Senate
6 September 1977

30th Parliament · 2nd Session

  1. Senate
  2. 30th Parliament
  3. 1977

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

page 589

MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS

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

– I inform the Senate that this morning His Excellency the Governor-General accepted the resignation of the Hon. Robert James Ellicott, Q.C., as Attorney-General. His Excellency subsequently directed and appointed Senator the Hon. Peter Drew Durack to hold the office of Attorney-General, and the Hon. Ransley Victor Garland to hold the office of Minister for Veterans’ Affairs. The Minister for Veterans’ Affairs will be represented in the Senate by the Attorney-General, Senator Durack.

page 589

DEATH OF FORMER SENATOR DITTMER

The PRESIDENT:

– It is with deep regret that I inform the Senate of the death on 29 August 1977 of former Senator Felix Cyril Sigismund Dittmer, a senator for the State of Queensland from 1959 to 1971 and a member of the Queensland Legislative Assembly from 1950 to 1957.

Senator GEORGES:
Queensland

-by leave- Mr President, I would like to take the opportunity of expressing to the family of Dr Felix Dittmer the deep regret that my colleagues and I from Queensland have after hearing of his death. I had the opportunity to know Felix Dittmer over a number of years. Although we did not agree politically on many matters, I came to be his friend, especially since it was my advantage to sit alongside him in this chamber. There is no doubt that I learnt many of the tricks that he used in this place. I use the word ‘tricks’ in the softer sense. Felix Dittmer was a person who with great energy intruded himself into debates in this place by way of speech and interjection. He was a colleague whose experience I appreciated well. To his family, a very large and devoted family, I express my sympathy in their time of loss. On behalf of the Australian Labor Party in Queensland, which he served so well for so long, I express the same sympathy.

Senator KEEFFE:
Queensland

-by leave-I join my colleague, Senator Georges, in expressing regret at the death of Felix Dittmer and in expressing sympathy to his family. Felix Dittmer came to prominence in the Australian Labor Party when he contested the Brisbane lord mayoralty. He was a longstanding delegate to the State Executive of the Labor Party in Queensland and attended quite a number of the triennial conferences. For a very brief period in about 1957 he was the Acting Secretary of the Queensland Central Executive. Probably his greatest contribution to public life was in the arena of State politics. He contested and won the seat of Mount Gravatt, which he represented for a period of time. He became the Deputy Leader of the State Parliamentary Labor Party in 1957. He was defeated in the seat of Mount Gravatt later that year- from memory on 3 August- by the late Mr Justice Hart. He was defeated by a very narrow margin- some 120-odd votes. At the time there was some tribulation in the Labor Party and he suffered some of the backwash. After that he came to this chamber. He represented Queensland in this chamber as a Labor senator for some 12 or 13 years.

The late former Senator Dittmer had experienced indifferent health over the last year or two. He suffered a minor stroke, which was followed by another one. I understand that he died suddenly of a heart attack last week. His family, as Senator Georges has said, was very devoted to him. In fact, it is only 2 years since his wife passed away. It was a fairly large family. One of the sons is prominent today in the Queensland Department of Labour Relations and Consumer Affairs and is a very close friend of mine.

I think that we in this chamber, as is perhaps the case in all parliaments, have a tendency to forget people when they retire from politics. Over the last few weeks a number of former members of this chamber have passed away. I think that it is probably one of the regrettable things about us- I suppose it is a selfish human trait- that we remain in close contact and friendly with our colleagues here but after they leave here for reasons of ill-health or retirement we have a tendency not to remember them. That was said to me very forcibly by a retired member of the other side of the chamber when I became a member of the Senate in 1965. We met for lunch one day and he said: ‘There is one suggestion I will make to you. If you ever let politics get you down you will be due for a coronary or a couple of bad ulcers, but if you continue to laugh you will see your way through life fairly satisfactorily’. This gentleman was a former senior minister. He also has now passed away. He also said: Do all the things that you want to do while you are in the Parliament because when you leave it you will be forgotten’. He expressed one regret to me. He had spent a long period in this chamber, including a lengthy period in the ministry, and he had hoped that at least he would have been consulted by his colleagues when he left the Parliament. He said: ‘I thought I would be an elder statesman, but it did not work out that way. They do not even call to buy me a grog any more’. I think there is a lesson to be learned from that. I think we should remember the contributions made in this chamber by our colleagues from both sides of the House and try to keep in touch with them in some sort of way afterwards. It is always a sad occasion when one of our former colleagues passes on. I reiterate my sympathy for the family of the late Dr Dittmer and my regret at his passing.

Senator McAULIFFE:
Queensland

-by leave- I did not have the honour to serve in this Senate with the late Dr Felix Dittmer. In fact, I succeeded him in this place. There can be no doubt that he was a man of scholarship and wide experience, particularly in the pastoral areas of Queensland where he had a close association with the Australian Workers Union. In fact, in those areas he became somewhat of a legend. There can be no doubt also that he served faithfully and well and with distinction to himself as a State member of parliament and a member of this Senate. I join with my colleagues in expressing to the members of his family my deepest sympathy in their sad loss.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order! I invite honourable senators to stand in silence as a mark of respect to the memory of former Senator Dittmer.

Honourable senators having stood in their places-

The PRESIDENT:

– I thank honourable senators.

page 590

PETITIONS

Pensions

Senator McAULIFFE:

– I present the following petition from 102 citizens of Australia:

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

That those who have retired and those who are about to retire, are being severely and adversely affected by inflation and Australian economic circumstances.

The continuance of the means test on pensions causes undue hardship to them.

We call on the Government to immediately abolish the means test on all aged pensions.

To ensure a pension for all on retirement, and a guarantee that all Australian citizens will retire with dignity.

Acknowledge that a pension is a right and not a charity.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.

Petition received and read.

Telephone Fees

Senator LEWIS:
VICTORIA

-I present the following petition from 896 citizens of Australia:

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

Telephone users outside major metropolitan telephone districts, particularly those conducting businesses outside those districts, suffer an unfair burden for fees charged for calls.

The system of charging fees for calls based on the distance between non-adjoining zones instead of for the time of the call is archaic and unreasonable.

Your petitioners most humbly pray that the Senate, in Parliament assembled, should require Telecom Australia to standardise all telephone fees for calls on a time basis so that the fee for calls of equal time be the same throughout Australia.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.

Petition received and read.

The Clerk:

– Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows:

Estate Duty

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

That where whole or part of a deceased estate passes to the surviving spouse it should be free from Federal estate duty.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Senator Carrick and Senator Chaney.

Petition received.

Pensions

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

That those who have retired and those who are about to retire, are being severely and adversely affected by inflation and Australian economic circumstances.

The continuance of the Means Test on pensions causes undue hardship to them.

We call on the Government to immediately abolish the Mean ‘s Test on all Aged Pensions.

To ensure a pension for all on retirement, and a guarantee that all Australian Citizens will retire with dignity.

Acknowledge that a pension is a ‘right and not a charity’.

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

Petition received.

page 591

QUESTION

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

page 591

QUESTION

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LEGISLATION

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

-My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. The Minister will recall the Speech of Her Majesty the Queen when she opened the second session of the Thirtieth Parliament in March of this year. Amongst other things, Her Majesty said:

With the growth over the years of the power of public and private bureaucracies, particular care needs to be taken to protect individual liberties and human rights against unwarranted intrusions.

My Government is acting to secure individual rights. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal is now operating, legislation to appoint a Commonwealth Ombudsman has been passed, the Human Rights Commission will be established and a Bill relating to freedom of information will be placed before the Parliament.

I ask: Does the Government intend to carry out its stated intention of introducing a Bill relating to freedom of information during the present session of this Parliament? If so, will the Government ensure that provision is made for people about whom dossiers have been compiled by the Commonwealth Police which apparently now are to be made freely available to Government Ministers to be advised of this fact and to have access to those dossiers so that, should they so choose, they will be able to lodge appeals against the contents of those dossiers?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-The honourable senator’s question is in two parts. As to the freedom of information Bill, I think as recently as the opening of the Australian Legal Convention in Sydney round about 4 July the Prime Minister again said that the Bill would be brought into Parliament. I think it was hoped that it would be introduced this year, but I cannot recollect the legislative program with such particularity. My colleague the Attorney-General may be able to help the honourable senator in a day or two as he settles into his portfolio. It is the Government’s intention to bring in that Bill and to proceed with it. As to the second part of the question about dossiers, this matter was bruited about a little bit in the Press last week. I said at the time that what was happening and what I hoped was happening was that there was an exchange of information between the police forces of this country about persons who may commit violence, no matter against whom, for what cause or where. I would have thought that all honourable senators would agree with such a situation.

Senator Georges:

– The police force -

Senator WITHERS:

-I am talking about violence. I believe that there is a duty upon members of police forces, where they receive information which may lead to the injury of people, to inform their colleagues in other forces so that the people involved may be properly protected. I know of no honourable senator opposite who subscribes to the theory of violence, nor is there any honourable senator on this side who subscribes to it. All that is being asked is that there be a continuation of the normal co-operation between police forces in the community, to inform one another about possible outbreaks of violence against human beings. That is a policy which I thought would have the support of every honourable senator in this chamber.

page 591

QUESTION

PUSHBUTTON TELEPHONES

Senator MESSNER:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I direct my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications. This most serious matter has been raised with me by a number of constituents in my State. The Minister will know of the introduction of Touchfone by Telecom Australia. Is the Minister aware that the order of numbers on pushbutton telephones, running from one to nine from top to bottom, is exactly the reverse of most calculating machines where the numbers run from bottom to top? In the interests of efficiency of operation and assistance to workers generally, will the Minister request Telecom to consider a re-arrangement of the numbers into proper form as already established by most calculators?

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

– I am not aware of the phenomenon which the honourable senator points out. This matter is one that I can understand could be complex if it, in fact, confuses those who normally operate calculators or other machines. I shall bring the matter to the attention of the Minister in another place and ask him to study it.

page 591

QUESTION

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCIES

Senator MULVIHILL:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I direct a question in two parts to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. The question concerns national security agencies and involves two areas which the Minister knows I have pursued over the last few weeks. Firstly, I ask: With the termination of a certain case in the Canberra courts under Justice Smithers which dealt with Australian Security Intelligence Organisation recruitment, are we likely to get some information on the recruitment methods, mindful of ASIO’s increased budget and some miscalculations regarding the personnel engaged? Secondly, I refer the Minister to a partial promise he gave me some weeks ago that when the Prime Minister returned from Japan we might get a further edition of the Justice Hope report which was supposed to deal with an appeals tribunal for people denied citizenship, which could be related to ASIO evaluations.

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I know that the honourable senator has had a continuing interest in this problem, as he has seen it, for a long time. I well recall saying to the honourable senator that the Prime Minister hoped to be able to deal with this report when he came back from Japan. I must ask the honourable senator to contain his patience somewhat. The Prime Minister has said that he will be making a statement on this matter as soon as he can. I do not know whether the honourable senator realises- I do not think I am giving anything away- that the Hope report is a very large document. It has only recently been completed. Without attempting to go into the covers of it so far, my estimate is that I will need 30 to 40 hours to read it. Honourable senators can understand the size of the task before the Government in going into the report and coming to decisions on it.

I assure the honourable senator that the Government has a very great and continuing interest in this matter. As far as possible it has been implementing parts of the Hope report as they have come in. The honourable senator may remember that the Prime Minister made a statement on 5 May- I tabled the statement on his behalf in this place on 24 May last- concerning certain decisions made by the Government on the first part of the Hope report. As the honourable senator will realise, that was but the start of what the report was to be all about. I well understand the problems in which Senator Mulvihill has been interested, especially those concerning people applying for naturalisation and migration to this country and the general pursuit of civil liberties about which he has been so ardent for so long. As I read the report I will certainly bear in mind the honourable senator’s attitudes and ideas on the subjects he has raised.

Senator MULVIHILL:

-I wish to ask a supplementary question. With all deference to the answer I received, I think the Minister overlooked the first part of my question which related to the recruitment of ASIO operatives in view of one or two apparently false evaluations of people in the past. The Minister did not mention the matter in his reply. I do not know whether it is related to the Hope report.

Senator WITHERS:

-I realise I overlooked that part of the question. I apologise to the honourable senator. I have not, as I said, read the report yet. I do not know whether the judge touched on the matter, but no doubt he did. I say in fairness to ASIO that not only does it make mistakes but also do selection committees and electors.

page 592

QUESTION

BOVINE BRUCELLOSIS AND TUBERCULOSIS ERADICATION CAMPAIGN

Senator ARCHER:
TASMANIA

-I direct my question to the Minister representing the Minister for the Northern Territory. Do the lands agreements with Aborigines in the Northern Territory require that the Aborigines are responsible to see that all livestock under their control are subjected to testing for diseases as required, particularly bovine brucellosis and tuberculosis? Is the Minister satisfied that all livestock are being tested? If he is not satisfied, what steps are proposed to ensure that there will be no hold up in completing the eradication program for the diseases mentioned?

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

-The Minister for the Northern Territory has supplied me with the following information. All pastoral leases in the Northern Territory are equally subject to disease control measures. It is unlikely that any Commonwealth or State Minister charged with the responsibility of ensuring that adequate disease prevention and eradication programs are being implemented can be entirely satisfied. However, the incentives provided to producers under the bovine brucellosis and tuberculosis eradication campaign apply equally to all pastoralists in the Territory. In addition, the technical officers of the Department of the Northern Territory are actively engaged in an educational program emphasising both the need for and the mechanics of the Commonwealth Government’s disease eradication program.

page 592

QUESTION

BULIMBA HOSTELS PTY LTD

Senator MCAULIFFE:

– I address my question to the Minister for Administrative Services. Is it a fact that the Government does not propose to extend the lease of Bulimba Hostels Pty Ltd but instead to transfer the lease to Telecom Australia? If this is so, what does the future hold for the 300 low income earners, two-thirds of whom are pensioners, who will become homeless? I ask this question in the light of the fact that already each night in Brisbane an average of 1,000 homeless have to ballot for a bed offered by charitable and welfare organisations.

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I hope to have the information sought by the honourable senator before the end of question time. Yesterday, the honourable member for Griffith in another place, Mr Don Cameron, rang me about this matter. I asked my Department to supply me with information sufficient to enable me to inform Mr Cameron about the situation. I have not had time this morning to check my files. I will check the matter as soon as I can and hope to give the honourable senator a reply before the end of question time.

page 593

QUESTION

ABORIGINAL LAND RIGHTS

Senator CAVANAGH:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, although it may have some bearing on the portfolios of the Treasurer or the Minister for National Resources. By way of preface I refer to section 63 of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act which states:

  1. . there shall be paid into the Trust Account -

That is the Aboriginals Benefit Trust Account- from time to time, out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund amounts equal to the amounts of any royalties received by the Crown in respect of a mining interest in Aboriginal land.

In view of that section, I ask the Minister: What is meant by the statement made by the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Mr Viner on the Government’s uranium policy? Mr Viner said:

The equivalent of a royalty of at least 21/2 per cent will be payable by the Commonwealth Government to the Aboriginals Benefit Trust Account for mining within the Ranger area . . .

Two and a half per cent of what? Will the Aboriginals be paid from Consolidated Revenue the full royalty collected for mining or will they only be paid part of it? In view of the fact that the Act makes it mandatory for the royalties to be paid to the Aboriginals Benefit Trust Account, what was the Prime Minister talking about when he said:

Part of the increased revenues which the Government will derive from uranium development will be used in substantial additional funding of solar energy research as part of our National Energy Program.

If the Aboriginals Benefit Trust Account receives all royalties, what increase in revenue will the Government receive?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-That is a very clever question because what the honourable senator obviously has overlooked is that it is indicated somewhere in that statement that a resources tax or other taxes may be levied. Company taxes also will be levied. The question is not as clever as Senator Cavanagh thought. He asked about a particular section of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act and he quoted from the Act. I only represent the Ministers to whom this question should be directed. The question almost verges on asking me for a legal opinion. Therefore, I suggest that the honourable senator place his question on the Notice Paper so that I may get a detailed answer for him.

page 593

QUESTION

SOUTH AUSTRALIA: TAX SHARING ARRANGEMENTS

Senator JESSOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I direct a question to the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in Federal Affairs. Is the Minister aware of the statement made today by Mr Virgo, the South Australian Minister of Local Government, to the effect that the Commonwealth Government adamantly refused to give special consideration to areas outside local government in that State? Is it a fact that the Premier of South Australia agreed to the original proposition put forward by the Commonwealth Grants Commission to the Premiers Conference late in 1976 that unincorporated areas would be excluded from the tax sharing arrangements? Is it also a fact that since the original agreement an opportunity has been provided for Tasmania to put forward complaints and that South Australia has had a similar opportunity to make a definite proposal as far as unincorporated areas of South Australia are concerned to qualify for grants under the local government personal tax sharing arrangements? Has the South Australian Government made representations to have any changes made to the original proposal? Are the charges made by Mr Virgo against the Commonwealth justified?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– Since the Premiers Conference met early last year to discuss various federalism matters, it has been clear to the Commonwealth and to all Premiers- specifically to the Premier of South Australia- that South Australia, by the choice of its Government, has a system of local government different from the system in other States and that there are large unincorporated areas in South Australia. It has been clear to all Premiers and to the Commonwealth that it is a matter of choice for South Australia whether those areas remain unincorporated. It has been made clear to South Australia that if it wants to take action and it wants to make representations to the Commonwealth Grants Commission on various matters it is quite competent to do so, but South Australia entered into the revenue sharing arrangements for local government in the full knowledge that those arrangements would apply to incorporated areas. Incidentally, it is fair to remind the honourable senator that I do not think there is any record of this complaint in those years of the

Whitlam Government in which that Government through the Commonwealth Grants Commission made grants to incorporated areas. I would think that the indignation now being expressed should be put down not only to spring time but also to other more subjective and narcissus-like matters.

page 594

QUESTION

INDONESIAN OFFENSIVE AGAINST EAST TIMOR

Senator McINTOSH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I direct my question to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Will the Minister confirm or deny reports that Indonesia is preparing for a large-scale offensive against East Timor? Will the Minister provide details? What is the Government’s attitude to this new invasion? Further, will the Minister outline the steps, if any, taken by the Government to persuade the Indonesians not to pursue such an outrageous, inhumane and callous action against the suffering people of East Timor?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-Is this an impending invasion of East Timor?

Senator Mcintosh:

– It is on.

Senator WITHERS:

-It is on, is it? Well, I have no knowledge of it. I will seek the information from my colleague in the other place.

page 594

QUESTION

UNEMPLOYMENT AT GUNPOWDER, QUEENSLAND

Senator KEEFFE:

-My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for National Resources. Is the Minister aware that all mine employees in the mining town of Gunpowder are to be dismissed and the mine closed down? Is the Minister also aware that as some 600 people live at Gunpowder the dismissal of the mine workers will cause a serious increase in the unemployment figures for Queensland? Is the Government likely to initiate a rescue operation at Gunpowder on a scale similar to that provided for Mary Kathleen?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I ask the honourable senator to place his question on notice.

page 594

QUESTION

DEFENCE SERVICE HOMES SCHEME

Senator BISHOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Veterans ‘ Affairs. The Minister may recall that when he was the Minister in charge of this portfolio I asked him questions about the future of the defence service homes scheme in relation to serving servicemen and others and to which he replied that, I think, there would be literally no alterations to the provisions. I now ask the Minister: Is it a fact that the conditions and eligibility requirements under this scheme have been quite drastically changed and that the future of land holdings which are at present held by the Defence Service Homes Corporation is in some doubt because of a Government direction that these are likely to be sold? Will the holdings in South Australia at Reynella, Hackham, Christie Downs and Christies Beach and O’sullivan Beach- the Minister has told me that several hundred blocks of land are held in those areas for building purposes- be sold on open tender or are they to be held for applicants who have already lodged applications?

Senator DURACK:
Attorney-General · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

- Senator Bishop referred to questions that he has asked me over some period- I think commencing about this time last year- concerning speculation about changes to the defence service homes scheme. The major speculation during that period was about interest rates being increased from the very favourable rate charged on loans under this scheme. In the answers I gave at the time I said that there were no changes. It is true that there were no changes at the time. The Government considered all matters in relation to the defence service homes scheme in the Budget context and it made some changes to the scheme, some of which have been referred to by Senator Bishop in his question this afternoon.

I am happy to emphasise that there has not been any increase in the interest charges on the loans that are available or any decrease in the term of repayment of a loan. These are two of the major features of the scheme which have been held intact. There have been changes concerning eligibility of those who have served in peacetime forces. They are spelt out in a statement attached to the Budget which I issued at the time of the presentation of the Budget. I do not propose to reiterate the changes here but I refer honourable senators to them. I think the major point of Senator Bishop’s question concerns decisions that have been made in regard to the policy hitherto of developing land and selling either developed blocks of land or houses and land to people who are interested in obtaining a house and land under those schemes. That has never been the major feature of the defence service homes scheme. The major feature has, of course, been its lending facilities. There is again considerable detail concerning the changes which are proposed in this regard. The Government intends to wind down and ultimately phase out the land development and construction activity aspect of the scheme. However, there are on the books large numbers of applicants for land or land and housing and the Department hopes to be able to satisfy as many as possible of these applicants registered on the books up to the day of the presentation of the Budget, that is, 16 August. That means there must be now a reappraisal of all land holdings to see how much will be required to meet, as far as possible, the requirements of those who have applied for this form of assistance under the scheme. We believe that there is enough land in South Australia, Western Australia, Victoria and Queensland in a state which may be developed to meet the requirements of those applicants. I cannot give details as to what particular land will be developed or made available.

Senator Bishop:

– Could you get that?

Senator DURACK:

-I shall obtain that information for the honourable senator.

page 595

QUESTION

PROCLAMATION OF COMMONWEALTH LEGISLATION

Senator THOMAS:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– I direct my question to the Minister for Administrative Services. In view of the High Court decision last week concerning the wreck of the Gilt Dragon and the reported subsequent proclamation of Commonwealth legislation, can the Minister indicate to the Senate the present position with regard to the protection of the Gilt Dragon and other ancient shipwrecks off the Western Australian coast?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-Honourable senators may recall that last week the High Court handed down a judgment in which it held not to be a valid law certain legislation of Western Australia concerning the preservation of maritime wrecks off the coast of that State. Honourable senators will recall also that this Parliament passed the Historic Shipwrecks Bill- I think it was last year -just in case the High Court did, in fact, come to that conclusion. As a result of the judgment which was handed down, I think, on Thursday, Senator Durack, who was then acting AttorneyGeneral, and I had certain discussions. Senator Durack had further discussions with the Attorney-General of Western Australia and the Act was immediately proclaimed to apply offshore in Western Australia to ensure that none of the historic shipwrecks were plundered for personal gain. The present situation is that those shipwrecks, both in general and in particular the ones named in the Bill, now come under the protection of Commonwealth law. It is my intention to enter into negotiations with my counterpart in Western Australia, as provided in the legislation, to work out a co-operative regime whereby the Western Australian Government, possibly through the Western Australian Maritime Museum will, to a very large extent, if not to the total extent, again resume the responsibility it had before the High Court judgment.

page 595

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN MILITARY AID TO INDONESIA

Senator SIBRAA:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Is the Minister aware of reports circulating which suggest that Australian military aid to Indonesia is being used to prosecute the war against Fretilin forces in East Timor? Is the Minister able to state whether Australian military aid can be used for such offensive purposes, or is our aid program geared to the defence needs of Indonesia?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I will get that information for the honourable senator.

page 595

QUESTION

LEGAL AID

Senator COLEMAN:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I direct a question to the Attorney-General. I recognise that he has new portfolio responsibilities and may not be in a position to give positive answers today. Nevertheless, I ask that he treat the matter as one of some urgency. In view of the extremely delicate situation in which legal assistance has been placed because of this Government’s decision, will the Attorney-General give the precise allocation of funds for the Legal Aid Commission in Western Australia? Will he advise the name and qualifications of his representative to the Legal Aid Commission? Will he table the agreement between the Federal Government and the Western Australian Government in respect to legal aid? Will he ensure that copies of this agreement will be sent to all Australian Legal Aid Office professional staff in Western Australia?

Senator DURACK:
LP

- Senator Coleman asks for a good deal of detail. Even if I had been the Attorney-General for more than an hour or so, I think it would have been beneficial to put a question of that kind on notice so that I might provide more accurate detail than she would expect to get in response to a question without notice. However, I would challenge her suggestion that any decision of this Government has placed legal aid in any jeopardy. In fact, the provision for legal aid in the Budget this year has been increased and we are proceeding, in accordance with Government policy, to establish Legal Aid Commissions, in conjunction with the States, or at least to encourage the States to set up Legal Aid Commissions to which we will be giving support. We believe that the legal aid policy of this Government will greatly rationalise and improve the schemes.

page 596

QUESTION

DEMONSTRATIONS ON UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES

Senator KILGARIFF:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

-I direct a question to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Recently there have been several demonstrations in Australian universities which have been marked by apparently increasingly violent incidents. Having in mind that some of these incidents have been directed at the Prime Minister and, indeed, have put him in danger of suffering bodily harm, is it correct to say that not all demonstrators have come from universities or from the universities where the demonstrations took place, but have come from left wing groups which are openly defying law and order in an effort to cause as much chaos as possible within the Australian community? Will the Government make known to the people of Australia the results of investigations that have taken place?

Senator Keeffe:

– Rent your own crowd.

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-It may be that rentacrowd or dial-a-demo is back in business.

Senator McLaren:

– Like the farmers in Western Australia.

Senator WITHERS:

-I think we would all deplore the incident that took place in Forrest Place when the then Prime Minister had beer cans and other things thrown at him.

Senator Georges:

– It was a mob.

Senator WITHERS:

-It was.

Senator Georges:

– It was your mob.

Senator WITHERS:

-It was not my mob. The real substance of the honourable senator’s question is that merely because some of these unfortunate demonstrations take place on university grounds, people attending the universities tend to get tagged with the bad name of the people who act perhaps somewhat extremely on those grounds. I hope the members of the community understand that the great majority of people in universities are very busy going about their own lawful business of attending lectures and passing exams. Unfortunately, far too often outsiders go on to campuses and act as they ought not to. They are no more than intruders. They are almost trespassers. They give the genuine students at those places a bad name. This is something which ought to be deplored. The students have enough to put up with in this country without having dial-a-demo and rentacrowd come to their places, so that all students are tagged with the same sort of attitude. I would hope that the Australian community would understand that the great majority of students at tertiary institutions in Australia have nothing to do with these outbreaks of violence on university grounds.

page 596

QUESTION

SALE OF NEWSPAPERS

Senator GIETZELT:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to Senator Durack as Attorney-General and Minister representing the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs. Is he aware that in all States of the Commonwealth newspaper proprietors require the sale of their newspapers to be restricted to newsagents or their nominees as approved by the newspaper proprietors? Is this practice restrictive and contrary to the provisions of free competition? Can the Minister advise what are the circumstances that allow for the sale of interstate daily newspapers in the Australian Capital Territory from a variety of shops, including grog shops? I use the term ‘grog’ as referring to the liquor discount houses that exist in Canberra. Can the Minister advise whether this means that newspaper proprietors are not able to impose their restrictive practices in the territories under the administration of the Commonwealth?

Senator DURACK:
LP

– This question relates to matters the responsibility of the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, whom I represent and to whom I will refer the question in an endeavour to obtain an early answer.

page 596

QUESTION

IMPORT QUOTAS ON TEXTILES AND APPAREL

Senator ARCHER:

-Has the Minister for Industry and Commerce yet concluded the details relating to the announced rearrangement of the distribution of import quotas on textiles and apparel and in particular the rules on transferability of quotas and the distribution of the 1 5 per cent set aside to assist in easing anomalies? If not, when is it hoped to do so?

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

– Those matters are being finalised at the moment, and I shall be able to tell the honourable senator and anybody else about them very shortly.

page 596

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT

Senator GRIMES:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Minister for Social Security. Is it a fact that the Government is not to introduce legislation into the Parliament this session to increase pensions and lump sum payments under the Commonwealth Employees Compensation Act? If so, why has this decision been made? Why should the bereaved survivors of Commonwealth employees or the injured Commonwealth employees paid under this Act be excluded from increased benefits when other pensioners have received increases?

Senator GUILFOYLE:
Minister for Social Security · VICTORIA · LP

– The Government has no plans to introduce legislation in this session to increase payments under the Commonwealth Employees Compensation Act. The matter was considered in the Budget context and, as previous increases had been dealt with last year, it was considered that at this time no new legislation should be introduced.

Senator GRIMES:

- Mr President, I have a supplementary question. Is it not a fact that until November 1975 increases of payments under the Commonwealth Employees Compensation Act had been annual increases and that the only reason increases were not given in 1975 was the constitutional situation at the time? Does the Government’s present stand mean that it intends to go back on the practice of previous governments of introducing such increases annually?

Senator GUILFOYLE:

– As I said, the matter was considered in the Budget context, and it was considered that no increases should be introduced in this session. The Government has made no concrete plans with regard to future increases, but it is noted, as was implied by Senator Grimes, that it was a two-year period from the previous increase to the one that was dealt with last year.

page 597

QUESTION

WESTERN MINING CORPORATION

Senator WHEELDON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

-My question is directed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate and relates to the announcement of the Western Mining Corporation that it intends to dismiss some hundreds of its employees engaged in the mining of nickel at Kambalda in Western Australia. In view of the considerable distress that this will cause to the people of Kambalda and the Eastern Goldfields generally and in view of the fact that the Western Mining Corporation has given as its principal reason for laying off its employees the fact that there is some $45 m worth of unsold nickel and in view of the fact that obviously the demand for nickel will be found again at some time in the future, will the Government consider the buying of the unsold nickel for the purpose of future stockpiling? I understand this is a practice that has been followed in other countries where a similar situation has developed in the mining of ore such as nickel.

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I well understand the honourable senator’s concern for what has happened there. As the honourable senator would know, most if not all Western Australian senators, together with the honourable member for

Kalgoorlie, Mr Cotter, have been active in this matter. The honourable senator has made an interesting suggestion. I will certainly put it to both the Prime Minister and the Minister for National Resources.

page 597

QUESTION

COCAINE

Senator JESSOP:

– Is the Minister representing the Minister for Health aware of the desperate shortage of cocaine at major hospitals in Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and Penh? The stock of this drug is very low. I understand that Adelaide Hospital has attempted to procure this drug from other hospitals and has been unable to do so. Is the Minister also aware that some hospital authorities have expressed concern that cocaine apparently is still available in Australia through illicit sources? As this drug is used as a pain killer in the treatment of terminal cases of cancer and other painful complaints will the Minister ask her colleague in another place for a report on this subject and also seek his assurance that action will be taken as a matter of urgency to ensure that supplies of this drug are made available as soon as possible to the hospitals of Australia?

Senator GUILFOYLE:
LP

– I have no personal knowledge of the matters that have been raised, but I undertake to draw the question to the attention of the Minister for Health and obtain an early answer to it. I will see that whatever public statement can be made about the matter will be made so that assurances are given to those hospitals which have difficulty in obtaining supplies.

page 597

QUESTION

COMPILATION OF DOSSIERS BY COMMONWEALTH POLICE

Senator McLAREN:

– I address a question to the Minister for Administrative Services. It arises from an answer given by the Minister to a question asked earlier today by Senator Douglas McClelland. As the Minister has said that dossiers are being compiled by the Commonwealth Police for the use of all police forces, I ask: What is the reason for the Prime Minister himself calling for these dossiers? Further, will the Minister assure the Senate that such dossiers as are compiled by the Commonwealth Police on persons participating in anti-uranium demonstrations against whom no charges are laid will not be allowed to be used against them in any application for employment that those persons may subsequently make to either government instrumentalities or private firms?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-Either the honourable senator is deaf or I do not know what I am saying, but I do not think that at anytime I -

Senator Georges:

– That is right.

Senator WITHERS:

-That is right; he does not know what he is saying because I never at any time said to Senator Douglas McClelland that dossiers are being prepared. I never at any time said that. Senator McLaren ought to be ashamed of himself for attempting to put those words into my mouth. What I said was that I thought that, in accordance with normal police practice, when the Commonwealth Police Force receives information about persons who may commit violence against anyone in any place and for any reason it should exchange that information with other forces to prevent that act of violence taking place. I have nothing further to add to that.

page 598

QUESTION

RADIO STATION 3ZZ

Senator MISSEN:
VICTORIA

– I address a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications. I refer to a Press release issued by the Ethnic Communities Council of Victoria alleging that a confidential interdepartmental report on ethnic broadcasting formed the basis of the Government’s decision to terminate broadcasting by radio station 3ZZ. Does that report in fact exist? Was the report used as the basis for the Government’s decision? Can the report be made available to members of parliament?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– I am not aware of the existence or otherwise of such an interdepartmental committee or interdepartmental committee report. I will invite the responsible Minister to look at the question and respond to it.

page 598

QUESTION

AIRCRAFT INCIDENTS IN WEST IRIAN

Senator PRIMMER:
VICTORIA

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence. I remind the Minister of a question I asked of him on 1 8 August relative to the crash of an Australian Iroquois helicopter in West Irian and his reply in which he promised to have the matter checked, despite the fact that in his answer he spoke of Papua New Guinea rather than West Irian. I now ask the Minister whether he will also check with his colleague the reasons for the more recent reported holing of a Royal Australian Air Force Pilatus Porter aircraft by what appears to have been anti-aircraft fire some 50 kilometres north of the previous incident. Will the Minister table a report in the Senate on both these incidents?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I suggest that the honourable senator put his question on notice.

page 598

QUESTION

TELECOM AUSTRALIA: GOLF TOURNAMENT SPONSORSHIP

Senator BUTTON:
VICTORIA

– My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications. Is it a fact that Telecom Australia is sponsoring, at a cost of some $100,000, a golf tournament to commence in Melbourne on 13 November? Is it not normal for sponsorship of sporting activities to be undertaken on an advertising basis by businesses in competition with one another? Has Telecom ever before been engaged in sporting sponsorships and, in view of its monopoly position, what is the rationale behind this particular sponsorship?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

-Whether or not Telecom is sponsoring a golf tournament is not known to me. If in fact it is doing so, its reasons are not known to me. I will ask the Minister to study the matter and give the honourable senator an answer.

page 598

QUESTION

GIANT CLAMS: POACHING

Senator WALTERS:
TASMANIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. Can the Minister say what steps are being taken to prevent the poaching by foreign fishing vessels of the stocks of giant clams on the Great Barrier Reef?

Senator COTTON:
LP

– The general position is that the Navy maintains patrols throughout the area and anybody who is flying over the area is usually asked to note particular vessels. Fishermen in the area have a fair knowledge of what is going on and they tend to report. However, in general there is a need for an acceleration of reporting and general noting of vessels that are fishing not only for clams but also for other fish in Australian waters which incidentally are going to be extended.

page 598

QUESTION

ABORIGINAL HOUSING

Senator MELZER:
VICTORIA

– My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs. During the debate on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) last May I raised the matter of money which had been allocated to the Department of Aboriginal Affairs for housing being used to build carports for Aboriginal families in Victoria who do not have cars or driving licences. I understood that the matter was to be investigated. Can the Minister advise me whether such an investigation has taken place and if so, what was the result of that investigation?

Senator GUILFOYLE:
LP

– I am unaware of what investigations have taken place. I suggest that the matter be deferred until the item is being considered by the Estimates Committee, and I will undertake to have some information available at that time.

page 599

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVANTS: APPEALS AGAINST DISMISSAL

Senator RYAN:
ACT

– I direct my question to the Attorney-General and ask him to confirm his assurances to Senator Knight and the honourable member for Canberra, reported in today’s Canberra Times, that public servants can appeal against dismissal or stand down under the Commonwealth Employees (Employment Provisions) Act under the terms of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act. I ask the Minister to explain those assurances in terms of his second reading speech on the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Bill, in which he said:

Judicial review . . . will not be concerned at all with the merits of the decision . . . under review. The only question for the Court will be whether the action is lawful, in the sense that it is within the power conferred on the relevant Minister or official or body, that prescribed procedures have been followed and that general rules of law, such as conformity to the principles of natural justice, have been observed. The Court will not be able to substitute its own decision for that of the person or body whose action is challenged in the Court.

I ask the Minister how he explains his assurances to his two colleagues in the light of his own interpretation of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act, which specifically precludes any possibility of public servants using it to appeal against ministerial decisions made against them.

Senator DURACK:
LP

-It is quite clear from Senator Ryan’s question that she did not really understand what I said in the Senate, even though she has gone to great pains apparently to get every word I said and to quote me.

Senator Button:

– She can be pardoned for that.

Senator DURACK:

-I think Senator Button also took some interest in this aspect of the debate. I can confirm that I wrote to Senator Knight on 2 September. I think it would be best if I read what I said. I said:

The Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act would be applicable to decisions made under the Commonwealth Employees (Employment Provisions) Act. Decisions made under that Act in relation to the suspension, standing down or dismissal of persons would be, in my view, decisions of an administrative character for the purposes of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act. It would therefore be open for a person aggrieved by such a decision, which includes a person whose interests are adversely affected by the decision, to apply to the Federal Court of Australia for review of the decision. It would also be open for such a person … to request written reasons for the decision.

The point is that the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act sets out a number of grounds or bases on which applications can be made under it. I have never said- I did not say it in the Senate or outside it- that it is providing a direct right of appeal in the sense in which that direct right is given to, say, an Administrative Appeals Tribunal or a Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. But it clearly gives a measure of redress, and in broad terms that can be called a right of appeal within the confines, of course, of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act. However, the main point of the request to me by Senator Knight and Mr Haslem was in regard to the question of when the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act would be proclaimed and whether or not the Commonwealth Employees (Employment Provisions) Act would be excluded when that Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act were brought into operation. In my letter to Senator Knight I said:

I also confirm that action has been put in hand … to bring the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act into force at a very early date.

Regulations are being prepared for this purpose at the present time. I repeat that I gave them an oral assurance that it is not the Government’s intention to exclude decisions under the Commonwealth Employees (Employment Provisions) Act when that other Act is proclaimed.

Senator RYAN:

– I wish to ask a supplementary question. Can the Attorney-General confirm that appeals under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act will be concerned only with legality of decisions that were taken, that is if they were taken properly under the terms of the appropriate Act, and not with the nature or the effect of the decisions that were taken?

Senator DURACK:

-Quite clearly Senator Ryan is seeking a legal opinion from me. I have already indicated that the grounds on which approaches can be made to the Federal Court of Australia are set out in detail in the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act. I suggest that she should read those sections.

page 599

QUESTION

REDFERN ABORIGINAL MEDICAL SERVICE

Senator KEEFFE:

– I preface my question, which is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, by reminding the Minister of the recent call by the Redfern Aboriginal Medical Service for funding in order to continue its work in the area. Can the Minister inform the Parliament whether the Minister for Health instigated an inquiry into the allegations of the high rates of malnutrition and general ill health, particularly amongst Aboriginal children in this area? Was the inquiry completed and the report made available to the Government several weeks ago? Does the report recommend the need for Australian Government assistance to the Redfern Aboriginal Medical Service in its attempt to provide adequate health services? ls it a fact that the Government does not intend to act on the advice set out in the report? Will the Minister now take the initiative in ensuring that the Medical Service receives the funds needed to provide a proper health service?

Senator GUILFOYLE:
LP

– 1 undertake to refer the matters raised to the Minister for Health and to the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs to find out whether there is an existing report from the Department of Health to the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and whether some action is to be taken on that report, if it does exist, and also to find out in general terms the situation concerning the matters of which I have been reading in regard to the Redfern Medical Service and Aboriginal children suffering from malnutrition. I undertake to get an answer as soon as possible.

page 600

QUESTION

INCOME TAX: GENERAL REBATE SYSTEM

Senator WALSH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I address my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. Does he stand by the assertion of the Minister for Primary Industry, which was repeated by the Prime Minister, that the general rebate system introduced in the 1975 Budget forced primary producers to pay an extra $40m to $50m in income tax? If so, why has the Government in two budgets perpetuated, and in the 1977 Budget exacerbated, what the Government asserts to have been a grossly unfair anomaly? Finally, in assuming that the original allegation is true, I ask: Are we to believe that the Ministers in this Government took more than two years to discover what they assert to be a gross injustice?

Senator COTTON:
LP

-I do not respond to assumptions and presumptions as to what somebody is supposed to have said at some point in time at some place. I look to see what they have said. When I find what they have said I respond to it. That is what I will do in this case.

page 600

QUESTION

MEDICAL PROFESSION

Senator GIETZELT:

– I address my question to Senator Guilfoyle in her capacity as Minister for Social Security and also as Minister representing the Minister for Health. Does the Minister concede that in the current downturn in the economy the medical profession can properly be described as buoyant and prosperous? Is it not a fact that the Medibank scheme and the private health funds have contributed much to this prosperity? In the circumstances, has the Government given consideration to withdrawing the need for all specialist consultation by patients to be regularly referred by a general practitioner? Will the Minister concede that it would be a saving of public funds if referrals could be valid for a period of, say, 4 years, thus providing some relief to patients as well as medical benefits organisations?

Senator GUILFOYLE:
LP

– I will deal with the question as Minister representing the Minister for Health who has responsibility for Medibank and medical insurance. I undertake to draw to his attention the suggestion that has been made with regard to referral to specialists. I do not know whether consideration has been given to this in any way. I will certainly refer the question to the Minister and obtain his response.

page 600

QUESTION

DOSSIERS ON ANTI-URANIUM DEMONSTRATORS

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

-My question is directed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate and follows answers that he gave to me earlier and to my colleague Senator McLaren. Because the Minister has now denied that dossiers against anti-uranium demonstrators are being compiled -

Senator Withers:

– I have not; do not put words into my mouth.

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Well, let me ask: Does the Minister deny that dossiers against anti-uranium demonstrators are being compiled? If so, because he is not one who, we know, commonly reads newspaper articles, I inform him that the National Times this week stated:

The Prime Minister, Mr Fraser, was the source for last week’s stories saying that Commonwealth Police and security officers were preparing dossiers on anti-uranium demonstrators.

Mr Fraser held a long background discussion with two journalists, Michelle Grattan from the Age, and Laurie Power from Channel 10- on board his VIP plane returning from Port Moresby to Canberra.

The story, which first appeared on page 1 of last Wednesday’s Melbourne Age, said Commonwealth Police would prepare reports for Mr Fraser which would include details of the names and groups involved in the anti-uranium demonstrations.

Are Commonwealth Police preparing reports for Mr Fraser which include details of the names and groups of people involved in the antiuranium demonstrations?

Senator WITHERS:
LP

-I have no direct knowledge. I will seek the information.

page 601

QUESTION

JAPAN: IMPORTS OF AUSTRALIAN SUGAR

Senator SIBRAA:

-I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry: Are reports accurate which suggest that Japan is about to cut her imports of Australian sugar by 10 per cent? If such reports are accurate, what has prompted this move by the Japanese? What action is contemplated by the Australian Government in order to ensure that our sugar industry is not subjected to dislocation and hardship because of the loss of the export market?

Senator COTTON:
LP

-Like the honourable senator, I saw this matter referred to, I think a day ago, in a newspaper. I have not been able to get an accurate statement since then about whether it is true but I have asked for that information. The Government has been in very close consultation with both the Queensland Government and the Colonial Sugar Refining Co. Ltd, the marketing agent, about this problem. I think the Senate would know also that Mr Fraser has taken up this matter personally with the Prime Minister of Japan. The Government is concerned about the situation and is doing its best to have attention given to the matter which is one of considerable difficulty.

200-MILE OFF-SHORE FISHING ZONE

Senator MULVIHILL:

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry, although it has defence overtones. I ask: In view of the large number of civilians who will be needed when we acquire the 200-mile off-shore fishing zone, has the Government considered the utilisation of blimps rather than conventional aircraft for surveillance purposes? I ask this question in view of the argument that the operating cost of blimps is supposed to be much less than the cost of conventional aircraft.

Senator COTTON:

– I am happy to answer this question. I have not heard of blimps being used as a method of surveillance but it is a worthy idea. I will suggest it to the appropriate authorities because we will acquire an immense new area of resources which will be of great importance to us. I was working on this in Papua New Guinea last week and so far as I can tell the area that we will acquire is about the size of the Australian continental land mass. Movable fisheries are contained in that area but there are also resources on the sea bed. It is a matter of great importance. I take what the honourable senator said as a good suggestion and I will put it forward.

page 601

QUESTION

CITIZEN BAND RADIO

Senator ARCHER:

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications. The interference caused to television reception in many places through citizen band radio has now become so prevalent that some television stations have begun broadcasting instructions to viewers on how to combat the problem. Does the Minister agree that is should be the responsibility of the citizen band radio users? Will the Minister take up the matter with his colleague with a view to having the problem rectified by those responsible for causing it?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– In response to Senator Archer, I fully understand that the problem is irritating and disturbing to the viewers and listeners. I certainly will take up the matter with my colleague and ask him to give attention to it.

page 601

QUESTION

ABORIGINAL HOME OWNERSHIP

Senator CAVANAGH:

– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs: In view of the fact that the Aboriginal Loans Commission, which is the body which lends money to Aborigines for the purchase of homes, used its grant of $ 10m last year, why has its appropriation been reduced to $5m this year despite the numerous applications for loans which have been made to that Commission? Does this indicate the Government’s opposition to Aboriginal home ownership?

Senator GUILFOYLE:
LP

– I am sure that the assumption in the question that the Government is uninterested in Aboriginal home ownership cannot be sustained. The amounts that were provided in the Budget this year were those that it was felt could be expended for the purposes that had been defined. The amount that has been appropriated for the Aboriginal Loans Commission will assist a number of Aborigines to pursue home ownership.

Senator Cavanagh:

– But not as many as last year.

Senator GUILFOYLE:

-Expenditure on housing was almost doubled in last year’s Budget. I think recognition of that fact needs to be taken account of when we are looking at what can be usefully expended this year.

page 602

QUESTION

PARLIAMENT HOUSE: INSPECTION BY ARMED FORCES

The PRESIDENT:

– On Thursday, 25 August 1977, Senator Georges asked me a question concerning an alleged inspection of the precincts of Parliament House by members of the armed forces. I am informed that on Monday, 22 August, and on Tuesday, 23 August, parties of Army personnel from Lavarack Barracks in Queensland visited Parliament House as normal tourists and were shown through the public areas of the building by the parliamentary guides, as are all other tourists visiting the building. The visit was without my knowledge and without the prior knowledge of parliamentary officers. No special arrangements are normally made on behalf of touring parties of this nature and the normal practice was followed on these occasions.

Senator GEORGES:
Queensland

-I seek leave to make a short statement about this matter.

The PRESIDENT:

-Is leave granted?

Senator Wright:

– No.

The PRESIDENT:

– Leave is not granted.

page 602

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION (FURTHER PAYMENT) BILL 1977

Assent reported.

page 602

NORFOLK ISLAND ANNUAL REPORT

Senator WITHERS:
Western AustraliaMinister for Administrative Services · LP

– For the information of honourable senators, I present the Norfolk Island Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 1976.

page 602

PAPUA NEW GUINEA SUPERANNUATION BOARD

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

– Pursuant to regulation 8A. of the Papua New Guinea (Staffing Assistance) Superannuation Regulations made on 30 May 1977 under the Papua New Guinea (Staffing Assistance) Act 1973, I present the report by the Commissioner for Superannuation on the operations of the Papua New Guinea Superannuation Board during the year ended 30 June 1973.

page 602

STUDENT ASSISTANCE ACT

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesMinister for Education · LP

– Pursuant to section 35 of the Student Assistance Act 1973, 1 present the report on the operation of that Act in 1 976.

page 602

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesMinister for Education · LP

– For the information of honourable senators, I present the report of the Commonwealth Department of Education for 1976.

page 602

CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT CENTRE

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesMinister for Education · LP

– Pursuant to section 40 of the Curriculum Development Centre Act No. 41 of 1975, I present the annual report of the Curriculum Development Centre for the year ended 30 June 1976.

page 602

NATIONAL HEALTH AND MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNCIL

Senator GUILFOYLE:
LP

-(Victoria-Minister for Social Security)- Pursuant to section 9 of the Medical Research Endowment Act 1937 I present the report of the National Health and Medical Research Council on medical research projects, 1975.

page 602

DARWIN RECONSTRUCTION COMMISSION

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

– Pursuant to section 58 of the Darwin Reconstruction Commission Act 1975 I present the annual report of the Darwin Reconstruction Commission for the year ended 30 June 1976.

page 602

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Motion (by Senator Withers)- by leave- agreed to:

That leave of absence for one month be granted to Senator Bonner, Senator Donald Cameron, Senator Colston, Senator Davidson and Senator Young on account of absence overseas on parliamentary business.

page 602

QUESTION

BUSINESS OF THE SENATE

Estimates Committees

The PRESIDENT:

-Is it desired to postpone or rearrange the business?

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

– I move:

Senator RAE:
Tasmania

– I would just like briefly to refer to the reports which have been presented here today. I refer not to any one in particular but to the whole lot. The first on the list is a report for the year ended 30 June 1 976. The second is for the year ended 30 June 1 973. The third is for the year ended 30 June 1976-15 months ago. The next one is the same. The one after is the same. The following report is for the year ended 30 June 1975, 27 months since the relevant period. The last one again is for the year ended 30 June 1 976.I know that some Ministers have had some concern about the fact that it seems it is taking a long time for some of these reports to come out. As Chairman of the Finance and Government Operations Committee I can indicate also that that Committee has expressed its concern about the length of time it is taking some of these reports to come out. I simply ask the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Withers) whether he could cause some statement to be prepared in explanation as to why these reports have appeared today so that we can perhaps learn something more as to the cause of the delays in the presentation of these reports.

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

– I will respond to that comment briefly. I was a bit shattered myself when I saw that the first report I put down, which was for my own Department, was for the year ended 30 June 1976.I have sent a message to the staffof the Department to the effect that when the Estimates Committee meets, the Department had better have a good reason or there might be trouble in that Committee.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

The PRESIDENT:

– The sitting of the Senate is suspended until 10.15 p.m. unless otherwise determined to enable Estimates Committees A, B and C to meet. The Committees will meet at approximately 4 p.m. Estimates Committee A will meet in the Senate Chamber, Estimates Committee B in Senate Committee Room No. 1 and Estimates Committee C in Senate Committee Room No. 5. The bells will be rung for 3 minutes prior to the meeting of Estimates committees.

Sitting suspended from 3.52 to 10.15 p.m.

page 603

BROADCASTING STATIONS LICENCE FEES AMENDMENT BILL 1977

Bills received from the House of Representatives.

Suspension of Standing Orders

Motion (by Senator Carrick) agreed to:

That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent the questions with regard to the several stages for the passage through the Senate of the Bills being put in one motion at each stage and the consideration of such Bills together in Committee of the Whole.

Ordered that the Bills may be taken through all their stages without delay.

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

Second Reading

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesMinister for Education · LP

– I move:

Senator CARRICK:

-I seek leave to have my second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard.

The PRESIDENT:

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

The second reading speeches read as follows-

Broadcasting Stations Licence Fees Amendment Bill 1977

As announced in the Budget, licence fees payable by commercial broadcasters are to be increased by 20 per cent. This Bill gives effect to that decision. The Bill extends the range of the present scale upwards so that the impact is upon commercial broadcasters with gross earnings exceeding $4m per annum. The variation of the scale of fees in this manner means that the new scale of fees will affect only a very small number of commercial radio broadcasting stations. The effect on licensees is quite minimal, but the Government decided to retain parity between the scale of licence fees payable by both radio and television licensees. The new scale, effective from 1 September 1 977, is estimated to increase 1977-78 radio broadcasting station licence fee revenue to approximately $ 1 . 4m. I commend this Bill to the Senate.

Television Stations Licence Fees Amendment Bill 1977

As announced in the Budget, licence fees payable by commercial television licensees are to be increased by 20 per cent. This Bill gives effect to that decision. The Bill extends the range of the present scale upwards so that the impact is upon commercial licensees with gross earnings exceeding $4m per annum. The variation of the scale of fees in this manner means that in the main, only metropolitan commercial television station licensees with high gross earnings will be affected. The new scale, effective from 1 September 1977, is estimated to increase 1977-78 television station licence fee revenue by $1.7m to $9.3m. I commend this Bill to the Senate.

Postal and Telecommunications Commissions (Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill 1977

Prior to the establishment of the Postal and Telecommunications Commissions, it was agreed with unions and staff associations that officers of the then Postmaster-General’s Department should not suffer reduced promotional opportunities as a consequence of being allocated to the service of one or other of the commissions. The arrangement agreed to was that, for the five years after the establishment of the commissions, either commission should be able to promote to a position in its service an officer in the service of the other commission; and any officer in the service of either commission should be able to appeal against any promotion to a position in the service of either of the commissions.

The promotions appeal boards of the two commissions have acted on the basis that section 20 of the Postal and Telecommunications Commissions (Transitional Provisions) Act 1975 gives effect to the agreed arrangements. Recent legal advice is that the section is more limiting in application and denies the right of appeal in certain circumstances. The purpose of this Bill is to amend the Act to accord with the original intention and to validate action taken by the promotion appeal boards on appeals and promotions based on that intention. I commend the Bill to the Senate.

Debate (on motion by Senator Button) adjourned.

page 604

ADJOURNMENT

Tasmanian Labor Movement -Joint House Committee-Security in Parliament House- The Senate

Motion (by Senator Carrick) proposed:

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Senator HARRADINE:
Tasmania

– It is not often that I delay the Senate by speaking in the adjournment debate. Tonight, however, I want to raise a matter which is of vital importance to all people of my State, which is of significance to the people of Australia and which deserves to be brought to the attention of the Senate. In this very chamber on 1 1 November 1976 Senator 0 ‘Byrne launched an unprovoked, vicious, premeditated attack on Bob Watling, the Secretary of the Tasmanian Trades and Labour Council, and Peter Imlach, the Minutes Secretary of the Council, as well as against myself. I disregarded this attack as just part of his usual obsession. It has now emerged that Senator 0 ‘Byrne’s November attack, a copy of the words of which I hold in my hand, was part of a prearranged plan to undermine the responsible leadership of the TTLC and pave the way for a pro-communist takeover.

Tomorrow night these two dedicated unionists face expulsion from the Australian Labor Party on the basis of what Senator O ‘Byrne said here on that day. Actually, a letter of 4 February 1977 from the West Hobart branch requested the Labor Party’s rules committee to investigate Bob Watling and Peter Imlach on the basis of evidence ‘from documents tabled in the Australian Senate on 11 November 1976’. In point of fact, no documents were tabled in the Australian Senate on that day, other than those tabled by Ministers pursuant to statute, which said nothing about Peter Imlach or Bob Watling. But that is only one of the lesser lies upon which the charges should fail. Senator 0 ‘Byrne did, however, make statements in the Senate that day which were designed to cause and which indeed have caused a witch-hunt of Gestapo proportions against those two top Tasmanian trade union officials.

Whilst I did not consider at the time that a reply was called for, subsequent events have shown that Senator O ‘Byrne’s parliamentary attack now invites a series of parliamentary rejoinders by me so that honourable senators may be aware of salient political and industrial facts. In the first of these rejoinders it should be noted that Senator 0 ‘Byrne launched his attack after close consultation and collaboration with the extreme Left faction of the ALP. I use that term advisedly. In Launceston the faction includes Tim Thorne and Jim Simmonds, to name just two. I will deal with others in that faction from time to time later.

Tim Thorne is one of Senator O ‘Byrne’s codelegates on the ALP Federal Conference. Jim

Simmonds is Deputy Chairman of the Bass Electorate Conference and a member of the ALP’s foreign affairs committee. Both men consistently aid and espouse the cause and policies of the Communist Party of Australia. In addition, Thorne has paid money into the funds of the Communist Party of Australia, which payment has been acknowledged by the Communist Party’s Tribune. Simmonds as late as December 1976 attended an exclusive gathering of Communist Party of Australia operatives at Orford in Tasmania. This is the very man who, with his hard Left supporters on the rules committee, relentlessly pursued the witch-hunts against Bob Watling and Peter Imlach. This man, who is in breach of the ALP’s rules for aiding and espousing the cause of the Communist Party of Australia, has just been made Chairman of the rules committee which is prosecuting Bob Watling and Peter Imlach. What a travesty and what a mockery of justice that is.

Seven members of the rules committee laid the charges. Five of them, including Simmonds, are of the hard Left. Who are they? Allan Newitt, the Deputy Chairman of the Wilmot Electorate Council of the ALP, who was not so long ago a well known member of the Communist Party, is one of them. Another is Norm Hanscombe who was imported into Tasmania last year and appointed Secretary of the Miscellaneous Workers Union without a rank and file ballot. He is a member of the ALP’s foreign affairs and defence committee. How they like to get onto that committee. That is the same Norman Hanscombe as the one who assisted the private inquiry agents to gather what Gough Whitlam described as perjured evidence against me in 1971.

Then there are J. Coates and D. Llewellyn, both of whom have track records of consistent support for the Socialist Left. Senator O ‘Byrne would also know that when Communist Party guru Derek Roebuck convened the inaugural meeting of the Australian-Democratic People’s Republic of Korea- that is to say communist North Korea- Society, Senator 0 ‘Byrne became its Patron and J. Coates became its Vice-Patron. Having secretly assisted in this dirty work, J. Coates and D. Llewellyn have now left the rules committee for fear of the electoral fall-out. Well they might, because both are ALP candidates for the next House of Representatives election.

This rules committee, rejecting the call by ALP President Hawke in Launceston on 19 February this year for unity to throw out the Federal Government and ‘not our colleagues within the movement’ and defying the plea made by Premier Neilson to drop the charges, pressed on secretly obtaining what they could from a collection of informers whose credibility is zero. Upon whom did they rely? On J. P. Forester, a man charged and found guilty on 24 June 1977 of offences against rules relating to the funds of the Union, fined the maximum amount under the rules and suspended from union membership. They relied on T. Keogh, who describes himself in his statutory declaration against the two charged men as ‘a retired trade union official’. Retired my foot! T. Keogh was dismissed from his union position. He tried to proposition organisers and other staff of the union to claim moneys on their expense account over and above those expenses legitimately incurred by them. In other words, he sought to defraud the union to build up the slush fund to pay the Egan mercenaries who are currently engaged in unsuccessful sorties into other unions and States. I do not hear many people coming to the support of the Egan mercenaries at this point in time, particularly as they realise just what Egan is about and just what he has done in New South Walesamalgamating the Australian Workers Union, which incorporated the Shop Assistants Union, with the Building Workers Industrial Union which is controlled by the Socialist Left.

Senator Cavanagh:

– What a crime!

Senator HARRADINE:

– Indeed, a terrible thing, done behind closed doors without consultation in any shape or form with the rank and file. Des Lavey was the next person persuaded to support Senator O ‘Byrne’s attack. Having given evidence which, so far as I am concerned, is false, Des Lavey realised as much and sought, by letter dated 1 June, to backtrack, stating that whilst the rules committee could use his evidence, with reservations, he does ‘not wish to become involved further in the current proceedings’. What can be said of him? His foolishness is surpassed only by his ingratitude. And for what price? V/as it to have his name not mentioned in this Senate by Senator O ‘Byrne as belonging to an organisation proscribed by the ALP, as alleged in the original Forrester document which Senator O ‘Byrne read on 11 November 1976? A very good friend of mine in the Labor Party gave me a copy of the Forrester document from which Senator O ‘Byrne made his wild allegations in the Senate.

Senator O’Byrne:

-You have been flushed out for the traitor you are.

Senator HARRADINE:

– I hold in my hand a copy -

Senator O’Byrne:

-You lied for years and you have been flushed out.

Senator HARRADINE:

- Senator O’Byrne does not want to hear this, I am sure. But just listen to it. A very good friend of mine in the Labor Party gave me a copy of the Forrester document from which Senator O’Byrne made his wild allegations in this Senate. I also hold in my hand a copy of the Forrester document which Senator O’Byrne gave to the rules committee. Incidentally it is identical but with the name of the chief witness inked out and the writing ‘when thieves fallout’.

Senator O’Byrne:

-I wrote that in there.

Senator HARRADINE:

– Yes, you wrote that in, Senator O’Byrne. You describe the supporters of the allegations against Bob Watling and Peter Imlach as ‘thieves’. I am glad you admit it. Who am I to take issue with you on that?

Finally we come to the disciplinary tribunal which will hear the charges tomorrow night. Whom does the tribunal consist of? It consists of R. D. Mainwaring J. Benson and Ms G. Blain. Ms Blain and J. Benson are on record as consistently supporting and voting with the Socialist Left at ALP conferences. R. Mainwaring is in the same boat. His claim to fame is that he is President of the Building Workers Industrial Union and of course, President of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society- an organisation which has close links with the KGB. The axes are indeed sharpened. The decision of the tribunal tomorrow night is entirely predictable. Little wonder that the TTLC secretary, Bob Watling, has called for an unbiased public inquiry into the whole of this unseemly episode. Is it any wonder that Bert Lacey, whom all honourable senators will know as a former senator in this place, a man who has served the trade union movement and the Labor Party with distinction, dedication and selfsacrifice for more than 50 years, was moved to come to that meeting last night in support of Watling and Imlach to make a speech full of courage and based on a logical understanding of Labor tradition. His speech, made to 160 representatives of 29 unions in Hobart last night, called on Bob Watling to boycott the kangaroo court tomorrow night, for the reasons to be sent in writing and for a firm stand to be taken against the pro-communist takeover bid. That meeting went on to make two declarations unanimously. It declared:

That the underhanded methods used to bring alleged charges against TTLC Secretary Bob Watling and Peter Imlach, the denial to them of their rights and adequate notice, the breaches of ALP rules which have been perpetrated by the Rules Committee and the tribunal are so fundamentally opposed to natural justice and the good name of the Party as to require the firmest challenge.

Because of the association and voting record of members of the Disciplinary Tribunal with those on the Rules Committee who instigated the charges, that tribunal is incapable of objective and fair judgment and is properly termed a kangaroo court’, whose decision is totally predictable.

Such tribunal derives its strength only from the ease with which the accused can be entangled in its fraudulent processes.

We therefore call upon Bob Watling, particularly in view of the absence of Peter Imlach, to consider whether his appearance before such a tribunal would only aid the kangaroo court, bring discredit on the Labor Party which is committed tO justice and fair play.

Formal advice tendered by senior counsel asserts that a hearing on 7th September -

Which is tomorrow- by the tribunal would be unconstitutional and invalid and we recommend to TTLC Secretary Watling that he boycotts the kangaroo court.

The meeting also supported the call made by Bob Watling on Friday last for an unbiased public inquiry into the whole of the unseemly episode. The second resolution I think ought to be detailed to the Senate. Honourable senators should bear in mind that this attack arose from the attack made by Senator O’Byrne on 11 November last. This is the response of the members of the organisation:

This meeting or representatives of 29 Unions declares that if the attacks on Bob Watling and Peter Imlach are allowed to succeed the result will lead to the destruction of the Tasmanian Labor Government and Labor’s chance in the forthcoming Federal Election and will pave the way for a procommunist takeover of the TTLC.

If some honourable senators on this side have an interest in a pro-communist takeover of the trade union movement they at least should heed the other part of that resolution declaring that it those two top officials are axed it will lead to the destruction of the Labor Government in Tasmania and Labor’s chances in the next Federal election. The resolution went on:

No genuine unionist or person interested in the Labor Movement can stand by and allow this to occur. We declare that the organised Trade Union Movement is prepared to stand by Bob Watling and Peter Imlach and to defend itself against the persistent attacks launched by the extreme left aided and abetted by informers.

It finally made this call to members of the Parliamentary Labor Party:

Members of the Parliamentary Labor Party are called upon to join with the responsible members of the Trade Union Movement in repelling these attacks.

The challenge is there. How many will take it up?

Senator O’BYRNE:
Tasmania

– I suppose one can almost call this a continuation of a saga that has been running between Senator Harradine and the Labor Party in Tasmania.

Senator Walters:

– The Communist Party.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– No. The Labor Party.

Senator Walters:

– And the Communist Party.

Senator O’BYRNE:

-I disregard that remark. It is unworthy of the honourable senator and she knows it is untrue. However, Senator Harradine has seen fit to continue this farrago of smears, innuendoes and lies that he has perpetrated on the Tasmanian Labor Party since Bert Lacey first brought him in under false pretences to the Clerks Union and to the Lutana Branch in Tasmania. He was flushed out by a member of the Federal Executive who knew him to be a member of the National Civic Council in South Australia.

Senator Cavanagh:

– The DLP.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– Yes, a member of the Democratic Labor Party in South Australia. But not only that, Brian Harradine over the years has been known under several aliases in Tasmania.

Senator Sir Magnus Cormack:

– I rise to a point of order. I suggest that the honourable senator address another honourable senator by his proper title.

The PRESIDENT:

- Senator Harradine ‘s correct title should be used.

Senator O’BYRNE:

-I ask Hansard to make the necessary adjustment.

Senator Webster:

– You had better apologise.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– How stupid can you be. Let me run quickly over what has happened. Senator Harradine has been known by many aliases over the years. He has kept this anticommunist thing going in the Tasmanian Labor Party for such a long time that he has eventually been flushed out. Everybody knows now that he has been an imposter in the Tasmanian scene for those years. It was because of a statement made by one of his own colleagues- I have it here- and in reply to an attack that Senator Harradine made on a colleague of mine, a fellow unionist and a member of the Miscellaneous Workers Union, that I came into the debate on 11 November 1976. Over the years Senator Harradine has found this situation helpful to him. He has been able to bring the dissident groups in parts of the trade union movement against the Labor Party, against their traditional political voice. He has been a white amer and a subversive influence in the Party all these years. Now not only has he been expelled from the Party but also some of his stooges he carefully trained in Tasmania, including the two people he named earlier, Watling and Imlach, have been flushed out. I would like to read the statement and put it on record again for the enlightenment of honourable senators who were not present earlier. After all, Senator Harradine provoked this statement. I remember Senator Baume, who was hurt by this statement, saying: ‘You are a plagiarist. You are reading that speech into the Hansard’. I said at the time: ‘Why should I not put it in accurately?’. I put it in accurately. This is what is hurting Senator Harradine. His friend was Mr J. P. Forrester, who was Branch Secretary of the Federated Clerks Union of Australia, Central and Southern Queensland Branch. The letter was written to the Branch Council. This is one of Senator Harradine ‘s own colleagues in his union.

Senator Harradine:

– He is not the secretary of the union at all. He was defeated in a rank and file ballot.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– He was secretary of the union when he wrote this report about Senator Harradine and when he explained to the people in Tasmania recently that members of the National Civic Council who lived in Tasmania were playing such a valuable role where they could train young people to go into other political parties such as the Liberal Party, the Country Party and the Labor Party. Senator Sheil, who is trying to interject, is so South African that he would not know who is doing what, with which and to whom. In view of his television appearance he should not shake his head at me or I will hear the pea rattle. This is what Mr Forrester had to say:

I have been surprised over the last three years to read of the Harradine situation in the Tasmanian ALP and the protestations made on his behalf by a number of prominent personalities. As I am not a member of the Labor Party and have not been for some five years, I have always felt Mr Harradine ‘s relations with that party were the business of the ALP and Harradine himself.

For what it is worth, I have always felt that the ALP was a little restrictive in rejecting for membership people of various independent and extremist groups and tended to overly limit its capacity to have an exchange of views within the party confines. I personally feel the ALP was a little silly expelling Mr Harradine for being a member of the National Civic Council.

He is surely not the only member of the National Civic Council in the ALP and some former members who are now quite prominent were in the National Civic Council as they climbed their way to their present pre-eminence.

I will give him his full title now:

What I find surprising though is these wide ranging denials of Mr Harradine ‘s membership. As long back as I can remember, Brian Harradine has of course been a member of the National Civic Council, and a late as the Australia Day weekend in January 1975, he was still a member and in fact, quite a prominent one.

I was one of a number of other union officials who sat with him in Melbourne at Belloc House at Sakville Street, Kew at a national trade union meeting of the National Civic Council. These meetings occur each year at that time and this was not the first occasion on which Mr Harradine and I had been at these meetings.

Mr President, I am only glorifying this situaton in Tasmania by continuing to expose this man. These two people, Watling and Imlach, want to be expelled from the ALP so that they can form a group with him for the next Senate election campaign. He finds that he can get some cheap publicity from Downey and the Examiner which splashes his propaganda and smears in headlines. It exposes what sort of a character this man is. He would stoop to anything to get publicity.

Senator Harradine:

– You just do not understand the trade union movement.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– I understand what a parasite the honourable senator has been in the trade union movement over all the years he has been in Tasmania.

The PRESIDENT:

- Senator O’Byrne, please do not use unparliamentary language.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– It is difficult to use proper language to describe the honourable senator. I will contine to quote what was said, amongst other things, just to make this point:

I have always had a certain sympathy for Brian Harradine and other National Civic Council members, such as Paul Houlihan, Ken Bennett, Bob Watling, Peter Imlach -

I will not name the others. The point is that we are entitled to have our own rules and to run our own business. This man wants to come to this Parliament and try to tell the Labor Party in Tasmania how to run its business. We have a rule that forbids any member of the Labor Party from being a member of the National Civic Council. It is as plain as that. If honourable senators opposite had any brains at all they would introduce the same rule into their party rules. If the NCC gets the chance to undermine the parties of honourable senators opposite, it will take them over as it wishes to do to the Labor Party in Tasmania. I am telling honourable senators opposite that this is the case. I have had a lot more experience of the NCC than they have. I have had ten years of this and I know exactly what its tactics are. This is the final clear-out of this influence. The NCC has carefully undermined and penetrated the Labor Party over the years, under the influence of Senator Harradine and his cohorts.

At the moment we have a situation in which there is no shadow of doubt that Senator Harradine has been a member of the National Civic Council during all these years that he has lied to the Labor Party by saying that he was not a member of the Council.

Senator McAuliffe:

– He has said so on the program This Day Tonight in Hobart on 18 February. He has not denied it.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– I will be quite pleased if the Tasmanian Press publishes what I have said. I will say no more. It helps Senator Harradine to get publicity that he does not really deserve. He gets it nevertheless because he is as good a man as any in Tasmania to act as the devil’s advocate to stir up troubles against the Labor Party. This is his mission. He has this fanaticism, this obsession and this complete paranoia about reds under the bed. Mr President, he would make you sick to see how it affects him. It makes a lot of people sick. When he directs his efforts to you, Senator Archer, you will find yourself on the skids. You will be underneath the arches.

Senator Messner:

– He has got you bluffed.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– The honourable senator has a very poor idea of what bluffing is. He has never bluffed me. I have known his fingerprints all the years and those of his colleagues. I wrote in my own hand on this document a reference to thieves falling out. This is exactly what has happened. These people have been conspirators. They have been termites on the political body. They have now been found out. We have isolated them and we have found also that Senator Harradine has lined up these two people. He has several of them lined up. But we know about Bennett. He has been a collector of funds for Santamaria who has his session broadcast over the radio. He has also given an address on Vermont Road. Senator Harradine stays with Bennett. Yet all the time he has the audacity and the sheer impudence to come into the Labor Party conferences and say: ‘I am not a member of the DLP; I am not a member of the NCC. We know that he is. He smells like one; he looks like one. He quacks like one. He waddles like one. If you waddle like one and you quack like one, you must be one.

Senator Webster:

– That is funny.

Senator O’BYRNE:

-So is the honourable senator. He would add to the humour.

Senator Chaney:

-How do you spell Santamaria’? I was just making notes.

Senator O’BYRNE:

– It is spelt ‘NCC. They will pull the Chaney on you one of these days, old boy. This is much too serious a subject to joke about. I will just say this: I reject the charges that Senator Harradine has made as extravagant. Of course, he has his own problems. He has to live with them. ButI am pleased to know that after 10 long years we are about to get rid of the NCC influence by the rules of the party. We will do this, in the same way as we got rid of Senator Harradine despite all the difficulties we had. We are now able to get rid of the last two such people from our Party. They can do what they like in the trade union movement. It has nothing to do with us. This episode represents the pulling down of the curtain on one of the worst episodes in the almost 100 years history of the Labor Party. The fact is that we have lasted 100 years. We have seen such people come and we have seen them go. They have been excrescences on the body of our Party. We will be glad to see the last of them.

Senator HARRADINE:
Tasmania

– Mr President, pursuant to Standing Order 364I move:

Senator Cavanagh:

– I suggest that the honourable senator should seek leave to move the motion.

The PRESIDENT:

– No, the honourable senator requires a seconder for the motion.

Senator Walters:

– I second the motion.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senator CAVANAGH:
South Australia

– I do not want to glorify what Senator Harradine has said by making a long address on this subject. I just say that there are a few things that need straightening out. It appeared in the closing stages of Senator O ‘Byrne’s address that we could be treating the matter as a joke. However, this is possibly one of the most serious things that has happened in recent times. It is serious that a senator will degrade himself by using the privileges of a coward’s castle to slander men no matter what truth there may be in the question. He came into the Senate to slander men knowing that they have no redress and can do nothing to him. The honourable senator has sunk to a very low level to take on such a job and carry it out in this Parliament. This is what has been done tonight. I dare Senator Harradine to repeat outside the Parliament the accusations he made against any of these men.

My main concern in speaking is to rebutt the suggestion that the dedicated Labor personality who we all knew, loved and respected- I am referring to Bert Lacey- went along to a meeting for the purpose of persuading two renegades to defy the authority of the Labor Party and not go to a particular meeting. The fact is that he went along to the meeting. I can assure honourable senators that, knowing Bert Lacey, he never ratted or allowed National Civic Council members to remain in the party. He is above that. I think an apology is owed to Bert Lacey for what it is suggested that he did. I should like to refer to the cases of Forrester and Egan, who are mainly in contention. Those two men were involved in a disputation which went to court. I believe that Forrester was fined for breaches of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act when he forged documents and acted improperly in the conduct of elections for the purpose of getting NCC members elected to the Miscellaneous Workers Union in Victoria. That was the meeting of the NCC which Senator Harradine attended but which he denies he attended.

The Labor Party has a rule that it has no place for NCC members. I am hopeful, if these men are NCC members, that they will be expelled from the party and that they will be expelled from every working class tribunal. Whatever may be the faults of the Communist Party, members of an organisation or trade union- an organisation representing working class peoplewill vote for those who give them some assistance rather than for those who are directly opposed to their interests. They would support a pro-communist movement rather than NCC members. These two men have been charged with belonging to an organisation, membership of which automatically puts them outside the Labor Party. They will be tried tomorrow night. Senator Harradine has come out with these public accusations tonight for the purpose of prejudicing the trial.

Senator Harradine has told us that they have obtained counsel’s opinion that the hearing would be unconstitutional and invalid and that they have nothing to worry about. But Senator Harradine wants them expelled tomorrow. He has made slanderous accusations- many of them false- about those who will hear the case. He has tried to put those people who will judge the case offside with the accused whose cases they will be hearing tomorrow night. He has done this for the sole purpose of ensuring that the persons hearing this case will have no sympathy with the accused. It is part of the whole scheme to ensure the expulsion of these members so that they will become martyrs at the expense of the Tasmanian Labor Party. I assure the honourable senator that I knew the facts as Senator O ‘Byrne recited them in relation to 1 1 November.

Senator Archer:

– They are opinions.

Senator CAVANAGH:

– I happen to know them as fact because I am aware of* the particular incidents. It is surprising how many events take place on 1 1 November. That is Armistice Day, so I suppose it is right that things should happen on that day. Let us hope that we can get above this type of slandering. We should not slander men under the protection of this Parliament for the advancement of our own political ideology when we are not prepared to make the same statement outside this Parliament.

Senator McLAREN:
South Australia

- Mr President, it is my desire to raise a matter which concerns you as Presiding Officer. Before I do that I should like to say that it is quite obvious who Senator Harradine ‘s friends are in this place. Since he has been here he has associated on every occasion with honourable senators opposite who belong to the Liberal and National Country parties. He dines with them, he drinks with them and daily he is in and out of the offices of some prominent honourable senators opposite. There is no doubt where his sympathies lie. There is no doubt that honourable senators opposite are using him on every occasion they can to try to belittle the Labor Party. We saw a perfect illustration of that here tonight when we saw Senator Walters and Senator Archer come to Senator Harradine ‘s defence. Of course, we have known for a long time that Senator Harradine has never been a loyal member of the Labor Party. As Senator O’Byrne has pointed out, Senator Harradine has been a white anter. We have woken up to him and that is what hurts him. He mentioned tonight that some friend he had in the Labor Party told him something. My interjection was that he does not have a friend in the Labor Party and he never has had one, because of his action in trying to white ant the Labor Party.

The matter to which I wish to draw your attention tonight is an article which appeared in the Sydney Daily Mirror on 1 September 1977. It is headed ‘Tighter security plan for House’. I will read it to the Senate because although I am a member of the Joint House Committee I am not aware that what this report purports has been carried out. It is an article written by Brad Lawson in Canberra. It states:

Plans have been made to tighten security at Parliament House in Canberra.

The present security measures have been described as almost non-existent.

Attendants have no system for carrying out security checks on visitors.

A report prepared by the joint house committee discussed bag inspections by attendants, metal detector tests and identification badges to be worn by all employees at Parliament House.

It compared the Canberra situation with the tighter security found at Capitol Hill in Washington and the House of Commons in London.

Under the heading ‘ Review ‘ it states:

The report was described as part of a continuing review of security and not urgent.

It will be submitted to the Speaker, Mr Snedden, and the president of the Senate, Senator Lucks.

They are expected to consider the measures next week.

Senator McAuliffe:

– It is Senator Laucke.

Senator McLAREN:

– I am quoting the article, Senator McAuliffe, and it says ‘Senator Lucks’. I have not met Senator Lucks, but that is what the article states. Having been a member of the Joint House Committee for some time, I am interested in a verification of this story because I am not aware of any in-depth inquiry that has been carried out. I am not aware, as a member of that Joint House Committee, of any report which is to be considered by you, Mr President, or by Mr Speaker this week. I would be pleased to hear from you tomorrow, after you have examined this article, on what has been carried out in this in-depth investigation without the knowledge of some of the members of the Joint House Committee. I may have something further to say when you, Mr President, have replied to my remarks on that report.

The PRESIDENT:

– I point out to the honourable senator that I have not seen the article to which he refers. I will examine it and report to the Senate.

Senator Harradine:

– I rise to a point of order. A few minutes ago I moved that pursuant to Standing Order 364 a document quoted from by Senator O’Byrne be tabled. When I heard Senator O’Byrne quoting I saw that he had a document which contained about 10 pages. I observed Senator O’Byrne take off the first page and give it to the attendant. I understand that only the first page of the document has been tabled.

Senator O’Byrne:

– I tabled the document from which I quoted. Everything that I quoted is in the document that I tabled.

Senator Baume:

– I do not know from which document Senator O’Byrne was quoting but I can confirm what Senator Harradine said. Senator O’Byrne took a page and tore it off.

Senator Primmer:

– You said you did not know.

Senator Baume:

– I do not know whether that was the document from which Senator O’Byrne was quoting, but I saw him tear the page off and I saw him then hand that page to the attendant. I do not dispute what Senator O’Byrne says if he claims that that was all that he quoted from. The fact remains that Senator Harradine is correct. Senator O’Byrne in fact tore the page off some other pages and handed a single page to the attendant. Then, a few minutes later and separately he handed to the attendant some pages on blue paper. The first page he handed in was one page torn from several pages.

Senator McLaren:

– I should like to speak to the same point of order. From where I sit I was able to witness that Senator O’Byrne quoted only from the page that he tabled. That was the page on top of the sheaf of papers that he held in his hand. I will verify the words uttered by Senator O’Byrne that he tabled the document from which he quoted. It ill becomes the Minister for Science (Senator Webster) to say- when attempting to interject- that Senator O’Byrne would stoop to such low tactics and not table the complete document from which he quoted. I verify that Senator O’Byrne tabled the exact document from which he quoted. He quoted from one page only.

Senator Harradine:

– I seek your ruling, Mr President. I will be guided by your ruling and I will accept it, of course. When an honourable senator moves, pursuant to Standing Order 364, for the tabling of a document from which another honourable senator is quoting, does that mean that in future an honourable senator needs only to tear out the page from which he or she is 3 uoting and will not have to table the whole ocument?

Senator Cavanagh:

– I just want to raise two points. I strongly object to an honourable senator speaking twice on the same point of order. That is the first thing. Senator Harradine seems to have the right to speak whenever he likes. Secondly, I think the pertinent question now is: What is a document? I do not think there is any disagreement that Senator O’Byrne has tabled the page from which he quoted. I think there is agreement that the page was clipped to other pages and he took the page from which he quoted off those other pages and tabled it. But the question is: Is everything a senator holds in his hand the document?

Senator Webster:

– Yes, of course it is.

Senator Cavanagh:

– Well, I do not know, I am asking Mr President. I expect a reasonable opinion from him. I think that is the question to be decided. I mentioned this because I recall that on one occasion I challenged Senator Wood about the tabling of a document. I said that he had to produce the document from which he had been quoting. My point was challenged by Senator Wright and that challenge was upheld.

Senator Withers:

– On the point of order, if I may I will take up basically the same question that Senator Cavanagh has posed because I think it is important. I have always understood the practice in this place to be that if one brings in a file and quotes from it the whole file is the document and one tables the lot. One has never been able just to take out of the file a piece of paper.

Senator McAuliffe:

- Senator Townley did.

Senator Withers:

– Wait a minute. That is why I understood that if one was going to quote from a file the sensible practice was that one brought in photostats of the parts one was going to quote from, not the whole file in case someone asked that it be tabled. In fact, I recall that a Minister in a previous government- the McMahon Government or the Gorton Government- had to table a whole file because he quoted from part of it. The question is: When is a file not a file? What is a file? It is a collection of papers. I do not know whether it has to be a collection of papers of the same sort. Perhaps a file can be a miscellany of papers. Senator O’Byrne evidently had the quoted matter on a page which was stapled, attached, pinned- I do not know which- to some other papers. I am not disputing his word that he has tabled the only page from which he quoted within that collection of papers he had but, Mr President, I am quite relaxed about whichever way you rule. Your ruling is going to be of great importance to the future practice of the Senate. I agree with Senator Cavanagh that the question is: When is a document not a document? I go further and ask: When is a file not a file? It has been alleged that in previous times some honourable senators have just taken out a particular part of a file.

Senator Georges:

– It depends on the resolution, does it not?

Senator Withers:

– No.

Senator Georges:

– It depends on what is moved.

Senator Withers:

– No. It is the document from which an honourable senator has quoted. If I come in here with a heap of papers -

Senator Georges:

– I might move accordingly that the file be tabled.

Senator Withers:

– No, you cannot because the Standing Orders say that the document from which an honourable senator has quoted can be tabled. You cannot move other than what the Standing Orders provide. As I recall the Standing Order- I am talking from memory- it says that an honourable senator may move that a document from which an honourable senator has quoted be tabled.

Senator Cavanagh:

– I think Senator O’Byrne may have done that.

Senator Withers:

– I am prepared to admit that he may well have done that but if you, Mr President, rule that what Senator O’Byrne did is correct and proper- I will not get excited if you do rule that way-it will mean that what I have understood to be the previous practice will not be the practice in future. That is that honourable senators can come in here with a sheaf of papers, attached or put loosely together, and they do not have to table the whole bundle- if I may use that expression- instead of the document, the file or whatever it may be. Therefore, I suggest, Mr President, you take the point of order of board and rule tomorrow. It is a matter of great importance. I do not know whether it is within your province to rule at a later hour but I think that it is a matter of vast importance to Senate practice. It is something on which we all ought to be quite certain in the future.

The PRESIDENT:

– Honourable senators, I will accept that suggestion and give a ruling. This matter could well set a precedent and a practice. I would like to give the matter consideration. I will announce my determination tomorrow.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 11.11 p.m.

page 613

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

The following answers to questions were circulated:

Aborigines: Employment and Unemployment (Question No. 20)

Senator Colston:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 8 March 1977:

  1. 1 ) What is the current number of persons in the work force on each Aboriginal reserve in Queensland.
  2. How many persons on each Aboriginal reserve in Queensland are currently in full employment.
  3. How many persons on each Aboriginal reserve in Queensland are in receipt of unemployment benefit.
Senator Durack:
LP

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

  1. The size of the labour force on each reserve in Queensland is not known. The honourable senator is referred to the reply to his question No. 564.
  2. ) On the question of employment on Aboriginal reserves in Queensland the honourable senator is referred to the Annual Report ( 1976) of the Queensland State Department of Aboriginal and Islanders Advancement, pages 13 to 16 and page 35.
  3. It is not known how many persons on each Aboriginal reserve are in receipt of unemployment benefit since the Department of Social Security does not record separate statistics for Aboriginals. However, a special survey carried out by the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations, of Aboriginals registered as unemployed, indicated that at the end of June 1976 for the whole of the State, including reserves, there were 2,491 Aboriginals registered as unemployed, of whom 2,34 1 (or 94 per cent) were in receipt of unemployment benefit.

Overseas Investment in Australia (Question No. 228)

Senator Wriedt:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 10 March 1977:

  1. How many applications were received by the Australian Treasury for approval for overseas investments to be made in Australia since 29 November 1976.
  2. What is the total value of applications received since 29 November 1976.

  3. From which countries, in which the applicant companies or persons are domiciled or registered, have the applications been received and what is the total value of applications from companies or persons domiciled or registered in:

    1. the United States of America, (b) the European Economic Community, (c) Japan, (d) Hong Kong, and (e) all other countries.
  4. In what category of industry have the applicants sought to invest the funds.
  5. How many applications have been approved, what is the total value of approvals, how many applications have been rejected and what it the total value.
Senator Cotton:
LP

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

  1. During the period 29 November 1976 to 31 March 1977, 407 applications were received.
  2. Information is not available in respect of cases withdrawn before a decision was given, cases for which no action was available under the policy, or cases still to be determined. Excluding these cases, there were 321 proposals for which information is available. The value involved in these proposals was as follows:
  1. In respect of the 321 cases lodged in the period 29 November 1976 to 31 March 1977 and for which decisions have been given, the information sought is as follows:
  1. A breakdown into the category of industries for the 32 1 cases referred to in (2) above is as follows:
  1. Of the 321 applications referred to in part (2), 319 have been approved involving $155 million by way of consideration for shares and assets and $126 million by way of new investment. Two proposals have been rejected involving $4.4 million by way of consideration for shares and assets and $ 120,000 by way of indicated new investment.

Cocos (Keeling) Islands (Question No. 482)

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Administrative Services, upon notice, on 20 April 1977:

  1. 1 ) What was the total value in Australian dollars of copra exports from the Cocos (Keeling) Islands in the financial year ending 30 June 1976.
  2. What was the total amount of money in Australian dollars, paid into the Cocos Community Fund in the year ending 31 December 1976.
  3. What developments were made to ensure free and compulsory education for children up to the age of fifteen years on the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, in the year ending 3 1 December 1976.
  4. What efforts has the Australian Government made to ensure working conditions, including wages of workers on Cocos (Keeling) Islands, accord with the International Labour Organisation Conventions that Australia has ratified, in the year ending 3 1 December 1976.
  5. What efforts has the Australian Government made to ensure that the tax-free status of Cocos (Keeling) Islands is not being abused by Australian and other companies in order to avoid taxation, in the year ending 31 December 1976.
  6. What developments were made in the year ending 3 1 December 1976 to affect the phasing out of the use of plastic tokens as currency on Home Island in the Cocos (Keeling) Islands.
  7. 7 ) What developments were made in the year ending 3 1 December 1976 to enable Cocos (Keeling) Islanders easier access to Australia for temporary or permanent residential purposes.
  8. Why has the Annual Report on Cocos (Keeling) Islands for the year 1976 not yet been published.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) Information on the value of copra exports from Cocos (Keeling) Islands for the year ended 30 June 1976 is not available. However, during that year 423 tonnes of copra were exported from Cocos.
  2. $15,631.
  3. 3 ) and ( 4 ) These matters are still under consideration.
  4. Legislation designed to prevent the use of Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Norfolk Island and Christmas Island to avoid income tax, was enacted in 1973. Companies which are not Territory Companies, for example Australian resident companies, are not entitled to taxation benefits available to Territory Companies incorporated in Cocos and in all senses owned, controlled and managed by individuals who are genuine Island residents. No additional companies were incorporated and registered in Cocos during the year ended 31 December 1976. The matter of company registration is being watched closely by the Government.

Because of the secrecy provisions of the income tax law, action taken by the Australian Taxation Office in relation to any particular company cannot be divulged. Speaking generally, that Office does maintain a watch over developments and did so during the year mentioned.

  1. See my response of 20 April 1977 to the honourable senator’s question upon notice of 9 March 1977.
  2. There were no changes in conditions of entry of nonAustralian Cocos (Keeling) Islanders for temporary or permanent residence.
  3. The Annual Report in respect of the period 1.1.76 to 31.12.76 was tabled by me on 16.8.77. This was the first opportunity following completion of the Report.

State Projects Funded by Commonwealth (Question No. 514)

Senator Wriedt:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 20 April 1977:

  1. 1 ) What projects funded by the Commonwealth, either directly or through State Government, Local Government or voluntary bodies, administered by the Minister’s Department or any statutory authorities under his control, are being carried out in each Federal electorate.
  2. Will a brass plaque be erected in respect of each project; if so, what will be the cost of the plaque.
Senator Durack:
LP

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

I refer the honourable senator to the Prime Minister’s answer to his Question on Notice No. S 1 3 (Senate Hansard of 26 May 1977, page 1519).

Mount Larcom Mining Project (Question No. 650)

Senator Keeffe:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Resources, upon notice, on 27 April 1 977 :

  1. 1 ) Is the Minister aware of the controversy over the Mt Larcom mining project in Central Queensland.
  2. Is foreign finance involved in this project; if so, how much and from what country.
  3. Has the Australian mining company, Darra Exploration Pty Ltd involved in this project, notified the Australian Government of the need for, and the level of foreign equity in the project.
  4. How does this foreign level in the Mt Larcom project meet the Federal Government’s regulations on foreign ownership.
  5. If there is a substantial level of foreign money involved in this project, will the Government attempt to curtail the project.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

I have nothing to add to the information supplied bv the Minister representing the Treasurer in his answer to Question No. 649, see Senate Weekly Hansard No. 11, 1977, pages 2092-2093.

European Economic Community Energy Minister (Question No. 735)

Senator Wriedt:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Overseas Trade, upon notice, on 28 April 1977:

  1. Did the Australian Broadcasting Commission program ‘AM’on 22 April 1977, correctly report the Minister for Overseas Trade as meeting with the European Economic Community Energy Minister on 2 1 April 1977.
  2. Was it correct that the representative of the Community expressed unilaterally an interest in negotiating an agreement between it and Australia for the purchase of uranium.
  3. Did the Community’s Commissioner indicate on what terms the Community would be prepared to purchase uranium.
  4. Did the Community’s Commissioner suggest that the Community would be prepared to change its existing attitude towards the import of beef and other agricultural products.
  5. Did the ‘AM’ report correctly state that the Australian Government would require better access for Australian agricultural and pastoral products before agreeing to any bilateral agreement on uranium; if so, what products were mentioned and what was the reaction of the Community’s Commissioner.
  6. Will the Minister make a detailed statement about the discussions when he returns to Australia.
Senator Cotton:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. No. The EC Energy Commissioner suggested that there would be advantage in a bilateral framework agreement between Australia and the EEC by way of reference, he mentioned the framework agreement between the Community and Canada which establishes broad guidelines for commercial and economic co-operation.
  3. No.
  4. and (5) During my discussions in Brussels, I suggested that the possibility of agriculture being included in any bilateral agreement should be examined. Clearly, the Community’s interest is in Australia as a continuing reliable supplier of raw materials and energy. Equally, however, Australia is concerned with impediments in regard to access to the Community for our agricultural products and the impact of increasing competition in third markets from the subsidised export of EEC surplus production. I am of the view that there would be advantage to Australia in having a bilateral agreement with the Community but the question of whether there is ultimately such an agreement and what it should include would, of course, be a matter for negotiation.
  5. On 25 May, I made a detailed statement in Parliament on International Trade in which I reported on my discussions whilst in Brussels.

Motor Vehicle Standards: Design Rule 27a (Question No. 930)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 24 May 1977:

Has the Prime Minister written to the States asking them to defer application of Design Rule 27a relating to exhaust emission control standards; if so, (a) when did the Prime Minister write, (b) for what reason has the request been made and (c) what has been the result of the correspondence.

Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. The Acting Prime Minister wrote to all Premiers on 1 5 June 1977.
  2. The purpose of the correspondence was to obtain Heads of Government agreement to an inter-government study of the effects of the introduction of ADR27A, which deals with exhaust emission controls.
  3. Replies have been received from the Premiers of New South Wales and Queensland.

The matter has since been raised in the Australian Transport Advisory Council (ATAC) where it has been agreed amongst Ministers to set up a special study group of Commonwealth and State officials to examine ADR27A and to defer for one year the final stage of ADR27A which was scheduled to come into effect on 1 January 1 979.

Treasury: Staff (Question No. 952)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 25 May 1977:

How many (a) permanent employees, (b) temporary employees and (c) other employees were there in the Treasurer’s Department for each month since and including November 1975.

Senator Cotton:
LP

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

I refer the honourable senator to the answer provided to his Question No. 949 by the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in Public Service Matters (Senate Hansard, 16 August 1977, page 74).

Department of Employment and Industrial Relations: Staff (Question No. 956)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 24 May 1 977:

How many (a) permanent employees, (b) temporary employees and (c) other employees were there in the Minister’s Department for each month since and including November 1975.

Senator Durack:
LP

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

I refer the honourable senator to the answer I gave him, in my capacity as Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in Public Service Matters, to his Question on Notice No. 949 (Senate Hansard, of 1 6 August 1 977, pages 74-9 1 ).

Department of Health: Staff (Question No. 964)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 24 May 1977:

How many (a) permanent employees; (b) temporary employees; and (c) other employees were there in the Minister s Department for each month since and including November 1975.

Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

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

I refer the honourable senator to the answer to Question No. 949 (Hansard, 16 August 1977, pages 74-91) provided by the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in Public Service Matters.

Transfer of Power to Northern Territory Legislative Assembly (Question No. 1094)

Senator Robertson:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 3 June 1977:

  1. 1 ) Have discussions been held between the Prime Minister and the Chief Secretary of the Northern Territory concerning the further transfer of powers to the Legislative Assembly for the Northern Territory; if so, what areas of responsibility are to be transferred in the second stage, and what is the proposed timetable for the transfer.
  2. Will the Prime Minister give an assurance that the transfer will not increase the level of taxation to be borne by the people of the Territory.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. and (2) I refer the honourable senator to the press statement issued by the Minister for the Northern Territory, the honourable Evan Adermann, on 1 7 July 1977.

Hypertension (Question No. 1104)

Senator BAUME:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

Is there a national program in Australia directed towards the continuing detection of hypertension and towards notification to the family doctors of those members of the Australian community suffering from unsuspected hypertension.

Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

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

There is no national program as such in Australia sponsored by the Government. The National Health and Medical Research Council however, contributes $70,000 per annum to the National Heart Foundation’s Blood Pressure Study which monitors blood pressure in 4,000 people who are known to have mild to moderate hypertension.

In addition, there is an increasing number of community groups throughout Australia conducting local blood pressure screening programs. Literature to support these activities is provided by the National Heart Foundation, and persons found to have hypertension are referred to their doctor.

It would be improper to consider the need for a national screening program before the results of the National Blood Pressure Study are available, since the aims of this study include provision of information on the most appropriate screening methodologies to be instituted and on their necessity.

I and my advisers are acutely aware of the high incidence of cardiovascular diseases in the community and their associated morbidity and mortality and will continue to evaluate the effectiveness of any control methods which come to our attention.

Fraser Island: Sand Mining (Question No. 1123)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development on 17 August 1977:

Does the Minister intend taking any action in relation to sand mining on Fraser Island as a result of examination of the study of the Fraser Island issue carried out by A. A. Heath and Partners; if so, what are the details?

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

No. The Government’s decision to prohibit the export of mineral sands from Fraser Island will not be affected by the A. A. Heath and Partners Critique of the Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry.

Officers of my Department reviewed this document in detail for me and I remain satisfied that the Commissioners reported comprehensively under their terms of reference.

Fraser Island: Compensation to Sand Mining Companies (Question No. 1127)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

What decisions have so far been taken with regard to the payment of compensation to D.M. Minerals and Queensland Titanium Mines Pty Ltd relating to the suspension of sand mining operations on Fraser Island.

Senator Withers:
LP

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

On 20 December 1976 the then Acting Minister for National Resources announced that the Government had decided to make ex gratia payments to the two mineral sands producers and to firms which had contracted directly with those producers and which were solely or substantially dependent on the sand mining operations.

A decision has not yet been taken on the level of payments to the mining companies as the matter is still under active consideration by the Government.

Commonwealth Offices (Question No. 1131)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 17 August 1977:

With reference to the Minister’s reply to Question No. 14 (Senate Hansard, 24 March 1977, p. 547), what has been the result of efforts to obtain ground floor accommodation for each of the offices mentioned in the reply, and which at that time did not have ground floor accommodation.

Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

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

None of the offices listed in my reply to Question No. 14 has been able to obtain ground floor space due to the lack of suitable and adequate premises, tenure of existing leases or restrictions on leasing funds.

Every endeavour will continue to be made to obtain suitable and adequate ground floor space for these offices.

As you know the accommodation for the Commonwealth is the responsibility of the Minister for Administrative Services.

Leadbeater’s Possum (Question No. 1133)

Senator Mulvihill:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

  1. 1 ) Are portions of theGippsland forests regarded as the major remaining habitat of the Leadbeater Possum.
  2. Has the Government considered the use of Conservation Grants, or any other legislation aimed at conserving endangered wildlife species, to purchase adequate forest enclaves within the Gippsland State Forest to ensure the survival of the Leadbeater Possum.
Senator Carrick:
LP

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

  1. The major remaining habitat for the Leadbeater’s Possum is to the north-east of Melbourne near Marysville, within an area of mountain ash forest of approximately 400 square miles. This area lies in the Victorian Highlands and is really outside the definition of Gippsland. Only the very south-eastern limits of the known range extend to Gippsland.
  2. No. All the known habitats of Leadbetter’s Possum are within State forests which belong to the Victorian Government, and necessary actions to ensure the survival of this species depend on management of these forest areas. Under the Victorian Forests Act 1958, the Forests Commission of Victoria is charged with responsibility for the protection of fauna in State forests and consequently with the necessary management of fauna habitats.

New South Wales Refugee Resettlement Review Committee (Question No. 1137)

Senator Mulvihill:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 1 7 August 1 977:

Who are the personnel of the New South Wales Refugee Resettlement Co-ordination Committee.

Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

– The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The members of the New South Wales Refugee Resettlement Review Committee and the organisations they represent are:

Mr S. Kerry (Chairman); Department of Social Security

Mr J. Tuchin;Department of Social Security

Miss J. Kavan; Department of Social Security

Mrs A. Leung; Department of Social Security

Mr P. Speers; Department of Social Security

Mrs C. Steinke; Department of Social Security

Mr K. Lim; Department of Social Security

Mrs E. Byrne; Department of Social Security

Mrs M. Bosanquet; Anglican Counselling Service

Mr F. Garforth; Anglican Immigration Office

Ms J. Fair;AUSTCARE

Mrs E. Udy;Australian Council of Churches

Miss D. Davis; Australian Red Cross Society

Mr G. Salter; Association of Apex Clubs

Mrs M. Guerbois; Commonwealth Department of Education

Mr R. Anderson; Commonwealth Hostels Ltd

Mr R. Gray;Commonwealth Hostels Ltd

Mr R. Ward; Commonwealth Hostels Ltd

Mrs B. Kennard; Commonwealth Hostels Ltd

Father Van Melis-Catholic Immigration Office

Father Heaps- Catholic Immigration Office

Mr D. Scotland; Good Neighbour Council

Miss M. Varga; Good Neighbour Council

Mr T. Fairbairn; Good Neighbour Council

Mr M. T. Stretton; Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs

Mr M. Hotson; Department of Employment and Industrial Relations

Mr W. M. Linton; New South Wales Department of Youth and Community Services

Mr D. Checkley; New South Wales Department of Youth and Community Services

Miss E. Warburton; Housing Commission of New South Wales

Mr P. Nadin; Housing Commission of New South Wales

Mrs A. Pittaway; The Smith Family

Mr G. Gencer; New South Wales Premier’s Department

Mr J. Hazell; St Vincent de Paul Society

Mr T. E. Carroll; State Adult Migrant Education Service

Mr P. Lovell; State Adult Migrant Education Service

Mr G. Falkenmire; State Adult Migrant Education Service

Dr P. Christopher;New South Wales Health Commission (Western Metropolitan Region)

Moorabbin Airport: Cargo Jet Port (Question No. 1184)

Senator Button:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

Are there any plans to make the Moorabbin Airport in Melbourne into a Cargo Jet Port; if so, what are these plans?

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

There are no current plans to use Moorabbin Airport for regular jet cargo use. The airport is restricted to aircraft under 5,700 kg and with noise levels no greater than those aircraft which currently use the airport. These restrictions preclude the development of the airport as a Cargo Jet Port.

Woodchip Industry- Western Australia (Question No. 1193)

Senator Mulvihill:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

In view of the testimony, given on oath by Western Australian Forestry Commission officers before the Senate Standing Committee on Science and the Environment examining woodchip industry operations that sizeable segments of Western Australia forests would be converted into

National Parks and Wildlife Reserves, can the Minister furnish details of increased National Park acreages in Western Australia during the past twelve months.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

  1. During the last financial year the total area managed by the Western Australian National Parks Authority increased from 2,281,450 ha (30 June 1976) to 3,871,505 ha (30 June 1977).

The increase comprised:

Woodchip Industry: Victoria (Question No. 1194)

Senator Mulvihill:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

In view of the testimony, given on oath by Victorian Forestry Commission officers before the Senate Standing Committee on Science and the Environment examining woodchip industry operations, that sizable portions of Victorian forests would be converted into National Parks and Wildlife Reserves, can the Minister furnish details of increased National Park acreages in Victoria during the past twelve months.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

  1. During the last twelve months there has been no increase in Victoria National Park areas. However, 446 ha of land had been reserved for National Park purposes.
  2. During the last twelve months, the total area managed by the Fisheries and Wildlife Division has not increased. However 500 ha has been reserved as extensions to existing Wildlife Reserves. 42,724 ha of land has also been recommended by the Land Conservation Council to be transferred to Fisheries and Wildlife Division control.

Woodchip Industry: Tasmania (Question No. 1195)

Senator Mulvihill:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

In view of the testimony, given on oath by Tasmanian Forestry Commission officers before the Senate Standing Committee on Science and the Environment examining woodchip industry operations that sizeable segments of Tasmanian forests would be converted into National Parks and Wildlife Reservations, can the Minister furnish details of increased National Park acreages in Tasmania during the past twelve months.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

During the last twelve months the total area managed by the Tasmanian National Parks and Wildlife Service has increased by 2 13,885.8 ha.

The increase comprised:

Governor-General Designate: Staff, Salary and Entitlements (Question No. 1197)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

  1. 1 ) What salary and entitlements, including office accommodation, staff, travel and transport, is the Commonwealth currently supplying to the Governor-General designate.
  2. ) What is the estimated cost of each item named.
Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. and (2) Following his appointment as GovernorGeneral Designate Sir Zelman Cowen has taken the view that he should disengage as Vice Chancellor of the University of Queensland and disengage also from the various other positions that he has held, including as Chairman of the Australian Vice Chancellors Committee. He has, as a consequence, been granted leave of absence by the Senate of the University of Queensland until he is sworn as GovernorGeneral.

In the circumstances, and being aware that discussions had taken place and undertakings had been given to Sir John Kerr as Governor-General Designate in 1974, the Government has thought it appropriate to provide Sir Zelman in Brisbane with an office and secretarial facilities. He has also the use of a Commonwealth car.

It is the Government’s intention to reimburse the University of Queensland on a pro rata basis for payments in the nature of salary etc., which it will continue to make to or on behalf of Sir Zelman until he is sworn as Governor-General. The amount of this reimbursement has not yet been finalised.

Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry (Question No. 1199)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development, upon notice, on 17 August 1977:

With reference to the Minister’s reply to Senate Question No. 694 (Hansard), is it a fact that the Terms of Reference for the Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry restrict the Commission to a consideration only of sand mining; if so, was the Commission justified in making the observation referred to by the Minister.

Senator Carrick:
LP

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

The Terms of Reference of the Fraser Island Environmental Inquiry, which are set out in full on page 24 1 of the Final Report of that Commission of Inquiry did not restrict the Commission to a consideration only of sand mining.

An examination of the detailed findings of fact of the Commission, set out on pp. 198-205 of their Report, will reveal how closely the Commissioners related their findings to their Terms of Reference. In particular, the honourable senator is referred to findings 2 (e) and 3 (d).

Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission: Twentieth Annual Report (Question No. 1204)

Senator Cavanagh:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

  1. 1 ) Did the Twentieth Annual Report of the President of the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission suggest amendments to both State and Federal Industrial Acts to permit members of Federal Tribunals to sit jointly with members of State Tribunals in order to hear particular disputes in which both Tribunals have jurisdiction?
  2. Has the Government done anything about this suggestion?
Senator Durack:
LP

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

  1. and (2) The Twentieth Annual Report of the President of the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission mentioned that on at least three occasions State and Federal Tribunals have conducted joint conferences or joint hearings because part of an industry was covered by State and part by Federal award or because one of two unions competing for particular work have State and not Federal registration. The President suggested that the Federal and State Acts be amended to put such joint sittings or conferences on a formal legal basis. I have referred the matter for examination to the Conference of Ministers for Labour.

United States Central Intelligence Agency: Allegation of Provision of Funds to Australian Political Parties (Question No. 1212)

Senator Cavanagh:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Resources, upon notice, on 1 7 August 1 977:

With regard to the statement made by the Deputy Prime Minister in an interview with journalists from the ‘Bush Telegraph’, and reported in ‘The Advertiser’ of 10 June 1977, that ‘it’s possible’ that the Central Intelligence Agency funded the National Country Party:

why does the Deputy Prime Minister now believe it is possible that the National Country Party received funds from the Central Intelligence Agency;

does the Deputy Prime Minister’s statement contradict an answer given in Parliament on 4 May 1977 (House of Representatives Hansard, p. 1515) by Mr Sinclair when he said: ‘I assure the House that, like the Liberal Party, the National Country Party does not solicit, nor does it accept knowingly, funds from overseas. Any allegations that might be made by Mr Marchetti or any member of the Opposition are totally false in that respect’.

Senator Withers:
LP

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

  1. No political party can give a categorical denial that it has received funds from a particular source. In the interview referred to, I used the words ‘It’s possible’ because it is impossible to say that it is impossible.
  2. No. Mr Sinclair’s statement and my own are completely in accord.

Industrial Areas: Sex Ratio of Children (Question No. 1222)

Senator Baume:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 16 August 1977:

  1. Has the attention of the Minister been drawn to recent publications in the Medical Journal of Australia, indicating an alteration in the sex ratio of children born to mothers in hospitals in highly industrialised pans of Australia.
  2. Is the Depanment able to comment on the significance of the figures, which seem to suggest a lower likelihood of conceiving or carrying to live birth a male child in areas heavily contaminated by air pollution.
  3. If the findings are thought to be reliable, can the Minister indicate what steps have been taken to draw these findings to the attention of relevant State and Commonwealth authorities as yet more evidence of the deleterious effects of air pollution on the health of Australians
Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. 2 ) The first publication hypothesises a lower likelihood of conceiving a male child in polluted areas, but the data presented show only variations of sex ratio within the limits of chance; it is noteworthy that the data presented in the second publication do not support the hypothesis. The second publication also found a nigh stillbirth rate in one area, with a suggestion that the male fetus was more likely to be involved. When considering industrial air pollution as a possible cause it added ‘other explanatory factors are being considered by us in current studies’. Air pollution is not a likely cause of any of the observations.
  3. See 2.

Employed Action Committee (Question No. 1230)

Senator Mcintosh:

asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 August 1977:

  1. 1 ) Will the Minister for Social Security inform the Senate of the bona fides of an organisation known as Employed Action Committee, Box 81, Mayfield, New South Wales 2304.
  2. Specifically, will the Minister provide the following information: (a) when was the organisation formed; (b) where does it meet; (c) how often does it meet; (d) who are its President and Secretary; (e) does it receive support from the Minister’s Depanment; and (f) is it affiliated in any way with the Australian Uranium Producers’ Forum.
Senator Guilfoyle:
LP

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

  1. and (2) I have no official information concerning the organisation known as Employed Action Committee. It does not receive financial or other support from my Depanment.

University Enrolments in 1977

Senator Carrick:
LP

-On 23 March 1977 (Hansard, page 402) Senator Tehan asked me a question, without notice, relating to enrolments in universities in 1977. In my answer I undertook to provide further information when final enrolment figures were available.

I am advised by the Tertiary Education Commission that total enrolments in Australian universities, as at 30 April 1977, were 157,919 (including enrolments at Deakin University for the first time). This figure represents an increase of 3 per cent over total enrolments in 1 976.

The total enrolment in universities was in accord with planned levels of student load recommended for 1977 in the former Universities Commission’s Report for 1977-79 Triennium. Measured in terms of equivalent full-time students, total actual student load in 1977 was only 0.8 per cent below the level recommended by the Commission. At some universities, enrolment levels in 1977 show a significant departure from planned levels. It should be stressed, however, that many factors affect the ability of universities to match enrolments precisely to these levels. I expect that the Tertiary Education Commission will comment on this matter in its forthcoming report.

Tasmania-Local Government Finance

Senator Carrick:
LP

-On 18 August 1977 (Hansard, pages 246-247), in the course of an answer to a question without notice from Senator Archer, I undertook, as Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in Federal Affairs, to provide honourable senators with precise figures showing the significant benefits Tasmania will receive under the revised local government revenue sharing proposals.

Whereas in 1976-77 Tasmania received $4,004,000 or 2.8601 per cent of the $140m of Commonwealth funds allocated to local government throughout Australia, for the current financial year Tasmania’s share will rise to $5,290,00 1 or 3.1997 per cent of the total allocation of $165,328,036.

Had the previous relativities applied to the distribution for the current financial year Tasmania ‘s share would have been $4,728,567.

Cost of Tax Reform

Senator Withers:
LP

-On 19 August 1977 (Hansard, page 343) Senator Walsh asked me, as Minister representing the Prime Minister, a question, without notice, concerning the cost of the Government’s announced tax reforms. I believe the reply by the Minister representing the Treasurer to a question without notice on 23 August and the document which he incorporated in Hansard at that time (Hansard, pages 403-4), provide the information requested by the h onourable senator. If the honourable senator has further questions to ask on this matter, I suggest he put them on the notice paper.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 6 September 1977, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1977/19770906_senate_30_s74/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant