House of Representatives
15 June 1938

15^th Parliament · 1^st Session

QUESTION
- AIR FORCE ACCIDENTS
NATIONAL HEALTH AND PENSIONS INSURANCE BILL
QUESTION
- EMBARGO ON THE EXPORT OF IRON ORE
QUESTION
- OVERSEAS AIRMAILS
QUESTION
- CUT-GLASS INDUSTRY
DARWIN
QUESTION
- LOCOMOTIVES ON TRANSAUSTRALIAN RAILWAY
QUESTION
- DEFENCE OF NAURU ISLAND
NON-OFFICIAL POST OFFICES
QUESTION
- DEFENCE WORKS AT NEWCASTLE
QUESTION
- PHYSICAL STANDARD OF MILITIA
ITALIAN CRUISER RAIMONDO MONTECUCCOLI: INCIDENT AT PORT MELBOURNE
- Formal Motion for Adjournment
NATIONAL HEALTH AND PENSIONS INSURANCE BILL 1938
HOUR OF MEETING
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
- Commonwealth Railways : Employees - Supplyof Sleepers
- Transfer tocanberra

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. Q. J. Bell) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

– The Prime Minister has already signed a commission authorizing Sir Edward Ellington, Marshal of the Royal Air Force, in company with Australian officers, to carry out a most searching inquiry into every phase of the activities of the Royal Australian Air Force. The investigation will cover the training of pilots, the whole of the mechanical organization, the work of those who service the machines, the kind of machines employed, and every other matter connected with the work of the air force. I can assure the House that Sir Edward Ellington is to be given full authority to investigate every phase of the training, as well as the operation of the equipment.

page 2113

NATIONAL HEALTH AND PENSIONS INSURANCE BILL

Appointment of Royal Commission.

Mr JOHN LAWSON:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– Will the Treasurer inform the House whether the Government has formulated any proposals to overcome the deadlock that has been reached between the Government and the medical profession with respect to the National Health and Pensions Insurance Bill?

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · CORIO, VICTORIA · UAP

– I am grateful to the honorable gentleman for having raised this subject, and I would ask- the indulgence of the House to make a short statement. - By leave - The Federal Council of the British Medical Association has asked that negotiations be re-opened on the agreement previously made, but the Government can have no security that any agreement reached by negotiations with the association would be accepted by the profession generally, and it cannot proceed on the basis of the demands now being made. The Government has, therefore, decided to set up a royal commission to advise it regarding the proper payment to be made for the treatment of persons insured under the national insurance measure. The Government intends also that the commission shall investigate the financial aspects of the voluntary provision of medical treatment for the wives and children of insured men, to whom the Government has promised some assistance.The commission will be constituted as soon as practicable, and it is intended that the friendly societies, as well as representative members of the medical profession and the National Insurance Commission, shall have every opportunity to submit evidence.

Mr CURTIN:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I move-

Thatthe document quoted from by the Treasurer be laid on the table.

I do that in order that the House may have further information regarding the commission’s terms of reference.

Mr Casey:

– A little further delay.

Mr CURTIN:

– The House is entitled to be informed in greater detail of the terms of reference in which certain matters are to be submitted to the commission for inquiry. All we know, as far as I understand the statement of the Treasurer (Mr. Casey), is that the commission is to inquire what would be fair remuneration of the medical practitioners for an unspecified service which they are to render to persons who are to be insured under the bill before the House. I understand that it is intended that the friendly societies shall be invited to give evidence on this matter. I suggest, however, that the commission’s terms of reference should be wide enough, and the Parliament ought to be satisfied that they are wide enough, to ensure that there will be available to the Parliament, when the report is submitted, findings which adequately cover not only the remuneration which the doctors will get, but also the nature of the services which the contributors are to receive. Further, I take it - although at this juncture I cannot be sure on the matter - that the pharmaceutical service also should bo the subject of examination by the royal commission. It would appear that the Treasurer’s statement has been made merely for the purpose of allaying the criticism which has been levelled against certain features of the proposed legislation. It does not convince us that the inquiry will be of a sufficiently comprehensive and precise nature as to afford guidance upon all the matters that are strictly relevant to the medical service aspect of the measure. At this juncture I would also say that, as a royal commission is once again to be invited to consider one phase of national insurance, the Government should give some indication as to whether or not, in its opinion, the inquiry will result in any radical disturbance of the actuarial basis upon which the bill has been computed.

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. G. J. Bell).Order! I do not remember action of this nature having been taken before. I do not know of any Standing Order that allows for it. Had a paper been tabled, it would have been in order to move that it be printed.

Mr SPEAKER:

– It appears to the Chair that Standing Order 317 does not refer to a case such as that now under consideration. The Treasurer was asked if he had any information to give to the House as to the procedure that would be adopted in dealing with certain matters. He asked for leave to make a statement, and he then told the House what he intended to do. He read from a paper which I do not think can be termed a document in the sense contemplated by the Standing Order. As I had never heard of a previous similar instance, I deferred giving a decision, but I do so now, because I do not think that it can be assumed that the Standing Order refers to a case such as this and, therefore, I rule that the Leader of the Opposition may not proceed further.

Later:

Mr CURTIN:

– Will the Prime Minister tell the House what terms of reference are to be issued to the royal commission which is to investigate certain phases of national insurance and services incidental thereto?

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · WILMOT, TASMANIA · UAP

– If I had had the opportunity to follow the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin) in his observations concerning this matter, I should have made it quite clear that the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) has merely given a brief indication of the intention of the Government to submit this matter to a royal commission. In due course, before the royal commission is appointed, a full statement will be made by the Treasurer.

Mr CURTIN:

– In view of the fact that it is the intention of the Government to appoint a royal commission to investigate certain of the services incidental, indeed so incidental as to be an essential part of the scheme, to national insurance, does the Prime Minister intend to defer further consideration of the National Health and Pensions Insurance Bill until after the report of the royal commission has been received?

Mr LYONS:

– No; the bill will be proceeded with as soon as the preliminaries have been disposed of to-day.

Mr JAMES:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– As the Treasurer has indicated that the proposed royal commission will take evidence from medical practitioners and friendly societies, I ask him whether it will also be authorized to take evidence from representatives of trade unions providing sick benefits for their members? I wish to know, also, whether representatives of the unemployed will be given an opportunity to submit reasons why the unemployed sections of the community should be covered by the national insurance scheme?

Mr CASEY:
UAP

– The terms of reference will be wide enough to allow the royal commission to take all relevant evidence which will help it to submit effective recommendations to the Government.

Mr LAZZARINI:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Treasurer inform me whether the proposed terms of reference to the royal commission will be submitted to Parliament for consideration before finality is reached ?

Mr CASEY:

– I can give the honorable member no such undertaking. The Government will accept the responsibility for drafting the terms of reference.

page 2116

QUESTION

EMBARGO ON THE EXPORT OF IRON ORE

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Prime Minister any information to impart to the House concerning the press reports that it is the intention of the Japanese Government to take action against the Commonwealth for alleged breach of contract as the result of the embargo against the export of iron ore?

Mr LYONS:
UAP

– I have no intimation from the Japanese Government that it intends to take action on the lines indicated by the honorable member for Newcastle.

Mr HAWKER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Has the Minister for the Interior yet received the report from Dr. Ward, the Government Geologist for South Australia, concerning the South Australian resources of iron ore? If he has received that report, can it be printed and made available to honorable members ? If it has not been received, can it be made available as soon as it has been received?

Mr McEWEN:
Minister for the Interior · INDI, VICTORIA · CP

– The Commonwealth geological adviser, Dr. Woolnough, is in close and frequent consultation with Dr. Ward, the South Australian Geologist, and no doubt a comprehensive report by Dr. Woolnough embracing reports by Dr. Ward and other State geologists will be made available.

Mr BLAIN:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

– In view of the wide publicity given in the press to the value of the activities of the geological and geophysical survey in northern Australia and of the announcement, through Sir Herbert Gepp, during the third year of this work, that huge iron ore deposits had been located at Portland Road in northern Queensland, will the Minister in Charge of Development ask the Chief Geological Adviser of the Government, Dr. Woolnough, for full information on the subject?

Mr CASEY:
UAP

– I think that the honorable gentleman is labouring under a misapprehension.So far, the work of the geophysical and geological survey has been of general interest and a great deal of most useful information both positive and negative, has been disclosed, but it is hardly fair to say that there has been any spectacular find. I can see no reason why the work of one well-equippedgeo- logical and geophysical body should be referred to another geologist for his opinion.

page 2116

QUESTION

OVERSEAS AIRMAILS

Mr FAIRBAIRN:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA

-Can the Minister for Defence give any explanation of two apparently conflicting statements that have appeared in the press in the last few days, one being to the effect that no passengers would be carried on the first few flights by the Qantas-Empire flying boats and the other being a statement purporting to be from Mr. Hudson Fish, chairman of the Qantas-Empire Company, saying that the company had made preparations to carry passengers for the inaugural flight?

Mr THORBY:
CP

– There is no ground whatever for the statement that the Civil Aviation Branch of the Department of Defence has refused to permit passengers to be carried on the first trip. It was not issued by me or by any officer of the department. It was the invention of some newspaper or person. The company’s licence allows it to carry passengers from the start of the flying boat service.

Mr HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the fact that residents of Rose Bay object to the proposed fibro-cement construction of the Rose Bay seaplane base terminal buildings, and also in view of the fact that the Woollahra Councilbuilding regulations prohibit such construction, does the Minister for Defence propose to take any action to conform to the regulations of the council and to satisfy the residents of Rose Bay that their wishes will be respected ?

Mr THORBY:

– The area in question is a reclaimed area, where it would not be practicable to erect large brick buildings.. Plans and specifications of the control building were submitted to the council for their information, and to meet the wishes: of the council we have decided to use corrugated fibro-cement for all the buildings. The original intention was to use galvanized iron for the roofing of the hangar. There will be no grounds for complaint. Every effort is being made to avoid anything ofan unsightly nature, but only two materials could be used, one being galvanized iron and the other corrugated fibro-cement. We have chosen the latter in deference to the wishes of the council and the community.

Mr BAKER:
GRIFFITH, QUEENSLAND

– Will the Minister for Defence inform me whether it is correctly reported in the press that mail matter arriving in Brisbane by the overseas airmail service will be delayed in delivery for one or two days or whatever period may be necessary in order to ensure that the delivery will coincide with the delivery of air-mail matter in the capital cities further south? If this is so, is the Minister able to advance any intelligent reason for this differentiation?

Mr THORBY:

– I say emphatically that there is no foundation whatever for such a report. When the Government reaches any decision on this subject it will be announced in the House. Mails will be distributed immediately they are available in the capital cities or anywhere else.

page 2117

QUESTION

CUT-GLASS INDUSTRY

Mr NOCK:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Acting Minister for Trade and Customs inform me whether the company which has made application for an increase of the tariff on cut glass is the same company as the company whose balance-sheets, which were published in the press on Monday, show that in the last three years the profits on its subscribed capital have been approximately 20 per cent., 23 per cent, and 28 per cent, respectively?

Mr PERKINS:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Trade and Customs · EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– The company is not the same company; it is a subsidiary company.

page 2117

DARWIN

Jury Accommodation and Compound fob Natives - Land Defences.

Mr BLAIN:

– Arising out of the following remarks by Judge Wells in the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, in a case in which, an aboriginal was charged with murder, as reported in the Darwin Northern Standard: -

If you are convinced you cannot reach a verdict by midnight there is nothing else I can do but discharge you. I am not doing it because I think you have given the matter sufficient consideration, but because there is no accommodation here for a jury. It is a serious matter, but it is the case. I have been endeavouring for years to have decent accommodation provided, but without success.

The plans have been twice submitted’ for prevision for accommodation and approved, but nothing further has been done in the matter.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The honorable member may not proceed on thos* lines.” He is merely quoting statements made by some one and not asking a question.

Mr BLAIN:

– May I not refer to the report ?

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable gentleman has been doing so at great length. He must ask his question.

Mr BLAIN:

– In view of the complaint by Judge Wells that money is being spent on a new compound four miles out of Darwin and only half a mile from the new Royal Australian Air Force aerodrome, where no doubt 500 men will be accommodated, I ask the Minister for the Interior whether he will immediately issue instructions to stop work on that compound and then choose a site from 50 to 100 miles from Darwin, where natives can be employed on stations and learn to be useful, and not be a nuisance, as they are to-day.

Mr McEWEN:
CP

– As regards the latter part of .the honorable member’s question, the answer is “No.” With reference to the first part, I am unable to see how the providing of accommodation for a jury in Darwin has any relation to the construction of a compound for aborigines.

Mr STREET:
CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

– In view of conflicting press reports concerning the intention of the Government to strengthen the land defences at Darwin, is the Minister for Defence able to give me any information on the subject?

Mr THORBY:
CP

– I cannot give (be honorable member any details of the works actually being carried out, but substantial provision is being made . to augment the land forces and the fixed fortifications in connexion with naval and air force activities at Darwin. Two air force squadrons have been provided for at Darwin, and the naval facilities there are being increased.

page 2117

QUESTION

LOCOMOTIVES ON TRANSAUSTRALIAN RAILWAY

Mr BADMAN:
GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Is the Minister for the Interior aware that statements have been published in this morning’s press to the effect that the locomotives recently provided for the trans-Australian railway service from Port Augusta to Kalgoorlie have proved so unsuitable that they have been withdrawn for repairs? Is the honorable gentleman able to inform me of the exact position in regard to these locomotives?

Mr McEWEN:
CP

– I have been informed that statements of the nature referred to by the honorable member have appeared in to-day’s Melbourne press. They are, however, quite incorrect. The locomotives recently provided for use on that section of the trans-Australian railway are still new and are not yet properly run in. Some slight troubles have occurred necessitating certain adjustments. The story that they are unsuitable for the service, and have had to be withdrawn from commission, is entirely without foundation.

Mr PRICE:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Is the Minister able to say whether, on the last three running days, the trains on the trans-Australian railway have reached their destination so late as to make necessary the running of three special trains from Adelaide to Melbourne? If this is so, who is footing the bill for the special trains?

Mr McEWEN:

– I shall make inquiries into the subject, and furnish the honorable member with information when it is available.

page 2118

QUESTION

DEFENCE OF NAURU ISLAND

Mr HARRISON:

– Will the Minister for Defence inform the House of the plans either made or contemplated by the Government to ensure the safety of the white community at Nauru Island in ease of emergency?

Mr THORBY:
CP

page 2119

ITALIAN CRUISER RAIMONDO MONTECUCCOLI: INCIDENT AT PORT MELBOURNE

Formal Motion for Adjournment

Mr SPEAKER (Hon G J Bell:
DARWIN, TASMANIA

– [ have received from the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan), an intimation that he desires to move the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, “The assault with violence on a person resident in Australia, named Frigo Orlando, who was temporarily on board the Italian Cruiser Raimondo Montecuccoli on the date of the assault, namely, the 15th February last, by invitation of the ship’s command, upon which cruiser the assault occurred at the hands of certain ratings of the ship ; and the action and attitude of the Government regarding the assault and subsequent developments arising therefrom.”

Five honorable members having risen in support of the motion,

Mr Archie Cameron:

– On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I desire your ruling as to whether an incident of the description referred to, whichis now four months old, constitutes a matter of either urgent or public importance ?

Mr SPEAKER:

– The Chair does not decide in these cases whether the matter referred to is or is not of urgent public importance. The requisite number of members provided for by the Standing Orders having risen in support of the motion, it is in order.

Mr.BRENNAN (Batman) [3.14].- I move -

That the House do now adjourn.

In the early part of the present year the Italian cruiser Raimondo Montecuccoli was lying alongside the pier at Port Melbourne. She was a guest of the Australian Government. Indeed, as a ship of war, she could not have entered an Australian harbour other than as a guest or in furtherance of warlike operations. By the courtesy of those in charge of the vessel it was thrown open for inspection by visiting Australians, a great number of whom availed themselves of the opportunity thus presented, and went on board. On the 15th February of the present year one Frigo Orlando, by occupation a hire-car driver, many years resident in Australia, married to an Australian girl, and the father of children born in this country, went on board that warship as a visitor. It was natural that he should do so, as he had long been separated from his native land. Having boarded the vessel, he stood for a moment inspecting the first thing which aroused his interest. Then, in compliance with the request, “ This way, please,” addressed at large to the visitors on board, he accompanied others down a narrow passageway. Here he was set upon by certain of the ship’s ratings. He was struck upon the head, and hustled about. His face was prodded with a pointed instrument like a funnel. Generally, he received a severe manhandling, and was covered with blood. I am able, from personal observation, to depose as to the nature of his injuries, because I saw him a couple of days after the assault had occurred. His face was then an interesting mosaic of scabs and sticking plaster, and it was evident that he had been very severely handled. The other visitors who were in the vicinity when the assault took place, dispersed, doubtless finding the welcome too warm for them, and Orlando was conducted by an officer into a private room, where he was attended to by a ship’s doctor - as far as is known, in an efficient manner. Eventually, he was allowed to leave the ship. As the result of the assault ‘ he lost his earning power, to the detriment of himself, his wife, and his family, in addition to having suffered the personal injuries that I have described. There does not appear to be any dispute on the facts up to that point, or, indeed, on any of the facts which I am narrating. I know of none, not having heard from the Government on the subject. While in the private room to which he was taken, Orlando was interviewed by an officer of the ship, who cross-examined him as to his activities in Australia. Incidentally, this officer showed that he had a very accurate knowledge of the conduct and political practices of this person, and ventured the unsolicited information that he was aware that Orlando had been associated with the Matteotti Club, but it was to his credit that he had long since dissociated himself from that body. So much apparently was to the good. At that stage in the inquiry a Commonwealth investigation officer merely made some visual observations and retired. That led a number of us to believe that the life story of this Italian was. known to this Commonwealth officer and had been supplied to the Commonwealt’h. Well, the one courtesy for which we have to thank the Government in the matter is that the Attorney-General (Mr. Menzies) at a later stage assured us that that was not so. I accept his assurance on that point. I, myself, cross-examined Orlando as to the incident and as to certain vague reports which I had heard of minor conflicts which it was alleged had taken place between Italian ratings and certain persons of Communist opinion in the suburbs of Melbourne. It was even suggested among the vague reports made about the matter, that the victim had circulated printed matter on the ship itself. There is no evidence, so far as I know or have been able to ascertain, in support of that. It seems to me to be a palpable untruth. Orlando himself states that he has been in Australia for many years, that he

Ifr. Brennan. had taken no part in politics at . all for a considerable time previously, that his interests were entirely confined to his calling, and that for the purposes of his employment he cultivated all classes of Italians, because, naturally, he thought he was more likely to get support from them than from others. He assured me that he had been in no brawl of anykind with any member of the ship’s crew, and that he was at least one mile away from a minor disagreement which was alleged to have taken place in a club in one of the suburbs, and had no connexion with it whatever. In considering what is really the major question, I think it seems to be agreed between myself and the Attorney-General, that these details are comparatively unimportant. The major question is: Was this Australian resident, with or without provocation, set upon in contempt of the law and grievously injured? I have thought it necessary to refer to these unimportant details because so many persons are inclined to decide issues of substance by reference to purely extraneous considerations. The fact is, that within call of the police, and within sight of the law courts with their legend engraven on their floor space “ Let justice be .done though the heavens may fall “, this man was so maltreated, and has had no more notice taken of it and has had no more recourse to law than if he had been a dog whipped by any person who thought fit to do so. He has had less consideration of his case than perhaps a dog would receive, because if a dog were ill-treated, a prosecution might be launched under the law which deals with cruelty to animals. Apparently, in connexion with this working class individual of Australia, no such protective law exists. There is the familiar attitude pf mind in such cases which prompts the statement, “ Oh, there must have been some reason for this; men do not set upon their fellow men without provocation or excuse of some kind “. Of course, my first answer to ‘that is that, even if provocation were proven, it would not justify hooliganism and lynch law in an Australian port. My second answer is that, if an explanation is called for, it would more appropriately come from the assailant rather than from the person assaulted. No authoritative statement has been made on behalf of the ship’s command. It is true that, apart altogether from the ship’s command, there has been speculation and gossip which, as is usual in these cases, has run rife; but no one has ever attempted to submit in evidence one single fact which might be urged even in extenuation of the incident which I have already described. If Orlando’s conduct on the ship were objectionable, the highly disciplined organization on the vessel was quite equal to .deal with him. He should have been restrained and, if necessary, contumeliously ejected, from the ship, or dealt with in any way considered appropriate by the organization on board the vessel. There is no evidence that steps of that nature were taken by the. ship’s command. As to his alleged association with the political cult known as communism, the truth is that neither communism, fascism, nor even ordinary tory imperialism arises in this case. In my view, it is intolerable to think that officers or ratings of a visiting warship should presume to discipline in Australia a resident Australian for his political opinions and, especially, by recourse to lynch law. I point out that the protection which we ask be afforded to an Italian national is not an unfriendly act towards the Italian Government, but is rather a friendly gesture. J am proud to be able to add that it is not the first time I have been associated with my fellow-members of the Labour party in (protecting Italian nationals in this country. On the other hand, visiting Italian sailors, of whatever rank, are assured of the protection of the laws of Australia when they .come here, and if one of them were subjected to attack or to public insult he could rely on the laws of this country being invoked for his protection, and even applied with a large measure of sympathy because of the fact that he was a visitor to Australia. Meantime, however, there remains Orlando’s emphatic denial of any impropriety of conduct, or of any association with politics, or of any offence whatever. It has been suggested that it was a case of mistaken identity. It may have been. It seems pretty certain that he was recognized as being an Italian national resident in Aus tralia. Even if it was a case of mistaken, identity, that furnishes the stronger^ reason why his case should be taken upand some compensation paid to him foi” what he has suffered. The policeauthorities, on being informed, .said that they could do nothing; and I think they were right. A visiting warship in Australian waters carries with it the law of” the country from which it comes. It is aminiature foreign territory in the country where it is a visitor. Process cannot beserved upon it, nor can an arrest of an offender be made upon it. That, of course, raises the very delicate question, which I do not propose to discuss on this occasion, as to the propriety of entertaining warships as emissaries of goodwill. A deputation consisting of my friends of the Labour party and myself waited upon the AttorneyGeneral and made representations to him. They asked, first, that the matter should be inquired into. It may be that the Investigation Branch knows much more about it than I do, and all I say ‘is that we are entitled to know what can be said in explanation or excuse. We asked the Attorney-General for such an inquiry, and we suggested that if the facts were as I have indicated, some compensation should be asked for in favour of Orlando from those who had done him this wrong, and that, failing compensation at their hands, the Commonwealth Government should compensate him, not because it was liable on legal grounds, but because it should, on moral grounds, compensate a man whohad been injured by the agents of a friendly foreign power. I have no reason to suppose that the Government of Italy would fall short, on proper representations being made, of what is reasonably required of a civilized people. Italy has a tradition of culture and politeness that goes much deeper than its present form of government. On another occasion I referred to some unfortunate consequences of this incident. ‘I pointed out that it was a most regrettable thing that the incident had unleashed violent attacks on the Italian Government.

Motion (by Mr. Gander) put -

That the honorable member have leave tocontinue his speech.

The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. G. J. Bell.)

AYES: 29

NOES: 40

Majority . . . . 11

AYES

NOES

– The motion of the honorable member for Batman contains the following words : “ The attitude of the Government regarding the assault, and subsequent happenings arising therefrom.” I conclude that the remarks of the Minister have reference to the subsequent happenings referred to.

Mr HUGHES:

– The honorable member for Batman is ever ready to exude vitriolic criticism from that side of the House, but when he is asked to accept criticism himself, he does not like it. This was a case of common assault on an Australian citizen. Had it occurred on shore, little or nothing would have been heard of it. In any case, the police would have dealt with it, and, had the matter come before a magistrate, the offenders might have been fined, or perhaps sentenced to a month’s imprisonment. Such incidents take place every day in this happy land of ours. I venture to say that, in the electorate of the honorable member for

– The honorable member has occupied a good deal of valuable time discussing a matter that is dead; it has no relevance to the position as it now exists. At the proper time the incident will be the subject of representations by this Government to the proper authorities. I venture to suggest that the honorable member for Batman moved the motion merely to obstruct the Government in the conduct of its business.

Several honorable members rising to address the House,

Motion (by Mr. John Lawson) put -

That the question be now put.

The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. G. J. Bell.)

AYES: 40

NOES: 29

Majority . . . . 11

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion put and negatived.

page 2124

NATIONAL HEALTH AND PENSIONS INSURANCE BILL 1938

Declaration of Urgency.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I declare that this bill is an urgent bill.

Question put. The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. G. J. Bell.)

AYES: 37

NOES: 31

Majority . . 6

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Allotment of Time.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the time allotted in connexion with the bill be as follows: -

For the committee stage -

To the end of Part IV., until 6.15 p.m. this day.

To the end of clause 87 (excepting clauses 48, 49 and 63), until midnight this day.

To the end of clause 103, from the termination on Thursday, the 16th June, 1938, of the answering of questions, without notice, or from 11 a.m. on that day, whichever is the earlier, until 12.45 p.m. on Thursday, the 16th June, 1938.

To the end of clause 164, until 6.15 p.m. on Thursday, the 16th June, 1938.

To the end of Part VIII., until 10 p.m. on Thursday, the 16th June, 1938.

To the end of postponed and excepted clauses, until midnight on Thursday, the 16th June.

To the end of the now clauses, from the termination on Friday, the 17 th

June, 1938, of the answering of questions without notice, or from 11 a.m. on that day, whichever is the earlier, until 12.45 p.m. on that day.

To the end of the first schedule, until 4 p.m. on Friday, the 17th June, 1938.

For the remainder of committee stage, from the termination on Monday, the 20th June, 1938, of the answering of questions without notice, or from 3.30 p.m. on that day, whichever is the earlier, until 5.30 p.m. on that day.

For the remaining stages until 6.15 p.m. on Monday, the 20th June, 1938.

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

.- This is an outrageous proposal. Members of the Opposition have not had an opportunity to examine in detail the motion submitted by the Treasurer (Mr. Casey), but I move -

That all the words after “That” be omitted, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following words: - “ this House declines to assent to this method of limiting the debate in respect of a bill which, while admittedly based upon principles novel and hitherto untried in Australia, will affect the futures of the great majority of the Australian people, and, unless its complexities are carefully considered, may inflict great hardships, without the knowledge and consent of this House, more particularly as the pro’ cedure involvedautomatically shuts out from consideration proposed amendments of which honorable members of the Opposition have given notice, and which have been drawn with a view to the improvement of the bill.”

Honorable members interjecting,

– If the Acting Minister for Commerce intended his remark to apply to me, I ask him to withdraw it.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The Acting Minister did not refer to the honorable member for Wimmera, but if the remark is regarded by him as offensive, I ask the Acting Minister to withdraw it.

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:

– I was referring to the fact that there are 44 members-

-I shall hear the Prime Minister.

Mr James:

– You would have turned me out before this.

Opposition members interjecting,

Mr Lyons:

– I do not wish to infringe any practice of this House; if there is objection to my speaking, I shall say no more. ‘ I rise to appeal to the Acting Minister. I take it that he himself does not regard his remark as offensive to any one, but, as it is regarded as offensive by another honorable member, I hope that he will do what a private member would do in the circumstances.

– The honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) would not know what the right thing was. With deep regret, I move -

Thatthe honorable member for Barker be suspended from the service of the House.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The time allowed by the Standing Orders for the consideration of this motion has expired.

Question put -

That the words proposed to be added (Mr. Curtin’s amendment) beso added.

The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. G. J. Bell.)

AYES: 29

NOES: 37

Majority . . . . 8

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Question put -

That the question be now put.

The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. G. J. Bell.)

AYES: 35

NOES: 29

Majority . . . . 6

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

In committee: Consideration resumed from the 14th June (vide page 2106).

Clause 31-

The employer of an employed contributor or 0/ an exempt employee shall, in the first instance, pay both the part of the contribution payable by himself and also, on behalf of thu employed contributor, the part of the contribution payable by thu contributor or exempt employee.

Mr BLACKBURN:
Bourke

.- I think that before we proceed any further the Government should undertake to insert a provision in the bill to ensure that an employee who has actually made his contributions shall be entitled to all the benefits of the bill notwithstanding the failure of his employer to make his contributions. Otherwise it is perfectly obvious that, by refusing or neglecting to make his contributions, a dishonest employer could deprive his employees of the health benefits provided under this measure.

Mr JOLLY:
Lilley

– I understand that it is the intention of the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) to move an amendment to clause 177 to cover this point.

Mr Casey:

– That can be done.

Amendments (by Mr. Casey) agreed to-

That the word “ an “, second occurring, bc omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “a partially”; that after the word “ or “, last occurring,” the word “ partially “ be inserted.

Mr BLACKBURN:
Bourke

.- I again ask the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) for an assurance that the point I referred to a moment ago will be covered. A provision should be inserted in the bill to make it quite clear that an employee shall not be deprived of his benefits by reason of the fact that a dishonest or negligent employer may have omitted to pay his contributions. I understand that, it is suggested that the employee will be sufficiently protected if an amendment is made to clause 177, but under that clause it seems that an employee will be required to take action against the employer in a civil court for damages, and if the employer subsequently becomes bankrupt it shall be assumed that the employer’s contributions have been paid. That, however, would be small satisfaction to a workman. It would be utterly unfair to put employees to the expense of taking action for damages in such a case. A provision should be included in this clause to the effect that, if an employee can establish definitely that he has paid his contributions, no negligence, dishonesty or failure on the part of the employer should be able to disqualify him. from benefits.

Mr Casey:

– .ll] iS point is relevant to clauses 177 and 178, and I shall see that it is examined.

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

– I suggest that a provision should be added to the clause .to the effect that failure on the part of the employer to pay his contributions shall not disqualify the claim of an insured person from the benefits of the act. Will the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) give us an assurance that the substance of our contention will be considered, and the clause amended to ensure that employees who contribute shall be protected against employers who do not faithfully discharge their trust or who deduct their contributions from the wages of their employees.

Mr Casey:

– I shall see that the proper course is taken in this connexion when clauses 177 and 178 are under consideration.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 32- (1.) Where an employed contributor receives any wages or other pecuniary remuneration from the employer, the part of any contribution paid by the employer on behalf of the contributor shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other act or State act or in any regulation or any contract or agreement. . . .

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I move -

That the words “ or State act “ be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words “ State act or ordinance “.

This is purely a drafting amendment. The clause, as drawn, refers only to Commonwealth and State acts, but it is intended also to refer to legislation dealing with. Commonwealth territories.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 33 agreed to.

Clause 34 -

Notwithstanding any contract or agreement to the contrary, the employer shall not be entitled to deduct from the wages of the contributor or otherwise to recover it from him, the amount of contribution payable by the employer.

Clause 36 (Contribution payable in respect of any employment in a week).

Mr WARD:
East Sydney

.- I should like some explanation from the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) as to how this clause will affect casual employees. The clause provides that a contribution shall be payable for each week during the whole or any part of which an employed contributor has been employed. Many casual employees during bad times may not receive more than one or two hours work each week. As the clause stands at present, it means that out of their meagre earnings of from 2s. to 4s. a week, those men will be obliged to make a contribution of ls. 6d. to the insurance fund. The honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) at an earlier stage gave reasons why, in his opinion, certain people in the community with incomes not exceeding £208 per annum should be exempted from making contributions in respect of their employees. Equal consideration should be given to the claims of casual workers who are not in a position to make the contribution that will be demanded o* them under this clause. Their contributions should he borne by the Government either out of the ‘ Consolidated Revenue Fund or out of some other fund which the Government may determine. I am of the opinion that if this clause is permitted to be passed in its present form, it. will impose a distinct hardship on a section of those.workers who do not enjoy permanent employment. In my opinion they should be given the same measure of assistance as I understand it is proposed to give the section of the community for which the honorable member for Swan made his plea.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– Sub-clause 1 provides that contributions shall, subject to the regulations, be payable weekly. In the ordinary course of events contributions will, in the large majority of cases, be paid weekly; but in those trades or occupations where it is usual to pay wages at intervals other than weekly, contributions covering the pay period will be accepted under the regulations, although primarily in the bill they are normally payable weekly. As to the point raised by the honorable member for East Sydney (Mr. Ward) regarding the contributions of casual employees, I may mention that that does not arise under this clause. For the information of the honorable member, however, I may say that, for the purposes of the bill, intermittent employment for a day or a half-day is not considered as employment.

Mr Ward:

– What about the waterside workers ?

Other honorable members interjecting,

Mr CASEY:

– I have not yet finished explaining the point in regard to casual employees. If I am to be constantly subjected to interruption by interjection, it is obvious that I shall be unable to reply to any of the points. Unless honorable members opposite are prepared to extend reasonable courtesy to me, I shall not answer any points raised by honorable members opposite.

Where there is no element of continuity in a man’s work, his employment would come under the category of excepted employments outlined in the first schedule. If, on the other hand, a man is employed regularly once a week digging a garden or work of that kind, he would come under the bill because there is the element of continuity in his employment. If he works for one employer one day and for other employers on other days, the contribution of his employers will be spread over the various employers. Many problems arise in connexion with casual and relief workers, and there are also many diverse types of employment in Australia in respect of hours of work and so on. All of these could more properly be dealt with when the first schedule to the bill is under discussion. I shall be glad to give full information in respect of any points raised when that stage has been reached.

Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa

.- The Treasurer (Mr. Casey)has said that if a man works only one day a week he is presumed to have regular employment. There is also the case of workers who are employed for one day on occasions and sometimes for a couple of days, but who, nevertheless, have no regularity in their employment. The Treasurer says that such workers, because they secure work on one day a week regularly, will have to make contributions of1s. 6d. out of their miserable earnings.

– I do not intend-

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member will resume his seat.

Mr WARD:
East Sydney

.- I am not at all satisfied with the explanation the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) has given in regard to the contributions of casual workers. Like the honorable member for Werriwa (Mr. Lazzarini) I am of the opinion that unless we can secure a satisfactory explanation now we will have no opportunity to do so at a later stage when the Government, with the aid of the “guillotine “, is rushing the bill through. The Government has accepted the ultimatum of the Country party that small business people and small farmers with incomes not exceeding £208 per annum shall not be required to contribute to the scheme in respect of their employees. Surely the Treasurer will not say that there is any justification for compelling casual workers to contribute to the insurance fund out of the few shillings each week they may earn because their employment is regular. I could give numerous instances of men who on many occasions have been engaged for only two or three hours a week, or perhaps one day a week. Provided they are able to secure that employment every week they will be called upon to contribute ls. Gd. to the insurance fund. Honorable members supporting the Government will have great difficulty in explaining this impost on this section of the community to the people of this country. It will be a great hardship on them. Because they are receiving less remuneration they will be penalized as compared with those in full work. Let me examine for a moment the position of waterside workers. They work a certain number of days a week, but by no stretch of the imagination can they be said to be regularly employed, for they are not. guaranteed employment on regular days each week. They are, in every sense of the word, casual employees ; yet the Treasurer is not able to give>-a straight-forward answer to the question as to whether they will be covered by the provisions of the bill. Knowing the effect of the measure on the general community, I am hopeful that these persons will not be compelled to come within its scope. The majority of them are not earning very high wages, and they are not desirous of being insured under the bill, which, by making people pay for their social services, will relieve the budget and the Government’s wealthy supporters outside Parliament.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member is not in order in discussing the whole of the bill.

Mr WARD:

– I am discussing how the clause will detrimentally affect a certain section of workers… Members of the Labour party supported the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory), and other members of the Country party, in their plea that small business people and farmers, who find, it difficult to make contributions, should be exempt from payment. The Country party and the United Australia party appear to have reached some sort of agreement on that point, and, to be logical, members of the Country party should now support, the . plea of the Labour party that many workers who do not receive even the basic wage should be exempt. For those low-paid workers who have come within the insurance field and have made some contributions to the scheme, but are unable to continue to contribute, the Government should make some provision to keep them in the scheme, if they so wish. The Government should postpone the clause so that consideration can be given to the request I have made. -Workers who receive low wages and are engaged in irregular employment should be given the same consideration as small business men and small farmers whose incomes do not exceed £20S a year. As we seem to he unable to get the satisfaction we want from the Treasurer, I move -

That the clause bc postponed.

Obviously the purpose of the clause is that where a man gets a day’s work, he shall, as an insured person, pay1s. 6d. weekly, as that is the weekly contribution of the employee, which has to be supplemented by the amount the employer will have to pay. The contribution is essentially a tax, and our objection to it is that the tax is computed on the assumption that a full week’s work has been performed by the insured person ; but in this instance a tax is being imposed regardless of whether an employee works for a part of a week or for the whole week. Even if an employee should not work for a whole week, he will have to pay the full rate of tax for a week. All the exemptions contemplated are nebulous and indefinite, and a case for the postponement of the clause has been established.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– It is quite impossible to include in the bill all the conditions of employment which obtain throughout Australia, even if we knew how to cope with all cases. In the circumstances provision has to be made by regulations. Subsequent clauses give the Government power to frame regulations under which it will be competent to deal sensibly and equitably with all border-line cases. Clause 186 gives the Governor-General power to state the conditions under which insurable employees shall be catered for.

Mr Curtin:

– The Treasurer has not indicated the manner in which that is to be done.

Mr CASEY:

– We have not yet considered clause 186. In many cases we do not yet know the procedure to be adopted. Awkward cases will arise and the commission will be guided by the circumstances and act in a common-sense way. That answers most of the points which have been raised by honorable members opposite.

Mr DRAKEFORD:
Maribyrnong

– As the time allotted for the consideration of part IV. of the bill has’ almost expired, it is quite impossible for me to state various points which I wished to bring under the notice of the committee, particularly in respect of casual employees. The action of the Govern ment in limiting the time is most unjust as it prevents the representatives of the people from assisting their constituents.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The time allowed for this portion of the committee stage having expired, I must put the question that is now before the Chair - “ That the clause be postponed”.

Question put -

That the clausebe postponed (Mr. Ward’s amendment ) .

The committee divided. (The Chairman -Mr. Prowse.)

AYES: 27

NOES: 36

Majority . . 9

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Clauses 36 to 45, and the circulated amendment of the Government, agreed to.

Circulated amendment -

Clause 38, omit “ in camp a period of continuous training in”, insert “a period of not less than six days continuous training in any branch of “.

Sitting suspended from6.24 to 8 p.m. [Quorum formed.]

Clause 46 -

Insured persons shall, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of this act, be entitled to the following benefits: -

Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1936

– This is an important clause to which, earlier in the discussion, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin) sought to move an amendment. This scheme, to be national in scope, should include provision for the wives and children of insured persons, at least in respect of medical benefits. During the afternoon the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) gave what was described as a “Dorothy Dix” reply to aninquiry by an honorable member, when he stated that it was the intentionof the Government to appoint a royal commission to inquire into and report upon this aspect of the scheme; but his statement did not satisfy honorable members on this side. The Government should insert in this bill the necessary provisions. For the payment of1s. 6d. a week members of friendly societies, their wives and children up to the age of fourteen years, get a full range of medical benefits; in addition, a funeral allowance is made for both husband and wife. This national scheme should give the same range of benefits to all contributors. A well-known medical practitioner informed me that the wives and families of members of friendly societies require the services of doctors much more often than do the members themselves.

Mr.Casey. - If that is so, the11s. capitation fee must be wrong.

Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1936

– I am opposed to the measure in its present form, and I move -

That the following words be added to paragraph (a) - “for the insured, his wife, and children “.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The adoption of the amendment would increase the appropriation. Therefore it is not in order.

Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1936

– In view of your ruling, Mr. Chairman, I move -

That the clause be postponed -

If it is carried, it will be regarded as an instruction to the Government - to consider and re-draft the clause for the purpose of making provision, in paragraph’ (a), of medical benefits for the wives and children of insured persons.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– This amendment, in practically identical terms, has been discussed on at least two prior occasions, and it has been fully explained, on behalf of the Government, why it cannot be accepted. The reasons have been given at great length. I do not wish to weary honorable members, but apparently I must repeat-

Mr Brennan:

– The Treasurer has wearied the committee to the point of distraction. He has no answer.

Mr CASEY:

– The honorable member for Batman knows that the Government has promised to introduce a further proposal to provide, among other things, medical benefits for the wives and children of insured persons.

Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

.- It would be a convenience to honorable members if the whole group of clauses which have to be considered in this period of the guillotine procedure, were open to discussion in the same manner as the whole of a small bill sometimes is dealt with. I say this because I know that several honorable members on both sides wish to raise points on various clauses for the consideration of the Treasurer (Mr. Casey). If the clauses are not taken in one group, the probability is that much of the limited time allowed will be occupied in the consideration of one or two clauses, whilst others, in regard to which we desire information, may not bo discussed at all.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member will not be in order in submitting another motion until the question before the committee is disposed of.

Mr MULCAHY:
Lang

– I support the amendment moved by the honorable member for Brisbane (Mr. George Lawson), and I agree with him that this national scheme should include benefits for the wives and children of insured persons. The Treasurer (Mr. Casey) has not advanced any valid reason why the clause should not be postponed. I am afraid that the honorable gentleman is losing his temper gradually, because, whenever questions are addressed to him he either leaves the chamber or declines to answer.

Mr.Casey. - Nonsense! If the honorable member is referring to a question asked by the honorable member for East Sydney (Mr. Ward), my reply is that it was not couched in civil terms. I do not propose to answer questions that are clothed in abusive language.

Mr MULCAHY:

– I was not referring to that particular incident.

Mr Casey:

– Which one, then?

Mr MULCAHY:

– Many honorable members on both sides have asked the Treasurer for explanations of different clauses and I regret to say that they have not been given. In a measure which affects so closely the interests of all the people, it is desirable that we should have the fullest information which the Treasurer is able to give to us. Since the bill does not make adequate provision for the wives and families of insured persons, the word “ national “ should be erased from the title.

Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa

.- I support the amendment to postpone consideration of the clause as an instruction to the Government to have it redrafted so as to include at least medical benefits for the wives and children of insured persons. Because the Government has a majority, it can ignore the claims of wives and children, but it will not be very long before the wives, at any rate, will have something to say in this matter. This measure is called a national health insurance bill, but, I suggest, the Government’s only purpose in introducing it is to ensure that the wage-earner may be patched up like a piece of old machinery, in order to fit him to keep his nose to the grindstone. This measure has not been inspired by humanitarian motives; it is founded on base commercialism, and is primarily designed to keep the wageearner fit enough to earn more profits for the boss. Any doubt that may have existed in that respect is completely dispelled by this proposal, which callously ignores the rights of wives and children. Of what use is it to endeavour to patch up a working man in order that he might continue in employment, if we ignore entirely the health of his children, who later will take his place in- ‘industry? Must one continue to repeat the unpleasant facts which our vital statistics reveal in this respect? Does not the Government realize that the worker’s children of to-day will be the wageearners of to-morrow, and that if every provision is not made to protect their health right from birth, a third of our future children, as vital statistics indicate, will be physically sub-normal and mentally deficient ? That is not my statement, but the considered view of officers of the Health Departments of. New South Wales and theCommonwealth. Yet this so-called national health insurance measure makes noprovision whatever for the protection- of the health of Australian mothers by extending to them the medical benefits provided under this bill. If the Government wishes to make any pretence of establishing a national health scheme, it should start with the infant in the cradle, or the mother in her pre-natal period; at that stage more than at any other can we safeguard the health of our people. Judging by this measure, however, industry is not concerned with either the infant or the mother, because neither of them earn a wage from which contributions towards this fund can be made. Because employers and vested interests wish to pay as little as possible towards the financing of this scheme, the Government is not concerned with the claims of wives and children to participate in it. The Government may describe this as a national health scheme, but history will call it something else. Practically every honorable member is the father of a family, and he knows from experience what family life means. He is aware of the risks involved in motherhood. But this Government declares, in effect, that it does not care “ a tinker’s cuss “ about the mothers of the nation. It has gone so far, however, as to bring experts from overseas to advise it as to the least expensive method of patching up the carcass of a man who works alongside a machine in order that he may be enabled to continue to eke out profits for his employer. This measure is the worst example of cold-blooded brutality which this Parliament has ever been asked to perpetrate; for sheer base commercialism..! have not encountered anything like it during my parliamentary career, and such brutal disregard of the rights of mothers and children will go down in history, not only as a discredit to this Government and every one who supports it, -but also as evidence of the degradation of this Parliament.

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

.- The refusal of the Ministry to take cognizance of the views expressed on the secondreading debate with regard to insuring that in this bill provision shall be made for medical services for wives and children makes it imperative that, on this clause dealing with medical benefit, the Opposition shall now make its final stand in respect of this all-important question. Talcing what is contained in the bill with the somewhat vague and nebulous statements which have been made concerning what may be included in another measure, we are .forced to the conclusion that the Government proposes that there shall be compulsory insurance for the medical treatment of the husband whilst the husband shall have the option further to make provision for the medical treatment of his wife and children. He has had that option hitherto, because friendly societies have given to the wage-earners of Australia the opportunity to make payments to cover medical benefits for their wives and children. ‘ One argument which the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) used in justification of the compulsory insurance of the men was the fact that only 400,000 wage-earners in Australia were members of friendly societies, the total number of persons embraced by friendly societies being approximately 700,000. Every one of those 400,000 members can be regarded as wage-earners, who have either felt the need to make this prudent arrangement for the medical treatment of their wives, or have felt that their income was such as to enable .them to make such provision. The Government, however, says, in effect, that this is a plan solely for medical benefits for employees, and it is compulsory for the husband to insure himself for medical ‘treatment. By its disregard of the principle of compulsion in respect of medical treatment for wives and children, however, the Government jeopardizes the whole proposal in respect of national health. An optional system does two things. First of all, it leaves the wife, as a citizen of the State, absolutely dependent upon what provision her husband makes for her, although her husband, as a citizen of the State, does have to make compulsory provision for his own medical treatment. I could understand that, in respect of a system of purely contributory insurance, the Government should say that it shall be compulsory for every employee to make full provision for medical treatment for himself, hut not for his wife and f amily. That, of course, would be a plan in which the community, as a community, would not be taxed in order to subvent it, and, therefore, the husband as an employee would not be drawing upon the taxpayers in any respect in order that he might have a better health provision for himself than would otherwise be possible. But this scheme distinguishes between the citizenship rights of the wife and the citizenship rights of the husband, in that the Consolidated Revenue of this nation is to be drawn upon to provide a fund out of which medical treatment will be made available to the husband but not to his wife. That is my. first point.

My second point is that in so far as the husband will have the option of making voluntary provision for the medical treatment of his wife, that option will be more apparent than real, because it has to be measured in relation to the resources of the husband. Already, the husband will be taxed ls. 6d. a week in order to make provision for his own insurance. Then he will be called upon to make an additional contribution should he desire to place his wife and children on an equal basis with himself in respect of medical treatment. Such a proposal calls to mind the remark of Anatole France : “ The rich, of course, are never accused of stealing bread because they are never under any necessity to steal bread; only the poor are convicted of such offences “. The man who is in receipt of from 10s. to £1 above the basic wage is warranted in making voluntary provision for the protection of his wife and family. I recommend all men who can afford to do so to make such provision for their wives and families, and I offer such advice not only in their own interests, but also because it is proper for them so to do. This scheme, however, has been born of the urge of the Government to give a national health service, by an averaging of the risks involved. But it violates the whole principle of averaging by excluding wives and children. It is a negation of the principle of national health insurance to say to a man on the basic wage : “ On your wage you will probably not be able to make a contribution,” and to a man in receipt of a margin above the basic wage: “ You ought to make a contribution “. The contention that this is a plan primarily intended to keep the worker fit in order that he may continue in production for the profit of his employer appears to be justified, when we find that it is the husband who is to be kept fit, whilst his wife, who has to stay at home and cook for him and care for bis children as an unpaid domestic - the sharer of all his risks and difficulties - is excluded from protection under this measure. The Opposition will not accept the assurance of the Government that, in another bill to be produced in the near or distant future, special provision will be made for the insurance of wives. As this is a scheme in respect of which the taxpayers in general, and employers and employees as classes, are to be called upon to make contributions, we say that this anti-feminist Government ought to be permitted no longer to exclude the wives of working men from the legal guarantees given to their husbands. “Wives are, at any rate, the equals of their husbands in the economic service they render to the country, for I reject the stupid argument that the husband alone earns the income. In the subdivision of labour, by which she does all the work in the home - cooking, washing, nursing and all the incidence of housewifery - the wife is a contributor to her husband’s earning ability. It is monstrous, therefore, that the income of the husband should be drawn upon, under the law, to ensure for him a service which is not to be made available to his wife. Every penny of the tax, which the worker would compulsorily pay under this scheme, would reduce the funds available to his wife for the upkeep of the home, and to that extent she would be deprived of means whereby she might make alternative provision. Any payment which reduced the husband’s wages would curtail his wife’s resources, and anything legally taken from the husband’s wage should be only for benefits which the wife is statutorily assured of being able to enjoy equally with her husband.

Mr PATERSON:
Gippsland

– The argument advanced by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin) in favour of the inclusion of wives and children as beneficiaries under the insurance scheme does not seem to be in accord with statements made by him in his second-reading speech. On that occasion he said that the cost of the medical treatment of sufferers from occupational diseases and vocational sickness could be properly regarded as a charge on industry to which the employer might be expected to contribute, but he suggested, if ihe did not actually make the statement, that the cost of the medical treatment of an employee affected with illness which could not be ascribed to the occupation which he followed, could not be fairly regarded as the responsibility of this employer.

Mr Curtin:

– Hear, hear ! I regard it as a social obligation.

Mr PATERSON:

– The honorable member regards it as a public responsibility. Now, however, he goes out of hi3 way to argue that, in a scheme which in its very essence is framed on a contributory basis, the employer subsidizing the payments to be made by the employee, the employer should help to defray the cost of the medical treatment of, not only an insured person suffering from an occupational disease, but also his wife and children. .

Mr Curtin:

– That is because the employer is to be taxed, as I believe, wrongly, to provide a system’ of insurance for the husband.

Mr PATERSON:

– I am pointing out to the Leader of the Opposition, who is usually very consistent, that the argument which he is now advancing is diametrically opposed to that used by him in his second-reading speech. The friendly societies, which have rendered a great service to Australia, have, I understand, made strong representations that they should be left some part of this field undisturbed in which to carry on their work. The Government, in enabling them to do this, is determined to assist in the provision of medical treatment of the dependants of the employee who is the subject of the honorable gentleman’s indignation. The Government proposes to assist them, by a subsidy on a family basis, to reduce the contributions that the wage-earner would have to make to such bodies in order to have his wife and children covered for medical benefit. That seems to be an admirable and practicable method of overcoming the difficulty. The Treasurer gave an undertaking, on behalf of the Government, that a subsidy of some kind would be made to the friendly societies to enable them to reduce their charges to the wageearner, so that the two contributions he will be required to make will not total a greater amount than he can afford.

Mr HOLLOWAY:
Melbourne Ports

– I cannot follow the reasoning of the honorable member for Gippsland (Mr. Paterson). It is ridiculous for him to suggest, at this stage, that there is anything inconsistent in the arguments used by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin), whose first objection to this bill was that it failed to provide medical benefit for the wives and children of compulsorily insured persons. It was pointed out that this measure would undermine the stability of friendly societies, without bridging the gap which it would create. It was said that the real reason why workers join these societies is, generally, to provide medical treatment, not for themselves, but for their wives and children. The records of the societies show that most members join on the eve of their marriage, or shortly afterwards. The honorable member for Gippsland selected a statement by the Leader of the Opposition that the employer’s share of the contribution should be sufficient only to meet the risks in respect of his own employee, and not the family of the employee; but the Leader of the Opposition knew that, as the contributions were to be made by three parties, and would not wholly come out of the Consolidated Revenue, the scheme could not fairly be described as a national one. It does not cover everybody in the commu nity, and all are not required to contribute towards the cost of the scheme. Probably 75 per cent, or 80 per cent, of the people whom I represent would be forced to become contributors under this scheme, and the great mass of them, I am sure, are already members of friendly societies. The average worker has some security for himself under the state laws relating to workers’ compensation, and his real reason for joining a friendly society is, as I have already suggested, his desire to protect his wife and children. I protest against this measure, because it excludes the wives and children of insured persons from medical benefit. A hotch-potch scheme such as this should not be described, as a national one. 1 protest, on behalf of my electors, against their being compelled to contribute ls. 6d. a week under this scheme, although it will still be necessary for them to retain their membership of a friendly society in order to provide medical benefits for their wives and children. At least 80 per cent, of the workers whom I represent would not be provided for under this bill as well as they now are by the friendly societies, and, therefore, I object to tb« measure being bludgeoned through this Parliament.

Mr MAHONEY:
Denison

– I stated in my second-reading speech that, in my opinion, the person responsible for the drafting of this bill either came from the ranks of the wealthy class, or was not a family man. I agree with the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin) that a citizen’s first responsibility! is to his wife and children. The average worker joins a friendly society, not to protect himself so much as to provide medical benefits for his wife and children. The utmost consideration should always be shown for the mothers of families, because the nation owes them a great debt. During an epidemic of a disease such as whooping cough, the children suffer more than the adults. The fact of there being thousands of children in our hospitals suffering from infantile paralysis should have been sufficient to convince the Government that children should be included in this scheme. Honorable members opposite are neither logical nor consistent in their treatment of women and children. I regard it as my first duty to preserve the health of my wife and children, and every decent man holds similar views. It is all very well for honorable members opposite, many of whom have private incomes in addition to their parliamentary allowance, to jibe at honorable members on “this side who advocate the claims of the women and children. There are some who claim that the farmers are the backbone of the nation, but I maintain that the mothers, who bring into the world our future citizens, are the nation’s greatest assets. Any man who has in him a spark of manhood will protect the mothers of the nation; yet honorable members opposite laugh when their claims are advocated. A man who is not prepared to fight for the women of the nation is not worthy of his mother or his wife. Although, as the Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Hughes) has said, the mothers are the reservoir from which the nation draws its manhood, this bill makes no provision for them. It is true that the Treasurer has promised to introduce other legislation later to deal with them, but, unfortunately, his promises cannot be accepted. I do not accept the statement that, following a meeting of caucus, the Government is prepared to rectify its neglect to the women and children of the workers. If this is to be in reality a national health and insurance scheme, it must include the whole of the people. Nothing is of greater importance to a nation than a high average standard of health, and, therefore, the care of the children should be our first concern. Even from an economic point of view, that is necessary, for, otherwise, a strong virile nation, cannot be. developed. Growing children require constant care. “We all know the serious effects of illness and neglect. Honorable members opposite talk glibly in praise of the women in outback districts, but this bill will not do anything to make their lot happier. There is no inconsistency on ‘ this side of the House, but honorable members opposite who have criticized this measure have allowed the steam-roller to be put over them to-day.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Collins:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Order!

Mr MAHONEY:

– Recalcitrant . members on the other side have been forced to accept this bill. Unless it con- tains adequate provisions to conserve the health of the women and children it cannot be regarded as providing for a national scheme of health and pensions insurance. I regret that honorable members opposite have been so scared by the steam-roller that they have accepted the Government’s proposals.

Mr CLARK:
Darling

– I support the amendment moved by the honorable member for Brisbane (Mr. George. Lawson) which aims at providing medical benefits, not only for the insured person himself, but also for his wife and children. A somewhat similar proposal was put forward by the Opposition during the second-reading stage. The Opposition regards the health of the women and children of the community as of such importance to the nation that it is not prepared to vote upon this clause without making a determined effort to secure medical benefits for them. It is the duty of the nation to protect and preserve the health of its growing citizens. As I pointed out in my secondreading speech, there is a good deal of talk about the value of physical training of youth, but no system of physical training can be successful if the health of the children has been neglected in their early years. The honorable member for Gippsland (Mr. Paterson) said that industry should not be called upon to provide for the women and children of the community.

Mr Paterson:

– I merely repeated the argument of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin).

Mr CLARK:

– Unless industry provides for the wives and children of the workers, for what purpose does it exist? Although .the mother of the family works in the home, she serves industry there just as effectively as if she were employed in the workshop. Therefore, any bill which purports to deal with the health of the nation, must provide for the family of the worker as well as for the worker himself. Under the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act, half of the income of the husband is considered to be the income of the wife; a woman is not entitled to a pension if her husband’s earnings are beyond a. certain amount. That is because half of the earnings of the husband arc considered to belong to ber. Any payment which a worker makes under this legislation ought to provide for medical services for bis wife and children, as well as for himself. I hope that the Government will agree to the postponement of this clause, with a view to making better provision for the wives and families of the workers. The Treasurer said that it is impossible to make that provision here. I should like to know his reasons. The production of this country is so great that ample provision should be made for all its citizens. The preservation of the health of the nation should be a charge on Consolidated Revenue. It is useless to talk of maternal and infant welfare unless we are prepared to do something under this bill for the health of the mothers and children in the community. I hope, therefore, that the Treasurer will agree to postpone the clause with a view to providing for medical services to the wives and children of insured persons, as well as to the insured, persons themselves.

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

.- The motion that the clause be postponed is both simple and reasonable. The motive underlying it is worthy. The precise meaning of the proposal to postpone the clause was laid down in a revised form Inst night by the Treasurer (Mr. Casey). The honorable gentleman is opposed to the postponement because he is not prepared to accept the principle of an amendment which was ruled out of order. Last night he inverted that erroneous view of what was involved in a postponement, when the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) moved an amendment which was ruled out of order. It was found that a considerable measure of support was forthcoming for that amendment, but as it was ruled out of order, the honorable gentleman moved for the postponement of the clause. Only after he had made a careful count of heads did the Treasurer admit that it was desirable to give a more restricted meaning to the word “ postponement “ and he thereupon agreed to postpone the clause. In the light of those facts, which are indisputable, I suggest that this clause might very well be postponed until the fate of the motion by the honorable member for

Brisbane (Mr. George Lawson) has been determined. When we consider the list of benefits provided in this bill - medical, sickness, disablement, pensions and additional benefits, widows’ and orphans’ pensions, and allowances for dependent children - it is evident that the underlying reason for this bill is that the burden of pensions payments shall be transferred from the taxpayers of this country to the workers, and that pensioners shall pay for their own pensions. In other words, the pressure on wealth is to be removed by the representatives of wealth. Those who profit by the capitalist system are to take drastic measures to unburden themselves of a responsibility which they think that they have borne too long. That proposition is ratified and proven up to the hilt by an examination of this clause, because, when we turn away from the pensions aspect, which is easily understood, and examine other aspects, such as sickness benefit, for instance, with which we are particularly concerned, we find that the Government is not interested in the maintenance and integrity of family life at all. The worker will receive in benefit only part of the money which he has himself compulsorily contributed. When we turn to the schedule and examine the insignificant amount of the orphan’s pension, and the precarious conditions under which that benefit can be enjoyed, we realize that the majority of orphans will be cheated of the pension, by reason of the fact that under the vicious social system that prevails, their parents have been thrown out of work and have been unable to maintain the weekly payments which condition all benefits under the bill.

An amazing development has occurred in regard to the medical benefits. An announcement was made to-day, in answer to a carefully but not very artistically arranged question, that a royal commission was about to inquire into payments to the medical practitioners for services rendered. The remuneration of the medical practitioner is entirely in the air, and as the rewards of the medical practitioner remain uncertain and cannot be determined for another six or twelve months it follows that the nature and extent of medical benefits must also, in the meantime, remain in the air. Just as the committee was asked last night to discuss details of contributions before it had determined that contributions should be levied, so the committee to-night is asked to discuss the incidence of medical benefits when the major question of medical benefits has been remitted to a royal commission which may not furnish its report for another twelve months, if ever.

I think Mr. Collins, that you must be impressed by the utter futility of proceding with the consideration of this bill under conditions which oppress honorable members. In an hour or two the guillotine will fall and discussion will be cut off. Amendments proposed to be moved from this side of the committee will be incontinently rejected, without even being put to a division. Our honorable friends opposite will thus be saved from the embarrassment which otherwise would have oppressed them, of voting against proposals coming from this side of which, according to their speeches on the secondreading, they, nevertheless, heartily approve. In the circumstances I am very glad to note the increasing volume of evidence that the bill becomes more unpopular every day. The better it is understood, the more certain it becomes that ultimately it must be frustrated. I said last night that the bill was doomed. The honorable member for Werriwa (Mr. Lazzarini) is right when he says that knowing that the bill is doomed, and knowing that it has to save its face in difficult circumstances, the Government is determined by force of numbers and by extreme and unjust exercise of the Standing Orders, to force this bill through the chamber and to force it through Parliament before opportunity can be given for it to be considered in the Senate by the recently-elected representatives of the people.

Question put -

That the clause be postponed (Mr. George Lawson’s amendment) .

The committee divided. (Temporary Chairman - Mr. Collins.)

AYES: 27

NOES: 35

Majority 8

In division:

AYES

NOES

Mr.Curtin. - I unreservedly accept the right honorable gentleman’s assurance.

Question so resolved in the negative.

Mr HUTCHINSON:
Deakin

– I ask the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) to explain how the provisions of this clause are likely to affect itinerant workmen, such as shearers. I take it that such a worker will be on the panel of the doctor in the district in which he lives, but as his work takes him away from his home for six or nine months in the year it seems to me that it will not be of great service to him to be on the panel of the doctor where his permanent home is. What will be the position of a man living in Victoria who goes to New South Wales to work and becomes ill while he is there? Has any provision been made to enable a worker in such circumstances to receive medical benefit?

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– Clause 52 provides that the commission may make arrangements in the prescribed manner for medical services to be rendered in accordance with the act and regulations. Under that clause arrangements will be made to protect itinerant workers of the class mentioned by the honorable member.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 47 -

Medical benefit consists of such proper and necessary medical services as are prescribed and the provision of proper and sufficient drugs and medicines mid of the prescribed medical and surgical appliances and the supply of such medical certificates as are required for the purposes of this act, but does not include medical services involving the exorcise of such special skill or experience as general medical practitioners cannot reasonably be expected to possess or treatment or attendance in respect of a confinement or such other medical services as are prescribed.

Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley

.- I had intended to move that all the words after the word “ act “ be omitted from the clause, but I understand that it would not be in order for me to do so. I therefore move -

That the clause be postponed.

I do this as an instruction. to the Government -

To amend thu clause to make provision for specialist treatment and also for medical services in maternity cases.

We have been told that this bill is modelled on the British act, but it is notable that that act docs not exclude contributors from specialist treatment. The Treasurer (Mr. Casey), in his second-reading speech, painted a vivid picture of the medical service that would be provided if this bill became law. He said -

It is the purpose of the Government steadily to develop the medical resources of thu country until it can bc said that not a life will be lost or avoidable suffering incurred for the lack of proper medical treatment.

The fact is, of course, that no such service is likely to be provided. The provisions of the bill fall far below the standard that might have been expected from the remarks of the Treasurer. The honorable gentleman went on to say -

It is no. longer a question of “the pouring of medicines of which we know little into bodies of which we know less”.

It has become increasingly evident, as the discussion of the measure has proceeded, that subscribers will be in grave danger of being placed on medical panels which will be far too large to enable practitioners to give even reasonable service. Neglect is likely to be the experience of many subscribers, not only in respect of general medical treatment, but also, and particularly, in respect of specialist treatment in connexion with industrial diseases and other disorders which may be held to bc outside the range of general practitioners. We have been told frequently during the last week or two that the British act has worked satisfactorily, but information available to us from other than Government sources is to the contrary effect. The Secretary of the Trade Union Congress of Great Britain, who has had a long experience of the operation of the British act, commented on the work of the general practitioner service in Great Britain as follows -

Sir Walter (Kinnear) recommends for Australia the same kind of medical benefit as we have here, namely, a general practitioner service as set out in paragraph 34 of his report. Our criticism of that service is that it is not by any means complete. The practitioner has no link with consultants or specialists of any kind and the range of services that he can give is strictly limited. This again is, in our opinion, a very serious drawback 5n the medical benefit, and although a royal commission as far back as 1925 recommended the provision of a consultant and specialist service, it has not yet been done.

Those observations indicate considerable dissatisfaction with the British law, yet the Government is offering us an inferior service. Moreover, as far back as 1925, a royal commission in Great Britain emphatically recommended that provision should be made for consultant and specialist services in addition to the existing, general practitioner service. The provisions of this bill therefore are at least thirteen years behind the most advanced thought in Great Britain on this subject. The rosy complexion which the Treasurer has sought to paint on the face of the British scheme will not bear examination.

Not only has that scheme been adversely criticized by the Secretary of the Trade Union Congress of Great Britain, but even medical practitioners working under it have condemned it as unsatisfactory. I direct attention to the following observations of Dr. Harrie Roberts which appeared in the New Statesman and Nation of June, 1935: -

But thu medical treatment officially provided for the wage earners of this country takes little account of the enormous development in practical therapeutics during the last 25 years. Commonly, the treatment means little more than that every insured person can have a bottle of medicine when he wants it and takes the trouble to ask for it. When the insurance act was introduced, the bottle of medicine was just about to settle down on its death-bed. The act rejuvenated it and to-day there can hardly bc a working class home in thu land without a- partly consumed or 10 oz. bottle of bitter or sweet, brown or pinkish, mixture composed of ingredient’s in the efficacy of most of which, not one doctor in 50 has thu slightest faith.

Dr. Roberts had an extensive practice as a panel doctor in Great Britain for many years, and he described the British general practitioner service as a “ bottleof.medicineservice “. He also wrote in the most disparaging way of the efficacy of the medicines prescribed. Yet the Treasurer, in spite of his statement that “it is no longer a question of ‘ the pouring of medicine, of which we know little, into bodies of which we know less’”, is advocating that we should adopt something even less satisfactory than the British service. Dr. Roberts also remarked -

No provision is made for a serious surgical treatment beyond such as is considered within the competence and skill of the average general practitioner - and thu medical organization has’ striven hard to keep that official standard as low as possible. The panel medi- i-al system should either bo scrapped or radically modified.

– In my opinion a woman should be entitled to special attention for a month before, and two months after, her confinement. The mothers of Australia are rendering to the nation the greatest .possible service within their power. I enter my emphatic protest against the failure of the Government to provide in this bill the fullest benefits for mothers, particularly during their confinement. All this clause sets out to do is to repair the injuries sustained by workers in industry. In contrast to the restricted benefits proposed under this bill, let me recite the benefits to which contributors to the voluntary scheme in my electorate are entitled: Provision is made for hospital treatment for a contributor and his family while he or they are in hospital. Further, in the event of the contributor’s death, provision is made for the payment of funeral benefits of £50 from the general organization and £50 from the local miners’ lodge. In the event of the death of the wife of a contributor a funeral benefit of £30 is paid, and ‘benefits are provided in respect of the death of children ranging down to £2 for a* child dying in its first year. In addition, provision is made for treatment by an eye specialist and free glasses for the contributor, his wife and family. This bill has been referred to as a great national insurance scheme; it is the rottenest piece of legislation that has ever been placed before the people of this country. It should be sent back to those responsible for it. So far as I am personally concerned, I would have nothing to do with it ; I would not try to amend it because it is not worth amending. The party to which I belong has endeavoured to amend it, in order to make it more acceptable to the people, but because of rotten party political considerations, the Government will not accept any suggestions that emanate from this side of the chamber. “With the assistance of its adherents, it hopes to gag the measure through this chamber, but I doubt if it will succeed. I trust that even at this eleventh hour the Government will agree to the postponement of this clause.

Mr BLAIN:
Northern Territory

– I intended to move au amendment on a succeeding clause, but seeing the amount of time the Opposition has determined to take upon this clause, I fear that the people of the Northern Territory will have no opportunity to have their views expressed by their representative in this chamber if I do not speak at this juncture. [Quorum, formed.]

The amendment I have in mind could be embodied in clause 47. Of all the areas with which Sir Walter Kinnear is highly competent to deal, the coal-fields areas must be the most understood by him. Therefore, I deplore the remarks of the honorable member for Hunter (Mr. James). I . feel sure that he did not realize the meaning of the words he used when he made such uncomplimentary references to Sir Walter Kinnear, who, in my opinion, should be eminently competent to give valuable information to the Government, certainly in respect of the coal-mining districts. I rise to speak of the isolated areas in respect of which I would not expect him to have exact knowledge because they possess problems of a peculiar and remote kind. I propose to deal with those areas where the services of specialists are not available and where specialists would have to undertake a journey of about 2,000 miles to visit their patients. I point out, however, that the Northern Territory has a great number of people who are competent to give ordinary medical services in remote areas pending the arrival of a qualified medical practitioner. I speak particularly in regard to the special circumstances of the Northern territory and other inland areas contiguous to the Territory. As honorable members know, we have few doctors, but scattered through our pioneering community we have a number of splendid women who came to us as nurses of the Australian Inland Mission, and who have since married and become citizens of the Northern Territory. We have others, including members and wives of members of the police force, who can carry out all the ordinary simple medical duties until ii qualified doctor arrives to take charge of the patient. Most of these people are the first resource of the sick and injured in the Northern Territory, and I think I can say that they all act without any thought of gain, and that many of them would consider it a bitter insult if it were thought that they sought to gain by their freely given services. At the same time, however, in view of the principles which are being established under this bill, their services, in my opnion, should bc recognized. Such recognition would at least give them a status; it would make known that they at least exist, and the public would be informed as to where their services are available. Some of them may be prepared to take payment, and I can assure honorable members that they would thoroughly deserve it. Others may feel that their circumstances are such that they do not need payment. The Government should concede to them the right to collect fees if they so desire. However, I do not stress that point. Some of them might like to hand the money to that magnificent organization, the Australian Inland Mission, which, conceived and managed by the Presbyterian Church, knows neither colour, creed, nor class when medical* services arc demanded of it. Others might like to establish local medical services with their earnings, but in any case the offer should be made as a tribute to the self-sacrificing services of this gallant outback band of women and mon, who, unlike many city doctors, cannot keep rich homes in the suburbs and still have a surplus left to buy yachts. These people of the outback are willing to give their time and labour to save valuable lives, to steer new popu lation into Australia, and to prevent suffering in the Never-Never. I would emphasize that the whole of the people of the outback are interested in this subject of medical services. Some of them may be temporarily annoyed with me for raising the question at all, but I am not going to allow the bill to pass without doing what I consider to be ordinary common justice to them. There is nothing new in principle in the alteration I suggest. In ‘the New Guinea mandate there is provision for medical assistance by “lik lik doctors “, which is pidgin English for “ little doctors “, many of whom arc far less qualified than the retired nurses of the Australian Inland Mission, policemen’s wives, and others who give their services in the Northern Territory. I am merely asking the House to extend to the people of the Northern Territory what is already a recognized type of service provided for natives and others in New Guinea. The least tribute that Parliament can pay to the outback medical workers is to recognize them in the bill. 1. can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that in my country these people are far more honoured than any city doctor who, in his own sphere, reaps a. rich harvest from illness and suffering, and maintains a palatial home in the suburbs. So that honorable members may have an opportunity to discuss the later clauses of the bill, I merely ask that those persons who are qualified in the outback to render assistance before a medical practitioner arrives should be given a status. The bill should recognize them and allow payment for their services, and their stations should be listed so that the people of the territory may know where medical services are obtainable.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– A means is provided for doing what the honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr. Blain) has suggested, and I hope we shall have an opportunity to give effect to it. If the honorable member will look at paragraph l> of clause 114 he will see that the Government seeks to give authority to the commission to assist in the provision of health insurance benefits in remote areas. Under that provision, of course, bush nursing services could be utilized, as well as the aerial medical services in inland areas. In those two directions the Government will seek to improve medical facilities in the outback.

The honorable member for Dalley (Mr. Rosevear) quoted from the works of a gentleman who is very well known as a writer on medical subjects - Dr. Harrie Roberts. I have read much of what he has written on popular medical subjects. He is popular in Great Britain as a writer on such subjects, and he writes in journals that come to Australia.

Mr Mulcahy:

– And he is u reliable authority.

Mr CASEY:

– I agree that that is so. Giving evidence before the royal commission, Dr. Harrie Roberts said -

In my experience, there can be no question an to the enormous advantage to insured persons resulting from the medical provisions of the Insurance Act.

That is a very valuable statement. Then, again, the honorable member for Dalley quoted from a report setting out the views of the secretary of the Trade Unions Congress on the scheme operating in Great Britain. I think th.-j honorable member will agree with me that the National Association of Trade Union Approved Societies would probably be more in touch with the medical side of the insurance problem, as it affects trade unions in Great Britain, than the congress he has cited. The report of the royal commission gives this as the view of the National Association of Trade Union Approved Societies -

The medical profession as a whole has rendered competent and conscientious service to insured persons.

I could continue to quote at very great length in the same strain. The honorable member made a very well-reasoned appeal to the committee for the broadening of the general practitioner service to something that would take in all the specialized services. He desired that an insured member of the community should have at his disposal specialists in dentistry, specialists in the care of the ears and eyes, and specialists in many other branches of medicine. I think that no person with red blood in his veins can demur to that ideal. It is a high and reasonable ideal, and I hope that one of these days we shall be able to give effect to it- Just now, however, we are only starting in this business of national insurance, and we are giving a general practitioner service in the first place. Out of the surpluses of the approved societies in the future we aim to extend the benefits set out in the bill, but I hope that even that will not be the end. As we gain experience, we should be able to improve generally, and particularly the medical services. At this moment, however, with all the goodwill in the world, and even if we had had the necessary experience, it would not be possible to launch such a scheme throughout Australia, because we have not the necessary number of specialists spread throughout the continent. Such a service is a matter for the future, but I hope that we shall be able to achieve it before very long.

In reply to the honorable member for Hunter (Mr. James), I would inform him that the Government takes full responsibility for the bill, and for everything in it. If he wants to place the responsibility on a particular individual, I am ready to accept it. I ask him not to direct any unpleasant remarks at the two English officers who are sitting in the officials’ compartment in this chamber, and who are unable, because of the forms of the House, to reply to him. His action is an unsporting thing to do. Let the critics of the bill direct their shafts against me or against the .Government, but not against men whose mouths are sealed because they are the advisers of the Government.

Mr James:

– I am willing to repeat what I said outside the House or anywhere else, and I am willing to say it about the Treasurer.

Mr CASEY:

– The honorable member may say it about whom he likes, but I tell him that the two English experts who are advising the Government have done yeoman service, and that the Government is extremely grateful to them for their invaluable work in connexion with the bill.

Mr James:

– “Why don’t they inquire from the unions in this country?

Mr CASEY:

– It is not a question of inquiring from anybody. The Government takes full responsibility for the measure. The officers who advise the the Government do so to the best of their ability, and the Government accepts, amends, or rejects their advice. Whether the decision is right or wrong, the Government is responsible.

Mr GREEN:
Kalgoorlie

.- I regret that in respect of the benefits to be provided under this bill the Government is lagging behind other countries. It is now over’ thirteen years since a royal commission, inquired into proposals for national insurance in Australia. I was a member of that commission, but there were only two other Labour members besides myself. The chairman was Senator Millen, of Tasmania, and there were several other members holding political convictions different from ours. It could not be expected, therefore, that the commission would make any very radical recommendations, but its suggestions, were, in many respects, much ahead of the proposals in the present scheme. For instance, it was recommended that a maternity benefit of 20s. a week should be payable for two weeks before the birth of a child, and for four weeks afterwards. There is no provision at all in this scheme for pre-natal or post-natal benefits.

Mr Casey:

– A woman may receive benefit if she is laid up or ailing prior to the birth of her child.

Mr GREEN:

– Yes, but the scheme does not provide for pre-natal and post-natal benefit as such. Senator Millen, the chairman of the royal commission, was a” very keen advocate of maternal welfare, a matter which is now receiving close attention throughout the world. Efforts are being made in Australia at the present time to reduce maternal mortality to the minimum. The honorable member for Moreton (Mr. Francis), and the other members of the royal commission, signed the recommendations in common with the rest of us. The honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Drakeford) in his speech this evening, referred to the vastly superior national insurance proposals that had been put forward in New Zealand.I do not propose to go over the same ground, and touch upon the matter merely in order to show that the Government is definitely lagging behind in regard to these matters, instead of bringing forward a scheme which is abreast of the times. The decline of the birth-rate in Australia is such that within 29 years our population will be stationary. Every one must admit that that is a serious condition of affairs for a’ country which is capable of carrying a population of 45,000,000. No matter how our people may work and strive to make this a great country, everything we have accomplished must inevitably be lost if this population decline is not stopped. We have tried to build up our population by immigration, and not only have we failed to do so, but we have been unable to hold even those Britishers who did come here from overseas. It is admitted that immigration is necessary, particularly from northern Europe and from Great Britain itself, yet the fact remains that, during the last few years, 7,000 more people returned to Great Britain from Australia than came here from Great Britain. Despite the expenditure of large sums of money to induce immigrants to come here, we have been unable to keep them because social conditions are not attractive. One reason is the lack of a national insurance scheme of the kind to which English people are accustomed. No doubt the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) will say that the scheme now before us is equal to that of Great Britain, but apart from the welfare of our own people which is, of course, our first consideration, we should have something better if we are to attract and keep immigrants. This is a country worth staying in, and we should endeavour to make conditions so attractive that people will come here and remain.

A step in this direction would be the making of a more substantial Commonwealth grant for the maintenance of aerial medical services in the outback areas. At the present time, a small Commonwealth grant is made towards the cost of this work, and with its help medical services are maintained at several centres from which they cover practically the whole of the north-western part of Western Australia. From Wyndham twice a day wireless medical sessions are conducted so that people in the outback, and particularly women in need of advice, may keep in constant touch with the doctor in Wyndham by means of pedal wireless sets. If a larger grant were available this work could be extended.

Mr MULCAHY:
Lang

.- Will the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) state when insured persons under this scheme will become entitled to medical benefit?

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– Assuming that the bill comes into operation on the 1st January of next year, insured persons will become entitled to,medical benefit on the 1st April. After that preliminary delay, however, insured persons will be entitled to medical benefit after the first weekly payment of ls. 6d.

Mr RIORDAN:
Kennedy

.- Can the Treasurer say what will be done to provide medical services for people living in the remote parts of Australia, such as those north-western towns of Queensland which are 150 miles and more away from the nearest doctor? The Sta te government has realized the difficulties confronting these people, and proposes to establish at Cloncurry a service similar to that provided by the Australian Inland Mission. A base hospital has been established at that centre, and two flying doctors will operate from there, covering an area of 300 miles in all directions. I should like to know, however, what provision is to be made for providing medical service under this scheme until the State scheme is in operation, and in areas which the State scheme will not touch.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer, · Corio · UAP

– The Government proposes to give flexible powers to the commission to deal with outback areas. If it is impossible, in the early stages, to provide medical assistance, the contributions will be diminished, or there will be a refund of an appropriate amount. The Government hopes that the number of areas in which adequate medical treatment is not now available will be relatively few, and that the number will eventually decrease. The Government will, through the commission, endeavour to get medical men to settle in those areas where at present the service is inadequate, and will also make some financial provision where the services are now lacking. One of the indirect benefits of the measure will be a- distinct and progressive improvement of the medical and pharmaceutical services at present available in the more remote parts of Australia. It is not practicable to say what will be done in any particular area, but the commission will have definite directions to fill the gaps such as those mentioned by the honorable member for Kennedy. No doubt the attention of the commission will be directed to that part of the continent referred to by the honorable member.

Mr HARRISON:
Wentworth

– A portion of this clause which relates to medical benefits generally, reads -

Hut floes not include medical services involving the exercise of such special skill or experience as general medical practitioners cannot reasonably bc expected to possess, or treatment or attendance in respect of a confinement or such other medical services as arc prescribed.

I can understand why such services as are mentioned are excluded under this scheme. Provision has already been made for the payment of a maternity allowance in certain cases, and I believe that the Government considers that that allowance adequately covers all those cases that should be met out of governmental subvention. The Treasurer informed the committee this afternoon that the Government intends to refer the treatment of dependent women and children to the royal commission to be appointed; and I suggest that the terms of reference to the royal commission should also include the amount of subvention that will be necessary to embrace in the proposed cover for wives and dependants of insured men the ante-natal and post-natal care of mothers. In support of my contention, I direct the attention of the committee to the statements made by the ex-Minister for Health (Mr. Hughes) from time to time, and also to those made by experts who at the requests of various governments have conducted inquiries in Australia in an endeavour to ascertain the cause of the high rate of maternal mortality in this country. I realize the difficulties associated with the problem, but I consider this an opportune time to bring the matter under the notice of the Government. Speaking at the .National Health and Medical Research Council held at. Hobart from the 1st to the 3rd February of last year, the ex-Minister for Health said -

Many great problems confront the Commonwealth, but the declining birth rate overshadows them all. It is impossible to exaggerate its gravity. Australia is bleeding to death. The indifference of ‘ the general public to all that the decline in the birth rate involves fills me, as I am sure it does you, with dismay. I would that I could write thu solemn warning that the latest vital statistics convey in letters of fire on the walls of the heavens so that all should see, and seeing, take heed while there is time to avert national disaster.

Sir Walter Kinnear, in his report, referred to a similar state of affairs. He said -

The population of Australia is not now increasing at an appreciable rate, and a striking change in the age distribution is taking place consequent upon the lower birth rate and the increasing expectation of life. In this respect Australia is sharing in the experience of most other countries.

Sir Walter Kinnear, who is fully informed of the position in Great Britain, realizes that in Australia we are facing a serious problem. I regret, however, that that gentleman has not encouraged an increase of population in this country hy making the position of women under this bill more favorable. The honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin), when Prime Minister, arranged for Dame Janet Campbell, senior medical officer for maternity and child welfare in the Ministry of Health in London, to report upon the conditions obtaining in Australia. After passing some very severe strictures upon the method adopted in Australia to handle the maternity problem, she said -

But this is not the end of the story: for every woman who dies as the result of child bearing, many others are injured more or less seriously, more or less permanently. It is impossible to measure accurately this morbidity and the consequent amount of illness and suffering which women are called upon to endure. We can only guess at it from the records of gynaecological hospitals, though we know enough to be sure that in many ways this physical disability and the resulting loss of health and strength is an even more serious matter than the actual mortality.

No provision is made in the British national insurance scheme in respect of the ante-natal and post-natal treatment of mothers, but a definite maternal rate or subvention is given to mothers because of the insurance of the breadwinner, and, where the wife is also insured, an additional payment is made; but that is insufficient. Recently, a midwifery act was passed in the British parliament under which regional clinics have been formed throughout the country in an endeavour to overtake the lag that has developed in preserving the health of the mothers and children. I suggest to the Treasurer that instead of ultimately having to introduce some new scheme to assist in preserving the health of mothers and children by governmental subvention, perhaps he may see his way clear to include in the reference to the royal commission authority to determine to what extent the ante-natal and post-natal treatment of mothers can be covered by the bill which he proposes to introduce to cover dependent wives ‘ of insured persons. We are told by all the experts who have investigated this problem that, if mothers were given the proper treatment prior to and subsequent to childbirth, the mortality and morbidity associated with this natural function would decrease to a. remarkable extent. I trust that the Treasurer will dissociate the present maternal allowance from any future proposals which may be made, and that the Government will introduce some comprehensive scheme somewhat similar to that for which provision is made in the British midwifery act. This would obviate the passage at some future date of a measure similar to that enacted in England. I ask the Treasurer to consider the advisability of including this matter in the references to the proposed royal commission.

Question put -

That the clause be postponed (Mr. Rosevears amendment).

The committee divided. (Chairman - Mr. Prowse.)

AYES: 25

NOES: 31

Majority . . . . 6

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I point out to the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Harrison) that under this measure, as it will be altered by Government amendments, it will be possible for insured women who are so certified, to claim sickness benefit, both before and after child-birth. I also inform the honorable gentleman that the royal commission to be appointed will consist, not of medical men, but of laymen, whose duty will be to determine the proper contributions to be made in respect of certain specified services.

Mr Gander:

– Who is the judge?

Mr CASEY:

– He has not yet been selected. The points raised by the honorable member for Wentworth will be borne in mind.

Clause agreed to. 01 a uses 4S and 49 postponed.

Clause 50 -

A person shall not be disqualified from receiving medical benefit under this act by reason that his sickness has been caused by his own misconduct.
A voluntary contributor whose total income from all sources exceeds three hundred and sixty-five pounds per annum shall not be entitled to medical benefit.

Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

.- I understand that sub-clause 1 has caused general practitioners some concern because, under it, they will be expected to give treatment for the cure of venereal diseases, illness resulting from drunkenness, and illnesses following illegal operations or attempted illegal operations upon women. I shall be glad if the Treasurer will tell the committee if services of this nature will be included in the prescribed medical benefits.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– This is a declaratory clause which, I think, is on the right lines, lt is just as necessary to cure diseases and disabilities of the kind mentioned by the honorable member as it is to cure other diseases. Still, this clause is ‘governed by clause 47 which states that what we are seeking to provide is the ordinary general practitioner’s service, and to the extent that these maladies are now Coped with by general practitioners we expect them to be coped with in the future. There must, however, be a dividing line somewhere, and it was proposed to draw such a line even if the Government’s previous agreement with the British Medical Association had come into force. Certain points were to be set aside to be more clearly defined than is the case in the clause as drawn, and that has still to be done before the commission is set up. 1 repeat that to the extent to which a general practitioner ordinarily copes with these maladies, he will be expected to cope with them under this measure, but not to any further degree.

Mr Hawker:

– For his ordinary capitation fee?

Mr CASEY:

– Yes ; but the extent of such services has yet to be made clear.

Mr Hawker:

– Prior to appointment of the commission?

Mr CASEY:

– The commission will require to have something in mind in order to be enabled to decide the fee to be paid.

Mr LANE:
Barton

. - I hope that the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) will accept the suggestion made by the honorable member for “Wakefield (Mr. Hawker). I am inclined to move for the deletion of this clause because honorable members recognize that even under present lodge practice such diseases are excepted. For that reason the Government should agree at once to the deletion of this clause. Cases of this kind can be otherwise provided for, but, I repeat, under present lodge practices sickness benefit or any other benefit is not allowed in respect of them. I yield to no one in my sympathy for the man who gets into difficulty as the result of his own misconduct, and I am always prepared to do what I can to help him. Medical practitioners, I believe, will come to his aid, but a special fee should be charged for the treatment of such cases. Special clinics have been established in metropolitan areas for the express purpose of dealing with them. Surely when the committee knows its mind on the subject, and the Treasurer has stated that the provision in the clause will be improved, the Government will not be so hide-bound as to refuse to delete this clause immediately. The Treasurer admits the desirability of this clause being dealt with by the commission, and I point out that the medical fraternity has no fault to find on that score. The profession, however, has declared that no case of this kind will be treated as part of the ordinary service and that special arrangements should be made for their treatment.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 51 to 53 agreed to.

Clause 54 (Supply of prescribed drug’s, medicines and appliances).

Mr GREEN:
Kalgoorlie

.- I move -

That the following further proviso be added to sub-clause (3) - “ Provided further that an agreement may be made with a friendly societies dispensary for the supply by it of drugs, medicines and appliances to an insured person. In this section and the following sections ‘ friendly societies dispensary ‘ means a dispensary, medical institute or pharmacy conducted by a friendly society registered under the law of any State or by an association of such friendly societies for the supply of drugs, medicines and appliances “.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 55 and 56 agreed to.

Clause 57 - (1)For the purposes of this act, there shall be a Medical Benefit Council consisting of -

pharmaceutical chemists supplying drugs, medicines and appliances under this act;
insured persons who are members of approved societies; and

Mr HAWKER:
Wakefield

.- Officers of existing friendly societies and provident societies wish to know whether they would be eligible for appointment to the Medical Benefit Council as representatives of members of approved societies. These societies have on their staffs highly competent officers who, because of their ability and experience, are paid salaries which preclude them from being insured persons. Particularly at the inauguration of the scheme these men will have the experience and ability to make them most valuable as members of the council. In order to remove any possibility of misunderstanding I should be glad to know whether sub-paragraph iv. of paragraph a of sub-clause 1 will enable such persons to represent members of approved societies.

Mr FRANCIS:
Moreton

.- I should like to know whether representatives of friendly societies dispensaries will be entitled to become members of the Medical Benefit Council referred to in this clause, and also of the District Medical Benefit Committees to be set up under clause 59.

Mr Casey:

– Yes.

Amendment (by Mr. Green) agreed to.

That after the word “chemists”, subparagraph ii.. paragraph a of sub-clause 1 the following words be inserted - “ (including pharmaceutical chemists representing friendly societies’ dispensaries)”.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I can assure the honorable member for Wakefield (Mr. Hawker) that, if nominated by an approved society or a friendly society, an official of such body may act on the Medical Benefit Council.

Mr Hawker:

– I take it that there is nothing in the bill to prevent an officer of an approved society who may not himself be an insured person from becoming a member of the council.

Mr CASEY:

– No, so long as he is nominated by the society.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 58 agreed to.

Clause 39 consequentially amended and, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 60 agreed to.

Clause 61 -

If a Pharmaceutical Chemists Committee is appointed by pharmaceutical chemists the commission may, if it considers the committee tobe representative of the pharmaceutical chemists in the Commonwealth who are parties to such contracts or agreements, refer to the committee for report matters relating to the administration of medical benefit under this act, and shall consider any representations relating to such administration which arc made by such pharmaceutical chemists and submitted to the commission through the committee.

Mr GREEN:
Kalgoorlie

.-I move -

That after the word “ chemists “ second and third occurring the words “and friendly societies dispensaries “ be inserted.

This amendment is consequential upon amendments made in clauses 57 and 59.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

. -I am not sure that there is not some slight misconception about this clause. The pharmaceutical chemists committee is not a mandatory body which the commission will set up. I remind the committee that the initial word in the clause is “ If “. The clause is a suggestion to the chemists that, if they so desire, they may form a committee through which matters affecting their occupation may be referred to the commission.

Mr Lazzarini:

– There is a possibility that the private chemists will refuse to have anything to do with the friendly societies’ chemists. If a committee of pharmaceutical chemists is to be set up, definite provision should be made that friendly societies’ dispensaries must be represented.

Mr CASEY:

– There must be a pharmaceutical chemist, in every friendly society dispensary. The term “pharmaceutical chemist “ is nor descriptive of a ny orga nization .

Mr Blackburn:

– No, but the Pharmaceutical Society will create the committee, and it may exclude representation of the friendly societies’ dispensaries.

Mr CASEY:

– If there were bad blood between the two groups it would be better for the friendly societies’ dispensers to form their own committee. The commission, I assure the committee, would recognize it as a channel through which the friendly societies’ dispensers could forward complaints.

Mr Green:

– I think that my amendment is important. The private chemists might discriminate against the friendly societies’ dispensers, claiming that they were an inferior group. There can be no doubt of that.

Mr CASEY:

– I have a doubt, but I accept the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 62 - (1.) Sickness benefit shall, subject to this act, consist of periodical payments to an insured person in respect of the period commencing on the seventh day of incapacity for work arising from sickness and terminating on the date when the incapacity ceases, or at the expiration of twenty-six weeks from that day, whichever is the earlier.

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

.- I move -

That the word “ seventh “ be omitted with a view to insert the word “first”.

In my opinion sickness benefit should commence on the first day of incapacity. That is the practice followed by the friendly societies in Australia. Section 32 of the National Health Insurance Act of Great Britain provides that sickness benefit shall commence on the fourth day of incapacity. The section reads -

Subject to the provisions of this Act, the benefits conferred by this Act upon insured persons . . . are: -

b ) Periodical payments commencing on the fourth day of incapacity and continuing for a period not exceeding twenty-six weeks . . .

– In certain directions Sir Walter Kinnear’s recommendations have been liberalized.

Mr McCALL:

– I should like to know why the Government saw fit to depart from his recommendations in this respect. If the more liberal benefit can be provided under the British legislation, there seems to be no reason why it cannot he provided in this bill. I trust that the Treasurer will give serious consideration to the matter, and. if he is not prepared to go as far as the Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggests and commence the sickness benefit on the first day of incapacity, he will at. least undertake to amend the bill to provide that sickness benefit commence on the fourth day of incapacity.

Mr BARNARD:
Bass

.- I support the amendment moved by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Forde). I hope that the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) will see the justice of his request that the item be postponed until it is ascertained if it is possible to commence the sickness benefit on the first day of incapacity. It is perfectly true that the amendment circulated by the Treasurer has improved the position to some extent, but I suggest that the Government might very well go further and accept the suggestion of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. It is true that some awards provide for the payment of sick pay for a few-days, but that provision is not common to ail awards, it is all very well for

Die ‘.treasurer to say that the provisions ot this bill are more liberal in some respects than the British legislation; those who have closely studied the British scheme claim that, in the main, its provisions are much more generous. Under this clause a large number of people, who become subject to minor ailments, will have to wait for a period of seven days before they will become eligible to participate in the sickness benefit. I agree with the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Drakeford) that these illnesses of short duration frequently have disastrous effects on those in receipt of low rates of pay, and for that reason I suggest that the Government might very well give sympathetic consideration to the request made on their behalf. All the various societies that administer ..provident funds commence the sick pay benefit on the first day of illness. One firm which administers its own provident fund pays a sickness benefit, not of £1 a week, but of £2 5s. a week to male members, and a smaller amount to adult females, from the first day of illness. The fact firms such as that consider it desirable that The payments of, sickness benefit be commenced from the first day of incapacity should influence the Treasurer to be more -generous. I agree with the honorable member for Parramatta that to provide for the payment of sickness benefit on the fourth day of incapacity would be far better than the present provision; this would provide a benefit similar to that enjoyed under the British scheme. But at the same time I urge the Treasurer to agree to the suggestion made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Deferment of the payment of sickness benefit in respect of those who become totally incapacitated does not affect the position, because the majority of such persons would subsequently be entitled to invalid pensions, lt seems to me that throughout i his bill the Treasurer’s aim has been to relieve the old-age pensions fund by placing a burden on this fund. I do not want, however, to use that for an argument, but I urge the Treasurer to do something to meet the representations that have been made from this side of the committee. With the utmost respect, I contend that members on this side have a more intimate knowledge of the requirements and difficulties of poor people than has the Treasurer. I support wholeheartedly the proposal of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, and I hope that the Treasurer will give very serious consideration to the request made.

Mr PRICE:
Boothby

.- I suggest that the period should be made four instead of seven days. 1 do not think that such an alteration would make very much difference to the finances of the scheme.

Mr BRENNAN:

– Why not come over here and compel the Government to make the alteration ?

Mr PRICE:

– I am doing this job for the present. It would be quite a satisfactory compromise if the Treasurer would agree to four days, which, I understand, is the period provided in the British act.

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

– I do not want to repeat statements I made earlier, but I emphasize that the scheme must be considered as a whole. ‘ It is impossible to provide the maximum benefit under every heading. But, in response to representations from all sides of the chamber, I am agreeable, on behalf of the Government, to amend the clause so that the benefit shall commence on the fifth day. That is quite an expensive concession. Sir Walter Kinnear’s report, as has been said, recommended that the benefit should start on the fourth day; but I would direct attention to the fact that the report was written over twelve months ago, and that additional benefits have since been included. The scheme to-day is very different from the one dealt with in his report. The difference amounts to many hundreds of thousands of pounds. I consider that the Government is acting reasonably in altering the seventh day to the fifth day of incapacity, especially as it has given way on clauses 62 and 63.

Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1936

– I support the proposal of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Forde). The compromise offered by the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) is of no importance whatever. If the Government wishes to compromise, it should have

Mr ROSEVEAR:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · LANG LAB; ALP from 1936; ALP (N-C) from 1940; ALP from 1941

.- The offer of the Treasurer (Mr. Casey) means really nothing. Honorable members on the Government side who have been criticizing the provisions of the clause ought, not to be satisfied with the proffered compromise. They would not be if they^ knew what necessity there is for sustenance when poor people are sick. The Opposition should make Ministerial-, ists who have spoken in support of the amendment stand up to their professions. It is futile to talk about giving a mau medicine while he is sick if we deny him sustenance. If honorable members opposite had to live on the basic wage for a while they would know what it means to be denied sustenance.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr Prowse:
FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– The time allotted for the consideration of clauses 46 to S7, excepting clause 63, has expired.

Question put -

That the clause be postponed (Mr. I’obbe’s amendment).

The committee divided. (Chairman - Mr. Prowse. ) ayes . . . . 25

AYES: 0

NOES: 32

Majority -. . . .7

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Question put -

That clause 62, and the circulated amendment of the Government, he agreed to; that clause t>3 be postponed; and that clauses 04 to S7, and the circulated amendments of the Government, be agreed to.

The committee divided. ( Ch airman - Mr. Pro wse. )

AYES: 32

NOES: 25

Majority . . 7

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Circulated amendments -

Clause62, omit sub-clause (3).

Clause68, omit the clause.

Clause69, omit “ or State act or at common law or otherwise”, insert “State act or ordinance or at common Taw”.; at the end of the clause insert the following sub-clause: - “ (4) Nothing in this section shall prevent any person who is entitled ‘to such compensation or damages, and who satisfies the approved society of which he is a member that he is unable to recover the compensation or damages, from receiving, under this act, sickness benefit or disablement benefit (including dependent child’s allowance).”.

Clause 70, omit “ who is insured at the date of his death “, insert - - (a)who is insured at the date of his death; or “

Clause 77, sub-clause (2), omit “an” insert “ a partially “.

Clause 78, omit the clause.

Clause 70, after “ or “ (last occurring) insert “, but for the provisions of section ninetythree of this act,”.

Progress reported.

page 2170

HOUR OF MEETING

Motion (by Mr. Casey) agreed to -

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until 10.30 a.m. this day.

House adjourned at 12.14 a.m. (Thursday).

page 2170

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

The following answers to questions were circulated: -

Commonwealth Railways : Employees - Supplyof Sleepers

Mr Badman:

n asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

What is the total number of porters engaged on the Commonwealth railways?
What is the number of porters on the permanent staff of the railways?
What is the number of porters who are entitled to long leave?
Will the Government provide a scheme for the construction of houses at Port Augusta for officers of the various Commonwealth departments stationed there who are not able to obtain housing accommodation at present?

Mr McEwen:
CP

– The information is being obtained.

Mr Makin:

n asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

What number of railway sleepers was used for special re-sleepering purposes during each of the years 1933-34, 1934-35, 1935-36, 1930-37 and 1937-38?

Mr McEwen:
CP

– The information is being obtained.

Migrationof Refugees from Austria : Commonwealth Representation on Committee.

Mr Blackburn:

n asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Did the Commonwealth Government receive an invitation from President Franklin Roosevelt to bo represented at a conference at Evian-les-Bains, in France, in July?
If so, what is the purpose of the conference and the substance of the invitation?
Has the Commonwealth Government accepted the invitation? If so, who will be the Government’s representatives? If not, what was the Government’s reply to the invitation?

Mr Lyons:
UAP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follows -

The Commonwealth Government received an inquiry from the United States Government as towhether it was prepared to co-operate to set up a committee to facilitate the migration from Austria of political refugees. It has been suggested that the first meeting of the committee should be held on the6th July at Evian, France.
See answer toNo. 1.
The Commonwealth Government replied that it was prepared to be represented on the committee. The question of the Commonwealth representative has not yet been decided. paint Brushesimportationfrom the United States of America.

Mr.Price asked the Voting Minister for Tradeand Customs, upon notice -

Is ita fact that paint brushes are being imported into Australia, fromthe United States of America, under dumping conditions?
Is it : afactthat thisdumping is seriously affectingthe brush industry, and that many skilled workmen arc on short working time”?
If the factsareas stated, willhe cause a thorough investigation to be made andtake steps to rectify the position?

Mr Perkins:
UAP

s. - The answer to the honorable- member’s questions is as follows : - 1, 2and3. Imports of painters brushes from theUnited States of America in the yearand tenmonthsbetweenthe1stJuly,1936,and the30th April, 1938. amounted to only £19. [Ihave received no representations from the local industry, and the import figures do not indicate any necessity for an investigation. In the event of imports increasing unduly, however, I shall give consideration to any representations whichmaybe received from Australian manufacturers.

AirDirection-findingBeacons.

Mr Spender:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice-

Is it a fact that after the crash of the Stinson air liner in Queensland it was announced on behalf of the Government that air direction-finding beacons wouldbe established at all principal aerodromes?
How many such beacon have been erected, and how many is it proposed to erect within the next twelve months!

Mr Thorby:
CP

y. - The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follows : -

Yes.
Ultra-high frequency radio range beacon stationsare approaching completion at Brisbane, Kempsey. Sydney and Melbourne. Similar beacons are in course of erectionat Canberra, Holbrook, Nhill, Adelaide, Western Junction ( Launceston) and Hobart, and these should bo completed and ready for testing within the next three or four months.In addition to the radio beacon stations, direction- finding stations,as a radio navigational aid to aircraft, are in operation at Rabaul, Salamaua, Port Moresby. Cooktown, Townsville, Rockhampton. Brisbane, Sydney, Canberra. Albury, Melbourne. Western Junction ( Launceston ) , Adelaide. Forrest, Perthand Darwin, Direction-findingstationat Kal- goorlie.Ceduna andCloncurryarein course of erection and will be available for service, in the near future.

Postal Department.

Mr.Perkins. - On the14th June, the honorable member for Lilley (Mr. Jolly) asked the following question, upon notice: -

Will the Minister supply the following information: - (a) The- excess of revenue over expenditure (excluding capital expenditure) of the Postmaster-General’s Department each year during the past three years: (6) The capital expenditure; made not of revenue during the same period: (c) The capital expenditure from loan during the same period; (d) the amount of interest paid each year during the same period: and (c) The loan indebtedness of the department on the30th June, 1037?

I am now in a position to furnish the honorable member with the following answers to his inquiries: -

Excess Revenue over Expenditure(in- cludingSpecial Appropriationbut EXCLUDINGCapitalExpenditure)..

AND (c) CaPITAlExpenditure.

Intereston Capital.

Loan Indebtedness Of the Department to the Treasury.

Conscription.

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s. - On the 7th June, the honorable member for East Sydney (Mr. Ward) asked me whether I could make available any information regarding a report which appeared in a section of the

Australian press that Australians resident in England would be liable to beconscripied in the event of conscription being introduced intothe United Kingdom.

I desire to inform the honorable member thatthe Commonwealth Government has no knowledge of any proposals for the. introduction of conscription in the United Kingdom.

It may be mentioned that the British Military Service Act1916, applied to male British subjects (unmarried, and widowers without dependent children) ordinarily resident in Great Britain. Exemptions were provided in the act for, inter alia, men resident in Great Britain only for the purpose of their education or for some oilier special purpose.

Payments to Dr. G. L. Wood.

Mr Lyons:
UAP

s. - On the 14th June, the

The Australian Broadcasting Commission has been asked to furnish the information, sought in the latter part, of the honorable member’s,question.

Commonwealth Departments: :

Transfer tocanberra

Mr McEwen:
CP

n. - On the 9th June, the honorable member for Bass (Mr. Barnard)asked the following questions, upon notice: -

Howmany Commonwealth departments are stillawaiting transfer to Canberra?
Can he say whenthe Government contemplatesestablishingthem in the Federal Capital?
How many, employees will be involved in the transfers?

The information desired by the honorable number is as follows: -

Two. 2.The transfer of these departments cannot beeffected until the necessary office and housingaccommodation is provided.It is proposed, subject to the provisions of the necessary funds, to proceed with these works with a view to transferringthe two departments at the earliest possible date.
It. was recently estimated that some 800 officers would bo involved in the transfers. This number may be substantially increased by the dates the transfers are effected.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 15 June 1938, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1938/19380615_reps_15_156/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives15 June 1938

QUESTION

AIR FORCE ACCIDENTS

Mr FORDE:CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr THORBY:Minister for Defence · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr Forde:

Mr THORBY:

Mr Forde:

Mr THORBY:

Mr SPENDER:WARRINGAH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THORBY:

NATIONAL HEALTH AND PENSIONS INSURANCE BILL

Mr JOHN LAWSON:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

Mr CASEY:Treasurer · CORIO, VICTORIA · UAP

Mr CURTIN:FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr Casey:

Mr CURTIN:

Mr CURTIN:

Mr Casey:

Mr CURTIN:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr CURTIN:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr CURTIN:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr CURTIN:

Mr LYONS:Prime Minister · WILMOT, TASMANIA · UAP

Mr CURTIN:

Mr LYONS:

Mr JAMES:HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr CASEY:UAP

Mr LAZZARINI:WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr CASEY:

QUESTION

EMBARGO ON THE EXPORT OF IRON ORE

Mr WATKINS:NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:UAP

Mr HAWKER:WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr McEWEN:Minister for the Interior · INDI, VICTORIA · CP

Mr BLAIN:NORTHERN TERRITORY

Mr CASEY:UAP

QUESTION

OVERSEAS AIRMAILS

Mr FAIRBAIRN:FLINDERS, VICTORIA

Mr THORBY:CP

Mr HARRISON:WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr THORBY:

Mr BAKER:GRIFFITH, QUEENSLAND

Mr THORBY:

QUESTION

CUT-GLASS INDUSTRY

Mr NOCK:RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr PERKINS:Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Trade and Customs · EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

DARWIN

Mr BLAIN:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr BLAIN:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr BLAIN:

Mr McEWEN:CP

Mr STREET:CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

Mr THORBY:CP

QUESTION

LOCOMOTIVES ON TRANSAUSTRALIAN RAILWAY

Mr BADMAN:GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr McEWEN:CP

Mr PRICE:BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr McEWEN:

QUESTION

DEFENCE OF NAURU ISLAND

Mr HARRISON:

Mr THORBY:CP

NON-OFFICIAL POST OFFICES

Mr HAWKER:

Mr PERKINS:UAP

QUESTION

DEFENCE WORKS AT NEWCASTLE

Mr WATKINS:

Mr THORBY:CP

QUESTION

House of Representatives
15 June 1938

Mr FORDE:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr THORBY:
Minister for Defence · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr SPENDER:
WARRINGAH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr JOHN LAWSON:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · CORIO, VICTORIA · UAP

Mr CURTIN:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · WILMOT, TASMANIA · UAP

Mr JAMES:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr CASEY:
UAP

Mr LAZZARINI:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYONS:
UAP

Mr HAWKER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr McEWEN:
Minister for the Interior · INDI, VICTORIA · CP

Mr BLAIN:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

Mr CASEY:
UAP

Mr FAIRBAIRN:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA

Mr THORBY:
CP

Mr HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr BAKER:
GRIFFITH, QUEENSLAND

Mr NOCK:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr PERKINS:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Trade and Customs · EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

Mr McEWEN:
CP

Mr STREET:
CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

Mr THORBY:
CP

Mr BADMAN:
GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr McEWEN:
CP

Mr PRICE:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr THORBY:
CP

Mr PERKINS:
UAP

Mr THORBY:
CP

Mr HOLT:
FAWKNER, VICTORIA

Mr THORBY:
CP

Mr SPEAKER (Hon G J Bell:
DARWIN, TASMANIA

Mr HUGHES:
Minister for External Affairs · North Sydney · UAP

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

Mr CASEY:
Treasurer · Corio · UAP

Mr CURTIN:
Fremantle

Mr LYONS:
Prime Minister · Wilmot · UAP

Mr SCULLIN:
Yarra

Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
BarkerActing Minister for Commerce · CP

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP