and the general public to make submissions and fully debate the issues involved. Undoubtedly, considerable attention will be focused on matters such as the extent and quality of children’s programming, as well as the Australian content of station program formats.

Under these circumstances I see little possibility of any reduction of effort by the new regulatory authority to ensure that there are adequate measures to safeguard the interests of children. Indeed the Tribunal will have the opportunity to implement those standards and administrative procedures which it knows to be in accord with a concensus of industry and public opinion.

Telephones: STD Calls

Senator Carrick:
LP

-On 18 November 1976 Senator Colston asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question without notice:

In the light of the fact that STD calls are not billed separately from local calls, will the Minister advise the Senate how it was determined what percentage of trunk calls (during the 1 975-76 financial year) were in fact STD calls.

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Individual STD calls are recorded on subscribers meters in a similar way to local calls. However, there is a comprehensive system of measurements of traffic flowing on various routes as this is necessary for traffic engineering purposes. At the same time, sample studies are made of individual call durations. From the foregoing, can be derived quite accurate statistics of the percentage of calls being handled over STD. Details of manual trunk calls are, of course, available from the trunk dockets.

Liquefied Gas

Senator Withers:
LP

– On 30 November Senator Bonner asked me as Minister representing the Minister for National Resources whether I was aware that the Iranian Government had recently cancelled a SUS5.6 billion project to export liquefied gas to the United States and Europe, the American company named being the El Paso Natural Gas Company and if so, whether the feasibility had been explored of further developing our country’s reputed vast reserves of this commodity on a viable basis so as to capture part of the lucrative overseas market in the United States and selected European nations.

The Acting Minister for National Resources has advised me that he is aware of reports of the cancellation of the 2 billion cubic feet a day LNG project involving export from Iran to El Paso Natural Gas Company of the United States and Distrigaz of Belgium. A memorandum of understanding was signed on this project two years ago.

If initial reports are correct there are two main reasons for the cancellation. El Paso became reluctant to finance 50 per cent of the cost of a liquefaction plant in Iran, as originally agreed. Secondly, it would take 20 to 24 months to obtain the Federal Power Commission’s approval to import the gas into the United States, thus further endangering the economics of the project. It is now considered unlikely that the venture will be revived unless the investment and FPC problems can be overcome.

During recent visits to Australia, officers of gas companies in California have indicated a strong interest in purchasing LNG from Australia. Another possible market is Japan. Studies necessary to plan the development of the reserves discovered on the North West Shelf are proceeding but it will be some time before firm commitments could be entered into. Any proposal for the import of LNG from Australia will require approval from the Federal Power Commission.

Ethnic Radio

Senator Carrick:
LP

– On 8 December Senator Button asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following question, without notice:

My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications. I refer to the joint statement by the Minister for Immigration and the Minister for Post and Telecommunications some 3 months ago about the future of ethnic radio in Australia and subsequent questions which I have directed to Senator Carrick and the answers thereto. I now ask the Minister Has the Government yet determined the future of ethnic radio and what structure will apply to the administration of ethnic radio in Australia? Has the Australian Broadcasting Commission continued to decline to take responsibility for ethnic radio? Did the Minister for Post and Telecommunications say in Sydney 3 weeks ago that, if the ABC continued to decline to assume responsibility for it, he would establish an ethnic radio commission? What is the present position?

The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Following a meeting of Commissioners on 8 December, the Australian Broadcasting Commission issued a statement accepting the Government’s offer to assume responsibility for ethnic broadcasting, subject to the Commission receiving assurance from the Government regarding adequate funding for the new service.

The ABC also indicated that it would expect to assume responsibility for the existing ethnic stations 2EA and 3EA sometime in, or shortly after March 1977, following completion of a number of administrative arrangements.

Darling Downs Co-operative Bacon Association (Question No. 1315)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice:

Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to claims made by the Managing Director of Darling Downs Co-operative Bacon Association, Mr R. G. Krimmer, in the Brisbane Courier Mail of 18 September 1976 that his Company had, following newspaper advertisements and with assistance from the Commonwealth Employment Service, received applications from 60 juniors and 70 seniors for 100 senior and 100 junior positions for process workers for a period of three weeks; if so, (a) were these 200 positions actually advertised and available at the Darling Downs Co-operative Bacon Association; (b) when were the vacancies advertised or available; (c) how many applications were referred to the Company by the Commonwealth Employment Service; (d) how many applicants for employment were recommended by the Commonwealth Employment Service; (e) how many persons were unemployed in the Toowoomba region during the period concerned; (f) how many vacancies were there in the Toowoomba region during the period concerned; and (g) what evidence can the Commonwealth Employment Service or the Minister’s Department, provide to support Mr

Krimmer ‘s claim that only one third of the 1 30 applicants for the positions were suitable for employment, and that the test seemed too grubby for food process work, or not willing to work’.

Senator Durack:
LP

-The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. and (b) I am advised by my Department that as far as it is able to ascertain no vacancies for Process Workers with the Darling Downs Co-operative Bacon Association were advertised in the major Queensland dailies and the local newspaper during the 3 weeks prior to 18.9.76. However, in August the Co-operative did advertise for Process Workers in the Courier Mail, as follows: 6.8.76 Males 25-50 years 24.8.76 Males 16 years 25.8.76 Females 15-17 years 27.8.76 Females 25-50 years

In addition to these advertisements for Process Workers the Co-operative also placed a number of advertisements in August and September for workers in the skilled and semiskilled categories. Details of these advertisements are set out below:

  1. Courier Mail- 12.8.76 Driver 14.8.76 Maintenance Fitter 16.8.76 Engineer 18.8.76 Driver.
  2. Courier Mail and Brisbane Telegraph- 4 September 1976- Maintenance Fitter 4 September 1976-Office Junior 8 September 1976-Junior Shorthand-Typist 9 September 1976-Office Junior 14 September 1976- Engineer 18 September 1976- Maintenance Fitter 25 September 1976-Sales Representative.
  3. Sunday Sun- 19.9.76 Engineer, and Maintenance Fitter 26.9.76 Maintenance Fitter.

Between 30.7.76 and 30.9.76 the CES received requests from the Darling Downs Co-operative for Adult Male, Junior Male and Junior Female Factory Hands. No specific number was mentioned and I am informed that a general arrangement operates whereby the CES may refer applicants at its discretion on a continuing basis.

  1. and (d) During the period 30.7.76-30.9.76 the CES made a substantial number of referrals to the Co-operative. However, because of the confidential nature of the relationship between the CES and its clients I am not able to disclose the actual figures involved.
  2. and (f) The numbers of unemployed and unfilled vacancies in the Toowoomba CES office area, and in the areas of the two offices which mainly service the Cooperative’s Brisbane plant, at the end of September 1976, were as follows:
  1. The decision to accept or reject applicants is the prerogative of the employer. The CES has made every effort to assist the Co-operative to meet its labour requirements in accordance with the known selection standard that is maintained by the company, and consistent with the nature of the work, which involves the handling of foodstuffs.

HMAS Bayonet (Question No. 1326)

Senator Colston:

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

With reference to the Minister’s answer to Senate Question No. 1 106, what was the name of the senior Queensland police officer who requested the presence of HMAS Bayonet in the Cedar Bay area on 28-29 August 1976.

Senator Withers:
LP

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

It would not be appropriate to divulge this information.

Service Personnel: Attachment to Vice-Regal Duties (Question No. 1338)

Senator Walsh:

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

  1. 1 ) During each of the past two years how many service personnel have performed duty on attachment to (a) the Governor-General, (b) the Governor of Queensland, (c) the Governor of New South Wales, (d) the Governor of Victoria, (e) the Governor of Tasmania, (f) the Governor of South Australia, and (g) the Governor of Western Australia.
  2. What was the rank and length of duty of each service person referred to in ( 1 ).
  3. For each of the cases (a) to (g) referred to in (1), what was the value of wages for the service persons involved.
  4. In each of the cases (b) to (g) does the State Government pay a contribution towards the cost of these service persons ‘ wages; if so, how much.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. to (4) It is customary for the Governor-General to have an Aide-de-Camp at the rank of Flight Lieutenant or equivalent from each arm of the Australian Defence Force and for the State Governors to have one Aide-de-Camp from the Australian Defence Force or the British Forces, except in South Australia where there are two Aides-de-Camp. AidesdeCamp appointed to the Governor-General generally serve for 12 months although this does vary to meet requirements at particular times. The normal period of posting to a State Governor is for two years. Each officer is paid the salary appropriate to his rank and classification.

In the case of Aides appointed to State Governors the State Government concerned meets the full cost of the officer’s salary.

Defence: Operation Whistlestop (Question No. 1374)

Senator Keeffe:

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

  1. WhatisOperation’Whistlestop’.
  2. Are any other countries involved in this operation.
  3. Where is Operation ‘Whistlestop’ being researched and/or carried out.
Senator Withers:
LP

– The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1), (2) and (3) I have no knowledge of any such operation.

Defence White Paper: Citizen Reserves (Question No. 1433)

Senator Primmer:
VICTORIA

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

  1. 1) Can the Minister inform the Parliament what type of situation is envisaged in the statement on page 33 of the Defence paper put down by the Minister for Defence recently, viz.: ‘Parliament may well wish to consider whether the purpose of better training and better sense of participation would justify provisions authorising compulsory call-up of Citizen Reserves for limited periods in international situations proclaimed as requiring augmentation of the forces, but not proclaimed as a state of war or time of defence emergency’.
  2. Is another Vietnam type commitment envisaged by the present Government.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. The suggestion that legislative changes might be desirable to facilitate the employment of reserve units in circumstances short of war or in civil emergencies, had its origin in the Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Citizen Military Forces (the Millar Committee) which reported to the previous Government in March 1 974, that such provision would require an increase in the readiness of the Reserve and impart greater sense of purpose.

The Government has not yet considered particular situations in which call-out could be invoked or whether the existing legislative provisions should in fact he amended. As the Prime Ministerhas already indicated, the introduction of legislation along these lines is not a step to be rushed. The proposal will not be considered by the Government until it has heard the views of interested parties and of the community at large, which are sought in the White Paper.

  1. No. As stated in the White Paper our assessments of the international situation have not revealed any present likelihood of our being called upon to deploy additional forces in support of our allies or other defence associates.

Department of National Resources: Research Grants (Question No. 1451)

Senator Keeffe:

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

  1. Have grants for research been made to organisations and/or individuals from moneys appropriated to the Minister’s Department, or appropriated for Commissions, agencies, or bodies for which the Minister is responsible: if so, to what organisations and/or individuals have such grants been made for each of the past four financial years.
  2. How much has been allocated and to whom for this financial year.
  3. What was the nature of the research for which each grant was made in all years.
  4. What information as to the nature of the research to be undertaken and the qualifications of the applicants was required to be supplied by the applicants.
Senator Withers:
LP

– The Acting Minister for National Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (l)Yes.

Australian Atomic Energy Commission Funds

1975-76

Australian Institute for Nuclear Science and Engineering.

Australian Mineral Development Laboratories.

University of New South Wales.

University of Melbourne.

The Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd.

Monash University.

1974-75

Australian Institute for Nuclear Science and Engineering.

Australian Mineral Development Laboratories.

University of New South Wales.

The Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd.

University of Queensland.

University of New England.

1973-74

Australian Institute for Nuclear Science and Engineering.

Australian Mineral Development Laboratories.

University of New South Wales.

Monash University.

The Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd.

1972-73

Australian Institute for Nuclear Science and Engineering.

Australian Mineral Development Laboratories.

University of Adelaide.

Royal Perth Hospital.

Flinders University of South Australia.

University of New England.

University of Melbourne.

Department of National Resources

Australian Water Resources Council (AWRC) Water Research Fund

The Water Branch of the Department of National Resources administers the Australian Water Resources Council Water Research Fund which is currently in the final year of a third triennium of research. Funds for this purpose are provided to the Department as annual appropriations from the Treasury. Prior to December 1975, appropriations were made to the former Department of Environment, which administered the Water Research Fund through its Bureau of Environmental Studies.

The AWRC water research program is intended to complement research work already being carried out by Government agencies, universities and other organisations and, in general, is used to stimulate new work which cannot reasonably be expected to be handled within existing programs. Financial support from the Water Research Fund is not normally given to research undertaken by Commonwealth Government agencies, such as CSIRO, Bureau of Meteorology and Bureau of Mineral Resources, where they can undertake and fund appropriate work from their own resources.

The following organisations have been offered and have accepted research grants from the AWRC Water Research Fund over the period 1972-73 to 1975-76:

Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation.

Canberra College of Advanced Education.

Caulfield Institute of Technology.

Water Resources Commission of New South Wales.

Western Australian Department of Agriculture.

South Australian Department of Agriculture.

University of Western Australia.

State Rivers and Water Supply Commission of Victoria.

Monash University.

Wollongong University.

Melbourne University.

Newcastle University.

Economic Research Unit.

University of New South Wales.

James Cook University of North Queensland.

Forests Department of Western Australia.

Victorian Department of Mines.

La Trobe University.

Swinburne College of Technology.

University of New England.

University of Queensland.

Australian National University.

University of Tasmania.

Adelaide University.

Mount Gravatt College of Advanced Education.

Queensland Forestry Department.

Queensland Institute of Technology.

Australian Mineral Development Laboratories.

Department of National Resources

National Coal Research Advisory Committee (NCRAC) Funds

NCRAC support was granted to the following organisations over each of the past four financial years except where otherwise noted:

Australian Coal Industry Research Laboratories

University of Melbourne

Department of Chemical Engineering

Department of Metallurgy

University of New South Wales

School of Chemical Engineering

School of Mining Engineering (1972-73 only)

University of Wollongong

Department of Geology

University of Newcastle

Department of Chemical Engineering

University of Queensland

Department of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering (1974-75 only)

Pipeline Authority Funds 1974-75 Australian Welding Research Association

  1. 2 ) Australian Atomic Energy Commission Funds

A total of $443,000 has been allocated for extra mural research for the financial year 1 976-77.

Department of National Resources

NCRAC Funds

NCRAC funds have been allocated to the following organisations for the financial year 1976-77.

  1. 3 ) Australian Atomic Energy Commission Funds

Research contracts are awarded for fundamental research into all areas of nuclear science and technology pertaining to the Atomic Energy Commission’s approved scientific program. Details of these contracts are set out in the Commission’s Annual Reports.

Department of National Resources

AWRC Water Research Fund

Research grants from the AWRC Water Research Fund are made with the purpose of fostering and supporting fundamental and applied research into all aspects of water resources with the aim of providing a better basis for the assessment, development and management of Australia’s water resources. Since the initiation of the Water Research Fund in 1968, research has been sponsored into a wide range of water resource topics including hydrology of small catchments, evaporation measurement, urban stormwater design, streamflow measurement, extraction and artificial recharge of ground-water, criteria for and analysis of water quality, water use efficiency, water resources planning and identification and control of pollutents in natural waters.

Department of National Resources

NCRAC Funds

NCRAC funds have been granted for research in coal winning and beneficiation, coal processing, coal combustion and gasification, and the production of synthetic oil and chemicals from coal.

Pipeline Authority Funds

Funds were granted for research into the effects of weld detail geometry on the fatigue life of line pipe.

  1. Australian Atomic Energy Commission Funds

Grants to AINSE and AMDEL are made in accordance with established agreements between the AAEC and these bodies.

All other extra mural research contracts are initiated by the AAEC as a supplement to its approved research program. The AAEC itself determines the nature of the research to be undertaken and awards contracts to those persons of institutions it judges competent to undertake the work. In the case of research contracts awarded to universities, the relevant professor is usually consulted.

Department of National Resources

AWRC Water Research Fund

The research program comprises projects derived from two separate sources- those formulated by AWRC appointed bodies such as project formulation panels, and those submitted by research institutions under the grants component of the Water Research Fund. Under the latter component the AWRC invites, periodically, applications for grants from research institutions throughout Australia on the basis of research priorities determined by the Council for each triennium. In submitting applications, applicants are required to clearly set out the significance of the project with respect to the primary objective of the Water Research Fund and the likely application of the results; the project title, objective, work plan and timing; staffing details such as the academic and professional qualifications, present appointment, and previous research experience of the Project Leader and names and qualifications of research staff to be engaged on the project; existing facilities and a detailed itemised budget.

Department of National Resources

NCRAC Funds

NCRAC invites detailed applications for financial assistance with coal research programs in January each year. The applications are carefully examined by one of the four technical subcommittees which make recommendations to NCRAC

Pipeline Authority Funds

The nature and scope of the research, the qualifications of the applicant and of the persons to carry it out, and the financial commitment were fully defined in the application.

Aborigines: Grants-in-aid (Question No. 1458)

Senator Keeffe:

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

  1. To what extent have Commonwealth funds been allocated directly to Aborigines or Aboriginal societies and associations, and to which persons since the Liberal-Country Party Government came to power in 1 975.
  2. How does this compare with the annual funding for each of the preceding three years.
Senator Guilfoyle:
Minister for Social Security · VICTORIA · LP

– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. and (2) It is not practicable to extract details of every direct grant made in 1975-76 distinguishing those made since December 1975 from those made earlier and those made to Aboriginal organisations from those to other organisations providing services to Aboriginals.

The following table shows the total amounts provided by direct grants-in-aid (most of which are made to Aboriginal organisations) under functional headings, for the past four financial years.

Currumbin Bird Sanctuary (Question No. 1461)

Senator Georges:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice:

  1. Can the Minister provide details of changes to the legislation proposed by the Queensland Act following the controversy concerning the Currumbin Bird Sanctuary in Queensland.
  2. Have any environmental organisations opposed the changes.
  3. Do changes to the National Trust of Queensland Act include the provision for the Governor-in-Council to suspend, nullify, vary or rescind any decision or resolution of the Trust; if so, does this in any way diminish the independence of the Trust.
Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question.

  1. The details of proposed legislative changes by the Queensland Government are not a matter within my responsibility of competence as Minister for Environment Housing and Community Development.
  2. I have no direct knowledge.
  3. ) Not applicable in view of the answer to part ( 1 ) above.

Australian National Line: Queensland Trading Rights (Question No. 1466)

Senator Colston:

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

Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to comments by the Director of the Queensland Harbour Boards Association, Mr Bert Field, referred to in an article in the Courier Mail dated 26 November 1976, that the Queensland Government’s decision to grant the Australian National Line only limited intrastate trading rights is farcical, and that the Association will exert further pressure to have the ANL granted unrestricted trading rights; if so,

what are the details of the Queensland Government’s decision;

b ) what trading rights were being sought by the ANL;

for what reason has the Queensland Government refused to agree to unrestricted trading rights;

what effect will the Queensland Government’s decision have on the operation of ANL in Queensland and throughout Australia;

, to what extent would industry and consumers in Queensland benefit if further intrastate trading is allowed in Queensland for the ANL; and (0 what action is the Australian Government taking to persuade the Queensland Government to agree to unrestricted trading rights for ANL.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

Yes. (a) The Queensland Minister for Transport has conveyed to the Minister for Transport the Queensland Government’s decision to take action to permit the Australian National Line to undertake the carriage intra-state by sea of cars, utilities, trucks, tractors, caravans, boats, earthmoving equipment, agricultural implements and over-dimensional loads which cannot be carried by rail;

b) The ANL has sought freedom to compete for sufficient paying cargo to fill vacant space between Brisbane and northern Queensland ports in order to maintain a viable economic service to those ports;

The Queensland Minister’s advice did not give a reason; but it could be assumed that the Queensland Government has taken into account the future of rail transport;

The effect of the Queensland Government’s decision will be to limit the possibility of ANL operating more economic services;

Industry and consumers in Queensland would have the benefit of competition and alternative services if ANL were allowed further intrastate trading in Queensland;

Discussions have taken place between Ministers and between officials when unrestricted trading rights for ANL were sought but rejected. The Queensland Government’s subsequent response does not suggest that it could be persuaded to agree to unrestricted trading rights for ANL.

Cedar Bay Raid: Report to Police Commissioner (Question No. 1470)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice:

Is the Minister aware of claims, reported in an article by Adrian McGregor entitled ‘Why Whitrod Gave Up $130,000’, which appeared in the National Times dated 22-27 November 1976, that a report on the Cedar Bay police raid on 29 August 1976 was made available to the then Queensland Police Commissioner, Mr Whitrod, the day following the raid; if so, and if the Minister has received a copy of the report in question (a) when did the Minister receive the report, (b) from whom did the Minister receive the report, and (c) what action did the Minister take on receiving the report.

Senator Durack:
LP

– The following information is provided in answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Apart from press reports I am not aware of any claims that a report on the Cedar Bay police raid on 29 August 1976 was tO- made available to the then Queensland Police Commissioner, Mr Whitrod the day following the police raid. I have not received a copy of such a report.

Aircraft Passengers: Baggage (Question No. 1473)

Senator Colston:

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

What is the full text of the request to all Australian airlines from the Department of Transport, relating to restriction on the amount of baggage and personal possessions to be carried in aircraft cabins by passengers or domestic aircraft, referred to in the article by Jack Percival entitled ‘Stricter Check on Air Luggage’ which appeared in the Sun-Herald dated 2 1 November 1976.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

The Department of Transport has not written to the airlines concerning carry-on luggage, and to that extent the Sun-Herald article is incorrect. The situation is that the Air Navigation Orders do not specifically limit what effects a passenger may carry on an aircraft, but they do require that anything carried on shall be stowed so that it does not obstruct emergency exits or aisles and that the stowage shall be such as will avoid the possibility of injury to persons or damage to the aircraft through inadvertent movement of such effects.

It is expected that airline operators will police these requirements. An operator may set any limits he wishes on the size, weight and number of articles which a passenger may carry on an aircraft in order to ensure that the requirements are met.

Commonwealth Employment Service Agencies (Question No. 1476)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) How many agencies of the Commonwealth Employment Service were there in each State and Territory between 30 June 1970 to 1976.
  2. What were the total fees paid to agencies for each of those years.
  3. Where are agencies presently located in each State and Territory.
  4. What fees are currently payable to each.
  5. How are fees for agencies of the Commonwealth Employment Service determined.
Senator Durack:
LP

-The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

In Queensland, State Officers acted as agents of the Commonwealth Employment Service until 30.6.73 and the State Government was reimbursed for its services. The Department now appoints its own agents in Queensland.

(2)-

  1. Agencies, as at 14.1.77, were located at the places shown in the accompanying attachment.
  2. and (5) As from 1.10.76 the monthly fees payable to each of the various grades of agent are as follows:

The grading is based on the number of registrations, referrals for employment etc, in each quarter. Performance above or below the grading over 2 quarters effects an increase or decrease in monthly remuneration for individual agents.

Annual reviews are made of amounts payable to all grades to ensure that the remuneration keeps pace with changes in the cost of living.

Cedar Bay Raid: Report to Police Commissioner (Question No. 1480)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice:

  1. Has the Minister received a copy of the report on the Cedar Bay police raid on 29 August 1976, prepared by Chief Superintendent Becker and Inspector Atkinson for the Queensland Government; if so, (a) when was the Report received, and from whom, (b) does the Report make mention of Commonwealth involvement in the raid and, if so, what are the details, (c) does the Minister intend taking any further action as a result of detailed study of the Report; if so, what are the details, and (d) will the Minister agree to table the report in Federal Parliament, consequent to permission to do so being granted by the Queensland Government.
  2. If the Minister has not yet received a copy of the Report in question, will he request the Queensland Government to provide him with a copy.
Senator Durack:
LP

– The following information is provided in answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. No.
  2. No. Had the report contained any information of particular interest to me I am confident that the Queensland Government would have provided me with that information.

Fokker Friendship: Aircraft Accident (Question No. 1487)

Senator Colston:

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

  1. 1 ) What steps have been taken to investigate the malfunctioning of the nose wheel of a Fokker Friendship aircraft at Bundaberg on 1 1 November 1 976.
  2. Does the Minister intend taking any further action as a result of the investigation.
  3. Has the Minister sought advice on the call, referred in the article in the Courier Mail dated 16 November 1976, for all Fokker Friendships to be grounded as a result of the Bundaberg mishap; if so, what are the details.
Senator Carrick:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) The investigation into the accident involving a Fokker Friendship aircraft at Bundaberg on 1 1 November 1976 was commenced that day by investigators of the Air Safety Investigation Branch of my Department.
  2. No. The necessity for any further action is considered during the course of the investigation and will be considered again at the completion of the investigation.
  3. 3 ) As indicated at Question ( 1 ) an investigation of the occurrence is being conducted and this investigation is nearing completion. No doubts at all have been cast upon the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft type and there is no basis of support for the call referred to in the article in the Courier Mail

Community Youth Support Scheme (Question No. 1489)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) How many applications have been received to date for funding assistance under the Community Youth Support Scheme.
  2. What are the details of each grant approved to date under the Community Youth Support Scheme.
Senator Durack:
LP

– The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. Seventy applications have been received as at 26.1.77 under the Community Youth Support Scheme.
  2. Forty projects have been approved as at 26.1.77. The details of each grant are as follows:

One People of Australia League (Question No. 1490)

Senator Colston:

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

  1. How many submissions seeking financial assistance for the One People of Australia League have been made to the Department of Aboriginal Affairs since December 1972, and, briefly, what are the details of each submission.
  2. Has the League received any financial assistance from the Department of Aboriginal Affairs since December 1972 (a) if so, what are the details and (b) if not, why not.
Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) My Department has received three submissions from the One People of Australia League since December 1972. The details of these submissions are: (a)-
  1. My Department has provided the following financial assistance to the League since December 1 972: (b)-

Commonwealth Employment Service: Alleged discrimination Against Youths (Question No. 1496)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice:

What action has the Minister taken to investigate claims, contained in a survey compiled by the North-Western Regional Council for Social Development and referred to in an article in the Melbourne Age dated 20 November, 1976, that the Commonwealth Employment Service discriminates against junior job seekers.

Senator Durack:
LP

-The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Investigations by the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations into the contents of the article reveal that the statements attributed to the Secretary of the Youth Standing Committee of the North-West Regional Council for Social Development are misleading and contain a number of errors of fact. These are-

1 ) The article implies that the CES determines eligibility for unemployment benefit. This is not so. Eligibility is determined by the Department of Social Security which may or may not act on CES advice if it is given;

The article states that if a person leaves a job voluntarily or is dismissed for misconduct he or she will not be paid unemployment benefit for 6 months. In fact the provision is that such a person may not be paid for 6 weeks; and

The above provision applies equally to all beneficiaries and in that sense is therefore not discriminatory.

The Manager of the Glenroy office of the CES has been informed by a member of the Youth Standing Committee that the newspaper article was prepared using a pamphlet entitled ‘To work or not to Work-Is that the Question? which was prepared by the Committee. The Committee claims that there was no survey undertaken and that the newspaper concerned was not advised that there was a survey.

The Department has written to the Chairman of the North-Western Regional Council for Social Development pointing out the errors quoted in the press article.

Entertainment Industry: Unemployment (Question No. 1510)

Senator Ryan:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) What is the extent of unemployment in the entertainment industry, in particular, how many actors and musicians are registered as unemployed.
  2. Will the Minister confirm or deny the report that such unemployment is now 80 per cent.
  3. Is there any attempt by the Government to monitor increased unemployment where it is the direct result of Government policy.
Senator Durack:
LP

– The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has provided the following information in answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) There are no data collected by either the Commonwealth Employment Service or by the Australian Statistician which indicate the extent of unemployment in the ‘entertainment industry ‘ (however defined).

Neither the Commonwealth Employment Service statistics nor data from the ABS quarterly survey are sufficiently disaggregated to enable identification of either the total number of persons seeking employment in the entertainment industry or the number of unemployed actors and musicians. It must also be remembered, however, that, with respect to CES statistics, there data show ‘occupation sought’ rather than ‘usual occupation’ and it is likely that such persons who seek CES assistance would register for employment outside their profession.

  1. No information is available to either confirm or deny this report.
  2. The Government is very concerned with the high level of unemployment which is prevailing in Australia at present. However, combatting inflation is our major objective as success in this area is essential for any sustained recovery in employment and the economy generally. The major avenue open to us is to achieve substantial reductions in the rate of Government expenditure which has risen to excess levels in recent years. This strategy of controlled recovery has entailed the prolongation of the high level of unemployment for a longer period than we would wish.

The Government has, however, endeavoured to identify specific areas of hardship or structural disability. In order to encourage employment and retraining by industry, the Government has extended the range of training allowances under the National Employment and Training System, introduced an incentive to employers to train school-leavers who have experienced long periods of unemployment and introduced a Community Youth Support Scheme. Furthermore, assistance with relocation has been introduced to assist unemployed persons to move to areas of employment availability.

The Government will continue to keep a close review of the employment situation, especially in those sectors where unemployment rates are well above the national average.

Department of Aboriginal Affairs: Mr B. Dexter (Question No. 1505)

Senator Colston:

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

Has the Minister advised the Secretary to Department of Aboriginal Affairs, Mr B. G. Dexter, that he is shortly to be appointed to a diplomatic post; if so, (a) what are the reasons for Mr Dexter ‘s proposed removal from the position of Secretary to the Depanment and, (b) has the Minister approached Mr David Hay to succeed Mr Dexter as Secretary.

Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:

Yes. Mr Dexter has been appointed as Ambassador to Yugoslavia. Mr Hay has replaced Mr Dexter.

Australian Capital Territory: Car Accidents (Question No. 1537)

Senator Ryan:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice:

  1. Has there been an increase in the accident rate in the Australian Capital Territory since the speed limit on many major roads was increased from 35 mph to 80 kph; if so, what is the increase.
  2. Has there been an increase in accidents at intersections; if so, what is the increase.
Senator Webster:
NCP/NP

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

  1. The Depanment of the Capital Territory and the National Capital Development Commission maintain statistics on road traffic accidents. These figures are kept and compiled in relation to traffic control and particularly the assistance which they can give in areas of deciding priority of expenditure. The statistics however are not compiled in relation to speed limits or to the contribution which speed makes to the accident. It would probably take up to six months of study to produce meaningful figures which would indicate whether or not an increase in speed limits to 80 kph has contributed to accident occurrence. In any case the increase in speed limits on arterials to 80 kph simply recognises the speed of moving traffic. These speed limits are often set to the speed at which 85 per cent of the traffic moves.

Those figures that are available on accident occurrence do not seem to indicate that there has been any major variation in accidents since the 80 kph limit was introduced.

  1. Again no figures are available.

Lithgow Polyclinic (Question No. 1541)

Senator Sibraa:

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

  1. 1 ) At what stage is Government planning for the Lithgow Polyclinic, a project which was being developed by the previous administration.
  2. Is the Government considering an allocation of funds for the construction of this facility.
Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) As the honourable senator will be aware, the provision of health services in the States is primarily the responsibility of the respective State health authorities, and those authorities have the responsibility for detailed planning of health services. In the case of your State, this involves the Health Commission of New South Wales.

I am informed that the Health Commission of New South Wales has no current plans for a polyclinic to be established at Lithgow. However, with Commonwealth and State financial assistance under the Community Health Program, a Community Health Support Centre has been established at Lithgow. This provides community nursing and social worker services. Specialist support staff provide back-up services, as required, from the polyclinic at Bathurst.

  1. As indicated above, there is no present intention to establish a polyclinic at Lithgow and, consequently, there is no intention to allocate funds for that purpose.

However, from the Commonwealth’s block grant of $29.4m to New South Wales under the Community Health Program in 1976-77, $18,300 has been allocated to the Lithgow Community Health Support Centre for this financial year.

Australia’s Future Energy Requirements (Question No. 1542)

Senator Sibraa:

asked the Minister for Science, upon notice:

Does the Government have methods of extracting oil from coal or shale as a means of providing for Australia’s future energy requirements, under investigation.

Senator Webster:
NCP/NP

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

CSIRO has been working on various aspects of the extraction of oil from coal for a number of years and has increased these activities in recent months. The Organization’s present investigations in coal conversion are concentrated upon the flash pyrolysis route which offers promise of providing the heavy fuel oil in which Australian indigenous crude is typically deficient. As this work has attracted considerable interest overseas, it is hoped that the results obtained by CSIRO will provide the basis for a fruitful information exchange between Australia and other countries, such as the United States, which are devoting impressively large sums to oil-from-coal research.

By way of providing the honourable senator with more information on this important topic, I shall be forwarding him a recent publication reviewing the Organisation’s activities in coal liquefaction research.

No investigations are being made on the extraction of oil from shale because the limited extent and indifferent quality of Australian oil shale deposits preclude them from consideration as a significant source of the nation ‘s liquid fuel.

Lithgow Small Arms Factory (Question No. 1545)

Senator Sibraa:

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

  1. 1 ) Is widespread concern being expressed in the Lithgow area over the future of the Small Arms Factory.
  2. Is the Government considering either scaling-down or phasing-out small arms production at this factory.
Senator Durack:
LP

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

  1. and (2) Concern has been expressed in the Lithgow area over the future of the Small Arms Factory by a number of local organisations, such as local government authorities and unions, going back to 1973. My answer to such expressions of concern is similar to that which has been consistently adopted by my predecessors. In essence, the Small Arms Factory is an important part of our Defence support capability, and as such there is no intention of closing it down or of phasing-out small arms manufacture at the factory. While it is true that the workload arising from small arms manufacture has been fluctuating downwards, it has gradually been replaced by other suitable defence demands, usually of a more immediate nature, and by non-defence work. It is not anticipated that employment will be scaled down any further.

Sydney Airport: Curfew (Question No. 1547)

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

  1. 1 ) On how many occasions since 13 December 1975 has the landing and take-off curfew at Sydney Airport been broken.
  2. What was the reason in each case for allowing the curfew to be ignored.
Senator Carrick:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) The curfew was broken on seven nights involving twenty-two aircraft.
  2. (a) On 9 March 1976 a delayed flight carrying the King and Queen of Jordan landed at 1 1.58 p.m.

    1. On 27 June 1976 an international flight carrying Mr Lynch, the Treasurer, was delayed and the connecting flight departed at 11.22 p.m.
    2. On 2 July 1976 an aircraft which had suffered excessive delays overseas causing considerable inconvenience to passengers, landed at 1.20 a.m.
    3. On 19 August 1976 an international flight was delayed by mechanical problems and there was a severe passenger accommodation shortage at Sydney. The aircraft departed at 11.32 p.m.
    4. On 25 August 1976 an international flight suffered a long delay caused by an unscheduled engine change. It landed at 12.46 a.m. (0 On 5 September 1976 an industrial dispute by air traffic controllers caused a bank-up of flights carrying school children. There were sixteen take-offs and landings between 1 1 .00 p.m. on 5 September and 1 2.23 a.m. on 6 September.
    5. On 1 October 1976 an international flight carrying an injured child landed at 1 1.12 p.m.

Sydney Airport: Aircraft Landings (Question No. 1548)

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

  1. 1) During heavy storms or severe westerly winds at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport do all aircraft landing there use the east/west runway.
  2. Is there an Instrument Landing System available for use in connection with the landing system on the north/south runway; if not, what would be the estimated cost of installing such a system.
Senator Carrick:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) No. Various operational factors such as type of aircraft, wind velocity, location of a storm, influence the designation by air traffic control of the runway to be used.
  2. Yes. There are two Instrument Landing Systems associated with the north/south runway, one for each direction.

Fruitgrowing Industry: Marketing Costs (Question No. 1549)

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

  1. 1 ) What is the estimated percentage cost of marketing compared with the percentage return to a grower, in relation to the marketing of fruit and vegetables in Australia.
  2. Have any programs been established to investigate the cost of marketing.
  3. Is the Minister aware that in June 1976 South Australian oranges, which returned 0.7c to the grower, were sold at 7.6c to the consumer, and apples at the same time returned 3.5c to the grower and were sold at 10.5c to the consumer.
Senator Cotton:
LP

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

  1. There are no regular statistics available for Australia that set out the costs of marketing activities for individual commodities but some broadly based indicators of costs of marketing for apples and pears and citrus fruit can be derived from data collected by State Departments of Agriculture, Primary Industries and from surveys made by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics.

These data indicate that using an averaged wholesale selling price for apples and oranges over the last 4-5 months, the marketing costs as a percentage of gross returns are approximately 42 per cent for apples and 82 per cent for oranges. This means that for apples the net return to the grower is around 58 per cent of the wholesale selling price and that for oranges around 1 8 per cent.

Market reports prepared by the N.S.W. Department of Agriculture show that since 1970 the share of the consumer’s dollar which has been going to the grower varies around 45 per cent-55 per cent while that going to the retailer and agent is 40 per cent-45 per cent and 5 per cent-6 per cent respectively.

  1. ) Numerous reports have been prepared, particularly by State Departments of Agriculture, but also by various ad hoc committees, on the organisation and operation of individual fruit and vegetable markets. There is a constant monitoring of key market statistics such as prices, quantities and the influence and direction of trade. In addition, the Economics and Marketing Committee of the Standing Committee on Agriculture, which is composed of members from State and Federal Departments of Agriculture/Primary Industry, has been examining aspects of the marketing of agricultural produce in Austrafia and it is proposed that wider reference be given to other issues, such as the role and functions of market information. Finally, the Bureau of Agricultural Economics has under way a program of research into the marketing of rural products. To date, this program has dealt with general aspects of the marketing of fruit such as industry stabilisation and the economic situation of producers. It is intended that more detailed studies of the structure and organisation of the fruit and vegetable industries be developed.
  2. Wide differences occur in the selling prices of fruits in different wholesale markets. During the four weeks of June 1976, which is the month referred to in the question, the prices of apples sold on the Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide markets ranged between $5.92 and $8.60 a bushel and the prices for oranges ranged from $2.29 to $4.00 a bushel. The differences in prices and the extent of the differences point up the difficulty of relating any estimates of costs of marketing to any particular quoted price. BAE Survey data shows that in 1 976 South Australian packing houses were able to provide growers with a gross return in the order of $3.40-$3.80 per bushel depending on variety and packing house. The net return to growers was around $ 1.40-$ 1.80 per bushel after deductions for transport, handling and packing and cool storage (around 2c per bushel). The return to the grower net of marketing costs was around 1.4- 1.8c per orange for a bushel box of approximately 100 count.

Australian National Line: Queensland Trading Rights (Question No. 1557)

Senator Colston:

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

With relation to the Minister’s answer to Question No. 1273, will the Minister advise whether ‘formal advice of the Queensland Government’s further consideration’ has now been conveyed to the Minister; if so, what is that formal advice; if not, has any formal advice been received and if so, what is that advice.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

Formal advice has been received from the Queensland Government that it will permit the Australian National Line to undertake the carriage intra-state by sea of certain cargoes only including vehicles, earthmoving equipment, agricultural implements and over-dimensional loads which cannot be carried by rail.

Tasmanian Information Service (Question No. 1563)

Senator Archer:

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

  1. What staff, or representation, is there in the Tasmanian Information Service, both full-time and part-time.
  2. Where are they located.
  3. What is the annual budget of the Service.
  4. Are any premises being leased or rented by the Service.
  5. 5 ) What equipment is owned or leased by the Service.
Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) The Tasmanian Information Service employs a total of five people.
  2. Hobart 3-State secretary, field officer, secretary, Launceston 2- Field officer, secretary.
  3. The annual budget for the service in 1976-77 is $85,000.
  4. Office space is rented in Launceston.
  5. The Service owns land and a building in Hobart, a motor vehicle, office equipment and sports equipment.

Dairy Research: Expenditure (Question No. 1565)

Senator Archer:

asked the Minister for Science, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) What funds have been spent on dairy research over the past ten years.
  2. At what institution were the funds spent, and on what project.
  3. What was the amount.
  4. 4 ) Who was the person in charge.
  5. What has been the result of or progress to date of the research.
Senator Webster:
NCP/NP

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

  1. 1 ) Dairy Research in Australia is undertaken by CSIRO, State Departments of Agriculture, Colleges of Advanced Education, Universities and a number of industrial companies. This research covers dairy cattle husbandry, disease and pest control, pasture improvement, dairy product processing and many other aspects. Any calculation of the funds spent on dairy research over the past ten years would involve subjective apportionment of expenditure on projects whose benefits were not confined to the dairy industry. Information is not available upon which to make calculations on a national basis. CSIRO advises that $7.1m has been spent over the ten year period by its Dairy Research Laboratory on processing and product development of dairy products. It is estimated that other CSIRO divisions have spent a similar amount on research covering genetic improvement of dairy cattle, disease and parasite control, and pasture improvement.
  2. , (3), (4) and (5) As indicated in the answer to question 1, dairy research is undertaken in Australia by a number of agencies and authorities. No project register is maintained covering this research so it is not possible to provide the information sought.

As a general statement it could be claimed that research has greatly assisted the dairy industry in all respects to improve its productivity.

Mount Lyell Mining Company (Question No. 1568)

Senator Devitt:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice:

In view of the fact that the basis of the Report of the Senate Select Committee into the operations of the Mount Lyell Mining Company was that the 17ft per cent devaluation should ensure that it could resume operations at the former level and thereby save the jobs of the 400 people to be retrenched, is it now a distinct possibility, in the light of today’s 2 per cent revaluation, that the position will be so changed as to once again place in serious jeopardy the jobs of a considerable number of employees of the Mount Lyell Company who might otherwise have been retained.

Senator Durack:
LP

– The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question.:

The honourable senator will be aware that events have changed significantly since the Senate Select Committee on Mt Lyell Mining Operations tabled its report on 3 December last.

In particular, the Australian dollar has been revalued on a number of occasions under the new ‘ managed float ‘ arrangements whilst the Company has re-assessed its position and continued with substantial retrenchments. My Department has been closely monitoring the situation, and has provided every assistance to those employees who have been retrenched from the Mt Lyell operations.

According to the latest information available to my Department, since 4 November 1976 (the date on which the Company announced the contraction of its mining operation and the proposed retrenchment of 400 employees), the company’s workforce has been reduced from 1038 to around 670 persons. Some 275 retrenchment notices have been issued, though some of the employees affected left voluntarily prior to the date of retrenchment. In addition, 90 other employees, not subject to retrenchment notices, resigned voluntarily.

With reference to the assistance provided by my Department, as at 28 January 1977, 33 persons had been approved for relocation assistance under the Relocation Assistance Scheme; 14 apprentices had been placed in training under NEAT; while 9 1 persons were still registered with the Burnie Office of the Commonwealth Employment Service. It is thought that some of these persons may have already found alternative employment and the CES is seeking to contact these registrants to determine whether they still require employment assistance. To date, fifteen persons have been placed in employment by the CES in the local area.

Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry (Question No. 1429)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice:

When was the Queensland Government first informed of the Federal Government’s decision relating to the recommendations of the Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry.

Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The Minister for Transport, Mr Nixon, and myself conveyed the Government’s decision regarding sandmining on Fraser Island personally to the Premier of Queensland on 1 0 November 1976 before announcing the decision in the House of Representatives later the same day.

Australian Government Works Contracts: Payment in Australian Currency (Question No. 1445)

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

Is there any provision in contractual documents drawn up in connection with Government works contracts that workers employed on such work shall be paid in Australian currency.

Senator Webster:
NCP/NP

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

There is no provision in the Department of Construction General Conditions of Contract (NPWC- Edition 1) under which a contractor is obliged to pay his employees in Australian currency.

Proserpine Airport (Question No. 1477)

Senator Colston:

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

Are there any plans to upgrade Proserpine Airport so that it may be used by jet aircraft; if so, what are the details, including the estimated expenditure and the amount that various bodies would be required to contribute.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

The Proserpine Shire Council in association with Ansett Airlines of Australia is upgrading the Proserpine aerodrome to the standard required for the operation of Boeing 727-200 aircraft. The work entails the construction of a new runway, taxiway, apron and terminal facilities plus night lighting and navigation aid facilities. It is estimated to cost about $2. 5m.

Ansett Airlines of Australia is meeting the cost at this stage and has requested some financial assistance from the Commonwealth. This request is being considered now. Some improvements to terminal facilities are proposed also but as the details have yet to be finalised the cost is not included in the estimate.

Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry (Question No. 1485)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice:

Why did the Queensland Government not present a submission to the Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry.

Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

As far as I am aware, the Queensland Government never formally advised the Commonwealth Government that it would not present a submission to the Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry. I therefore do not know the reasons sought by the honourable senator.

I am advised that the former Prime Minister wrote to the Queensland Premier in May 1975, informing him of the intention to hold an inquiry into sandmining on Fraser Island and indicating that submissions from Queensland

Government Departments would be welcomed. The Premier made no comment on this invitation in his reply.

Although no submissions were received from the Queensland Government the Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry had before it as exhibits a number of State Government documents, including mining lease special conditions and the Survey of Fraser Island-Round Hill Head ( 197 1 ).

Mr E. Da Silva (Question No. 1523)

Senator Mcintosh:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) Is the Minister aware that Mr E. Da Silva has been charged for operating a radio-link with East Timor from a point near Darwin.
  2. ls the Minister aware that Mr Da Silva was held in the Phillip Street Cells, Sydney on Friday night, 26 November 1976.
  3. Why was Mr Da Silva arrested on warrant instead of by summons.
  4. Who made the decision to proceed on a warrant that was issued on 25 November 1976, almost 2 months after the confiscation of the radio.
  5. Why was there such a delay in proceeding by warrant against Mr Da Silva.
  6. Is it intended to proceed against Mr Da Silva through summary or indictable proceedings in the Darwin Court on 1 December 1976.
  7. Why has Mr Da Silva not been granted an exit visa in order to leave Australia.
Senator Carrick:
LP

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

  1. to (7) Mr E. Da Silva applied in Lisbon for a visitor’s visa to Australia for the purpose of a lecture tour for four weeks’ duration. A visitor’s visa was granted on this application to him in Lisbon on 20 February 1976. On his arrival in Australia on 26 February 1976 he was granted a temporary entry permit valid for four weeks. Mr Da Silva failed to depart upon the expiration of his approved stay and his whereabouts remained unknown until 27 September 1976 when he was found by police in the Northern Territory. Following investigation and extradition proceedings from Sydney, he was charged and convicted in Darwin on 2 December 1976 of an offence against section 6 of the Wireless Telegraphy Aa. Da Silva departed Australia under his own arrangements on 5 December 1976.

Antarctica: Radioactive Contamination of Soil (Question No. 1535)

Senator Keeffe:

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

  1. Are reports in the Dunedin Evening Star and the Christchurch Star of 9 October 1976 that the United States of America plans to ship 6500 cubic metres of soil contaminated by radioactive material from the McMurdo Sound nuclear power generator in the Antarctic accurate; if so, does this proposal involve a violation of Article 5 of the Antarctic Treaty.
  2. What are the likely ramifications of this action.
  3. How did the contamination of the 6500 cubic metres of soil occur.
Senator Withers:
LP

-The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1), (2) and (3) The reports mentioned by the honourable senator are believed to be basically accurate. According to information provided by United States authorities, a routine inspection in 1972 of the McMurdo Sound nuclear reactor revealed some evidence of wetting of insulating material by shield water. Since the insulation contained teachable chlorides that could have come into contact with the primary cooling system, it was considered possible that chloride stress corrosion might develop and ultimately cause failure in the stainless steel components related to the reactor. Nevertheless, there was no accident and, we understand, no actual leakage of primary cooling water. Largely for reasons of cost, but partly from a safety point of view, it was decided to close the plant. Accordingly, the reactor was dismantled and shipped out of Antarctica in three stages during 1974, 1975 and 1976. The soil on which the reactor stood was checked and found not to be contaminated beyond a safe level according to International Atomic Energy Agency standards. However, in order to remove the possibility of any question being raised concerning adherence to the terms of the Antarctic Treaty, all soil having any trace of contamination above the local background level of radiation has been oris in the process of being removed.

Concerning the 6500 cubic metres of soil mentioned in the honourable senator’s question, it is understood that the United States has advised the New Zealand authorities that it proposes to ship approximately this amount of soil from McMurdo Sound through Lyttleton in February 1977. The New Zealand National Radiation Laboratory has satisfied itself that the radioactive level was so low as to exempt the proposed shipment from New Zealand regulations governing the transport of radioactive materials. (These regulations comply with IAEA standards.) A previous soil shipment which was removed from McMurdo Sound in 1975 also recorded a very low radiation count, well below the danger level established by New Zealand. The circumstances outlined above provide no grounds for suggesting that the proposed shipment of soil involves any violation of Article V of the Antarctic Treaty.

Housing for Aged Persons (Question No. 1567)

Senator Archer:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) Under which Acts are funds provided for housing of aged persons.
  2. How many units have been provided under each Act for the last 5 years by States and what is the amount of funds involved.
Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. The Department of Environment, Housing and Community Development administers the States Grants (Dwellings for Pensioners) Act 1974. Under this Act $30m in nonrepayable, interest-free grants is being made to the States over the 3-year period 1974-75 to 1976-77 for the provision of housing accommodation for eligible single aged, invalid and Class B widow pensioners and certain categories of Service pensioners. This Act succeeded the States Grants (Dwellings for Aged Pensioners) Act 1969 which was operative for the 5-year period 1969-70 to 1973-74. In addition advances made by the Commonwealth to the States for welfare housing purposes under the 1973-74 Housing Agreement may be used for the provision of accommodation for both single aged persons and aged couples. The extent to which these advances are so used is a matter for decision by the State authorities.

Memorandum to Federal Government Departments (Question No. 1577)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice:

What is the full text of the memorandum to all Federal Departments from the Treasurer entitled ‘Effects of Devaluation on 1976-77 Budget’, referred to in the article by Warwick Bracken in the Canberra Times dated 7 December 1976.

Senator Cotton:
LP

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

The memorandum which was referred to in the Warwick Bracken article in the Canberra Times of 7 December 1976 was an internal communication between departments. It is not the practice to make such communications public and I do not propose to make an exception in this particular case.

Cedar Bay Raid: Report to Police Commissioner (Question No. 1580)

Senator Colston:

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

  1. 1 ) When and how did the Minister first learn of the existence of the report prepared by Inspector Bob Gray of the Queensland Police Force and forwarded to former Queensland Police Commissioner on the day following the raid at Cedar Bay.
  2. Has the Minister, officers of his Department, or the Minister’s personal staff seen a copy of the report; if so (a) who has seen a copy of the report, (b) what action has been taken as a result of the report and (c) does the report make mention of the actions of Federal officers involved in the Cedar Bay raid; if so, what are the details.
  3. When and how did the Minister first learn that the Queensland Minister for Police had destroyed copies of the report.
  4. Have the Ministers or officers of the Queensland Government in any way sought to influence the Minister in answering queries about the Cedar Bay raid or about events related since the raid; if so what are the details.
  5. Did Chief Superintendent Becker and Inspector Atkinson who were delegated by former Queensland Police Commissioner, Ray Whitrod, to inquire into aspects of the Cedar Bay raid, at any stage during their inquiries interview, or seek to interview, officers of the Minister’s Department or of statutory bodies under the Minister’s jurisdiction; if so, what are the details.
  6. Does the Minister currently have access to (a) the Gray Report or (b) the Becker Report; if so, what action is the Minister taking as a result of study of the report/reports in question.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. and (3) My only knowledge of these matters comes from newspaper reports.
  2. , (4), (5) and (6) No.

Cedar Bay Police Raid (Question No. 1602)

Senator Colston:

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

With reference to the Minister’s reply to Senate Question No. 1 ISO, has the Minister, in a capacity other than Deputy Prime Minister, or has any of the Minister’s personal staff or officers of his Department, been in contact with the Queensland Premier, the Queensland Treasurer, the former or current Queensland Minister for Police, or the former or current Queensland Police Commissioner, concerning the raid by Commonwealth and State Officers at Cedar Bay on any occasion since the raid took place on 29 August 1976; if so, what are the details.

Senator Withers:
LP

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

page 55

No

Revaluation: Effect on Net Farm Income (Question No. 1613)

Senator Gietzelt:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice:

  1. With reference to the estimated increase of $17 per week in net farm income projected for 1976-77 by the Minister for Primary Industry as a result of the recent devaluation, by what amount is this marginal gain eroded by the Government’s decision to revalue.
  2. What is the estimated loss to net farm income in the remainder of the 1976-77 financial year caused by revaluation.
Senator Cotton:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) On the basis of the rate of exchange applying at the commencement of 1977, preliminary projections of the Bureau of Agriculture Economics indicate a figure of about $S per week.

It needs to be emphasised, however, that a calculation of this kind is necessarily subject to a wide margin of error. Were it simply a matter of gauging the ‘first round ‘ effect of the exchange rate changes on the export price of farm products and the import prices that enter into farm costs, the calculation would be reasonably straightforward. But what happens to net farm income over the remaining months of 1976-77 as a result of the initial devaluation and subsequent revaluations will also depend in no small measure on how the general rate of inflation of prices and costs in Australia is modified in consequence of what has been happening to the exchange rate.

  1. According to the same preliminary projections of the Bureau of Agriculture Economics and subject to the same proviso about the margin of error, the I7V4 percent devaluation would have added $ 150m to the net farm income of primary producers in 1976-77. Subsequent revaluations to the beginning of 1977 would, on a pro rata basis, reduce this figure by about $43m.

Lead Content in Petroleum (Question No. 1653)

Senator Keeffe:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice:

  1. 1 ) Did Federal and State Ministers undertake in January 1974 to reduce the level of lead in petroleum, by a factor of 33.3 per cent over the following three years; if so, has this project commenced and at what stage is it at present.
  2. If this project has not been commenced, what will the Government do to instigate the undertaking previously given by the Ministers.
Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. The Australian Environment Council at its Fourth Meeting in July 1973 resolved to co-ordinate a program to bring about a progressive reduction of the lead alkyll content of motor spirit to protect the environment. Subsequently, in January 1974 the Council finalised details of the program which it recommended for implementation by the individual States and Territories. The recommendations were:
  1. I am advised that other States may be giving consideration to control measures similar to those outlined under ( 1 ). These measures are the subject of continuing review by the Australian Environment Council.

Construction Industry

Senator Cotton:
LP

-On 18 November 1976 SenatorO ‘Byrne asked me a question without notice concerning economic conditions in the construction industry. The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

As the table below shows there has been a strong recovery in the dwelling industry since mid- 1 975.

There are also definite signs of improvement in the private non-residential building sector.

Currency Revaluation: Exchange Rate

Senator Cotton:
LP

-On 7 December 1976 Senator Wriedt asked me a question without notice concerning exchange arrangements. The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The general procedures to be followed under the changed exchange arrangements adopted on 29 November are outlined in the Treasurer’s statement of 28 November 1976. Information which could give rise to the possibility of currency speculation will remain confidential.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 15 February 1977, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1977/19770215_senate_30_s71/>.