House of Representatives
2 July 1941

16th Parliament · 1st Session



Mr. Speaker (Hon. W. M. Nairn) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 683

QUESTION

THE WAR

Middle East Command

Mr FORDE:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

– Is the Prime Minister in a position to make a statement in regard to the transfer of General Wavell from the Middle East to India, an intimation of which has been broadcast?

Mr MENZIES:
Minister for Defence Co-ordination · KOOYONG, VICTORIA · UAP

– The position, which doubtless has been broadcast or otherwise published, is that certain changes have been made in the arrangements for the conduct of the war in the Middle East. In the first place, the Bight Honorable

Alfred Lyttleton, until recently President of the Board of Trade, has been appointed Minister of State, with a seat in the War Cabinet, and has been sent to the Middle East to represent the “War Cabinet in that zone. His function there will be to act in the fullest sense as the representative of the War Cabinet, in order to keep that body fully informed upon all matters which come within his observation. In particular, it is designed that he should have under his jurisdiction - with, of course, a suitable and adequate staff - the supply aide of the operations in the Middle East.

Mr Archie Cameron:

– What is wrong with the Quartermaster-General ?

Mr MENZIES:

– I have not the faintest idea. I do know that the Home Command under General Brooke, for example, has behind it the administrative resources of the War Office and the Department of Supply. The War Cabinet in Great Britain considered - if I may say so without impertinence, quite rightly - that the General Officer Commanding in the Middle East had to devote too great a proportion of his time to problems which, in Great Britain, would be dealt with by the two departments concerned. In order to relieve him, as far as possible, of that responsibility, and set him free to discharge his operational functions - which are his primary functions - it was decided to send a member of the War Cabinet to the Middle East, in order to attend to those matters which are not operational but are on the material side. It is thought that this will give relief to the General Officer Commanding in the Middle East in the way that I have described.

Mr Forde:

– Who will be the General Officer Commanding in the Middle East?

Mr MENZIES:

– That is the next point. A change is being effected by appointing General Auchinlech, who for the last six months or thereabouts has been General Officer Commanding in India, to the Command in the Middle East, and transferring General Wavell to the Command in India. Honorable members will realize that each of these commands is one of the major commands in the British Army. One commander has responsibility for the whole of the army provision in India, and the other forthe whole of the army provision in the Middle East. In justice to General Wavell, I think it should be pointed out that this is in no sense to be regarded as a supersession of that gentleman. He has, in fact, as honorable members know, done conspicuously able work ; but he has had very large responsibility, in covering not only operations but also matters of supply. In all the circumstances it was felt that, in the making of this change, opportunity should be taken to apply a fresh mind to the enormously difficult problems of the Middle East. I may add that the reputation of General Auchinlech is of the highest. I was familiar with his reputation before I heard the announcement of his new appointment. In total, I think that I may say to honorable members, these changes indicate that there is to be real concentration of attention and effort upon the Middle Eastern theatre of war.

Mr Makin:

– Is General Blarney to have additional responsibility?

Mr MENZIES:

– His position is not affected by the change. Of course, he has a degree of intimate knowledge of the Middle Eastern theatres of war which the new general cannot, as yet, possess, and to that extent will no doubt be of added value to the General Officer Commanding. These changes of command, plus the locating of a member of the War Cabinet directly in the Middle East, and the efforts that are being made continuously to reinforce that theatre, both with aircraft and with armoured fighting vehicles, indicate something that will be most satisfying to honorable members and to the people of Australia generally; that is, a major concentration of effort upon the fighting in the Middle Eastern zone.

Later:

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:

– Has the Prime Minister come to a decision in regard to a debate on the position in the Middle East, especially since that decision has become more imperative as the result of Sir Archibald Wavell being apparently selected as the first of the scapegoats in the Middle East?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– It is a very unfortunate thing that any honorable member should use an expression of that kind about the changes made in these commands. I am unaware entirely of . Sir Archibald Wavell being made a scapegoat for anything. The transfer of officers in that zone is more a recognition of something which is obviously true, and that is that there are limits to the capacity of any one individual to withstand a great strain for a long period of time. I shall consider the possibility of having a discussion on the Middle East.

page 684

QUESTION

WAR EFFORT RE-ORGANIZATION

Absorption of Unemployed

Mr JOLLY:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND

– I ask the Prime Minister whether the Government has any plan for the absorption of the large number of men who, it is reported, are being thrown out of employment as the result of the restrictions imposed on certain industries in furtherance of the war effort?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

by leave- I am glad that the honorable member has asked this question. I have noticed in the press a certain number of statements which indicate that some misapprehension exists as to what is happening in relation to war effort re-organization. A good deal of the matter published appears to proceed on the assumption that the Government has already put into operation a series of drastic alterations in relation to the needs of the war industries, and for their benefit, with the result that a large number of men have been displaced, to deal with whom the Government has no plan.

Mr Beasley:

– That is true in respect of the operations of the Capital Issues Board.

Mr MENZIES:

– If the honorable gentleman will permit me to make my statement, he may then describe it as either true or untrue, according to the way in which he views it. So far as I am able to make it so, it will be true. It is important that the public mind should be clear on this point. The announcement that I made recently concerning the setting up of a department and a Ministry of War Industry Organization, under the control of a new Minister, indicates future policy; but I may tell honorable members at once that, pursuant to that intention, no industry has yet been affected.

Mr Ward:

– The Capital Issues Board is making orders every day which affect employment.

Mr MENZIES:

– I am talking about the new department. If the honorable member will allow me to discuss one subject at a time I shall try to make the position clear to him.

Mr Brennan:

– The new order!

Mr MENZIES:

– Yes, and in it the honorable member will have no place. This new department, the duty of which is to reduce civil production in order to increase war production, has the most delicate task before it, and the new Minister does not expect that within a day or a week he will be in position to make a series of sweeping orders. He has to perform a task of delicate economic surgery. He must reduce civil activity, and increase activity on the military production ‘ side. The new Minister, together with the director under him, and the committees appointed within his department, will survey with immense care the whole field of industry, and select industries in which production is to be reduced so that war industries may be correspondingly increased. The task will be performed with all possible consideration for the needs of the munitions industries on the one hand, and for the claims of labour on the other.

Mr Makin:

– And for the needs of those displaced from industry.

Mr MENZIES:

– That isso. The Minister will not proceed with elephantine clumsiness, but with firmness where necessary, with promptness when possible, and always with great thought and great skill. The activities of this new department are only now being planned. The new policy is not yet in operation, and so far no industry has been closed, or in any way affected, and therefore no one has been thrown out of work.

Mr Beasley:

– What about the motor industry?

Mr MENZIES:

– I turn now to the two industries which have been affected, not by the new department-

Mr Beasley:

– No, but by the policy of the Government.

Mr MENZIES:

– It is a pity that I am not allowed to make my speech in my own way. This is not a matter for controversy, but for explanation. The honorable member may not want me to make that explanation, but the public will. The motor industry is one in which, in all probability there has been some displacement of labour through the operation of the Government’s policy, and, there has also been displacement of labour because of the rationing of newsprint. Newsprint was not rationed in order to divert employment from civil to military activities. It was, as the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Harrison) has repeatedly explained, designed to conserve dollars, something of the greatest importance and urgency. It gives rise to problems of employment to which my colleague, the Minister for Labour, and his department, have been devoting their attention. This, however, is in no way associated with the policy of the Government in connexion with the new department. The position is much the same in regard to the rationing of petrol. Many reasons exist for the rationing of petrol, but the primary intention is to build up vitally necessary stocks of petrol, without which the country cannot be regarded as, adequately equipped for war. The matter is so urgent that delay cannot be’ tolerated, and that is why the new schedule became operative as soon as it was announced. Here, again, the problem of what is to happen to employees and others who lose their occupation because of petrol rationing has engaged the attention of the Minister for Labour, the Minister for Munitions and the Minister for Supply.

Mr Beasley:

– Does the building trade come under the new policy or the old one?

Mr MENZIES:

– The building trade was affected by announcements relating to capital issues before any announcement was made in regard to this new policy.

Mr Beasley:

– Then it comes under the old policy ?

Mr MENZIES:

– Yes, certainly. In regard to petrol, newsprint, and the building industry, the Government is conscious of the fact that a problem of employment has been created, and no one is more aware of this than is the Minister whose particular responsibility it is to handle labour problems. However, honorable members and the public would be under a serious misapprehension if they thought that the new department, which is to be administered by the & ‘lister for War Organization and Industry, has yet made any order in regard to employment, or has influenced it in any way whatsoever. On behalf of the Government and my new colleague, I say that no action will be taken by the new department in a reckless fashion, but only with great thought; with due regard to the needs of war-time production and the general economic position of the country ; and also with due regard, so far as it can be paid, to the employment of individuals.

Mr FORDE:

– Will the Prime Minister guarantee that those who are thrown out of work will be given employment elsewhere ?

Mr MENZIES:

– The honorable member is aware that no government can give such a guarantee in respect of every individual affected by some act of government policy. There was a time in the history of this country when a Government, drawn from the other side of the House, very properly felt that it was compelled to impose drastic import restrictions. I admit the need for such action. The right honorable member for Yarra (Mr. Scullin) remembers very well when he had to take action of that kind. It gave him no pleasure, but it was, necessary, and he stood up to his obligations.

Mr Pollard:

– That action was forced on him.

Mr MENZIES:

– Does the honorable member think that we are doing these things for fun, or because there is a war on? Does he believe that the right honorable member for Yarra imposed those import restrictions for fun, or was it because he found himself in what might be described as a state of economic war, and had to adjust the economy of the country to meet the position? Yet. I have never heard it suggested at that time or since that, because a government was forced for high reasons of State to impose trade restrictions which resulted in throwing people out of work, it must at once guarantee to everybody previously engaged in the business of importing that he shall have another job.

Mr Pollard:

– The right honorable member for Yarra did not have the means to do so; this Government has.

Mr MENZIES:

– I deny that this Government possesses the means to do so. If the duties of the Government in regard to employment involve the provision of work of real value to the country, then this Government has a record second to none in the history of Australia.

page 686

QUESTION

RATIONING OF NEWSPRINT

Mr SHEEHAN:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the fact that the statement of the Minister for Customs yesterday in regard to the rationing of newsprint has been contradicted in almost every detail, is he prepared to make a further statement on the subject?

Mr HARRISON:
Minister for Trade and Customs · WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– Yesterday, when I made my statement, I moved that it be printed. I shall have an opportunity to say all that I want to say when the matter comes up for discussion in the House.

page 686

QUESTION

STEEL SUPPLIES FOR SHOEING SMITHS

Mr HUTCHINSON:
DEAKIN, VICTORIA

– I desire to ask a question regarding supplies of steel for use by shoeing smiths, and I shall preface it with an extract from the Melbourne Sun-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The reading of extracts from newspapers is not permissible when asking a question.

Mr HUTCHINSON:

– As the result of petrol rationing, many bakers and other small tradesmen have been obliged to revert to the use of horse-drawn vehicles. When they take their horses to the smithy they are informed that the steel which is required for the shoeing of the animals is unobtainable. As I have received a number of genuine complaints regarding this matter, I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Supply to explain the reason for the shortage of steel for shoeing, and to inform me whether the .position can be remedied ?

Mr SPENDER:
Minister for the Army · WARRINGAH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– Whilst I am not personally acquainted with the subject. I can appreciate the necessity for clarification. As the result of petrol rationing, horse-drawn vehicles must be used in increasing numbers. The demands upon steel production for various purposes are enormous, but I shall see whether special consideration can be given to the matter raised by the honorable member.

page 687

QUESTION

PRODUCER-GAS UNITS

Mr BARNARD:
BASS, TASMANIA

– As the need and demand for producer-gas plants is urgent, can the Minister representing the Minister for Supply inform the House whether firms which are desirous of manufacturing these units, and who applied months ago for permission to do so, have yet been authorized to undertake the work? What is the reason for the irritating delays which occur before the department grants to manufacturers permission to proceed?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– Offhand, I am not able to answer the question, but I have not gathered from my discussions, with the Minister for Supply that any irritating delays have occurred. The subject has engaged his attention for a considerable time and the problem is well in hand. I shall ‘bring the question to his notice and have a reply conveyed to the honorable member.

Mr WARD:

– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and Development whether it is a fact that only certain special types of producer-gas unit are permitted to be manufactured, and that the manufacture of improved types will not be considered by the Government? Is it a fact that the Minister for Social .Services (Sir Frederick Stewart) is financially interested in a firm which is manufacturing one of the approved types of unit?

Mr SPENDER:

– I know, from discussions with the Minister for Supply and Development, that several types of producer-gas unit have been approved. The approval of these types is determined by technical experts. Improvements are fully provided for by the Government. I am informed, and I have no doubt of the truth of the information, that there is no substance whatever in the allegation contained in the latter part of the honorable member’s question.

page 687

HOUSE COMMITTEE

Motion (by Mr. Fadden) - by leave - ii greed to -

That Mr. Abbott bc discharged from attendance on the House Committee and that, in his ].lace, Mr. Billimari bc appointed a member of the Committee.

page 687

QUESTION

STATE PARLIAMENTS

Mr JAMES:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Of the six Premiers who rejected the Commonwealth’s proposals for income tax uniformity recently, four subscribe to the principle of unification, even to the abolition of State parliaments. As those gentlemen may excuse their vote against the Commonwealth’s proposal on the ground that it constituted only a portion of the policy of the Labour party, will the Prime Minister immediately submit to the people a referendum for the abolition of State parliaments, thereby removing a hindrance to the war effort and fulfilling a promise which was made to the country on the birth of federation in 1900?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– Judging by sounds that I hear from behind me, I had better discuss the question with my colleagues.

page 687

QUESTION

COLD STORAGE

Sir GEORGE BELL:
DARWIN, TASMANIA

– Will the Minister for Commerce inform me what action has been taken to provide emergency cold storage for meat and butter in Tasmania ?

Sir EARLE PAGE:
Minister for Commerce · COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– The Department of Commerce, in conjunction with a special committee representing the meat and butter industries, has been investigating the problem for the last three or four work*, and a decision has been made to increase the meat and butter stores at Launceston and Somerset. As the preparatory details of the work have now been completed^ it is hoped to begin the job within a month.

Sir GEORGE BELL:

– Will the Minister for Commerce tell me why the offer of the Duck River Co-operative Butter Factory Company to provide the necessary cool storage for butter at Smithton at its own expense has not been accepted by his department?

Sir EARLE PAGE:

– I understand that the proposition was examined, but the reasons why it was rejected have not yet been given. I shall ascertain them and inform the honorable member.

Mr McLEOD:
WANNON, VICTORIA

– Because of the urgent need for cold storage accommodation, I ask the Minister for Commerce whether he will obtain a report from an expert on the suitability and capacity of such facilities at Murtoa in Victoria?

Sir EARLE PAGE:

Mr. Critchley, the officer of my department who is dealing with this subject, has already been in touch with the Government of Victoria with the object of making arrangements to examine the position.

page 688

QUESTION

PARLIAMENT

Business

Mr FORDE:

– Will the Prime Minister at this stage indicate what business he expects the House to deal with before it adjourns for a short recess?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I think that it would be in accordance with the wishes of honorable members generally if I were to ask the House to meet to-morrow morning instead of to-morrow afternoon. The business to be done, apart from a statement on finance which the Treasurer may desire to make for the information of honorable members, so that they may have it to consider before the Budget session, is first, the National Fitness Bill 1941, which, I understand, will engage the attention of a few more speakers. It would be convenient to take that measure first, so that it may be presented to the Senate. That will be followed, by a resumption of the debate on my statement on my mission abroad and the war position ; some honorable members have indicated their desire to speak on that order of the day. Previously, I gave an undertaking that certain notices of motion standing in the names of private members under the heading of “ General Business”, would be discussed at these sittings. I understand from the honorable members in whose names notices of motion Nos. 1 and 2 stand, that they will not at this stage proceed with the motions; and I also assume - I hope correctly - that notices of motion Nos. 4 and 5 will not at this stage be proceeded with, in the absence of the two honorable members in whose names they are listed. That leaves notices of motion No. 3 and No. 8 in the names of the honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron); No. 6 in the name of the honorable member for Werriwa (Mr. Lazzarini), No. 7 in the name of the honorable member for Bourke (Mr. Blackburn), and No. 9 in the name of the honorable member for Corio (Mr. Dedman).

Mr Lazzarini:

– I understood that these motions would be completed.

Mr MENZIES:

– I am quite prepared to complete them.

Mr Blackburn:

– Will they be taken in the order in which they appear on the notice-paper ?

Mr MENZIES:

– I- assume that they will, unless honorable members arrange among themselves to vary it. When the House last met I agreed to provide an opportunity for honorable members to debate these motions, and Ministers are prepared to proceed with them.

Yesterday. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin) requested, for certain reasons which he stated, that the bringing down of the proposed amending Conciliation ‘and Arbitration Bill should be deferred. The Government has since had an opportunity to consider his request and has decided to defer the introduction of the bill for the time being.

page 688

QUESTION

HOUR OE MEETING

Motion (by Mr. Menzies) proposed -

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until to-morrow at 10.30 a.m.

Mr CALWELL:
Melbourne

.- I ask the Prime Minister not to facilitate the departure from Parliament of those honorable members who are not prepared to remain here for the purpose’ of attending to the business of the nation after to-morrow. Originally he proposed that Parliament should sit on four days this week. The business of the nation should not be hurried simply because some honorable members do not desire to stay in Canberra until Friday.

Mi-. Menzies. - I am not hurrying anybody. I merely submitted a motion to allow Parliament to assemble to-morrow morning.

Mr CALWELL:

– I do not blame the right honorable gentleman for the hurry.

Mr Blackburn:

– Does the Prime Minister propose not to ask Parliament to sit on Friday?

Mr Menzies:

– I am prepared to ask Parliament to sit next week if necessary.

Mr CALWELL:

– I have what Carlyle would call, “ a preternatural suspicion “ that the resolution will help to close the

Purlliament to-morrow instead of on Friday.

Mr Menzies:

– It is a state of mind that should be overcome, if possible.

Mr CALWELL:

– I suspect that if this motion be agreed to, there will be an unholy rush of honorable members from Canberra to-morrow evening, and we shall be told that the remainder are too few to constitute a quorum in order to discharge the business of the nation. I think that the right honorable gentleman ought to pursue the ordinary course and allow Parliament to meet at the usual rimes, to-morrow and Friday. In view of the gravity of the international situation, the desire which some honorable gentlemen may have to seek further information concerning the transfer of Sir Archibald Wavell to India, and the possibility that some people may think that that transfer portends some sinister development on the north-west frontier of India, I do not think that Parliament should go into recess for five or six weeks. The unanimous report of the Man-power and Resources Survey Committee, about which some honorable members want to ask questions, has been in the hands of the Government for two months. In all the circumstances and having regard to the imminent dangers which confront this country, the personal interests of some honorable members should not be allowed to override the main consideration that this Parliament should remain in session at least until the end of this week.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 689

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH RAILWAYS

Mr DRAKEFORD:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

– Has the Government placed the Commonwealth Railways under the newly-created Ministry of Transport? If not, will the Prime Minister favorably consider the advisability of doing so as early as possible, in view of the fact that railways are the backbone of any effective transport system ?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– That matter is under the active consideration of the Government. The honorable gentleman’s suggestion will not be .overlooked.

page 689

QUESTION

IMPORT OF BAUXITE

Mr PERKINS:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and

Development who is responsible for importing large quantities of bauxite? In view of the fact that we have such ample quantities of bauxite in Australia, will the Minister direct that further imports be not permitted?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– The answer to the honorable gentleman’s first question is : “ The Government “. The second is covered by an answer given to-day to a question upon notice.

page 689

QUESTION

CAPTURED SAILORS’ DEPENDANTS

Mr CONELAN:
GRIFFITH, QUEENSLAND

– I ask the Minister for External Affairs whether any provision has been made to provide assistance to the dependants of Australian sailors who have been captured and interned in enemy countries ?

Sir FREERICK STEWART:
Minister for External Affairs · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– I ask the honorable member to place that question on the notice-paper. With regard to the internees themselves, Australia does take ‘ responsibility through the representatives of the United States of America to ensure that they are adequately provided for.

page 689

QUESTION

MILITARY ENLISTMENTS

Mr MARWICK:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Is the Minister for the Army in a position to give the percentages of enlistments in the various fighting forces for the different States of Australia ?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– Not offhand, but I can supply the information.

page 689

QUESTION

BOILERMAKERS AND SHIPBUILDING

Mr MARTENS:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

– I have received from the Townsville branch of the Boilermakers’ Society of Australia a copy of a letter sent to the Prime Minister from which the following is an extract: -

Yourself and also the members of your Government are asking over the wireless and also through the press for the co-operation of the trade unions in the war effort, yet your Government does not consider such an important organization as the Boilermakers’ Society worthy of consideration when appointments are made on boards such as the Australian Shipbuilding Board when they leave a representative of our society off this board.

Does the Government intend to give to that society representation on the Shipbuilding Board?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– The representations contained in that letter are now being discussed between my colleagues, the Minister for Munitions and the Minister for Labour and National Service. As soon as they have concluded their discussions, they will report to Cabinet, which will give consideration to what they have done.

page 690

QUESTION

NATIONAL EMERGENCY SERVICES

Mr ROSEVEAR:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister for Home Security whether any information has filtered through to him about a request by the Minister for National Emergency Services of New South Wales for the co-operation of the Commonwealth in providing protection for the people of New South Wales ? If not, will the Minister get into direct contact with the Minister for National Emergency Services in New South Wales with a view to establishing co-operation between Commonwealth and State authorities?

Mr ABBOTT:
Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence Co-ordination · NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– It is not customary to disclose policy in answer to a question. The whole matter will be dealt with in the future and when an announcement is due, it will be made.

page 690

QUESTION

DALBY POST OFFICE

Mr BAKER:
MARANOA, QUEENSLAND

– In view of the much dilapidated and overcrowded state of the post office at Dalby and the promise made by his predecessor, I ask the PostmasterGeneral whether anything in the way of establishing a new post office building at Dalby has been done?

Mr COLLINS:
Minister Assisting the Minister for Supply and Development · HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– Nothing so far has been done, and what can be done in the way of building new post offices in the future will depend entirely on the amount of money that will be available.

page 690

QUESTION

SIR BERTRAM STEVENS

Mr MORGAN:
REID, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and Development whether there is any foundation for press reports that Sir Bertram Stevens, chairman of the Eastern Group Supply Council at Delhi, is unhappy, dissatisfied and disconsolate, and that he wants another job - a bigger job as Minister Plenipotentiary to India and all points east of Suez, with a roving com mission, a proper entourage and staff, and suitable perquisites and allowances, including more elephants?

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! Such frivolous questions cannot be permitted.

Mr MORGAN:

– Is the Minister aware of any reason for Sir Bertram Stevens’s dissatisfaction and has the Government any plan which will satisfy his ambitions?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– I have not the faintest idea. Moreover, I have not seen the report.

page 690

QUESTION

RAILWAY COMMUNICATIONS

Mr CLARK:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Minister for War Organization of Industry inform me what amount of money has been expended, or is proposed to be expended, on the railway line between Broken Hill and the South Australian border which is controlled by the Silverton Tramway Company? If he cannot furnish the figures now, will he obtain them for me, and will he consider recommending to the Government that it should take over this privately owned railway line in view of the large amount of public money that will be expended on it in order to make possible the full use of New South Wales and South Australian lines for national purposes?

Mr SPOONER:
Minister for War Organisation of Industry · ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– I am not sure thai this matter comes within the jurisdiction of my department, but I shall make inquiries and inform the honorable member.

page 690

QUESTION

FENCING WIRE

Mr GUY:
WILMOT, TASMANIA

– In view of the acute shortage of fencing wire and the urgent war-time necessity for providing primary producers with adequate supplies of wire, will the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and Development make every endeavour to have consignments shipped to Tasmania?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– I shall discuss the subject with the Minister for Supply and Development and ascertain what can be done to meet the honorable gentleman’s request.

page 690

QUESTION

EMPLOYMENT OF PARTIALLY INCAPACITATED LABOURER

Mr BREEN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Some time ago a member of the New South Wales Parliament forwarded to me a letter from a man residing in his electorate, who asked that he be granted an invalid pension. This man, who was a farm labourer, had his leg amputated. I made representations to the Pensions Department, but was informed that as the manwas not totally incapacitated he was not entitled to an invalid pension. The applicant has been unable to obtain employment either privately or with public utilities in the district where he resides, and I should like to know whether the Minister for Labour and National Service can inform me of some place where this man can be employed ?

Mr HOLT:
Minister for Labour and National Service · FAWKNER, VICTORIA · UAP

– If the honorable gentleman will supply me with the name of the man I shall take the matter up with the Employment Inspector in the State of New South Wales in order to ascertain whether the man can be employed.

page 691

QUESTION

SUPERPHOSPHATE INDUSTRY

Leave to Withdraw Notice of Motion

Mr MARWICK:

– A notice of motion for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the superphosphate industry stands in my name. In view of the assurance which I have received from the Prime Minister that this matter will receive consideration, I ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Leave granted; notice of motion with- d rawn.

page 691

QUESTION

REPATRIATION

Mr MULCAHY:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the Minister for the Army prepared to make a statement to the House before it adjourns on the subject of compensation to soldiers who are not covered by the provisions of the Repatriation Act? I believe that the departmental committee which was appointed has reported on this subject to the Minister.

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– I shall endeavour to do so, but I cannot give a definite undertaking.

page 691

QUESTION

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Newspaper Extracts

Mr BRENNAN:

– I ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether I should be right in forming the opinion that you have ruled that when asking a question an honorable member may not read an extract from a newspaper or any other publication in order to explain the point of his question?

Mr SPEAKER:

– That is not quite the case. I merely reaffirmed a ruling that has operated in this House from the inception of federation. The ruling is that extracts from newspapers may not be read when a question is being asked. The reason is that this would afford honorable members the opportunity to introduce newspaper comment into questions, and the use of comment or argument in questions is expressly forbidden by the Standing Orders. The same objection does not apply to the reading of passages from telegrams and letters, because these ordinarily contain information, not comment.

page 691

QUESTION

PRICES OF BUILDING MATERIALS

Mr LAZZARINI:

– I wish to base a question on the answer given by the Minister for Trade and Customs to a question which I asked, upon notice, in relation to increased prices of building materials and timber. The honorable gentleman said that the only increases which had been made were justified. In view of the fact that many timber mills ha ve closed down because merchants are not taking supplies from them, and that merchants have had large stocks in hand for a considerable time, how can the Minister, or the Prices Commissioner, justify an increase of 10 per cent, or more of the prices of such timber ?

Mr HARRISON:
UAP

– The information in the possession of the Department of Trade and Commerce as to the number of timber mills that have been closed down is not in accord with the statement of the honorable member. As a matter of fact, a recent investigation resulted in arrange- . ments being made with the State Governments with regard to royalties, and with the Railways Departments with regard to freights, as the outcome of which increases of the prices of local timbers were approved. These increases were commensurate with the demands of the situation and were received with satisfaction by those concerned. The honorable gentleman’s statement with regard to stocks held by the timber yards is contrary to all of the price-fixing regulations, and if the facts are as stated I shall ensure that appropriate action shall be taken.

page 692

QUESTION

POWER ALCOHOL

Mr WILSON:
WIMMERA, VICTORIA

-Is the Treasurer able to inform me whether the recommendations contained in the report of the Power Alcohol Committee of Inquiry are likely to be given effect to by the Government in the near . future? Will favorable consideration ‘be given the establishment of distilleries in the heart of the wheat-growing areas for the production of power alcohol from wheat? Does the Government propose to subsidize production by private companies, or will it undertake the activity as a State enterprise ?

Mr FADDEN:
Treasurer · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · CP

– That part of the report which the Government intends to implement will be the subject of action in the near future. It is intended to establish distilleries in the wheatgrowing States of Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia and Western Australia. A conference with State representatives is to be held shortly to consider the financing and managing of the enterprise, and I hope that it will be more fruitful than the conference held last week.

page 692

QUESTION

CONCESSIONS TO PENSIONERS

Mr JAMES:

– Some time ago a deputation, introduced by the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) and myself, made certain requests to the Minister for Social Services in Sydney for the liberalizing of conditions applicable to invalid and old-age pensions. I wish to know whether the Government has reached a decision on the submissions made to it on that occasion, and, particularly, whether it intends to grant free wireless licences to invalid and old-age pensioners living by themselves ? Has the Minister for Social Services approached the Postmaster-General on this subject?

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:
Minister for External Affairs · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– The Postmaster - General has been approached concerning the issue of free wireless licences to pensioners but, unfortunately, he did not feel that, be could grant the concession sought. I understand that the decision on that subject has been conveyed to the deputation through the honorable member for West Sydney.

Mr Beasley:

– I understood that the Postmaster-General was prepared to meet a deputation on the subject?

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:

– The other matters referred to by the deputation relate to inter-departmental action and they are still under consideration.

page 692

QUESTION

MORATORIUM

Mr DEDMAN:
CORIO, VICTORIA

– I have received a letter from one of my constituents which contains the following paragraph: -

I would appreciate your advice on how to approach the National Security (Debtors Relief) legislation. As I am unable to secure welding bronze for oxy-weldiug unless I have a Government contract, this has hit me hard. Oxy-welding in the country is absolutely essential to primary production. The welding of broken parts often saves the farmers days.

I ask the Prime Minister whetherhe will inform the House what he proposes to do in regard to the provision of a moratorium to cover such individuals as the writer of that letter?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I am in no better position to answer that question to-day than I was yesterday. I said then that the subject will receive the prompt attention of Cabinet; but, so far, Cabinet has not had an opportunity to deal with it. I anticipate that such an opportunity will occur within the next few days.

page 692

QUESTION

TOCUMWAL-SEYMOUR RAILWAY

Mr RANKIN:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA

– In view of the vital necessity for having available a ready means to transport troops from the -southern to the eastern States for defence purposes, I ask the Prime Minister whether, for strategic purposes, the Government will consider converting to the standard gauge the railway line from Tocumwal to Seymour?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I shall direct the attention of the appropriate Minister to the honorable gentleman’s question.

page 692

QUESTION

PORT STEPHENS ROADS

Mr ROSEVEAR:

–Will the Minister for Home Security immediately consult the authorities in charge of the work of constructing defence roads in the Port Stephens area in order to discover the number of men employed on the work and the progress that is being made with it? “Will he make a statement on the subject in the House before Parliament adjourns?

Mr ABBOTT:
CP

– I set such inquiries on foot this morning.

page 693

QUESTION

FIGHTING SERVICES

Travelling Facilities

Mr CONELAN:

– As the Government has now decided that free travelling facilities will be provided on government railways to enable men in camp to visit their homes, I ask the Minister for the Army whether men who have volunteered for the duration of the war and are now serving at Port Moresby and Darwin will be assisted in relation to their fares on their return to their homes after twelve months’ service? The allotment of most of these men is only 2s. a day. The fare from Port Moresby to Australia, by aeroplane is £32. I therefore ask that special consideration be given to the circumstances of these men.

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– I assure the honorable member that this subject has already engaged my attention. He may rest assured that men serving in those distant places will receive fair consideration.

page 693

QUESTION

BLANKETS

Mr SHEEHAN:

– As it is now almost impossible to purchase blankets for domestic use, I ask the Minister for Trade and Customs whether he will call for a report on the stocks of blankets held by storekeepers and merchants on the 30th June, 1941 ? If such report discloses that stocks of blankets are being hoarded, will the honorable gentleman order that the stocks shall be made available to the public at once at a reasonable price?

Mr HARRISON:
UAP

– I shall consider the honorable gentleman’s suggestion.

page 693

QUESTION

FISHING INDUSTRY

Mr BARNARD:

– Has the Minister for Trade and Customs yet been able to give consideration bo the report of the Tariff Board on methods of assisting the fishing industry of Australia? If so, has he submitted the matter to Cabinet? When is it likely that the report will be released for the consideration of honorable members?

Mr HARRISON:
UAP

– I have not yet been able to give detailed consideration to the report, nor have I placed it before Cabinet. The matter is under consideration and will be dealt with expeditiously.

page 693

QUESTION

ALLOTMENTS BY MISSING SOLDIERS

Mr MARTENS:

– During the last week two persons have informed me that payments which they had been receiving as dependants of soldiers abroad have been stopped in consequence of .the soldiers having been reported as missing. Will the Minister for the Army inform me whether it is true that that procedure is being adopted?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– I gave a full reply to a similar question asked by the honor-, able member for Hunter (Mr. James)’ some time ago. He drew attention to the fact that certain payments had been stopped one month after men had been reported as missing. The position, as I then explained, is that persons dependent upon payments in respect of soldiers serving abroad are to receive their allotment for three months after the soldiers have been reported as missing. In other cases the allotments have in the past been discontinued after one month. Since it seems to me that the foundation of the claim is similar in both eases I have given directions that the same principle shall apply. It will be found that the allotment is continued up to the end of three months, after which either the pension rate or the allotment - whichever is the smaller - is paid to the dependants.

page 693

QUESTION

LIFE ASSURANCE POLICIES

Mr CALWELL:

– In view of the fact that the livelihood of many thousands of Australians is jeopardized or otherwise adversely affected by reason of petrol rationing, newsprint restrictions, and other decisions made by the Government in pursuance of its war policy, and that considerable unemployment of either long or short duration will eventuate if all unessential industries are sacrificed to a 100 per cent, war effort, will the Prime Minister introduce legislation to ensure that the holders of ordinary and industrial life assurance policies shall have statutory rights as to surrender values and paid-up policies in respect of their holdings?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I shall he very glad to study the suggestion madeby the honorable member.

page 694

QUESTION

WALES DIFFERENTIAL

Mr MORGAN:

– I understand that about 12 months ago the Army authorities tested out thoroughly a differential designed to be attached to motorized equipment for the armoured forces, in order to prevent the break-down of such motorized equipment, particularly in the class of country in which the fighting forces are operating overseas. All that could be supplied were requisitioned for the Army authorities, but that requisition has been hold up by either the Department of Supply or the Contracts Board in Melbourne. I ask the Minister for the Army, who also represents in this chamber the Minister for Supply, whether effect has been given to that requisition, or whether any influences or vested interests are at work to have it rendered inoperative?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– I confess that I am unaware of the subject matter of the honorable member’s question.

Mr Morgan:

– Information concerning it is in the department.

Mr SPENDER:

– Many matters pass through the department which do not come to my. personal notice.

Mr Morgan:

– I refer to the “Wales differential.

Mr SPENDER:

– I shall inquire into the matter.

page 694

COMMONWEALTH BANK

Appointment of Governor

Mr FORDE:

– As the position of

Governor of the Commonwealth Bank has been vacant for a lengthy period, and in view of its great importance to the community, will the Prime Minister state whether the Government has yet made a decision as to who the new . Governor is to be? Will the right honorable gentleman give the assurance that if it be not possible to make the announcement now, it will be made before the adjournment of Parliament at the end of this week ?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– An announcement will be made before the rising of the House this week.

page 694

QUESTION

LABOUR POSITION IN NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr ROSEVEAR:

– I have received from the new Labour Department in Sydney a letter which states -

As you know,the unemployment position in this State is acute, and so far it has not been possible to find a job for Mr.- Inquiries will proceed, but prospects of work at an early date are not attractive.

May this be taken as a fair sample of the work being done by the new department in Sydney, and is this sort of answer given because the office has been staffed with ex-employees of the State Labour Office, who were condemned by both employers and employees?

Mr HOLT:
UAP

– To the best of my knowledge, no staffing has taken place at the Sydney office in addition to that which has been in. existence for some weeks. Insofar as the letter read by the honorable member is a statement of facts as they exist in New South Wales, I find no cause to disagree with it. As the Prime Minister has already indicated, the Government is actively engaged on measures which, it hopes, will obviate any increase of unemployment as the result of steps taken in connexion with those items of policy to which the right honorable gentleman referred.

Mr BEASLEY:

– The Minister for War Organization of Industry will have noted from the letter just read, that in the view of another Commonwealth department unemployment in New South Wales is acute, and the prospects of work being provided at an early date are not attractive. Can he take somesteps immediately to meet this situation? Has he the authority or the means to check the road and other works now in progress, upon which, it is reported, men are engaged under relief rather than full-time conditions? Can steps be taken without delay to proceed with such buildings and extensions in relation to war production as will tide over those men who to-day are without sustenance, employment, or anything else? .

Mr SPOONER:
UAP

– I ‘ should act wrongly if I tried to be specific to-day in regard to what I may attempt to do next week, or so soon as my department is in full operation. The honorable member may, however, rest assured that I shall be constructive, and shall endeavour to deal quickly with the problem to which he has referred, insofar as it relates to my department. 1 am not, at the moment, certain as to whether it is a problem for my colleague, the Minister for Labour and National Service, to handle. In that event, also, the honorable member may, I think, expect as quick treatment as possible.

page 695

QUESTION

MILITIA

Classification of Horse Drivers

Mr PATERSON:
GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA

– Can the Minister for the Army say when he will be in a position to make the long-awaited decision with reference to the classification of horse drivers in the Militia?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– I regret any delay that may have taken place. As the honorable member knows, there have been progressive decisions in relation to particular classes. I shall endeavour to see whether a reply can be given to-morrow.

page 695

QUESTION

DEFENCE ACCOMMODATION AT TOWNSVILLE

Mr MARTENS:

– Some time ago, I asked the Minister for Air whether Mr. Kjellberg’s premises at Townsville had been taken over by his department, and whether the compensation promised to that gentleman had been paid. The Minister advised me that a certain amount had been placed to the bank credit of Mr. Kjellberg. On the 25th June, the honorable member for Townsville in the Queensland Parliament advised me in a letter that up to that date Mr. Kjellberg had not been informed of any amount having been made available to him as a bank credit. Will the Minister explain the position?

Mr McEWEN:
Minister for Air · INDI, VICTORIA · CP

– I find that £1,000 had been paid to Mr. Kjellberg’s solicitors by the time that I replied to the honorable member’s question in this chamber. [ am in possession of a letter of acknowledgment to that effect from those solicitors. . As the result of negotiations, a decision was made to acquire Mr. Kjellberg’s premises. I am practically assured that agreement has been reached between Mr. Kjellberg and the Common wealth authorities as to the basis of payment for the complete ownership of the premises.

page 695

QUESTION

ASSISTANCE TO PRIMARY PRODUCERS

Mr WILSON:

– Can the Prime Minister state whether consideration has yet been given to my request for some action, by means of the promulgation of a regulation or otherwise, to afford a degree of protection for wheat-growers and other primary producers who are suffering the most acute economic pressure, due to drought, as well as the deprivation of labour, loss of markets, and other extraordinary conditions brought about by the war?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I regret that I am not able to make a statement at the present time; but I assure the honorable member that his representations have not been overlooked. There has been singularly little opportunity to discuss matters of this kind during the last few days.

page 695

QUESTION

LICENSEES OF PETROL STATIONS

Mr FORDE:

– Will the Prime Minister state when we may expect a decision as to what action is intended by the Government in order to relieve the licensees of petrol stations, who .are bound by leases entered into in pre-war days, to pay high rents over lengthy periods, notwithstanding the big decline of their revenue?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I have already indicated that this matter is under consideration. I have nothing that I can usefully add at this juncture.

page 695

NATIONAL FITNESS BILL 1941

Second Reading

Debate resumed from the 1st July (vide page 634)., on motion by Sir Frederick Stewart -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Mr HUTCHINSON:
Deakin

.- I do not intend to delay the House for very long. In fact, I do not regard the bill as worthy of delay, in comparison with the big and important subjects with which we are confronted to-day. Because of its fragmentary character, it should be given short shrift.

The subject of national fitness was brought before this House some years ago, and £100,000 was set aside for expenditure over a period of five years. I understand that that was in 1939; yet legislation in respect of it has only now been introduced.

The bill does not provide for any considerable enlargement of activities in relation to national fitness. Its main points are, I should say, summed up in clause 3, which makes provision in respect of measures to be adopted to develop an appreciation of the need for physical fitness - in other words propaganda for this particular purpose - and the organization of movements, the provision of facilities, and the training of teachers of classes and leaders of movements or groups. If its aim were to promote national fitness over a wide field, I should be prepared to consider it, but even then on lv at the correct time and in the right place. In other words, if the Commonwealth, in conjunction with the States, were prepared to tackle the problem of national fitness on a nation-wide scale, and in peace-time, I should give to the matter every consideration. But nothing of the kind is contemplated. It is altogether too foolish to contemplate a bill of this sort as a piece of legislation designed to promote a war effort. The health of a nation is, of course, of great concern to everyone; it is fundamentally important to national welfare. My conception of national fitness is, that consideration of it should begin with provision for pre-natal and other advice, to be followed by the provision of maternity homes, the care of the infant during its progress to adolescence, establishment of public health centres, advice as to feeding, and so on. In the schools, I would make compulsory, provision for the physical well-being of’ the child. That, of course, is the case now in many of our public schools. I refer particularly to the boarding section of our public schools, where indulgence in some branch of- sport by every scholar is compulsory. They must visit the cricket field, or the river or the tennis court. Unless sport were made compulsory many of the scholars would never take part in it. Thus, the provision of funds for the en- couragement of sporting activities among young people will benefit only those to whom sport is already attractive. The others will derive no benefit at all. After the children leave school, those who are not attracted to sport will take no further part in it unless they are compelled to do so. The Minister mentioned police boys’ clubs, and the activities of the Young Men’s Christian Association, but to pin our faith to them is merely to play with the problem. In peace-time it would be reasonable for this House to devote an afternoon or two to discussing the subject of physical fitness. At a time like this, when the manhood of the country is being called up compulsorily for training in military camps, it is a piece of pure humbug to concern ourselves with it.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– Is the honorable member joining in the humbug by speaking on the bill?

Mr HUTCHINSON:

– I am going to knock the bill out if I can. I remind the Government that there is a war on. There is need for wise expenditure of money in certain directions; there is need for economy in a hundred and one other directions. The House, instead of wasting its time in discussing subjects of this kind, should devote its attention to something of real national importance. Otherwise, we ought to go back to our homes.

Mr BAKER:
Maranoa

.- This is one of the rare occasions upon which I find myself in agreement with the Government. I regard its proposal as most important, and as one of a series of measures, including child endowment, which together will make up a list of adequate social services. The old saying mens sana in corpore sano was, perhaps, never so true as it is at the present time. Mental . and spiritual health is based on physical health. Unless he or she has a sound body it is merely waste of time and energy trying to educate a child. In my opinion, the amount to be provided for the work, £20,000, is too small. I should like to see it increased to ten times that amount. To those who are opposed to the bill on the ground that we must be careful how we expend public money, I say that the one great lesson which emerges from the present war is that money can always be found when it must be found. We must win the war, and we must needs find sufficient money with which to do it. If we are able to find and expend hundreds of millions of pounds for destruction, surely we can find a few hundreds of thousands of pounds in order to improve national health. Physical health is developed through physical culture, but there must also be adequate feeding, clothing and housing.

Of all peoples, ancient and modern, the ancient Greeks were seized most strongly with the importance of a well-balanced mind in a well-developed body. I have myself been privileged to do something in the way of improving national fitness, having been for over half a century engaged in this work. In the sixtieth annual report of the Queensland Education Department, now in the Parliamentary Library, I had incorporated this extract from my 1935 report on educational activities in the Northern Downs inspectorial district -

In an article recently written by H. Gibson appears the following: -

Tin- ancient Greeks understood physical culture better than any nation ‘before or since, and exploited its resources with unparalleled success. The curriculum of the Athenian children up to the age of seven (7) years consisted chiefly of games. From seven (7) to sixteen (1G) half of the time devoted to exercises was given over to physical culture; and from sixteen (16) to twenty (20) education remained predominantly physical.

Notwithstanding this (more likely because of it), it is recognized that Athens possessed the most intelligent populace the world has ever seen and produced the most remarkable galaxy of intelligent men of which history makes record. With us, a game is to a great extent played for the sake of achieving victory or enjoying ourselves. But behind the Greek games lay a much higher motive.

Munroe, in his book, A, Brief Course in the History of Education, writes -

And yet, for all this (physical training), the Greeks got much more than physical development. Moral results were no less important. Whole-mindedness or temperance - the control of the passions and emotions by reason - was thus obtained. Above all, the coordination of thought and action, the fitting of conduct to precept, of word to action, was secured through this same training. There resulted the harmony between the inner thought life and the outer life of conduct, which formed the ideal of the Greeks.

Gaines and contests were not indulged in haphazard as with modern youth, nor participated in by the few for the edification of the many. Nor were the standards “of excellence the same as modern ones.

Success consisted not so much in winning the contest, as in the evidence given of the proper form of exercise, in graceful and dignified carriage and in control of temper and of skill.

Honorable members will recall reading in their histories how, like sparks from a fire that is being beaten out, the Greek learning was carried throughout Europe, and brought about that wonderful movement usually referred to as the Renaissance, or the New Learning - a movement, as Shelley says -

To scatter a? from ‘ all unextinguished hearth ashes and sparks.

The great Labour movement, of which I have the privilege of being a humble member, has for one of its objects the giving of equal opportunities to all - the giving to each according to his or her capacity; in brief, giving to each child, youth or maiden his or her birthright - a sound physical, mental and moral development, so that each may express his or her convictions in thought, word or act; or, as Milton puts it, “ The determination of men to think, to know, and to utter freely”. In short, the Labour party stands for an enlightened democracy, knowing that the human mind is stronger than dictators, as Aristotle has proved stronger than Alexander, Solon stronger than Crsus, and Socrates stronger than the political tyrants of Athens. The much-vaunted new order, of which we hear so much, can come only through the enlightenment of the people, and must be based on the physical. I hope that in the time to come we shall have a shorter working week, and this raises the problem of how we are to employ our leisure time profitably. This is such a serious problem that, here and now, I suggest the appointment of a Minister for Recreation. This may sound revolutionary, but we have had three new Ministersappointed recently, bringing the number to nineteen. I suggest that we make the number an even score by the appointment of a Minister for Recreation. His portfolio would be one of the most important of all.

Effective physical culture must be provided by the teachers in the schools and must be given from the time the child begins to attend the school. In Queensland, and I suppose in other ‘States also, the teacher! are to be complimented upon the very fine work they have done in this respect. They give much of their time and energy to teaching the young people how to swim and play games. The difficulty arises when they leave school. Who is to carry on their physical training then? It is here that careful organization is needed.” We should not wait until the war is over; we should go right ahead now, and do what is necessary in order to build up a healthy and virile nation. The trouble at present is that too small a proportion of the population takes part in sporting activities. Recently, I attended the soccer match between the Chinese team and a team representative of New South Wales. There I saw a few men participating in the game, and thousands merely looking on. In my proposed new order, many will participate and only the halt, the blind, the maimed and the aged will applaud.

The time has come when the Commonwealth should relieve the States of their responsibilities for education. The existence of six curricula has retarded our march to nationhood. More and more, the States are finding it increasingly difficult to finance education. Australia is a great young nation which federated over two score years ago for the purpose of establishing a united democracy, and the creation of conditions that will lead to the adoption of one curriculum will be the consummation of federation. I have pleasure in supporting the bill.

Mr MORGAN:
Reid

.- I can conscientiously support this bill. Although I. do not endorse the statement of the honorable member for Deakin (Mr. Hutchinson), that the bill is “pure humbug I agree that it is fragmentary. I cannot enthusiastically commend the Government upon the bill, because it is totally inadequate for the purpose for which it has been introduced. For the promotion of national physical fitness, the Commonwealth will grant £20,000 per annum for a period of five years. To equal, on a population basis, the expenditure by the Government of Great Britain upon this object, the Commonwealth would require to vote £200,000 a year. All progressive countries now encourage physical education because they realize that a .healthy body begets a healthy mind. The time has come when we should follow their excellent example. The United States of America, which has entered enthusiastically upon this scheme, now provides $50,000,000 a year in order to finance it. After five years, its expenditure will reach $100,000,000 a year. The Minister for Social Services (Sir Frederick Stewart) is doubtless sincere in his expressed desire to foster the national fitness campaign, just as his sincerity has been revealed in other measures for social reform. Consequently, I sympathize with him, because, regardless of his sincerity, his efforts may be attended by the ill-fortune that overtook the national health insurance scheme, with which he was associated. After spending nearly £1,000,000 upon the national health proposal, the Government decided that it could not find the sum of £2,000,000 a year which was required in order to implement the scheme. A year later, the Government began to budget for the expenditure of hundreds of millions of pounds for the prosecution of the war. That indicates the attitude of our present society’ toward human material. The capitalistic society is concerned primarily with profits, not with social reforms, health and human units.

At the outbreak of war, 100,000 persons were unemployed in Australia. It has been asserted that of the first contingent of the Australian Imperial Force that went abroad, 70 per cent, had been unemployed at the date of enlistment. Many thousands of them have now returned to Australia because they could not endure the stress and strain of modern warfare. In the United States of America, 20,000,000 persons were in receipt of the dole or on relief in 1939. According to Dr. Leslie W. Irwin; Director pf Health and Physical Education at the University of Chicago -

Indications that many of the present youths of military age are lacking in physical condition may be had from information obtained regarding recruits for regular enlistment in the United States of America Army. This information shows that approximately 50 per cent, of the volunteers examined are not accepted for service. Approximately 00 per cent of the volunteers for the United States of America Army Air Service are rejected on the basis of physical examinations.

The criminal records of the democracies reveal the degree, to which youth has been neglected under the present social order. An article entitled “ This Lawless Age” which appeared in Signs of the Times reads -

The greatest threat to the welfare of the United States of America to-day is disregard cif law and order. It is a most alarming fact that during the past year, in some form or other, crime visited one-fourth of all American homes. One criminal offence was committed for every ninth person in the land.

That nation’s annual crime bill has now reached the staggering sum of $15,000,000,000 (£A.3,750,000,000). This is equal to the amount spent for food, and four times the expenditure for education. Last year, the police force handled 1,500,000 serious crimes, such as murder, banditry, and aggravated assault, and 14,000,000 lesser offences, like trauds, forgeries, embezzlements, disturbances of the peace, &c.

J lie ‘ black army” of crime now numbers nearly 5,000,000, which is more than three and n. half times the number of students in all universities and colleges in the United States of America.

I cite another disturbing fact regarding the youth fulness of criminals -

In the past, hardened criminals were usually of middle age; to-day the penal institution? house multitudes of youths with extended prison records who calmly confess the most cold-blooded planning and execution of ruthless crimes.

The journal publishes a graph showing the number of arrests and the average age of the offenders. The highest percentage occurs in the age group between IS and 22 years. That again illustrates the position into which youth has been allowed to drift in our present society.

The position in Australia is equally serious. The Director of Physical Education in New South Wales, Mr. Gordon Young;, declared that the population of New South Wales at the 31st December, 1938, was 2,735,695; registered unemployed aged fourteen years and upwards at ‘the 31st May, 1939, totalled 59,531; inmates of charitable institutions at the 3 lst December, 1928, numbered 20,700; persons admitted to penal institutions during 1938, were 8,136 ; inmates of penal institutions as at the 31st December, 1938, 11.370: and inmates of corrective institutions, child welfare shelters, church institutions and state ward depots, 2,489. These figures indicate that 102,000 individuals in sunny New South Wales have not achieved adjustment, effective living or their share of happiness in our modern world. The figures do not include . those who died through preventable acci dent, illnesses or mental disorders. Three years ago, 224,433 persons were admitted to hospitals; 12,940 were inmates of mental institutions; and 8,733 either appeared in the juvenile court or were sent to jail. These statistics indicate a human wastage which offers a challenge to national fitness. In one year, one out of every nine of the citizens of New South Wales was a charge on the State. To pay for the maintenance of the necessary buildings, to compensate for accidents and illnesses, and to feed the human derelicts, the State incurred in a twelvemonths’ period an expenditure of £2,919,247.

Dealing with crime as it affects youths, I. quote from a newspaper article which explains how a boy, the product of our present society, became a criminal. As the result of the position of his parents, he became an inmate of the Gosford Farm Home. The article reads -

HOW BOY BECAME CRIMINAL.

Farm Home Attacked.

At the- Gosford Farm Home, potential murderers, bashers, juvenile sex perverts and other criminal types, mix freely with all the other inmates.

This was alleged yesterday by the mother of a boy who spent three years there. “At 15 my son was a bit wayward and headstrong, but had no criminal tendencies,” she said. “I let him go, there voluntarily because I hoped lie would learn something useful.

He learned how to crack a safe, how 1o break into a. house,’ and similar criminal tricks’.

Within a month of leaving the home lie had been sentenced to nine months’ gaol for housebreaking and thieving.

At the home he learned no trade, received little education, and was fit only for pickandshovel work.”

During the last war, many countries concentrated their attention upon prosecuting the struggle and training men of military age. They entirely neglected the youths in the community. Responsibility in the United States of America was shouldered by a high-minded gentleman, Father Flanagan, who discovered that many homeless waifs, uncared for and alone, were wandering aimlessly about the countryside. He established an institution in which they were provided with food and shelter. At. first. he accommodated only a few; but so many sought his assistance that in due course. thousands came under his care and were trained to be worthy citizens. Each year, 500 of them are discharged from his institution fully trained. Unfortunately, the Commonwealth Government has not profited from the unfortunate experience during the last war. It has no worthwhile programme for physical or technical education. Those allimportant subjects are left entirely untouched. As an excuse for its short-sighted policy, the Commonwealth declares that technical education comes within the province of the States. It disregards the fact that technical trainees are urgently required for munition factories. The States lack equipment and money to finance the construction of centres for technical training, with the result that thousands of enthusiastic young men and women are unable to undergo the course.

Mr Marwick:

– Is it entirely the responsibility of this Government to care for the youth of the nation?

Mr MORGAN:

– The Commonwealth Government is responsible for finding the necessary money, because the States lack the means.

Mr Marwick:

– A few years ago the Commonwealth provided money, but it was used to finance the erection of schools.

Mr MORGAN:

– The scheme could be put upon a proper basis. Many struggling organizations which are conducted on a voluntary basis would welcome a grant from the Commonwealth. The life of a child, before it attains maturity, may be divided into four phases. In the preschool year group, up to the age of five, are many children who are not receiving adequate care. More kindergartens and day nurseries are required to look after them. The Government, is asking Australian manhood to serve either in the fighting services or in the munition industry. Women are being called upon to assist in the war effort, and, later, employment on a large scale will be found for them in the munition factories. With the parents so busily engaged, children will lack adequate care and attention, as did children during the last war. The Commonwealth Government ought to provide sufficient money with which to subsidize existing kindergartens and day nurseries and to establish others.

Mr Marwick:

– That was done under legislation some years ago, and in some of the States the money provided was misappropriated.

Mr MORGAN:

– A proper accounting system would prevent misappropriation. At any rate, such a happening in the past is not a reason why we should not renew our efforts now and in the future. A. parallel argument would be that, because, in the last war, a certain officer drew thousands of pounds as pay for non-existent troops, we should not have an army now.

Certain organizations try to look after children from five to ten years of age. For instance, the Woollahra Municipal Council demolished nine of the most filthy hovels that could be found in any part of the world in order to provide half an acre of ground as a playground for children who formerly had to play about in the noise, dust and grime and amid the traffic of congested Paddington streets. With appropriate buildings and all facilities, including attendants, the playground makes provision for up to 500 children. These things cost money. Other Sydney municipal councils would like to follow the example set by the Woollahra Municipal Council, but they have not the funds with which to do so. This Government would do well if it provided those funds.

Another example of how certain publicspirited people are trying to improve the lot of the children is the establishment by Father Dunlea of “Boys’ Town “, on the lines of the original “ Boys’ Town “ established in the United States of America by Father Flanagan. From the outset, Father Dunlea was hampered by the Sutherland Shire Council. He and the boys were subjected to so much pinpricking by the local authorities that eventually they were forced out of their temporary accommodation in Sutherland into tents in National Park, a.s is shown by the foi- . lowing extract from the Sydney Morning Herald: -

Twenty-seven past and present members of the “ Boys’ Town “ at Sutherland marched out of the “ town “ premises yesterday afternoon, through the Sutherland business centre, past the council chambers, and up to National Park to live in tents on a picnic reserve in the park, near the main Prince’s Highway … A number of placards r/ere carried by the boys, reading, “ We are Australian refugees.” “ We only want independence.” “ Give us a fair go.” “Help us to help ourselves,” and “ Australian homes for Australian lads.” Before the boys loft the premises, the Australian flag was flown reversed as a signal of distress. The boys had begun gardening in their yard, but the work was abandoned. “ We are leaving our ‘town’ here in Sutherland because of the unpleasantness which has been caused to us in recent days “, said Father Dunlea. “ The boys do not like the reflection which has been cast upon them by council officers and others. We have received very little help in our work, but plenty of criticism, and so as to avoid any more of it we are going away out to trek the highways andcamp amid nature in National Park, where the trees and the birds will not start hampering us by letting us know all about clause ten and subsection so and so of the Public Health Act.”

That is the attitude taken towards homeless lads who should he given special care and attention.

Mr Marwick:

– Takenby local governing bodies.

Mr MORGAN:

– Under the present capitalist system, that seems to be the general attitude of society towards young people. The attitude is that less fortunate boys should be reared to become wage slaves and that nothing ought to be done in order to give them a creative outlet. It is no wonder that many of them are forced into a life of crime. Somewhat similar to the organization created by Father Dunlea is the Christ Church Welfare Hostel in Sydney. That hostel is conducted by the Anglican Church, but, like Father Dunlea’s “ Boys’ Town “, it is entirely nonsectarian, because lads are taken into itirrespective of denomination. The Christ Church Welfare Hostel takes boys from the children’s courts, either before or after they have been charged and convicted, and endeavours to lead them back on to the right track. Much of its work, however, is like locking the stable door after the horse has been stolen. The better approach is by way of the institution of physical training camps and hostels and so on, on the lines suggested by the Director of Education in New South Wales. The State Government is making aworthy attempt to grapple with the situation, but it is hampered financially, and the problem is far from being solved. Here is an opportunity for the Commonwealth Government to do something really worth while.

Australia possesses some of the finest tourist resorts of the world, but they are beyond the reach of the younger generation. Mostly, they are frequented by elderly people, many of them far beyond the stage of being able to derive benefit or enjoyment from’ those resorts. What. Australia has already done in this direction is, as was said by the honorable member for Deakin (Mr. Hutchinson), merely a fragment of what has been done in other parts of the world, notably Germany and Italy, where the rulers, especially Hitler, are fully aware of the need to ensure the fitness of the people by treatment and training in the early years of their lives. The way in which properly to handle the whole situation is to provide facilities for physical and cultural development of our youth in order to inspire them to uphold the principles of democracy.

Mr CALWELL:
Melbourne

.- I support the bill, but, I regard it as merely a token payment to the youth of the nation. It does not go as far as it ought to go, and, in this respect, I join issue with the honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron) who mistook the bill to be a “ Nationalist unfitness bill “ instead of the National Fitness Bill. The Government does not seem to please the honorable member for Barker; the Labour party does not seem to please him, and the Country party which he used to lead, does not please him. I do not know what sort of party or government would please him either. It is all very well to talk about national fitness and to establish national fitness councils, and say that by a series of physical exercises, we shall make this nation the nation that we should like it to be. National fitness was obtained in Germany, Italy and other countries, not by physical exercises alone, but by feeding the people. The first essential to a fit people is food. Many Australians are not being properly fed, housed or clothed.

Mr Archie Cameron:

– Or proper ly led.

Mr CALWELL:

– Certainly the nation is not properly led. The honorable member and I are at last on common ground. There have been many investigations ‘of the problem of malnutrition in this country. A Commonwealth inquiry sat for a long time and produced voluminous reports which contain scathing indictments of the system of society under which we live, but nothing was done either by this Government or by the State governments to set the matter right. The Melbourne City Council, of which I am a member, had inquiries made by its officers, including eminent doctors, who conducted tests in the industrial areas, in order to determine to what degree malnutrition existed in the City of Melbourne. Those tests were made in order to determine just how many of the children reached the standard laid down in the Emmerson Test. The fact was established that, children up to one year of age, because they were fed at the mother’s breast, and from one to two years of age, because the council subsidized various baby health centres under its control so that free milk and free emulsions could be given to them, did not suffer greatly from malnutrition, there was evidence, however, that malnutrition existed among children of from two to three years of age and was worse among children from three to four years of age, apparently because the council’s resources were deemed so limited that it could not help them. Then there is the group between the ages of four and five years. In the city of Melbourne where Collins House, the nerve centre of industry in this country is situated, 43 per cent, of the children between the ages of four and five years who were submitted to this test were found to be suffering from malnutrition. The Government will not make fit Australians of them just by voting money to a national council that will give them physical exercises. As I said during the debate on the Address-in-Reply at the end of last year, the nation has no right to demand that Australians whom it starves in their infancy shall, when they reach man’s estate, form an Australian Imperial Force to defend it against external aggression. The Government ought to address itself to the problem of feeding our children properly, as the first instalment of its much vaunted new order.

Mr Falstein:

– It is a necessary measure of defence against future attack.

Mr CALWELL:

– That is so. I have told the House about what has happened in Melbourne. Investigations in other parts of Australia have also brought forth the same damning condemnation of our economic system, and the same irrefutable criticisms of our Parliamentary institutions and the governments that, in their self-sufficiency and selfcomplacency, believe that these evils do not exist merely because they are not brought face to face with them. At least one member of the medical fraternity of Australia has a very inquiring mind. I refer to Dr. E. P. Dark, M.C., who practises in New South Wales. He is the author of an article published in the Medical Journal of Australia of the 4th March, 1939, under the title “Property and Health “. As one might surmise from the title, Dr. Dark is cynical of the regard that we pay to the defence of property, and the very little that we do in order to prevent ill health or promote public health. He said that we ought to follow the example of the British Medical Association in England, and ascertain the cost of a diet which would ensure optimum nutrition. That is something which the Government might do during the next Parliamentary recess. Dr. Dark made the following reference to the views of Sir J. Boyd Orr, a very eminent British authority on the subject of malnutrition in Great Britain.

Sir . J. Boyd Orr’s figures cannot be quoted too often. There are 4,500,000 people whose diet is grossly deficient in every constituent; 9,000,000 more deficient in all vitamins and minerals; and 9.000.000 more lacking some of the “ protective “ elements. This is not because the people do not know how to buy, but simply because they have not enough money.

We have those protective foods - milk, eggs, fruit and vegetables - in abundance in Australia. Nevertheless, the people of Great Britain, and many Australians, cannot obtain sufficient quantities of them. The article also stated: -

Here in Australia we have the beginnings of all the traffic conditions we see in England. We have slums which must be as bad, though not as extensive . . . We have malnutrition, to the extent of 33 per cent, of a group of children examined in Sydney . . . There are many things which we must do before we can lay honest claim to care anythingabout preventive medicine.

Dr. Dark stated that the value of a human life to the nation is reckoned at about £10,000. If we have stock we feed it in order to ensure that it will be fit to work for us, but we seem to care nothing for the human beings who may be asked to defend the country against attack, and who, in the natural course of events, will become the fathers and mothers of the nation. Dr. Dark also stated -

The effect of poverty on physique and on intelligence is just us malignant.

It is equally as malignant as the lowering of the individual income, which causes an increase of the death rate amongst the poorer classes.

Referring to a test by the Anthropometric Committee of the British Medical Association of England, which divided the population into five classes and found an average difference of height of 8.75 centimetres - three and a half inches - between the first and fifth classes, Dr. Dark stated that the committee found that the average difference between the richest and poorest classes was about 10.0 centimetres - four inches - in height, and 5.9 kilograms - 13 lb. - in weight. The committee found, by testing two groups of children, that in weight 87.1 . per cent, of the children of professional parents were normal, or above normal, as against 44.8 per cent, of the children whose parents were mostly unemployed. In height, 95.2 per cent, of the “professional “ children were normal or better, as against 53 per cent, of the latter class. Dr. Dark remarked on these results -

This difference is acquired. It is not inherited, and does not exist at birth, unless the mother is living at starvation level. Up to three weeks there is no measurable difference between the classes in either weight or height; then it begins, and at thirteen weeks the first effects of poverty are visible enough.

Repeated investigations by psychologists demonstrate that the intellect may be stunted a<* surely as the body. According to Dr. Dark, it is an undeniable fact that up to two years of age, these investigations find no difference in the average mentality of the children of. the richest and poorest classes. From then on the gap in average intelligence widens. The inevitable conclusion is that people are not poor because they are stunted and stupid ; they are stunted and stupid because they are poor. The doctor concludes that it is a dreadful biological imperative from which there is no escape. Yet the Government dawdles along with a bill of this kind, and dallies with the problem of social services generally. It seems to believe that it has earned the gratitude of this generation and of posterity because it has enacted a child endowment scheme. Dr. Dark further stated -

I he children born in the Melbourne slums, many of them inevitably destined to death in infancy, or to become diseased, or to bt’ criminals, have at birth, as has been shown, just the same natural inheritance of mental und bodily well-being as the children of the professional classes.

From a purely commercial point of view it ought to be our endeavour to ensure that, all children born to the community - and heaven knows that few enough are being born - should be given every possible natural advantage to grow in bodily and mental strength so that they will be an acquisition to the nation instead of being social liabilities, as many of them unfortunately are through no fault of their own. We are maintaining huge hospitals to-day, and the people are crying out for even more. Many people go into them at middle age because they were malnourished in their childhood, and therefore are more liable to disease infection than if they had been given the proper foods that this country could provide under good management.

Mr BAKER:

– What about asylums?

Mr CALWELL:

– They are full of subnormal people whose mental development was retarded because they were insufficiently fed in this country that boasts of its limitless resources and great potential riches, and is looked upon by people in other countries as a great and glorious land. It is certainly not great and glorious for that 43 per cent, of the children in Melbourne between the ages of four and five years who are insufficiently nourished in this era of civilization, to mention only one class. I quote further from the article by Dr. Dark: -

We must show that any attempt to get physical fitness is a farce unless everyone, especially every child, is adequately fed.

I commend that statement to the Minister in case he may be tempted to feel some smug satisfaction if this measure should pass through both Houses of the Parliament. In another part of his article, Dr. Dark stated: -

Perhaps the crowning piece of cruel stupidity was achieved by the Blackburn (England) Public Assistance Committee, who administered the means test there. If a mother fed her baby on the breast they cut down her allowance.

  1. conclude my references to this timely and valuable article with what might be termed the expression of Dr. Dark’s faith : -

It is better to have a few shillings extra for food than to have all the other conditions of living improved.

Not long ago the Minister for Health managed somehow to come to verbal grips with the Bishop of Willochra, the Eight Reverend Dr. R. Thomas, over some statements made by the right reverend gentleman. I do not agree that the child endowment scheme was panicky legislation, ‘but I consider that there is much truth in the bishop’s remarks concerning evils from which society is suffering.. The suggestions which he made are worthy of commendation.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– Does not the honorable gentleman think that we could have those things mentioned by the bishop, as well as child endowment and other benefits?

Mr CALWELL:

– Precisely.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– That was my answer to the bishop.

Mr CALWELL:

– I should not have attacked the bishop as the Minister did; I should have pointed out to him the error of his thought, but I should also have commended him for his suggestions. I doubt whether the Minister gave to the bishop the credit that was his due. The right reverend gentleman suggested the following five ways by which our society could be improved -

Raising our moral standards: instruction and preparation before marriage; a revival of true religion; realization of our duty to God and man: and patriotism and love of home life.

I am in hearty agreement with those suggestions, and I shall offer some remarks anent them on the subject of national fitness and the failure of the Government io take notice of a great and growing evil in our community. I refer to the number of cases of criminal abortion which occur throughout Australia, and the failure of all governments to do anything of an effective nature to remedy the evil. About 50 cases of terminated pregnancies are dealt with at the Women’s Hospital at Melbourne each week. About 50 cases are also dealt with each week in other hospitals of the same city. In all, about 5,000 such cases are treated in Melbourne hospitals each year. I am advised by a Collins-street gynaecologist that about 60 per cent, of these cases are due to natural causes, but the remaining 40 per cent., totalling about 2,000 cases, are either self-induced or the result of illegal operations. I .have also been informed that at least 5 per cent., and it may even be 10 per cent., of the medical profession in Melbourne engage in criminal abortions. Many of these gentlemen were educated partly at the expense of the State and might reasonably be expected to use their healing powers in the interests of the community, but actually they are not doing so. Some of them protest that they occasionally perform therapeutic abortions for health or medical reasons. Of the 5,000 cases to which I have referred 25 per cent, relate to single women. The death rate is between 7 and 8 per cent., and the number pf abortions is increasing. I am credibly informed that the total has increased by ten a week in recent times. Neither the Commonwealth Government nor the Government of Victoria is doing anything to grapple with this diabolical evil. This Parliament has recently passed legislation designed to increase the birth rate by helping parents to provide adequate food and clothing for their families, but it has done nothing to stop infanticide. The Victorian Public Health Commission is greatly concerned at the shortage of beds in private and intermediate hospitals for midwifery cases, but it is entirely unconcerned about the death of 150 young women each year, following illegal operations. It has never issued any advice warning these unfortunate women against the grave danger to their lives through criminal interference. Neither has the Commonwealth Department of Health done anything to warn expectant mothers of the danger to health and happiness .and even to life itself by such defiance of both divine and natural laws. Apparently no one in authority is concerned, nor for that matter is there a discernible stirring of public conscience at the tragic and unnecessary loss of the lives of children and mothers on every day of the year in all our capital cities. This is not a tragedy of this year or of last year. It has been going on for many years, and is now, thanks to the pagan times in which we live, almost condoned and even excused.

Murder is murder no matter where, or how, or by ‘ whom it is committed. The slaughter of the innocents in 1941 and the sacrifice of the lives of strong, healthy young women, married and unmarried, must be brought to an end. I make the following four suggestions to the Government: -

  1. All abortionists - and they are well-known - should be interned forthwith. No fifth columnist, or pedler of subversive literature, is half so dangerous to society as these destroyers of young Australian lives.
  2. The law against abortion should be Strengthened as it was in Germany and Italy. The National Security Act could be used effectively to this end.
  3. A campaign pointing out the grave dangers of abortion to life and health from such malpractice should be carried on continuously for the threefold purpose of saving lives for Australia, preventing fearful suffering to the victims of illegal operations, and sparing the relatives of these victims life-long sorrow and remorse.
  4. It should also be made a grave offence for any person to suggest, aid, or encourage the procuring of an abortion.

If we are not prepared to do this much we have no right to ask brave men to risk their lives to protect a people so bent on self-destruction or so indifferent to the fate that so surely awaits them. Is it too much to ask that when, in this hour of gravest crisis, the flower of this generation’s manhood is prepared, if necessary, to immolate itself on the altar of national sacrifice in order to defend Australia, the married women of the nation should not shirk their duty to the country?

Certain other aspects of physical fitness also call loudly for attention, and I sincerely trust that we shall hear about them from other ecclesiastical dignitaries and leaders of public opinion. I hope that some of them will also address themselves courageously to. the diabolical practice of abortion to ‘which I have just referred at some length, so that valuable lives may be saved to this country and the purpose of the Government’s child endowment legislation be achieved.

I could spend a considerable time in dealing with other factors in national fitness, but I shall conclude by bringing to notice the opinion of Sir James Boyd Orr, the eminent authority whose words I have already cited at some length, that an increase of the consumption of milk highly desirable in the interests of good health. A campaign was conducted in Melbourne last year with the object of increasing the consumption of milk by the common people. It, was suggested in the course of extensive advertising and platform activity that every person desirous of preserving his or her health should drink not less than one pint of milk a day. The consumption of milk in the metropolitan area of Melbourne last year was about 27,855,000 gallons, an average of about 76,000 gallons a day from 2.000 dairy farms. Under the operations of the Milk Board, the price received for that milk by ‘ the dairy-farmers was ls. a gallon delivered at Melbourne. The farmers had to pay the freight, which averaged from Id. to Hd. a gallon. Haulage of 95 per cent, of that big volume of milk was by road transport. Almost double that quantity of milk would need to be produced and transported to Melbourne to achieve the ideal of a. daily consumption of one pint of “ the food of foods “ by every person. In other countries, notably the United States of America and Sweden, big national educative drives have helped greatly to increase milk consumption. The researches and investigations by Sir James Boyd Orr would fully justify such a campaign. I therefore sincerely trust that after this bill has been passed by the Parliament, the Minister for Social Services will address himself to the problem of providing a pint of milk a day for each working-class child in ‘

Australia. If the Commonwealth Government would subsidize a scheme designed to achieve that end, it would certainly deserve the thanks of this generation and also of posterity.

Mr MARTENS:
Herbert

– I am in accord with the ideals which have prompted the introduction of this bill, but I do not think that the Government lias done much so far to give expression to such objectives. Yesterday afternoon, the honorable member for Moreton (Mr. Francis) made some remarks which suggested that little had been done in Queensland to promote the physical fitness of the people. I deny the accuracy of the honorable gentleman’s statement. There if no better system in operation in the Commonwealth for caring for young children, and young mothers than that of Queensland. Under the legislation of that State, clinics have been associated with numerous hospitals, and they are staffed by thoroughly qualified women in order that the best advice and help may be given to expectant mothers and young mothers’ and babies. That in itself is a substantial contribution to national fit11(.SS. As governments are encouraging the bringing of young children into the world, an obligation rests upon them to do everything possible to ensure that the greatest care and attention, as well as the best medical advice, shall be available to young mothers. In this regard, excellent work is being done in Queensland. Moreover, the health of the people of Queensland will compare favorably with rh at of people in any other part of the world.

It is sometimes said that parts of Queensland with a high temperature and an exceptionally heavy rainfall are not suitable for habitation by white people, but that is a fallacy, for the health of the white people of tropical and semitropical Queensland is excellent. I do not know the proportion of rejects in North Queensland in connexion with the present national fitness campaign, but I am sure, from my general knowledge of the subject, that it is not likely to be greater than that of other parts of the Commonwealth. That, in itself, indicates that the Government of Queensland has not been indifferent to the public health. During the last war, the number of re jected applicants for enlistment was less, proportionately, in north Queensland, than in most other parts of the Commonwealth. “Proper housing, adequate clothing, and suitable food in sufficient quantity, are far more, important to national fitness than “ physical jerks “ though I do not doubt the value of physical exercise. I believe that Major Hatfield, of 2FC Sydney, is doing a good job at 7 o’clock each morning; but a much better job would be done by this Government if it would take steps to ensure that all of our people are adequately fed, housed and clothed. People know very well that it would be good for them to eat more apples and meat, and to drink more milk; but the trouble is that they have not the wherewithal to buy more apples, meat and milk. Anything that the Government can do to increase the purchasing power of the people will be abundantly worthwhile in the interests of national fitness.

An increase of wages, and an improvement of working conditions, would do a great deal to increase national fitness. In Queensland wages are higher and the working week shorter, generally speaking, than in other parts of the Commonwealth and, for that reason, the health of our people is better than that of the people of the other States. It is generally recognized in our arbitration courts that the basic wage of Queensland has a purchasing power at least 10s. a week in excess of the basic wage of New South Wales. With that 10s. the wage-earners of Queensland can, of course, buy more of the necessaries of life. If this Government desires to improve our physical standards, it should take steps immediately to ensure better conditions for the people in. general.

In the light of what I have said it must be obvious to all honorable members that there was very little justification for the remarks made yesterday by the honorable member for Moreton in relation to Queensland. Anti-Labour governments of the kind supported by the honorable gentleman were in power in Queensland for many years, and I have no doubt that if they had paid as much attention to the well-being of the people as the Labour governments of that

State have done, the general position of the people would be even better than it is. It was not becoming for the honorable member for Moreton to decry his own State.

The clinics associated with our public hospitals are doing a fine work in the interests of mothers and young children. It is highly desirable that expectant mothers should have well qualified persons of their own sex available to advise them., so that everything possible may be done to ensure that children born into the world will have the best possible prospect of a healthy life. I consider that the Commonwealth Government would be wise if it made the greater part of the £20,000 proposed to be allocated to universities available for expenditure in State schools, for we should then be sure that the money would benefit, in the main, the children of the working classes. It is beyond question that the working people of this country rear by far the largest proportion of our children. It is also beyond dispute that the young men and women who enter our universities have access to far better facilities for physical culture than are available to the children of working-class parents.

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition advocated yesterday that a certain gentleman should be placed in charge of the physical culture activities that will be made possible under the provisions of this bill, but I have no doubt whatever that any number of other people could do just as good work as he in that connexion. I have been in some of the gymnasiums established by physical culture experts, and I know that excellent work is being done in them. It is not possible to have a well-conditioned mind without a well-conditioned body. Without doubt physical fitness is of great importance.

I agree with the observation of the honorable member for Corio (Mr. Dedman) that we should keep in mind both the biological and the economic aspects of this subject. Efforts are being made to-day to encourage working-class people to curtail practices which have for their’ object the limitation of the size of families. If the Government wishes to see a substantial increase of the average size of families it should do everything possible to improve living conditions. Whatever might be the conditions, the wealthy would be able to give to their children greater care than can be given by the poor. Therefore, first consideration should be paid to the children of the poor, and whatever assistance is available should be placed at the disposal of the State authorities, in order that it may be expended to the best advantage in the public schools of this country. The lie direct has been given to the assertion that Queensland has not a healthy and virile people, by the men who have offered for enlistment in that State. Queensland produces, on a pro rata basis, as many athletes as any other State, and it possesses natural facilities for indulgence in sport of all kinds which are unequalled in the other States. I agree that a physical fitness campaign is essential, and that gymnasiums should be made available at a cost which will enable the people totake advantage of them. The Church of England is doing very good work in this connexion. If we are to have a healthy-minded race, some form of recreation must be provided which will attract the people from places of evil. In the God-given bright sunshine and sweet fresh air, we should have no trouble with our children. I cannot conceive of the possibility of a healthy, virile people being raised while slums exist in the bis: cities. Many of the young children in Sydney have no place in which to play. Physical fitness and worth-while citizenship are not possible under those conditions. The predecessor of the present government of New South Wales did nothing to remove them. The honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron) said yesterday that he believed that the Deputy Leader of the Labour party would spend millions of pounds in that connexion. Expenditure along such lines would lead to the raising of a healthy people, and would be far better for the country than to have children raised only in order that they might be destroyed at an expenditure of millions of pounds - which the honorable member is always pleased to advocate; he would conscript the manhood of this country, and send them overseas in order that they might kill persons with whom they have no argument, or be killed by those persons. If we were to educate our people and give to them the opportunity which should be theirs as a paramount right, we should not have the trouble that exists to-day. If the physical fitness advocated had been sought in the years that have gone, there would not have been so many men rejected as unfit for military service. A year or two ago, I mentioned that hundreds of gallons of milk was thrown away every morning at the Royal Agricultural Showground in Sydney, by the owners of cows who were waiting for the annual show to commence, and the right honorable member for North Sydney (Mr. Hughes), at that time Minister for Health, said that it was the duty of the State to see that it, was distributed among the people. I affirm that work of this sort is the duty of the Commonwealth. Although there are departments of health in the States, the health of the people of this country is nevertheless a first responsibility of the Commonwealth. Certain women in Sydney, and in every other city, are doing noble work every day in the week and every week in the year in providing food for children whose parents cannot afford to purchase it for them. If the milk thrown away at the time to which I refer, which must have totalled thousands of gallons, had been given to the women who were doing this wonderful work, they would have seen that those who needed it received it. By means of this legislation, the Government is taking a slight interest in the building up of a virile manhood. I wish that it would do something worthwhile, and thus make itself more representative of this nation.

Mr SHEEHAN:
Cook

.- I protest against the inadequate financial provision proposed by the Government.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– No amount is stated in this measure.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– An amount of £20,000 per annum is to be expended over a period of five years.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– That is not so.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– The cost of implementing the proposals in the bill would be nearly £200,000.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– The bill proposes to set up a trust, which will deal with such moneys as may be allocated from time to time.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– From what source will the trust derive its revenues?

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– From the Commonwealth Parliament.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– The bill is introduced in order to placate an existing council, which threatened to resign and to take no part in the national fitness campaign of the Government. It will absorb most of the money which the Government proposes to appropriate in the furtherance of that campaign. It has stated that £50,000 will be needed for the campaign in Victoria alone. That is not an over-statement of the position. Although the Government brings down legislation, it makes no attempt to put it into operation. Mention of national fitness has been made periodically since 1939. The Minister for Social Services (Sir Frederick Stewart) went so far as to visit Erskineville in order to select a site for a nutrition centre, hut that project has not been proceeded with.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– There are 100 children there to-day.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– That is the kindergarten.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– That was the purpose of my visit.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– That is controlled by the State, and the Commonwealth cannot link itself with it.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– That is not so. The Commonwealth is providing the money with which to pay all the teachers and purchase all the food.

Mr SHEEHAN:

– The State Government claims that the Erskineville centre is its concern. The point that I wish to make is, that the small amount to be provided for this important scheme will not be adequate, particularly as universities are to receive the bulk of the money. Why is there need for the intervention of universities? I should say that, when the young men and women of this country begin university life they are well able to protect themselves and look after their physical fitness. Complete equipment, gymnasiums, swimming pools, and the like, must be provided free of cost for the children in our public schools, and films should be screened to give them a knowledge of developments overseas in relation to physical fitness. I do not think that the Government is sincere in its proposals. In twelve months or two years it will probably ask for an appropriation of £200,000. Why should it not do the job properly now?

Mr WILSON:
Wimmera

.- 1 support the principles implicit in this bill in respect of national fitness, particularly as it applies to the younger people, especially school children. I have noted that Australia is lagging very far behind the achievements in this respect of other nations, notably the United States of America and ali the countries of Europe. We have a beneficent climate, and the greater proportion of our young people have ample opportunities in respect of food and exercise, with the result that in our race the percentage of physical fitness is probably greater than in the races of older countries of the world. Nevertheless I feel sure, from my observations, that we have drifted somewhat during the last ten years. In the depression years standards of life were lowered to a great degree, and this left its imprint on the growing generation. It is regrettable that a larger sum for this purpose is not provided. Instead of being placed in the hands of a comparatively new body, the money might l*e distributed direct to educational institutions, particularly to State and other schools which are educating the younger generation on a free basis. One of the disappointments felt by many of those on the staffs of those schools, who are interested in this matter, is that the necessary time and equipment have not been provided which would have enabled proper attention to be given to that side of education. The’ Commonwealth should provide a far larger sum for this purpose. There can be no doubt that when it proposes to provide, if necessary, £250,000 or more, no objection will be raised from any part of this House. I commend the principles of the bill, and hope that the administration of the trust fund will result in the raising of a physically fit generation.

Ifr. DRAKEFORD (Maribyrnong) [5.12]. - The debate has had a wide range, covering the’ details’ of health education, from the pre-natal to the octogenarian stage. The Government is to be commended for having introduced a measure to deal with national fitness, even though the amount provided for that purpose is small. Honorable members on this side of the House realize the need for some such provision, and although in the opinion of nearly every speaker the amount is insignificant, the government which succeeds the present administration - it will be a Labour government - will have a foundation on which to build, and thus will be able to do some good for the nation. Any proposals of this sort ought to be welcomed on a non-party basis as indicative of measures for the benefit of the nation as a whole. I appreciate the views expressed by the honorable member for Maranoa (Mr. Baker), who referred to the position in Greece in ancient times, when the people had the healthiest bodies, in conjunction with perhaps the highest intellectual standard ever achieved. I commend the honorable member for the quotation he made in that regard, and also for the study he has given to this subject. I know that it is possible to obtain from the parliamentary library a wide range of books which give details of what is being achieved in this or any other direction.

An examination of the bill will show that it is intended to provide for the setting up of a Council for National Fitness. There may be something in the charge that the only reason for its introduction is to placate a- dissatisfied body. I do not know whether that is true or not; but I do know that at long last the Government has brought down something substantial, upon which Labour members ought to be prepared to build when the opportunity to do so arises. I feel sure that they will welcome such an opportunity; because we cannot have a healthy nation unless some attention be paid to physical fitness, not only during school years, but also in later life.

Although children are encouraged at school to indulge in physical exercise, there is a tendency to allow them, after they leave school, to drift into unorganized sport, which is not so effective. The council, if truly representative, will do much good. I disagree with some honorable members sitting behind the Government who have criticized the measure in an unfair way. They seem to have taken this opportunity to vent their spleen on the Government for something else, something quite unconnected with this proposal. The fund proposed to be established is not large enough, ,but I have no doubt that it will be increased later, if not by this Government it will by a Labour government. Clause 4 provides that donations may be received from the public for the purpose of furthering the work, and I hope that many rich and philanthropic people will subscribe. Assistance is to be given for promoting physical fitness in each State under the direction of a council to be set up by the State Government. Here is an opportunity for State and Commonwealth co-operation, of which there is at present too little. I do not blame the Commonwealth altogether for that; there is a restricted State outlook which we must try to overcome. At present, unfortunately, the Commonwealth must placate the States which control education, and even if the States delegated further powers to the Commonwealth, education is probably one of the matters which would remain under their control. It is essential, even in time of war, to undertake this work. “While the system under which we now live remains in existence, wars appear to be inevitable. As this is the case we may have to defend ourselves again ten years hence, unless this war ends as we would like it to end, and it is necessary that the race should be physically fit. It was shown by the last census that many thousands of breadwinners in Australia were in receipt of less than the basic wage. It is necessary to begin with nutrition. Reports have been made to Parliament on this subject, and it has been shown that a great many children are not receiving sufficient food, or are not receiving the right kind of food. I admit that some of the nutritive value of food may be lost in distribution and in inefficient cooking, but I think that the main factor is lack of means to purchase foods of nutritive value. In such circumstances, it is impossible for children to be brought up in good health. I quote the following from page 35, chapter 3, of a British book entitled Health Education, which has application to physical fitness:-

There are three essential conditions for the enjoyment of physical health. The first requirement - given a sound body, born of good “ stock “ - is its nourishment and training throughout life. The second requirement is the protection of the body against hurtful agencies, and is part of man’s perpetual conflict with his environment. Thirdly, there is the immediate and effective treatment of any damage, deficiency, or disease, in the body as soon as it can be detected. The earlier a disease is dealt with, the more practicable is its cure. But childhood is the time not only to cure diseases which have actually begun, but also through timely recognition of danger signals to prevent other diseases from establishing themselves. Fulfilment of these three requirements - the care of the body, the control of environment, and the treatment or the prevention of disease - constitutes the way of hygiene. There can be no dispute as to their validity, for without them a healthy life is impossible.

A branch of the national fitness organization in my electorate wrote to me recently in an endeavour to obtain Government assistance. I took the matter up, but it is almost impossible to discover which department is responsible. I wrote to the Minister for Labour, who, I thought, was the person concerned, regarding a grant, but after a long delay I was referred to another department. At last we are to have a department charged with the special responsibility of undertaking this work. Care should be taken to encourage organizations already in existence. It may not always be possible to make large grants of money, but the services of experts should be made available to them. In Melbourne, there is an “ Opportunity Club “ in the district of. Collingwood, which does a wonderful work in teaching adolescents handicrafts such as cabinet-making &c, and in caring for the welfare and tuition of children who, because of their circumstances, could not otherwise obtain it. Frequent references are made to it over the air, and it puts out a publication which is distributed from door to door. I believe that it is non-sectarian; it is certainly non-political, and deserves every encouragement. The late member for Melbourne, Dr. Maloney, was for some years interested in a scheme to provide fresh milk for school children. That work is still being carried on, and there is now in existence in the same locality as that covered by the Opportunity Club an organization whose work it is to provide a diet known as the “ Oslo breakfast “ for school children. Although this work has been going on for only a short time, great benefit to the children has already been observed. The Labour Women’s Organization Committee in Victoria has interested itself in providing fresh milk for school children, and has sent many deputations to wait upon the Education Department, sometimes with disappointing results. The book from which I have already quoted describes conditions which should exist in schools. Here is a further extract -

  1. life as far as possible in fresh air find sunlight;
  2. a proper and sufficient diet (it is usual to provide three meals daily) ;
  3. one hour’s midday rest lying down in the open air when fine, or in an openair rest shed when wet;
  4. the hygienic way of life, including shower baths and organized physical exercises;
  5. special educational methods with much time devoted to practical subjects, nature study, gardening and manual work;
  6. individual attention to remedy the backwardness which so often accompanies debility;
  7. careful medical and nursing super vision.

At page 34 of this publication, there is the following interesting reference to the physical training of school children : -

Children should be trained to play together, to use their limbs freely with increasing control, to move quietly and to develop balance; a. sense of rhythm may be fostered by music and dancing.

Games should be free and unhampered but not aimless. They should be simple, but children must learn to keep to the rules and to play “ fair “. Games should lead to alertness, independent action and a ready response to unexpected directions.

Physical exercises and games should develop in the child a bright, happy, fearless, independent spirit. The children should be encouraged to make effort, though detailed perfection in young children should not be expected.

In all physical exercises and games correct breathing is important; one of the chief advantages of physical exercises is the development of breathing capacity.

Of all games, those involving the throwing,hitting or kicking of a ball appeal most to the sporting spirit and are most successful in giving mental and physical poise to the child. Riding and swimming are invaluable if within reach.

I am glad to see that, despite the opposition of some honorable members sitting behind it, the Government proposes to go on with this scheme. It shows that there are some progressive minds in the Cabinet who recognize that concessions must be made to opinions held and the policy advocated by honorable members on this side of the House. That has been done in respect of child endowment, and now in regard to this scheme. We have had experience in matters of this kind, and can assist the Government to frame useful social legislation. I do not subscribe to the view that all legislation . introduced by the Government should be opposed by us simply because the Government introduces it. Anything that is in line with Labour policy I shall support, and help to put it on the statute-book so that it can be expanded later on for the benefit of the Australian nation.

Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa

.- I agree with the statement of the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) that the bill merely sets the seal upon a completed policy. In a campaign for national fitness, the health of the people transcends in importance any other consideration. If the toiling masses are to enjoy good health, they must be provided with hygienic housing. To date, the Government’s efforts in that respect have been negligible.

Through infant health centres, New South Wales has instituted a vigorous and valuable programme for caring for the young. The mother receives ante-natal and post-natal advice about the welfare of the infant, and in that manner, an excellent foundation has been laid for national fitness. But that progress will be nullified if the home and the environment in which the child is reared are squalid and unhealthy. Recently, I read a statement that 40 persons occupied houses in Sydney that would normally be used by one family. Such conditions constitute a direct threat to the health of the people, and to the proper development of family life. Our policy should not be to foster physical culture in order simply to make a man strong in body. Such an object savours of paganism. People would be produced like animals and taught to perform their tricks and no more. When promoting national fitness, the Government must recognize that family life is the foundation upon which the scheme must rest. If family life is not properly safeguarded, legislation of this kind will fail to achieve the purpose for which it was introduced. The Australian family is a unit of our civilization, and any legislation which does not recognize that principle is humbug.

Recently, the Minister for Health (Sir Frederick Stewart) visited two districts in the electorate of Werriwa. I do not accuse him of being responsible for the lamentable conditions that he saw. If the Government would make available sufficient funds, he would be able to improve the lot of those unfortunate victims of the present social order. Whilst I sympathize with him in his present position, I cannot forget that he, as a member of the Cabinet, has influence in deciding ministerial policy, and to that degree he must bear his share of the responsibility. On the South Coast of New South Wales housing conditions are indescribable. Rapid industrial development resulting from the expansion of the armaments programme outstripped the construction of homes, and people are herded in hovels like cattle. If the Government does not make industry responsible to a large extent for providing proper accommodation for its employees, the national fitness campaign will be rendered abortive. Two years ago the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited, the Commonwealth Rolling. Mills Proprietary Company Limited and Lysaght’s Newcastle Works Proprietary Limited at Port Kembla, erected a factory for the purpose of manufacturing goods for profit. The premises which housed the machinery so that it would not deteriorate cost £1,000,000, but the human machines were forced to dwell in shacks and miserable habitations unfit to shelter animals. No scheme for promoting physical fitness will be acceptable to the Labour party, unless its primary purpose is the preservation of the sanctity of the Australian home and family life. My objection to the bill is not that the grant is inadequate, but that no specific sum is mentioned. The Government in its discretion may make available £10, £500, or nothing. In the absence of statutory provision, the Council for National Fitness may have to rely upon “gifts of money made for the purposes of the fund “.

The Commonwealth Government should now assume responsibility for the health of the people. Nothing that I am about to say should be construed as a reflection upon the medical profession, chemists, and nurses, but the time has arrived when the health of the people should no longer depend upon the charity of benevolent persons who contribute to the erection and maintenance of hospitals. No poor person should, simply because of his inability to pay, be deprived of medical attention and medicine. I pay a tribute to many family doctors in suburbs and country towns who never refuse to attend a patient, though they know that they will never receive payment.

I read in the press so often that it becomes nauseating that mothers have been discharged from maternity hospitals a week before they should have been, in order to make room for others. Because of the lack of accommodation for patients beds have been placed on the verandahs. For the Government to advocate an increase of the birthrate is futile, while it continues callously to disregard the welfare of the mothers. If a child has suffered from malnutrition, all the “ physical jerks “ that are known to gymnasts will not improve his physique. Proper safeguards must be created in order to ensure the health of all of the people. Some years ago, a former Minister for Health, Mr. Hughes, announced that 40 per cent, of Australian children were suffering from malnutrition. Admittedly, the condition of a number of them was not caused through the in- ability of their parents to purchase the necessaries of life ; but the economic position of the parents of 30 per cent, of them was responsible for their plight. The position is anomalous. Although thousands of children have insufficient milk to drink, large quantities are daily fed to the pigs. As apples cannot be marketed, they are allowed to rot. If the Government were to arrange for a dozen apples to be provided daily to every needy home, the fruit would be consumed and the problem presented by the unexportable surplus would be overcome. If a similar policy were adopted for oranges, mandarins and pears, the Commonwealth would not be obliged to launch a national fitness campaign.

The bill is an indication that the Government realizes its obligations, but I urge the Minister to use his influence with Cabinet to see that more positive action is token to ensure the well-being of the people.

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:
Minister for Health · Parramatta · UAP

. - in reply - I am gratified to have learned from this debate, which has certainly taken much longer than was expected when the bill was introduced, that the measure has the approval of honorable members, with a few notable dissentients. The discussion, however, has provided definite evidence of a mistaken idea of the purpose underlying the bill. The real object is to give a degree of permanence to a campaign that was initiated by the Government two years ago. It is not proposed to constitute the council for the purpose of placating some people, as was suggested by the honorable member for Gwydir (Mr. Scully). The Government was not obliged to establish the council in order to distribute the funds which were voted two years ago.

Incidentally, one of the misconceptions regarding this measure is that it contemplates the distribution of £20,000 per annum. The honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Drakeford) correctly indicated that it does not appropriate any money at all, but provides for the creation of a trust fund to deal with such moneys as may be voted for the purpose from time to time. The £20,000 a year which has been referred to so often during this debate is the present commitment of the Government for the next three years, but there is nothing whatever in the proposed statute to limit the amount of assistance to that sum. There is also some misconception as to the part which the universities are to play under the proposal. If it were properly founded, I should agree with the criticism that if we have money to spend in creating a condition of national fitness in the community, we should he better advised to start with the State schools than with university students. That is not the situation, however. The reference to universities has special application to the training of students by the setting up of lectureships, which have already been instituted in four universities. I am gratified to learn of the degree to which the opportunities of training are being availed of in the different universities throughout Australia. At the University of Sydney, 32 students are undertaking a three years’ diploma course in physical education. The University of Queensland has 48 students, the University of Adelaide has 47 students, and the University of Melbourne has 36 students undertaking similar courses. Originally the universities of Tasmania and “Western Australia proposed to devote the money allocated for this purpose to the creation of scholarships to be used to send students from those two States to other universities which have established lectureships. But I am pleased that Western Australia now proposes to co-operate fully by providing its own lectureship in physical education. As the direct result of the action taken by this Government two years ago, 164 students are now taking courses of physical education at the various universities of Australia. They are the people who will go out to the schools and clubs to train youths. I am glad that the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) drew attention to the magnificent work which is being done by the Police Boys Club, the Rotary Club, and other bodies in looking after the interests of boys, particularly those from the crowded areas of our cities. All that this bill is designed to do is to place the work on a permanent footing. Without this measure, the commitments of the Government would terminate three years hence and the scheme might then be dropped, automatically, were it not that the statutory establishment of a council will provide a considerable degree of permanence.. I can hardly contemplate that at the end of five years, the Government of the day - it will be the present Government - will terminate a grant which is now being made from year to year.

One aspect of this legislation appears to have escaped attention. The introduction of this measure indicates a trend towards a greater acceptance by this Parliament of responsibility for the health and betterment of the community - a responsibility which hitherto has been obscured by the constitutional hedge. 1 am glad to be the Minister to bring this item of social reform out of its obscurity, and to be the medium whereby the most important duty of safeguarding the health of the people is recognized as a national responsibility. The honorable member for Barker (Mr. Archie Cameron) was rather scathing in his references to this expenditure, and also to the expenditure in connexion with the model kindergartens which have been established by the Government in the six capital cities of Australia. I was amazed to hear the honorable member for Cook (Mr. Sheehan) say that nothing had been done by the Commonwealth at Erskineville. As Erskineville is in his electorate, the honorable member should know what has been done there, and therefore I now inform him that 100 children in that district are receiving not only care and attention, but also food each school day.

Mr Sheehan:

– That is provided by the State Government.

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:

– No; the building was erected with money granted by the Commonwealth Government for the purpose. Every member of the staff is paid by the Commonwealth Health Department, which also pays for the food that is consumed by those children each school day.

One would think from the discussion that has taken place here last evening and to-day that this measure constitutes the complete programme of social alleviation which the Government has in mind. As Minister for Social Services, I say frankly that I. should be as disappointed as any other honorable member if that were true. I hope that, before long, I shall be able to claim some of the assistance which has been so freely proffered by members of the Opposition in connexion with some other elements of social reform. I am happy indeed to know that honorable members generally approve of this measure. The only amendment which has been suggested so far is one foreshadowed by the Deputy Leader o’f the Opposition (Mr. Forde), who sub.gested that clause 5 should be amended by the inclusion of the word “ schools “ where it refers to “ universities and other institutions “. I see no need for the amendment, for surely the term “ other institutions “ covers schools. However, in order to avoid any doubt on the matter, I am prepared to accept the amendment.

Mr Rosevear:

– Cannot the universities themselves provide these facilities ?

Sir FREDERICK STEWART.They were not prepared to do so until the Commonwealth Government provided money for the purpose. After all, the money which comes to the universities from the States is provided by taxpayers of the Commonwealth. I find great difficulty indeed in discriminating between the taxpayer as a State citizen and the same taxpayer as a Commonwealth citizen. The outstanding fact is that there were no lectureships in physical fitness in any university, except the University of Melbourne, until money for the purpose was provided by the Commonwealth Government.

Mr Beasley:

– Does not the Minister think that the physical fitness course may become too technical and lose its practical aspect, as the honorable member for Herbert (Mr. Martens) pointed out?

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:

– The Deputy Leader of the Opposition stressed the need to have as instructors people who are trained in physical education and are able to impart their knowledge to the rank and file. I have no difficulty in agreeing with him in that matter.

Mr Beasley:

– We have found that the best instructors are practical men.. who, not having had university training, are not full of highfalutin ideas.

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:

– I am not disposed to belittle education, even in respect of physical fitness.

Mr Rosevear:

– How many university trained men are training boys in the Police Boys Club?

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:

– I believe that the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Marwick) will agree that the boys’club in Western Australia was started by the Council for National Fitness, which provides the instructors. As I have already indicated, I am prepared to accept the amendment indicated by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, although I do not think that it is necessary.

Question put -

That the bill be now read a second time.

The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. W. M. Nairn.)

AYES: 54

NOES: 3

Majority . . 51

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.

Clause 3 (Commonwealth Council for National Fitness).

Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney

– Will the Minister for Social Services (Sir Frederick Stewart.) indicate to the House the composition of the Commonwealth Council for National Fitness?

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– Itconsists of the Director-General of Health, the Minister for Labour and National Service, who has always taken a keen interest in this matter, and a representative from each of the State councils.

Mr BEASLEY:

– Will the Minister consider the desirability of having the trade unions represented on the Commonwealth council?

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– I hardly think that this is a committee on which sectional representation is warranted.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 4 agreed to.

Clause 5 -

  1. Subject to the next succeeding subsection, the Minister may apply the moneys standing to the credit of the fund for the purpose of providing assistance -

    1. to promote physical education in universities and other institutions: and
Mr FORDE:
Capricornia

– I move -

That in sub-clause ( 1 ) , paragraphb, after the word “in”, the word “schools,” be inserted.

I foreshadowed this amendment in my second-reading speech, and I understand that the Minister for Social Services (Sir Frederick Stewart) is prepared to accept it.

Sir Frederick Stewart:

– I have no objection to the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 6 and 7 agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with an amendment; report - by leave - adopted.

Bill - by leave - read a third time.

page 716

TARIFF PROPOSALS 1940-41

Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 3) ; Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 4) ; Customs Tariff (Exchange Adjustment) Amendment (No. 2) ; Customs Tariff (Canadian Preference) Amendment (No. 2) ; Customs Tariff (Special War Duty) Amendment (No. 2); Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) Amendment (No. 2) : Excise Tariff Amendment (No. 3)

In Committee of Ways and Means:

Mr HARRISON:
Minister for Trade and Customs · Wentworth · UAP

.- I move - [Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 3).]

That the Schedule to the Customs Tariff 1933-1939 be amended as hereinafter set out, and that, on and after the third day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, duties of customs be collected in pursuance of the Customs Tariff 1933-1939 as so amended. [Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 4).] That the Schedule to the Customs Tariff 1933-1939, as proposed to be amended by Customs Tarin Proposals introduced into the House of Representatives on the third day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one (other than these Proposals), be further amended as hereinafter set out, and that, on and after the third day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, duties of customs be collected in pursuance of the Customs Tariff 1933-1939 as so amended. ifr. *Harrison.* [Customs Tariff (Exchange Adjustment) Amendment (No. 2).] That on and after the third day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one, a.t nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Terri tory, the Schedule to the Customs Tariff (Exchange Adjustment) Act 1933-1939 be amended as follows: - by omitting "130(a)" and "130(b) {: type="1" start="1"} 0. (6) "; by omitting "289 (a) ". [Customs Tariff (Canadian Preference) Amendment (No. 2).] That the Schedule to the Customs Tariff (Canadian Preference) 1934-1939 be amended as hereinafter set out, and that, on and after the third day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, duties of customs be collected in pursuance of the Customs Tariff (Canadian Preference) 1934-1939 as so amended. [Customs Tariff (Special "War Duty) Amendment (No. 2).] That, in addition to the duties of customs collected otherwise than in accordance with the Act passed to give effect to this resolution, there be imposed on and after the third day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one, at nine o'clock in tha forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, on all goods (other than goods covered by Items 18, 19, 23 and 229(c) in the Schedule to the Customs Tariff 1933-1939) entered for home consumption on or after that date, a special war duty of customs at the rate of ten per centum of the amount of the duties of customs so collected on such goods. [Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) Amendment (No. 2).] That the Schedule to the Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) 1933-1934 be amended as hereinafter set out and that, on and after the third day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, duties of customs be collected in accordance with the Customs Tariff (New Zealand Preference) 1933-1934 as so amended. [Excise Tariff Amendment (No. 3).] That the Schedule to the Excise Tariff 1921-1939, as proposed to be amended by Excise Tariff Proposals, be further amended as hereinafter set out, and that, on and after the third day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one, at nine o'clock in the forenoon, reckoned according to standard time in the Australian Capital Territory, duties of excise be collected in pursuance of the Excise Tariff 1921-1939 as so amended. That in this Resolution " Excise Tariff Proposals " mean the Excise Tariff Proposals introduced into the House of Representatives on the following dates, namely : - 21st November, 1940 ; and 11th December, 1940. The tariff proposals I have just introduced consist, for the most part, of tariff amendments which were included in tariff proposals introduced into Parliament in November and December of last year. The collection of duties under these proposals has been validated until to-morrow, the 3rd July, and their rein- troduction is now necessary, for the reason that an opportunity has not been presented to debate the proposals and place them on the statute-book. The only new matter is contained in Excise Tariff Amendment (No. 3), which grants exemption from the excise duty of 9½d. a gallon on petrol for the official use of consular representatives, trade commissioners and other official representatives in Australia. In the past these official representatives of overseas countries have been accorded the privilege of obtaining imported petrol free of duty when for official use. This measure will enable them to obtain locally produced motor spirit under the same conditions. The effect will be that *some imported* petrol will be displaced by locally produced petrol. Progress reported. *Sitting suspended from 6.13 to 8 p.m.* {: .page-start } page 729 {:#debate-44} ### INTERNATIONAL SITUATION {:#subdebate-44-0} #### Prime Minister's Mission Abroad - Ministerial Statement Debate resumed from the 19th June *(vide* page 218), on motion by **Mr. Menzies** - >That the following paper be printed: - Prime Minister's Mission Abroad and the War Position - Ministerial statement by the Prime Minister, 28th May, 1941. {: #subdebate-44-0-s0 .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY:
West Sydney . -Although much time has elapsed since the Prime Minister made his statement on international affairs in this Parliament after his return from abroad, and since he made a broadcast declaration of policy on the 17th June, the importance of those speeches is still sufficient to warrant further consideration by this House. It is regrettable that discussion of the important problems involved was not allowed to continue without interruption. However, many changes have taken place in international affairs and policies in the meantime, so that it is reasonable that honorable members should now be given a further opportunity to state their views in regard to both the Prime Minister's statements and the changes that have been made since. I shall approach consideration of the statements upon the basis, not that the Prime Minister is the leader of a political party, but rather that he is the leader of the form of Democratic Government in Australia. This observation is made with due regard to the shortcomings under which we still labour in respect of the way in which the powers of Democratic Governments are exercised by the party in power to-day. The speeches, however, can be divided into two categories. The first relates to our problems abroad, involving foreign policy, and the second to problems involving our defence organization within Australia. In determining these matters we must have regard for the responsibility of this Parliament and the Government to maintain Australia's status as a selfgoverning dominion in spite of any decisions that may be made by the British Government. We have pledged ourselves to fight and destroy the monsters of Nazi-ism and fascism. To this end, the Government agreed to send Australians to fight in other parts of the world. It claims that it has the responsibility of determining where these men shall be required to fight. Accepting that as a fact, we must also believe that the Government has the responsibility of ensuring that, wherever they are called upon to fight, they are fully equipped for modern warfare. Australia has not been in a position to produce all of the equipment necessary for our troops. Therefore, it is the duty of the Government, in its negotiations with the British Government, when determining the position of our troops, to arrange and obtain absolute guarantees for the supply of all kinds of modern equipment to all Australian soldiers abroad. We have overwhelming evidence that our men who were engaged in important actions overseas suffered severely through the lack of equipment. Some time has passed since these engagements took place, but this has not diminished the seriousness of the problem, and we should fail in our duty if we did not canvass the position fully and express our views to the Government. This war is by no means over; to some of us there seems to be even greater cause for anxiety now than there was when our men were engaged in the campaigns of Greece and Crete. Some may say that this is not the time for bemoaning past events, but my answer is that these events must be carefully examined in order that the lessons to be learned from them shall ensure that mistakes of the kind made then will never be repeated. We, in this Parliament, should express our views in such a way that they will reach the ears of those who are guiding the Empire's war machine. They must be made to realize that we speak in earnest when we demand that our men should be supplied with all of the modern equipment that they need. We must make clear to the British Government that Australian troops must never again be sent into battle without sufficient arms and ammunition. During this debate many honorable members have produced evidence that Australians were insufficiently equipped in their engagements iu Greece and Crete. It is desirable that we should give proof of any such statements. The evidence which I am about to submit to the Parliament is of such a nature that it must be accepted; it proves the serious deficiency of the equipment of the Australian Imperial Force. I refer first to statements which have been made by the Prime Minister of New Zealand. According to newspaper reports, **Mr. Fraser** made the following declaration when addressing New Zealand troops at Cairo: - >We must and shall see that next time you go into battle you will have adequate air support and ground equipment. You proved yourself more than equal to the Germans, man to man. You were not defeated in Crete because of any superiority of Nazi personnel or morale, nor because of any weakening in your ranks. You were literally blown out of Crete by an air attack, which flesh and blood could not withstand. That was a forceful pronouncement, and doubtless **Mr. Fraser** made it having in his mind assurances that the British Government had given to him prior to his decision to permit New Zealand troops to engage in the Grecian campaign. I do not say that the New Zealand Prime Minister and members of the Commonwealth Government did not obtain assurances that Australian and New Zealand troops should not be sent to Greece and Crete without adequate equipment. It is reasonable for us to assume that the Prime Minister of New Zealand made his statement to the troops in Cairo with deep regret upon learning that they had not been supplied adequately with weapons of war. He made another statement when he arrived in Great Britain. On that occasion he said - >The experience of Crete will never be repeated in the Kiddle East. Air strength in the Middle East has been greatly increased and troops will never again be asked to go into action at such a great disadvantage. Many statements that have been made by members of this Government were designed to conceal these facts from the people of Australia. It has been stated publicly by army leaders and leading newspapers that Australian troops did have equipment in Greece and Crete. Certainly they had some kind of equipment, but they did not have anything like adequate equipment. It is wrong to attempt to conceal the truth by refusing to acknowledge the difference between the words " equipment " and " adequate equipment ". Ministers will achieve more satisfactory results if they are frank, and speak so that the British War Cabinet will understand that never again will Australian soldiers be allowed to fight in such unfavorable circumstances. The next proof of this deficiency of arms that I produce also comes from New Zealand. Apparently the Government of that dominion decided to choose a responsible army officer to convey information to the British War Cabinet after the disaster of Crete. Brigadier Inglis was selected, and in a public statement in Great Britain, he said - >We were beaten in Crete because of inadequate equipment. Part of the deficiency was due to the heavy losses of ships sunk in Suda Bay and part was not. That is one of the reasons why the War Cabinet wanted to sec high officers from the battlefield itself. Try to defend a mile front with one 3-in. mortar and then guess why certain of these high officers are not so popular as they might be in certain quarters . . .It was a question of saving some of the best soldiers in the world or fighting till all were killed - so evacuation began. I do not believe that any honorable member would dare to refute that evidence. Having been on the spot and seen what actually occurred, Brigadier Inglis went much farther than the Prime Minister of New Zealand, and said that even ordinary equipment of war was supplied to New Zealand troops in completely inadequate quantities. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr Martens: -- That is the position now. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Yes. Major-General **Sir Iven** Mackay, Commander of the Australian Sixth Division, made the following statement in a broadcast through Australian national stations on the 16th June, when he gave a brief *resume* of the part taken by the Anzacs in the fighting in Greece in April: - >To Australian troops in Greece, who, for strategic reasons, were ordered to withdraw from positions they felt they could have held, the whole Greek campaign was most unsatisfactory. Here again we have evidence -from an important military official to prove that things were not as they should have been. We have further evidence from **Mr. James** Aldridge, a war correspondent of the Sydney *Sun,* who has visited various fronts, including Greece. He wrote - >Every time we shot down one nearby- meaning the enemy - we had a race to get to him for his am munition or Tommy gun. There were four of us and because we stuck together we always had at least one Tommy gun among us. It may be that the Commonwealth Ministers in previously answering this criticism have simply repeated to the Parliament and to the public statements made to them or assurances given by the British authorities, but, if so, they have been grossly misled. I feel that I must use a hard word and say that false information seems to have been furnished to our Ministers. The plain fact is that from its very beginning our men fought the Greek campaign without a chance to meet their enemies on anything like even terms. That is a sorry state of affairs. Australia has always been proud of its fighting forces. When we send our men out we at least expect - in fact, we now demand - that they be adequately equipped; but on this occasion the situation was entirely unsatisfactory. By this blundering our good record in the eyes of .the world has been spoiled. During the last war the Australian troops conducted themselves with great honour and distinction, and their services and valour were appropriately acknowledged throughout the world. In this war, in the Greek campaign at least, although our men conducted themselves with their accustomed bravery, they had no equipment with which to face a foe whose supplies were provided to the last detail. We shall find it difficult ever to forget these facts c»r to erase this most unpleasant memory. I am anxious that we shall effectively impress upon the British Government the seriousness of our views. We desire the British authorities to be told in unambiguous language that we do not expect our troops to be used simply as stopgaps or as forces to be thrown into a delaying strategic action in which they cannot meet their opponents on even terms, and from which, therefore, they can have no chance of gaining success. I consider that both the Parliament and the Government should declare their view on this subject. These issues are not the concern of honorable gentlemen on this side of the House or the other, for relations of all of us are in the fighting services. We should therefore speak with one voice. The lives of our men, and the interests of our country, are at stake. We ought to declare our attitude without equivocation, for the very existence of the free institutions of our country and all that we possess are involved. In my view, no language could be too strong for us to use in stating the course that we think should be followed. We ought to make it clear beyond all question that we expect and demand that our men will be given at least a fighting chance. I have submitted to honorable members evidence from high military authorities to support my view. I now intend to cite some passages from letters written by rank-and-file soldiers. The first letter that I shall quote was written by a man who occupied a high position in Australia before he went abroad and has since lost his life. In a letter to his wife, this soldier wrote - >We were on our way back to Egypt, when the ship was sunk and the destroyer which rescued us dumped us all on what Hitler call3 the "Island of the Doomed" (Crete) as they reckoned they would clean us up there before now. For the first day or so we expected to be taken off at any tick of the clock, but we've been here for twelve days already, and have no idea what's going to happen or when. The Army feeds us, but that's about all, as we've got no tents, blankets or anything other than what we brought off the *Costa* *Rica* and are living in the open. Fortunately the weather is warming up. I am informed by one of my colleagues that the writer of that letter was a lieutenant. His statements need no emphasis from me. I should like to know why the British authorities did not use the eight months that were available to them in order to make provision for the adequate defence of Crete. Surely some equipment and some effective fortifications could have been put on the island! It is almost incredible that twelve days after our men were landed there they still had only the equipment that they took with them on to the ship that rescued them from Greece. The next letter from which I shall quote w.as also written by a rank-and-file soldier. It reads - >Why we went to Greece with a- few Aussies and New Zealanders and expect to down 21 German divisions, I don't know. You talk about bombs. I've never seen so many planes in my life, not even in the pictures. But never one of our own and the Hun simply did as he liked to us. I think they asked a little too much of us when you consider we had been in the. desert for fifteen months, and then they put us into the mountains without a chance to get used to the changed conditions. We struck bad snow storms, our blankets were light on, and our funk holes would get mud and water in them. The rarefied air knocked us up very quickly and after climbing a mountain we would blow like cab horses. Our feet were numbed, and our boots, socks and feet' were always wet, and our feet frozen. We didn't have a change with us and every now and then we would take our socks off and wring them out. A point worth noting in that letter is that our men were expected to stand up to weather conditions with which they were entirely unacquainted. Another soldier wrote home as follows : - >We have been doing infantry training of late. We have to do something to keep the lads interested. We scrounged a Bren and Vickers and had about a fortnight with them. Some one talked and back to ordnance they went. Isn't it great? These extracts from various letters fully corroborate the point of view expressed by the officers of high authority whose opinions I have previously given. The whole situation *is* most serious from the Australian point of view. When our men return to this country, they will undoubtedly feel that they have a score to settle with us. Our men were told frequently before they left Australia that they 'would be properly equipped for whatever duties they were called upon to perform. This Parliament has made various declarations to that effect. The men were told that they would be "fully and properly equipped ", and they were entitled to believe that those words carried their common meaning. Yet, when our forces were thrown into the battle in Greece, they lacked almost all essential equipment. Naturally, the men consider that they have a serious grievance against this Parliament and they are entitled to use the strongest language in stating it. We surely were under an obligation to give to them at least some chance to hold their own. The question arises: On whose shoulders should the blame for this failure be placed? There has been far too great a tendency to speak in glowing terms of the work of the British Prime Minister, **Mr. Churchill.** After all, he is the Leader of the British Government, and if criticism has to be voiced - and in this case it is amply justified - the Leader of the British Government must expect to take it, for on him rests primarily the responsibility for the manner in which our troops have been used. However, even if there has been too great a proneness in Australia to pat **Mr. Churchill** on the back, he has had to meet some stinging criticism in Great Britain. In fact, the criticism of him there has been stronger than the criticism of him here, although the Australian soldiers suffered most severely in the Greek and Crete campaigns. I direct the attention of honorable members to the following comments on **Mr. Churchill,** published in Great Britain on the 14th June last: - " What is the Teal meaning of the Commons debate on Crete? " Cameronian asks. " Churchill is Argus, with his eyes on everything. He is an octopus, with his hands on everything. His War Cabinet doesn't formulate policy - it merely implements the policy Churchill formulates. The War Cabinet, instead of being a dynamo of drive and ideas, becomes a rubber stamp." {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: -- That is what happens under a national government! {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- The interjection of the honorable member for Bourke **(Mr. Blackburn)** is pertinent. Unfortunately, the British House of Commons is to-day without a virile, fighting opposition. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- And there is not one in this Parliament. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Well, whatever may be lacking in that respect on this side of the House, I will now, in order to meet his wishes, give whatever credit is due to the honorable member for Barker **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** for his opposition to the Government. Some people seem to think that the British Prime Minister should be above criticism. Apparently, he is the be-all and end-all in Great Britain. But, facing such facts as I have stated, I cannot refrain from declaring that the British Prime Minister must be held, at least, partly responsible for the matters I have raised. It is not too much to say that **Mr. Churchill** is not entitled to the glowing tributes which have been paid to him by the Prime Minister since his return. In spite of his high office, we should be sufficiently frank with one another to say that all is not well with his actions concerning our Australian troops. As General Mackay declared, the Greek campaign was most unsatisfactory from beginning to end. Our whole diplomatic strategy in relation to the Balkans has been a failure, for we have lost all along the diplomatic line. Prior to the actual movements of the German troops in that quarter, we naturally hoped and expected that aBetter understanding would have been reached with Turkey. I was given to understand that our relations with that country were on a fairly high level. Not long ago, a loan of, I think, £60,000,000 was made to Turkey by Great Britain; consequently, we might with reason have expected a greater degree of assistance than was forthcoming from that quarter. This has vital relation to the present struggle inSyria. It would now appear that we have no chance of obtaining real support from Turkey. To give some idea of Turkish opinion, the Turkish press, a few months back, expressed strong criticism of British actions in relation to the Balkans. I cite the following : - >The criticism of Turkey has caused Turkish newspapers to ask - > >1 ) Why Britain did not bomb the Rumanian oilfields? > >1 ) Why the German battleships,Gueisenan andScharnhorst, have not been sunk, after eleven raids on Brest (French port where the ships are stationed)? > >) How it was possible for the British Navy and Air Force to have allowed the Germans to land a large army and tanks in North Africa? > >The papers making these criticisms are *Aksum, Vakit, Yenisabah, Tan, Tasviri Ekfar* andHedam. All of them emphasize that the questions are not asked in a spirit of hostility. > >A typical comment is that of *Yenisabah.* which says: "England's allies are bound to exert some influence on the course of the war, but some points make them doubt if the war is following altogether wise leadership. > > **Mr. Churchill** should consider the people beyond his island, in addition to the people in his island. We want to know why the help to Greece was small and ineffective." That comment voices the Turkish view, as the result of a close-up scrutiny of developments. This is not information which is specially available to me; it has been published in our own press in Australia. Considerable doubt is held concerning the strength of the leadership exercised. Even if it be the policy of the British Government to regard these episodes as delaying actions, it is nevertheless important to realize that the psychological effect of successive retreats, defeats and evacuations must be to our detriment in countries which we hoped would come to our assistance. There have been so many failures, both in active warfare and on the diplomatic front, that a long time will probably elapse before we shall be able to regain the ground that has been lost. The following comment from London was published in the Melbourne *Herald* of the6th June last: - >It is all to the good that Australia's voice is heard by the public here, but is Australia's voice being heard as it should he in high places ? I am unable to say to what degree the Prime Minister of Australia was able to influence the strategy employed in both Greece and Crete.[Leave *to continue given.]* The right honorable gentleman has not yet told the Parliament; consequently, we must declare our feelings as best we can. Where our men are now fighting the struggle is by no means easy, nor can we predict what the outcome will be. As the matter is one largely of equipment, particularly in the air, 1 am anxious - as every honorable member shouldbe - that our voice shall be heard in high places; that, our criticism shall not be soft-pedalled, but, on the contrary, shall be pressed home with all the vigour at our command, even to the extent of presenting the ultimatum that our men must be fully equipped before they are engaged in any further struggle. The Prime Minister in his statement next referred to the position at home, and mentioned a number of things that he proposed to do. At the time, I offered the criticism that throughout the life of this Government, we have listened to many speeches and radio talks, and have read a lot of memoranda but, unfortunately, most of the effort has been on paper only. The whole of the criticism levelled since the war began has been fully justified, because the utmost pressure and influence which the public and the press could bring to bear was necessary in order to achieve results. Proof of the fact that the past has been unsatisfactory, if proof be needed, is furnished by the declaration of the Prime Minister himself, in his broadcast of a fortnight ago. In that fortnight, so far as I am able to judge, with the exception of the appointment of additional Ministers, there is no Tangible evidence of any great changes having been made. A fortnight is a. long time in the struggle in which we are now engaged. Those who are competent to express a view concerning the conflict in Russia, regard it as one which gives to us n little more breathing space. Whether Russia will hold the German forces has yet to be shown. Whilst we hope for the best, the strength which Germany has exercised leaves me with the feeling that it is very doubtful if a serious reverse can be inflicted on Germany in that quarter. Therefore, whatever time may bc afforded us because of the struggle between these two great nations, should be utilized fully by us. In this connexion I refer particularly to the defence of our own soil. The outcome of the German-Russian conflict may alter our position at home materially. There is another Axis power which so far has moved, not openly, but in many strategic ways, and doubtless it has engaged in military and naval preparations of varying kinds. . Therefore, we have to examine the problem more closely from r he standpoint of the defence of Australia itself. On that account I repeat that the loss of a fortnight - the period -'mee the Prime Minister's declaration - is material. We must press for, and if need be, demand, results without any further delay. The whole of my criticism of the Ministry of Munitions has been dictated by my disapproval of men who have special and vested interests in the manufacture of arms and munitions being empowered to exercise the authority that they exercise to-day in that department. Governmental and semi-governmental institutions in this country have officers who are competent in every sense to undertake the supervision of the various sections of the Ministry of Munitions. They are capable of giving directions, and of seeing that those directions are carried out; of exercising any authority which the Government might vest in them to direct the leaders of the different industrial enterprises in Australia. I shall never be satisfied that the Department of Munitions has absolute freedom to discharge its functions in the interests of the country as a whole, so long as control or authority is exercised by men whose interests are associated with the protection of profits and dividends, and, what is worse, with ensuring the avoidance after the war of competition which might prove detrimental to the welfare of the industrial enterprises with which they are to-day associated. When drawing attention from time to time to our lack of equipment, we have been met with the very common reply that the particular equipment occupies a low place on the priority list. The reason is, that those responsible for the administration of this department first propagated the idea of a long war. I am not competent to say whether the war will be long or short; but I think it will be agreed that we cannot afford to work on the premise that it will be long. The movements of the German forces have been extraordinarily rapid, and this has enabled them, to achieve quick successes. If we plan on the basis of reaching a desired point in three, four, or five years, it may before then bc far too late to bother about preparation. Further, if those who are engaged in industry have prepared the priority list on the assumption of a long war, the result is likely to be most detrimental to the interests of this country. The policy followed by many of these men who are connected with the Ministry for Munitions and who are at the same time directors of large industrial undertakings is not to proceed at the proper time with the manufacture of equipment which at any stage of the conflict may be required, and rather than parcel it out to other manufacturers who are ready to do the work, they have placed it low on the priority list in order that later, when they are able to take up its manufacture, either with the industries they now control or with some subsidiaries that are in process of formation, they will have complete control of as much as possible of the Government's requirements of both munitions and equipment. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr Martens: -- They have sabotaged the Commonwealth's war effort. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Exactly ; that is my argument, and the substance of my criticism of this department. I have proved it to my own satisfaction in cases that I am not at liberty to discuss to-night. This has been a worrying aspect, and I shall never be satisfied so long as the authority to determine questions that arise in connexion with the manufacture of equipment is left in the hands of men who are interested in conserving their personal welfare and the welfare of the businesses to which they are attached. " No one can serve two masters " is an old and true saying. There is only one master to serve in this struggle, and only one objective, namely, the safeguarding of our own country. That cannot be done if these men are permitted to exercise control in the arranging of priorities, and in determining when the manufacture of equipment of this and that form shall proceed. Such authority should be placed in the hands of men who are free in every respect. There are men in the public service who are quite competent and absolutely free to undertake these duties. They could direct that Smith, Jones, or Brown may engage in the manufacture of such and such, not in three or six months, but immediately. I am convinced that the Prime Minister does not intend to abandon this policy of allowing big business and the monopolists to control our war production, because, when he was setting up the Supply Department, where did he go for a director? He went to big business again, and appointed a representative of one of the largest and most powerful monopolies in Australia, the British Australian Tobacco Company Proprietary Limited. {: #subdebate-44-0-s1 .speaker-JY7} ##### Mr DUNCAN-HUGHES:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA -- A man with a splendid record. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- He may have a splendid record, but, as I said before, no man can serve two masters. That should be remembered when appointments of this kind are under consideration. Not only is he the representative of one of the most powerful monopolies in Australia, but he is also a director of the Commercial Banking Company of Sydney. I do not know in what way his peculiar attributes qualify him to be Director of the Department of Supply. Apparently, the only qualification the Government requires for a position of that kind is that he moves in the proper circle of big business, banking, and monopolies. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- Does the honorable member suggest that there is any rivalry or competition between munitions and the tobacco industry? {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- There is rivalry between the banking companies and the best interests of this country, in which the principal undertaking now is the production of munitions, and the Tobacco Trust is playing no small part in the great venture. This leads me to call for a close analysis of the operations of the Capital Issues Board. If I want to invest capital in an industry for the production of goods for the war effort, my application must go before the Capital Issues Board, which, in turn, consults the Ministry for Munitions, whether or not the application should be granted. If it is found that other firms are already engaged in the manufacture of the goods under consideration, the request will be refused. No excuse or reason is given, and the applicant is told to put his money into a war loan. He must not trespass on the close preserve of those already engaged in the particular industry he proposes to launch. The whole thing - business, banking, industry and the elimination of competition - is tied up through the Capital Issues Board and the Ministry of Munitions, and that is why many of the workers engaged in the production of munitions have no confidence in this Government. They see that everything is controlledby the same interests, and for the benefit of those interests. Until the men who have been appointed to control these undertakings are removed, and control is restored to independent officers, the workers will continue to doubt the bona fides of theGovernment. It is of the utmost importance that the policy formerly announced by the Government for the control of industry, which, unfortunately, has every appearance of remaining in force, should be revised, and those who now have financial interests in munition production removed. It would be the duty of a Labour government immediately it attained office to reconstruct the Ministry of Munitions, and to remove this form of control from all authority. I cannot allow this opportunity to pass without saying something on the subject of petrol. The present position is such, owing to the actions of the larger off companies, that this country could be defeated without a shot being fired. I know that it will not be easy, but the Government must demand a show-down. It must take steps, however drastic, to show that it really does govern the country. We were told by the Prime Minister to-day that petrol rationing was introduced so that stocks of petrol might be built up in Australia. As a matter of fact, that is not being done. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- We are worse off now than ever. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Of course we are. Oil supplies are vital to the defence of this country. An enemy, by cutting off our oil supplies, could ground all our aeroplanes and immobilize all our mechanized forces. We could talk ourselves black in the face about building Beaufort bombers or mechanized units, but they would be of no use to us without petrol. At the present time we have not more than six weeks' supply of petrol in Australia. The position is really desperate. Here is an extract from the minutes of a recent meeting of the oil cartel - >Tanker availability would be based on consumption in the respective countries. Therefore, rationing in Australia in excess of 33 per cent, would reflect itself in the future plans for tanker supplies. The cartel is controlled by the major oil companies, although the independent com panies have been forced into it because the Government would 'afford them no protection. Like the small manufacturers, they are afraid to speak their minds, because they know that they will receive no support. Rightly or wrongly, they believe that the Government is the mouthpiece of big business. {: .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr Wilson: -- Did not the Government force the independent companies to join the cartel? {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- It did. In this minute it is stated that tanker accommodation will be based on consumption, not on storage needs. Thus, if consumption is reduced by rationing, tanker tonnage will be reduced proportionately, so that it will be impossible, by refraining from the use of petrol, to build up stocks. Some of the independent distributors have access to tanker accommodation, but as the result of an arrangement made by the cartel the Shell Company and the Commonwealth Oil Refineries Limited, which have allowed their stocks to become depleted, are drawing a portion of their supplies from the tankers brought here by the independen t companies. This arrangement has in no way assisted the building up of stocks so urgently required by the Government. On the contrary, the stock position in Australia has deteriorated to the extent that we now find that the Shell Company, which control one-third of the Australian market, is in such a position that, basing consumption on present figures, these stocks will have completely disappeared by the 1st September next, and they will be minus 16,000 tons or, approximately, 4,800,000 gallons. Furthermore, Commonwealth Oil Refineries Limited, in which the Commonwealth Government has a controlling interest, will have only 8,086 tons in stock throughout the whole of Australia, representing one month's supply. Other importing companies appear to have been sincere in their endeavours to build up stocks, but, unfortunately, due to the insincerity of the Shell Company and the Commonwealth Oil Refineries Limited, stocks have been lent to these defaulting companies under the cartel agreement, with the result that the general position, far from having improved, has actually deteriorated. I am informed that if the Government will make finance available, the independent companies are in a position to obtain tanker accommodation to bring additional supplies of petrol to Australia. Is the Government big enough to stand up to the oil companies, and follow this course of action? I am afraid that it is not. We are told that the major companies cannot be dispensed with because they have storage and distribution facilities all over the country. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- *Do* I understand the honorable member to say that it would be possible to get more tankers to come here than are coming now? {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Tes. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- Then I have no hesitation in saying that the Government will accept any proposition which can produce that effect. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- It would be necessary to discontinue the cartel system as it now operates, and probably fight the major oil companies on this issue. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- The Government's concern is to get the petrol to this country. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- If the Government is big enough to take away the franchise enjoyed by the Vacuum Oil Company and the Shell Company, and also, I am sorry to say, by the Commonwealth Oil Refineries Limited, which is working hand in glove with the other companies, something might be achieved. It is pointed out by the independent companies that most of the oil comes from the Netherlands East Indies, and that the tankers which formerly traded to Australia have now been diverted to Japan. Whatever the objections of the major oil companies - whether it be a matter of greater profits, or dollar exchange, or of our insistence that a part of their profits shall remain in Australia - they must, be faced and overcome. During the Abyssinian campaign the League of Nations imposed sanctions which, it was suggested, would throttle the Italian advance. Although many goods were withheld from Italy, members of the league were not able to restrict the supply of oil, which continued to reach its destination. The oil interests proved to be more powerful than the League of Nations. Whilst I am not unmindful of the influence that the major companies wield in Australia, the Commonwealth is engaged in a lifeanddeath struggle for its existence, and we must have a plentiful supply of oil. The need for oil in this country is probably greater than anywhere else in the world on account of the great distances our armies would have to move in defending us. The maintenance of our internal economy is being seriously disrupted by the impact of petrol rationing, and the position will continue to worsen. The major oil companies are not increasing reserves here, although the Prime Minister announced that they were doing so. They are basing their tankerage upon our consumption. As we reduce consumption, they reduce the tankerage available. If that is an illustration of the operation of the cartel system, are we big enough to challenge it? We can train our fighting forces and spend millions of pounds upon equipping them but all will count for nought if the powerful oil interests throttle us, as they ave doing at this moment. Their restrictive influence is felt, on supplies and prices. They have been squeezing from the Government higher prices than they are entitled to ask. Before the formation of the cartel, the independent distributors were able to reduce the price on the competitive tender basis, but that system no longer operates. The petrol must be drawn from the cartel, members of which are now making up their earlier losses. The price which is charged to the Commonwealth Government has been increased from ls. 10½d. to more than 2s. While the Government is adjuring the people to bear with as much equanimity as possible the heavy burden of taxation, foreign interests are squeezing taxpayers by raising the prices of oil and petrol. Is it any wonder that a demand has been made that certain of the budget proposals should not be implemented? Complaints have been made with justification by the independent distributors that the sale of aviation spirit is notopen to competitive tender, as are other grades. They also allege that the conditions under which tenders must be lodged are so drawn up that independent distributors are unable to tender. The annual consumption of aviation spirit in the Commonwealth is 22,000,000 gallons, and again, the price is in excess of a fair and reasonable amount. Prior to the formation of the cartel, the major companies were compelled to sell at reduced prices. I am unable to ascertain the price which the Government is now paying for aviation spirit. {: .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr Wilson: -- Does the Government know what it is paying? {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Possibly it does not. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- The Minister for Supply **(Senator McBride)** offered to make the information available to the honorable member. Has he made application to the Minister? {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Yes, on two occasions. I sought the information four weeks ago but I have not yet received it. In making my criticism during this speech I have been very guarded in my statements owing to the position I hold in this Parliament, and I believe that I have kept within the bounds of what should be said in public. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- -And the honorable member still remains a member of the Advisory War Council ! {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- I hope that I have honoured all my obligations as a member of that body, along with my colleagues who have done their best in their own way. I believe that I have not trespassed beyond the bounds of what I am entitled to say in Parliament. {: #subdebate-44-0-s2 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Minister for the Army · Warringah · UAP -- The honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** has made a number of comments and observations about the equipment of Australian troops. Ear my part, I do net deny the right of every honorable member to express his views as strongly as he will upon the equipment position ; but it is as well, as I observed in the House on the 25th June last, that the position should be clarified. It is unwise merely to assume that details which are contained in letters from individual soldiers reflect the whole position as regards equipment, either in Greece or in Crete. The Government has taken second place to no one in its determination to do all in its power to ensure that our troops are fully equipped. No government could have done by cablegram and by direct representation, more than this Government has done to ensure the attainment of that objective. The honorable member for West Sydney has seen some of the cablegrams. The difficulty of a Minister in dealing with this matter is that it is not open to him to reveal the details of all the messages that have been exchanged. Some can be disclosed, others cannot. In the cablegrams which were sent, it was made abundantly clear that we insisted with the British Government on the obligation to have our troops fully equipped before they went into action. When the Grecian campaign was embarked on, the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** was in England. Communications were passing between the right honorable gentleman and Ministers in Australia, again making the point that we required full equipment to be made available to the men. Finally, the Government had the assurance of the one man upon whom it must finally rely, namely, the General Officer Commanding the Australian Imperial Force in the Middle East. The important point is, What was the equipment of the troops when they were despatched to Greece? That they were without many items of equipment shortly before, and at, the evacuation, is patent to every body. That many items of equipment should be lost in their retreat from the line which they originally took up was inevitable. But the important point is, What was their condition when they arrived in Greece? From the time they landed in that country, the lines of communication were subjected to continual and overwhelming aerial bombardment. The number of troops who fought in 'Greece was, as I have been at pains previously to point out, less than the strength which had originally been intended. If this venture had succeeded, it would have been praised as being a brilliant example of military genius. As it did not succeed, it is inevitable that reasons for the failure should be sought. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- The Minister's idea is that the venture was an " even money " bet. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- My idea reflects the advice which the Government received. I have stated more than once in this House that when the Government decided to send Australian troops into Greece it had the assurance of the best military advice available to Ministers that there was a reasonable, fighting chance of holding the line. It was an important and vital matter to hold at that time, if we could. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- Did the Government stipulate that sufficient aerial protection should be provided? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- Yes. I shall deal with that subject shortly. I shall not shirk any questions relating to it. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- Do honorable members want the troops to be brought back to Australia ? {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- Better that than to have them butchered. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I regret that the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear)** used the word " butchered ". Responsible members using that and similar words suggesting that the Government simply sent the men to a butchery, which could have been prevented, are both gravely mistaken and, I believe, are doing a disservice to the country. Before our troops went to Greece, the Government stipulated, as I have said, that they should be fully equipped. Ministers had the assurance of the men on the spot regarding the military advisability of the operation. What else could a government have done in the emergency, once it had the assurance that the men would be fully equipped but to accept the advice of its experts upon the adventure? Honorable members should place themselves in the position of the Government at that time. The Government of New Zealand, which represents a different shade of political opinion from that represented by the Commonwealth Government, faced a similar problem. We had the advice of our military heads that there was a reasonable chance of success. We had obligations to Greece and we realized the importance of holding, if possible, the German advance. With their eyes open, both governments decided to approve of the sending of their troops into Greece. For my part, I make no apology for that decision. {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- Was the advice sound? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- It is easy to say after the event and because the venture did not succeed that the advice was not sound. That is the loosest kind of reasoning. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- The General Officer Commanding the Imperial Forces in the Middle East has since been " sacked ". {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- -General **Sir Archibald** Wavell was acclaimed by every honorable member when his drive into Libya succeeded. Views which have been expressed in the House indicate that, in the opinion of some honorable members, if the men are not completely equipped in every detail, the Government should withdraw them and surrender the country to the enemy. I hope that it will never be said of us that we must be guaranteed every single item of equipment, failing which we shall back out of the venture. Although individual soldiers may have truthfully declared that they were short of equipment in their own areas at certain stages of the campaign and some honorable members may have in good faith repeated those statements, the important consideration is, Were they fully equipped when they went into Greece? It is a different matter when an army is retreating from one position to another. The troops cannot be expected to withdraw, bringing with them all their equipment. As they retreat, their equipment diminishes. It may, therefore, truthfully be said that towards the end of the Grecian campaign some of our men were without some part of their equipment. The campaign failed primarily in my view because of the overwhelming aerial superiority of Germany, and, secondly, because of the fact that men were not sent to Greece who were originally destined for that adventure. Why they were not sent to Greece I have frankly revealed more than once to this House. They were not sent because of a miscalculation by the British High Command about the thrust by the Germans in Libya. The force intended for Greece had to be diverted to meet that thrust. There is no purpose in going back over this except to test the theory that the Australian Imperial Force troops went into Greece without equipment. I can do no more than say that the CommanderinChief of the Australian Imperial Force, General **Sir Thomas** Blarney, tells me that except in a few instances our forces in Greece were fully equipped. On the 25th June last, following a question asked by the honorable member for Cook **(Mr. Sheehan),** I made a statement in which I was careful to reflect as faithfully as I could, without giving details, what was contained in the official advice received from **Sir Thomas** Blarney himself. If there be one leader in whom we can have confidence and of whom we can be proud, and if there be one man who has the welfare of his troops at heart and whose thoughts are always with his troops, it is **Sir Thomas** Blarney. He told me that, except in a few instances, the Australian Imperial Force in Greece was fully equipped. There were certain deficiencies, small deficiencies in respect of some items and larger deficiencies in respect of other items. The small deficiencies were negligible. **Sir Thomas** Blarney said that the other deficiencies did not affect the issue, because of the character of the terrain upon which the operations took place.I cannot go through his summary item by item, although I should like to do so, because security reasons demand that nothing be told which may reveal any item of weakness to the enemy which may be of value to him. The honorable member for Griffith **(Mr. Conelan)** laughs, but. he may rest assured that I have at heart just as much as he has the interests of our troops. I repeat that I can only give the summary of what General Blarney says and that is that any suggestion that the Australian troops engaged in the Grecian campaign were not well equipped cannot be sustained. {: .speaker-K0K} ##### Mr Conelan: -- What does he mean by " fully equipped " ? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I have sought to deal with that before. I welcome the honorable member's interjection. As I indicated in observations made previously to honorable members, the question of full equipment depends on the composition of the forces engaged. The point to be considered,to which I directed the attention of this House before, was that our men went to Greece as infantry divisions and supported by artillery and armoured forces, which, it was thought, would be of sufficient strength to oppose the forces against them. As to whether the infantry divisions intended for this venture were sufficient to meet the forces against them I am obliged to rely on the advice tendered to the Government. Our advisers knew substantially the forces that Germany had, knew of the Panzer strength available, and also knew the terrain. The attack which came from Germany through Thrace and Yugoslavia had its entrances to Greece through a limited number of defiles.I do not pose as a military expert, but, rightly or wrongly, men like **Sir John** Dill, the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, and **Sir Archibald** Wavell, who was there on the spot, with General Papagos, the general commanding the Greek forces, having regard to the forces against them, came to the conclusion, and advised us accordingly, that, if we had those men there as infantry divisions with artillery and armoured support, they would have areasonable chance of holding the position. In order to satisfy the House and the people of Australia that our troops as infantry divisions were fully equipped for the role allotted to them, I cannot do more than give the summary of **Sir Thomas** Blarney's report. That I have done. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- Does the Minister think that they were equipped to meet the known strength of the German Army? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I thought that I hadanswered that. They were sent as infantry divisions with artillery and armoured support. A number of troops destined for Greece had to be diverted to meet the Libyan thrust by Germany. We have to foe guided by the experts in this matter. If we disregarded that advice and took a different course and disaster came, we should have no defence to offer. So it resolves itself into this : Those best able to give a. decision, the highest military experts, gave us advice, and this Government and the Government of New Zealand accepted it. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- With a reasonable chance? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- The honorable member can answer that question himself when he speaks. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- I have spoken. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- Well, speak again. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- I spoke long ago, and was not like the Minister in his belated apology. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I am making no apology whatever. If the honorable member were faced with deciding whether or not a certain military venture should be undertaken, I assume that he would take the advice of his military advisers. If those military advisers said : " You have a reasonable chance of defending this line," and, if it was considered vital to hold or attempt to hold that line, I could not understand the honorable member or any one else refusing to accept that advice. The important factor is, as 1 have indicated, the condition of the troops when they went into Greece. I repeat that **Sir Thomas** Blarney indicated to me that they were fully equipped as to their equipment when they went in. The men were driven back bit by bit, moving at night from line to line, ever heavily pressed. Naturally equipment was lost, progressively. No one denies, therefore, that there is the substance of truth in letters of individual experiences written from time to time during the Greek campaign. But surely it is idle to look back except to see what lesson can be learned. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- The Government has learned no lesson. The Minister is justifying every bit of the Greek campaign. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I have defended the Government against the allegations that we sent men into Greece grossly illequipped. Such statements are most unfair. It must have a very serious effect upon the community to allege, on the basis of one or a number of instances in which, owing to the exigencies of the campaign, men may have been without full equipment, that they were sent to Greece to be butchered. I come now to the situation in Crete. When the evacuation of Greece took place there was only one place, I believe, from which' heavy equipment could be taken off. The only port available was that of Piraeus, which was subjected to continuous heavy bombardment from the air. The men were told to find their way to prearranged places and to discard their equipment, the- important thing being "lives before equipment". I do not apologize for that. ,So when, some of them, about a brigade, got to Crete, the others having reached places from Alexandria to Palestine, the problem was re-equipment. Had we evacuated Crete at that stage where should we be in Syria now? With the Germans once in Syria, what was the immediate peril to Suez? So I say that it was important to hold Crete. We could not say to the High Command that, because it could not guarantee 100 per cent, re-equipment, we should not attempt to hold it. Before the Crete campaign opened, I received a statement from General **Sir Thomas** Blarney that he took the view that Crete should be held and not surrendered to Germany, because, if the enemy held Crete it would threaten our flank in 'Syria, and that would precipitate the time when we should have to meet a thrust from Syria. We started this war well behind scratch in respect of equipment. For years we wasted time by living in a " fool's paradise ", not only in this country but also in England. Not one of us can escape the blame. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- The Opposition less than the Government. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- Yes. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr Forde: -- Things would- have been much better if the Government had applied our policy. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- The honorable member's interjection about policy draws this from me: The Opposition's policy for years before the war was a policy not to spend one penny upon defence! {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr Forde: -- What about the policy speech delivered in 1937 by the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** ? Why did the Government not carry that out ? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- Since war broke out we have had teething troubles in respect of equipment. Equipment for the Middle East has to be taken by a long circuitous route round the Cape, which strains our shipping to the utmost. Every effort has been made in recent months to send equipment there to the maximum capacity. I hope that it will not be said that because we could not get to Crete full equipment in every respect, we ought to have withdrawn without a fight. We were told by **Sir Thomas** Blarney that the equipment position at Crete was rapidly improving and that with the equipment there it was thought that the island could be held against airborne attacks. I have not sought to hide the fact that Crete was lost because of a lack of fighter aircraft. When *om-* men went to Crete they were without arms. Had they tried to save their heavy equipment, they themselves could not have been saved. Instead, they were told to abandon their equipment; to blow it up so that the enemy would not get it; and to escape with their personal armament. That was a wise decision. Superhuman efforts were made to get equipment to Crete until we reached the stage on the 5th May, when the position, on the advices we received, was rapidly improving and, in the view of General Freyberg, there was a general conviction that Crete could be held. Everything must not be put upon the debit side. One hears much of our losses, but little of the advantages that we gained. Nobody regrets more than I do the numbers of men who died, were wounded or were taken prisoner in Crete, but I ask honorable members to view this in its proper perspective. Large numbers of the men who were lost in Crete are no doubt prisoners, and will return to their homes when this conflict is over. The facts ,are that we held Crete for a certain time, we did stay the hand of Germany in Syria, and we gained more breathing space in Iraq, because there can be no doubt that Raschid Ali's insurrection there began in accordance with a German time-table, and it went wrong. These items should be entered on the credit side of the ledger. "We must not, we cannot give in because on every occasion we may not be able to obtain 100 per cent, of equipment and supplies. No war can be won in that way. We are now holding positions in the Middle East that are vital to the Empire. Because somebody says that he is not satisfied that our troops are provided with every item of equipment, and that their reserve supplies are sufficient to maintain them for an indefinite period, are we to say that the game is not worth the candle? We are well established there, and our equipment position is improving day by day. I believe that the very rapid improvement that has taken place in this connexion is the result of the personal visit to Great Britain of the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies).** We are in the Middle East; we must fight there. I welcome what the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** has said. I acknowledge that he is as eager as 1 am to do the job properly for our men who are fighting overseas. I welcome his criticism because it gives point to the issue that has been raised. That is of great value. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- Did **Mr. Anthony** Eden interfere with our plans? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I am concerned not with **Mr. Anthony** Eden, but with the issue now before this House. I say that the struggle in Greece and Crete was lost because of the overwhelming air superiority of Germany. We have been told that it was impossible to maintain fighter aircraft in Greece when our troops were being driven back. The same position arose in Crete. But we are now established in the Middle East on interior lines of communication where our aircraft position has for some time past been rapidly improving. I would willingly give details, but I am not free to speak. However, I can say that this Government and the British Government fully realize the importance of equipment, and we are doing all that is humanly possible to improve our position in the Middle East in order to ensure that we shall hold it. {: #subdebate-44-0-s3 .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- What was the cause of the lack of aerial support for our troops in Greece? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I have already indicated that. In Greece originally we were driven back step by step. We had to make a very rapid retreat, and, bit by bit, our air squadrons were forced to cease operations. There is no doubt - I am being frank about this - that the aircraft that went to Greece were not adequate to meet the overwhelming force of Germany. {: .speaker-K0K} ##### Mr Conelan: -- They were obsolete. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- That was not the case at all. I venture to say that no government could have done more, or could do more now, except by the continued presence in Great Britain of the Prime Minister himself, in order to ensure that the equipment position in the Middle East shall be made secure. I shall make some observations now on the production of munitions. I know the views of the honorable member for West Sydney regarding the men who have charge of our munition programme, and it is obligatory upon me to say at least something in their defence. There is room for improvement of our munition programme, as there is in every department, including my own, but great things have been done in munitions, and the men who are responsible were leaders of industry before the outbreak of war. I do not agree with the honorable member that a man cannot place patriotism before self. This would be a poor world indeed if that were so. Knowing the labour and the length of time that these men devote to their work, and the way in which they stint nothing so that they may render service to the Government, I say that it is wrong to suggest that there is something sinister about their association with our war effort. Of necessity, when a government is dealing with heavy industries in time of war it must put in charge of them men who in time of peace were familiar with their methods of operation and organization. When it chooses a man such as - but it would he wiser not to mention names. {: #subdebate-44-0-s4 .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr WILSON: -- Hear, hear ! {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I am sorry to hear that interjection. I could praise the work of all of the particular men associated with the Government's munition programme, but it would be better to deal with them, as a class. These men who, by virtue of their ability, had won their way to key positions in important industries, were chosen by the Government because of their knowledge of the difficulties that had to be overcome. Is it to be suggested that they will serve their companies before the nation? It may well be that some other man could be suggested to take the place of this man or that man, but in fairness to those whom the Government has selected, I say that they have accomplished great things, for which the nation should be very thankful. {: #subdebate-44-0-s5 .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley .- We have just seen the only outward and visible sign of any interest by the Ministry in this debate since it was initiated a fortnight ago,, and this was only because the Minister for the Army **(Mr. Spender)** was stung into activity by the criticism expressed by the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley),** who, apart from the interest that he takes in the general subject of defence, has had an opportunity as a member of the Advisory War Council to learn prob-ably more about our war effort than most other honorable members. Other Ministers have shown a complete lack of interest in the debate. They have displayed utter contempt for the Parliament in their attitude towards this important matter. This debate arises more from a variety of statements made outside of Parliament than from anything important that has been said by the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies),** or any of his colleagues, in this chamber. It has been interesting to see the manner in which an. attempt has been made since the right honorable gentleman returned from Great Britain to build up his. reputation in the eyes of the people. He was hailed on his arrival as though he were a warrior returned from fields of battle. {: .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr Fadden: -- So he was. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- We were told by the press, in its fatuous flattery of the Prime Minister on his return, that he looked weary, that he looked burlier than usual, that he had a glint in his eyes, but that withal he had the demeanour of a man with a new sense of responsibility from what he had seen and heard overseas. So far as I can see, that was the only indication that the Prime Minister had seen or heard anything overseas of real importance to this Parliament. Nothing that he has disclosed since has given any evidence that he considers it even remotely advisable to take the Parliament into his confidence regarding Australia's conduct of its war effort. But one very notable statement that he made was that after all that he had seen and all that he had been through, he regretted that he had to come back to Australia and take part in the diabolical game of politics. Yet every action that he has taken, and every piece of political by-play that he has indulged in since his return, has been branded with the stigma of what he has been pleased to term the "diabolical game of politics ". First we had the well stagemanaged reception at the Sydney Town Hall, where people of all shades of political opinion were invited to swell the audience. There we were regaled with a travelogue of what the Prime Minister had seen overseas. Nothing that he told that audience was new to it. It had been well primed for every one of his statements. Every body knew the degree of suffering of the people overseas as the result of the war. There was nothing new in the tragic picture of misery and suffering that the right honorable gentleman painted. After going on with his story for about an hour and a half, and making capital out of the misery of the people overseas, he veritably crawled over the bodies of the dead in London and elsewhere in order to make a subtle attack on the Labour party because it had refused to become enmeshed in the net of a national government. Later we witnessed the same sorry performance in this House. I had thought that at least the Parliament would be entitled to learn something more than he had told the people outside of it. Nevertheless the same story was repeated here, but I think that honorable members will agree that it did not achieve the same success as it achieved in Sydney. Later, we were invited to attend a farcical secret meeting that was turned into nothing more than a glorified question hour. But the Prime Minister succeeded in piquing the curiosity ofpeople outside of Parliament as to what he might have said in secret. Having heard all that the Prime Minister had to say about what he had done overseas, I venture the opinion that if one had read the files of the daily press one would have had an advance copy of the right honorable gentleman's disclosures to honorable members at that secret meeting. All of these things were done with one specific purpose in view. They were done in order to build up the reputation of the Prime Minister, because it was realized after the last elections that he had sunk low in the political estimation of the people of Australia. All of this stage-managing of public receptions, and a secret meeting of the Parliament which was turned into a screaming political farce, was done in order to create an air of mystery and, if possible, preserve some of the tarnished glamour that surrounded the Prime Minister. It reminded me of these famous lines which Macaulay wrote in the *Lays of Ancient Rome -* >But hark! the cry is Astur! > >And lo! the ranks divide; > >Asthe great Lord ofLuna > >Comes with his stately stride. This atmosphere was created in order to direct people's thoughts to the magnitude of the great figure that was leading the nation in war. The stage was set a few weeks ago for a great broadcast that was to set Australia by the ears. Perhaps it was unfortunate that, immediately prior to this much-heralded broadcast, there was a radio flash from the Department of Information which warned the people of the damage that could be done by wagging tongues. Perhaps it was still more unfortunate that **Mr. Cliff** Eager, who is described as the special writer of the *Sunday Telegraph,* should have happened to be sitting with the Prime Minister in the studio when he made this broadcast, for **Mr. Eager** subsequently wrote an article in the *Sunday Telegraph* from which I abstract the following paragraphs : - >I sat with Prime Minister Menzies while he made his " New Order " speech in Canberra this week. > >There's one thing you may want to know. Does the radio make any difference to his voice and manner ? {:#subdebate-44-1} #### Yes Those little inflections that make him sound as if lie's speaking with his tongue in his cheek can't be noticed at all when you're sitting beside him. It seems to be some trick of the microphone that thins out 'his voice. Here we see the alibi from a new point of view! The *Sunday Telegraph* writer said in effect that it was the microphone which made it seem as though the Prime Minister was speaking with his tongue in his cheek. If the Prime Minister learned anything while he was abroad that was of real consequence to the people of Australia he has not so far disclosed it at either a secret or an open meeting of members of the Parliament. Yet there are matters on which the Parliament should be furnished with specific information. We should be told, for example, exactly what we are doing as a nation in connexion with the war. We should also be told our position in regard to home defence. The admission of the Minister for the Array lately as to the state of Australia's defences was a most sensational disclosure. The people should also be informed of the Empire war policy of the Churchill Government. We are entitled to be told whether it differs materially from the Empire policy enunciated by the Chamberlain Government in 1938. If it does, I ask for a pronouncement of the policy of this Government on the subject. Australia is entitled to know where it stands. Are we to be expected to continue to equip troops for service on an ever-receding front? To what did the Prime Minister commit Australia while he was abroad? We have been given no information on this subject. So far as I can discover, the attitude of the Churchill Government on Empire defence matters is not materially different from that of the Chamberlain Government. In support of this view I ask honorable members to consider the general tenor of a speech made by **Mr. Chamberlain** in the House of Commons on the 7 th March, 1938. That speech followed the holding of a number of Imperial conferences at which the obligations and responsibilities of the different parts of the Empire were specified in the event of a war involving .the Empire. Reports made to people of this country by Australian members and representatives who attended those conferences indicated that it had been agreed that it should be the settled policy of the British Government and of the dominion governments that in the event of a war involving the Empire each part of the Empire should defend itself. We were led to believe that that policy would be implemented. In dealing with the attitude of the British Government and the British defence authorities to the dominions in the event of an international war involving the Empire **Mr. Chamberlain** said - >Our main strength lies in the resources of man-power, productive capacity, and endurance in this country. > >And unless these can he maintained - not only in peace, hut in the early stages of war when they will be the subject of continuous attack - our defeat will be certain, whatever might be our fate in secondary spheres elsewhere. > >Therefore, our first main efforts must have two main objectives: We must protect this country, and we must .preserve the trade routes upon which we depend for our food and raw materials. > >Our third objective is the defence of British territory overseas from attack, whether by sea, land, or air. > >I would remind the House that our .position is different from that of many continental countries in that we have the necessity at all times of maintaining garrisons overseas in naval bases, and strategic points, in different .parts oi the world. > >That makes it necessary for us to have available forces which can be despatched on what may be called " Imperial police duty ". > >In war-time there would undoubtedly be substantial demands for reinforcements to be sent to these strategic points, but taking them in order of priority, they are not as vital as the defence of our own country, because, as long as we are undefeated at home, although we sustained losses overseas, we might have an opportunity of making them good thereafter. It is clearly indicated in that statement that the British policy was quite definite. Moreover the policy was supported by an overwhelming majority of the members of the British House of Commons. In effect it was laid down that the first obligation of the British Government was to provide for the protection of its own country. With that principle we can have no quarrel. But we say it is the first duty of the Australian Government to protect Australia. The obligation upon Australia to send troops outside of Australia to other parts of the Empire is no greater than is the obligation on the British Government to do a similar thing. I know that **Mr. Chamberlain** was roundly condemned in this Parliament for having made the speech to which I have referred, but the policy of **Mr. Churchill** out-Chamberlains Chamberlain, if that be possible. I do not find fault with the first two principles of policy which **Mr. Chamberlain** laid down. I do not think that any honorable member will deny that it is the duty of the Imperial Government to-day to protect Great Britain first. We, on our part, claim that our first responsibility is to protect Australia. The British Government is also doing its best to maintain its trade routes, for the foodstuffs and raw materials which are needed for defence purposes in Great Britain must be transported over those trade routes. We have had ample proof that until within a few weeks ago, at any rate, all the troops sent from Canada were stationed in Great Britain which also was being defended, to some degree, by foreign legions. Speaking in general terms it may be said that no soldier has gone out of Great Britain without another soldier entering the country. **Mr. Churchill** therefore, is simply applying the policy which **Mr. Chamberlain** laid down in 1938. The Churchill Government is giving its main attention to the defence of Great Britain, and I do not blame it for doing so. Australia, however, is also sending troops abroad to protect Great Britain, and our Navy to help to keep open the trade routes of Great Britain. Under the 1938 declaration of policy, this was not regarded as an obligation of this country. The third objective enumerated in the speech of **Mr. Chamberlain** was " the defence of British territory overseas from attack, whether by sea, land or air ". The Churchill Government, however, is not giving effect to that principle, for the dominions, and particularly Australia, are being asked to defend other parts of the Empire, and large numbers of our troops are to be found in Egypt, the Sudan, and Syria. **Mr. Chamberlain** also said that it was the duty of the British Government to maintain garrisons overseas in naval bases at strategic points. This principle has also been departed from by the Churchill Government, for Australia has been called upon to shoulder this obligation. The Singapore Naval Base was constructed partly, we were told, for the defence of Australia, but the plain fact is that this country is being denuded of its man-power for the purpose of assisting to defend Singapore. In spite of all these facts, certain honorable members opposite have spoken disparagingly of the part that Australia is playing in the war. They have argued that Australia ought to be doing more. Actually, this country is doing more than any previous British Government expected it to do. I cannot see any justification for the reflections which some honorable gentlemen opposite have seen fit to cast upon our war effort. I endorse the attitude of the Chamberlain Government. I endorse, too, the view of the Churchill Government that the first responsibility of that Government is to provide for the protection of Great Britain, and that its second responsibility is to protect the trade routes of the country. I am wondering, however, why we have not a government in power in this country which is prepared to say, " We are going to defend Australia ". Instead of having in office a government which adopts that attitude, we have a government which admits that the state of affairs is most unsatisfactory. It is hard to understand this, seeing that we have trained and equipped so many men, and have manufactured such large quantities of munitions of many kinds. {: #subdebate-44-1-s0 .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- I do not know whether it was or was not intended for publication, but I know that the people of Australia should be aware of it. I consider, also, that any honorable member, whether he holds Cabinet rank or not, who shelters behind a contention that a certain statement should not be made public, is guilty of a gross dereliction of duty to the people of this country who sent him to this Parliament to provide, among other things, for the defence of Australia. We shall not be doing a service to Australia by covering up the ineptitude of Ministers. I think it right and proper that the people should be told. What has occurred should be exposed for the benefit of the people who send representatives to this Parliament to protect their interests, instead of its being smothered up. {: .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr Fadden: -- For the benefit of the enemy. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- Anyhow, it is the opinion of only one man, and a stupid one. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- I consider, also, that the House is entitled to know to what the Prime Minister committed this country while he was overseas. We ought to know whether Australia has been asked to give greater assistance in respect of munitions and/or armed forces for service on the ever-receding fronts to which I have referred. If that be expected of us, there should be some sort of reckoning of possibilities. We should know exactly to what the Prime Minister has committed us in respect of the sending of men overseas, what his outlook is with regard to the provision of adequate defence for Australia, what munitions Australia is expected to produce, what quantity ho expects to keep in Australia for defensive operations here, and what quantity is to be sent out of Australia. Neither in secret nor in open sitting has the right honorable gentleman been prepared to take either the House or the country into his confidence on these very important matters. Reference has been made to-night to the use of our forces overseas, and the adventures in Greece and Crete have been largely covered. I have read what I could of the debate that took place in the House of Commons, when the Prime Minister of Great Britain was called to account. It would appear that more members of the House of Commons than members of the Commonwealth Parliament are interested in the welfare of Australian soldiers. They dismiss all the frivolous excuses pui forward by the army authorities and are contemptuous of the " hush-hush " policy which dictates the view : " What is the use of talking about the blunder, now that it has happened; all that we can do is to learn something from the blunders that have been made." If a similar blunder should occur in respect of the armed forces of Australia in their next engagement, the same Minister will be guided by the advice of the same gentleman who advised him in connexion with the campaigns in Greece and Crete. It should not be sufficient for this Parliament that the Prime Minister of Great Britain should have dismissed the debate with another alibi. His usual retort was: "What is the good of talking about the past ? " On this occasion, he used the same excuse as has been used by the Minister for the Army. Possibly that gentleman was aping him, as this Government apes the British Government in any decision it makes. The excuse advanced was that no reasons would be given in case the enemy might learn something of our weaknesses or future movements. If other honorable members are satisfied with that, I am not. It may be said that only honorable members who sit on this side of the House have criticized the adventures in Greece and Crete. I do not suppose that honorable members ' will claim that the Sydney *Sun,* in its editorial columns, is irresponsible, except when it " tickles them up ". On the 21st May last, thatjournal published the following: - " The Army should never have been in Greece", declares the editor of a leading London newspaper. " Sending a force at all was against all military thought. The decision must have been due to political, not military, considerations." That is the comment of :i great American news-magazine, *NewsWeek* Throughout Australia is echoing the question, " Why were troops sent to Greece so hopelessly inadequate in numbers and so hopelessly inferior in equipment, as is related in the cables day by day - outnumbered by twenty to one? " It went on to say - >We could have anticipated the heroism, the fury with which our troops fought back against the overwhelming numbers and the colossal weight of armoured equipment which the enemy flung against them; for we know the Anzacs are the hardest fighting and most gallant storm-troops in the world. > >But why were they offered up before superior numbers and superior equipment, in what quite apparently has been a political manoeuvre ? It said further - >We want the Government to tell the people all the facts surrounding this great misadventure, this miscalculation that opposed heroism to impossible odds. > >When these troops were sent to Greece our strength in Libya presumably became so thin that within ten days the Germans smashed their way to Benghazi, to Bardia and Solium and retook what it had taken us eight weeks to conquer. > >And now it is pointed out to us that Egypt, to which our men in Greece must be evacuated - if they are evacuated - is itself suffering the gravest of threats. > >The public of Australia will demand to be told the fullest details surrounding the ugly predicament in which our troops find themselves in Greece. > >They must be told exactly how many Imperial divisions were sent, what proportion was armoured, and what possible hope our expeditionary force had of holding up an army which in a short thirty-eight days overwhelmed France. That is criticism, not by the Labour Opposition, but by a journal which is habitually opposed to Labour policy. 1 wonder whether the Minister for the Army regards it as irresponsible criticism of the adventures in Greece and Crete! The honorable gentleman to-night went to great pains to explain that the men sent to Greece were fully equipped as an infantry division, and added that our military experts knew the strength of the enemy; but when I asked whether he or they were satisfied that with the equipment provided our forces could meet the known forces of the enemy, he evaded the question, by reiterating the statement that they were fully equipped as an infantry division. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- He did not know how many traitors there were in Yugoslavia. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- That is a side issue. 1 am concerned, not about the traitors in foreign countries, but as to whether the honorable gentleman approves of the incompetence of our military advisers or the Government, or the failure of tlie Government to make a forceful dein and that our men shall be properly protected. "Would the honorable gentlemen oppose ill-equipped men to overwhelming odds of mechanized troops ? {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- They were fully equipped as an infantry division. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- I am beginning to wonder whether there are traitors in the ranks of our own leaders, seeing that they lead our men into such a hopeless mess. The Minister for the Army goes fart,her. by defending the operations in Crete on. the ground that Syria was thereby saved. I do not believe that the defence of Crete had any connexion with the saving of Syria, because our men were hopelessly locked up there. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- Where did the honorable member obtain his strategic knowledge? {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- I shall not indulge in an argument with the honorable member for .Bendigo **(Mr. Rankin)** in regard to military tactics. I am, I think, as much entitled to say that the holding of Crete was not responsible for the saving of Syria, as the Minister for the Army is entitled to affirm that it was. Our men were in such a hopeless state of disorder after the evacuation of Greece that they were dropped at the nearest point, which happened to be Crete. All the experts admit that, although the British were in possession of the island for eight months, no preparations for its defence were made, and when our men arrived there, no additional equipment was available for them. Another impartial witness who, I assume, is not prompted by party political considerations, is **Mr. James** Aldridge, styled " the *Sun's* roving war correspondent ". He wrote - Every time we shot down one nearby we had a race to get to him for his ammunition or tommy gun. There were four of us, and because we stuck together we always had at least one tommy gun among us . . . There were a dozen or so in a small hollow, which we attacked. They had machine-guns, tommy guns and a mortar as usual. One N.C.O. with us was killed by a mortar shell, but we killed a whole dozen of the Germans and got more tommy guns . . . We had to part with our tommy gun because it was needed by those remaining, but we got off the beach safely and here we are. There is nothing outstanding about this story but digest it awhile, and you have the whole war spread out before your eyes. Those were the conditions under which the island of Crete was held. Yet the Minister for the Army says that that meant the salvation of Syria ! Men were waiting to kill their enemies in order to get their guns and ammunition. The honorable member for Bendigo, who wears the uniform and holds the rank of a general in the Australian Army, judging by his interjections and his attempts to harass me in my speech, is a supporter of that policy. When we say that, to send men into conflicts of that description, against the mechanized force of an army such as Germany can concentrate, is sheer butchery, our statement is resented by honorable members opposite. In what other way could it be described ? Of what use is it to laud the heroism of these men ? We know that they are the bravest soldiers in the world. *[Leave to continue given.']* Of what use is it to talk about the defence of Crete being the salvation of Syria, when the men who were defending Crete had to depend on the shooting of their enemies in order to obtain guns and ammunition? That brings me to the defence of Australia. Is the equipment of the forces in Australia as deplorable as that which was sent to Greece and Crete? The evidence supports the view that it is. Even after the lead allegedly given by the Prime Minister to Australia in his broadcast speech, there was the utmost confusion in the ranks of government supporters, most of whom have sought refuge in silence. Some of them, like the honorable member for Bendigo, have, with the tolerance of the Chair, spent their time in interjecting during the speeches of other honorable members. The evidence of confused thinking in the minds of honorable members opposite is amazing. Some of the Tory gentlemen, trying to be heroic at the expense of other people's lives, ' have openly advocated conscription. 1 do not know whether the silence of other honorable members indicates that they acquiesce in the demand for conscription, but it did appear that, when the honorable member for Barker **(Mr. Archie Cameron),** the honorable member for Wakefield **(Mr. DuncanHughes)** and the honorable member for Flinders **(Mr. Ryan)** were openly advocating conscription, there was a good deal of discomfiture among other members of their party, because they were letting the Government's cat out of the bag. The confusion of honorable members opposite on this subject reminds me of the lines written by Macaulay in which be depicts the disorder in the ranks of the Etruscan army when confronted by Horatius and his two companions defending the bridge - >But those behind cried, " Forward ! " > >And those before cried, " Back ! ". in the same way those on the back Government benches are advocating conscription, while those on the front benches are saying, " For Heaven's sake keep quiet, you are letting the cat out of the bag ". The Labour party is opposed to conscription. The Opposition, which is equal in numbers to the Government parties, is entitled to be taken into the Government's confidence in regard to its policy at home and abroad, and especially in regard to defence. I was particularly interested in the broadcast statement of the Prime Minister on the subject of non-essential industries. The right honorable gentleman spoke in a. very vague and airy way regarding certain industries which, in his opinion, ought to be controlled, restricted, or altogether closed down. I believe that infinite damage will be done to Australia economically, and our ability to defend ourselves will be seriously impaired, if the Prime Minister is allowed to apply his policy in regard to industry. The Prime Minister's analysis of the industrial position was unreal and unconvincing. Of course, I admit that he is not able to investigate personally the industries of Australia, or to estimate their potential value for war purposes. He has to depend upon the advice of others. *No* satisfactory explanation has yet been given as to what are non-essential industries. In one sense, the term might be taken to include all industries not actually engaged in the production of war materials. The Prime Minister says that there are too many civil industries, and that they must release machines and men for war production. He says that he will set up an authority to control civil industries, and, if necessary, to close them down. That statement is damaging in two ways. It creates uncertainty in the minds of all persons in' control of industries not directly concerned in the manufacture of munitions. They do not know whether to continue or extend production, or to get out before the Government takes action. Confusion and dismay are created, because the industries which will be affected have not been defined, and no one knows at which of them the Prime Minister is pointing the bone. Apparently, however, he proposes to set up some sort of an authority which will have power to close down any industry it chooses. I asked the Prime Minister whether he would be prepared, before interfering with any industry on the report of this authority, to consult this Parliament. Before any variation of the tariff becomes permanently effective, Parliament must be consulted, although the variation may amount to only 2 or 3 per cent.; yet the Government now proposes to set up an authority which, without Parliament being consulted, will have power to close down industries altogether. No authority outside Parliament should be endowed with such power. M!r. ARCHIE Cameron. - If the honorable member were made a member of one of the committees he would agree to anything. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- I have watched with interest the wobbly political career of the honorable member for Barker **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** ever since he came into this . House under one flag, and then deserted it to serve under another. He got into the Government by exploiting his nuisance value, and then was thrown out for the same reason. I do not know what could buy his loyalty, but I assure him that nothing can buy mine. The present unsatisfactory position in regard to industry is not due to a shortage of machinery or man-power; it is due entirely to faulty organization, and this is because the representatives of big business interests have been placed in the saddle. They, and not the Government, are determining national policy. One has only to recall the personnel of the various advisory committees and control boards in order to understand to what a degree big business interests have been placed in control, and to understand that it is they, and not the Government, who will determine what industries shall be allowed to continue, and what industries shall be closed down. If there be a lack in munitions, it is not due to lack of labour. The investigations of the Man-power and Resources Survey Committee reveal that at least 30,000 men in New South "Wales, and possibly an equal number of women, are entirely unemployed and are registered for employment at the local relief depots. {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr Jolly: -- Are they all tradesmen? {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- No. In Queensland, due mainly to seasonal conditions, there is an equal number of men unemployed, and an unstated number of women available. When we contrast the conditions in those two States with the situation in Victoria and South Australia, we see something of the maldistribution of defence effort in this country; two States are overwhelmed with business and are experiencing a shortage of labour, whilst in other States men walk the streets and are unable to obtain work. I do not believe that the Government would voluntarily bring about that state of affairs, and that is why I say that it is not responsible for what is taking place. The Government is in the hands of the representatives of vested interests. The reasons given for this uneven distribution of war work are that strategic considerations demand it, and that Victorian industries are in a better position to undertake the work that is offering because they are better developed. One must concede the latter point, but the argument as to the strategic situation is foolish. It matters not where the factories for equipping, the defence forces of Australia are established, so long as on the east coast of New South Wales the establishments in which the steel required for the production of munitions is manufactured remain vulnerable. If those places were destroyed, the geographical situation of the factories in which munitions are made would not matter one jot. *[Further leave to continue given].* And so we have the remarkable position that in Victoria, where there are practically no unemployed resources to draw on- {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- That is not so. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- It is all very well for the honorable member for Melbourne to contradict what I say, but official figures and the recognized leader of the unemployed in Victoria agree that there are only about 2,500 unemployed persons in Melbourne, most of them being unemployable, and a similar number in the country districts in that State. I place those official figures against the honorable member's interjection. I do not know how many workers are registered at the various munition establishments for work. It may be that some workers in other industries have registered there. All I say is that the people w,ho constitute the reservoir of labour which is available for these jobs are not where the work is situated. If we examine the position in South Australia, we find that within the next six months between 50,000 and 60,000 workers will be required for the munition factories to be started there, and that the number of registered unemployed in that State totals about 2,500, most of whom the bureau officials admit are unemployable. In addition, about 8,000 workers who are at present engaged in other occupations have volunteered for munitions work. That makes a total of about 10,500 workers who are available for the 50,000 or 60,000 positions which will soon become available. Despite the encouragement offered by the Government of Western Australia, no munitions establishment has yet been established in that State. In New South Wales, in addition to an unemployed army of about 30,000 for whom no work has been provided, there are scores, perhaps hundreds, of small workshops which have not been organized in any war effort. They are considered to be too small to take any significant part in that effort, and accordingly they have not been organized into groups. In Victoria and South Australia, where work is or soon will be available, control is in the hands of big businesses which are the major contractors. Because of this unbalanced policy, two States will be. fully occupied with the war work within six months, whilst in other States men still seek employment in vain. In these circumstances, the Government should say that it will not any longer follow the advice of those big-business interests which are controlling the production of munitions, and will itself do something in the matter. Another point which seems to have been overlooked is that in some of these small businesses which the Government seems determined to close are some of the finest mechanics in Australia. These men, because of their ability, initiative and business capacity, have branched out in businesses of their own, rather than continue to work for employers. Many of them have inrested most of their life's savings in their businesses. They will be dispossessed of their machines, which will be placed in factories controlled by the big concerns. What are the prospects of these men after the war is over? It is all very well to say that the machines which are being confiscated will have to be replaced after the war, but what about the goodwill of these small concerns? Men who have built up business connexions will find that they will have to start again. What possible chance will they have in competition with big business concerns? It would be an economic tragedy if, as a result of government policy, these men should be dispossessed of their factories and equipment, and forced to. surrender them to the big business interests which are running Australia's war effort to-day. I believe that no country can succeed if it concentrates its efforts on the production of machines of destruction. In Australia, because of war conditions, we have a unique opportunity to establish and strengthen industries so that they may hold their own against foreign competition after the war. We now have an opportunity to establish in dustries for the purpose of producing articles that appear on the list of prohibited imports. The country cannot economically survive if we increase the productive capacity to construct engines of war while neglecting and destroying wealth-producing industries. Side by side with the expenditure on defence which is purely for the purposes of destruction, we must have wealthproducing industries, because from their earnings we can draw the finance required to maintain the war effort. I direct attention to an enlightening observation upon this subject by the late **Mr. Chamberlain,** when some members of the House of Commons urged him to take similar action to that proposed by the Prime Minister. He said - >I know there are some who have thought that perhaps it would be better that we should devote the whole of our resources to the production of munitions. That is a course which any government would hesitate to take unless it was convinced that matters have become so critical that it could not any longer be avoided; but of course, to do that would be to deal a terrible blow at industry. It would not merely mean the loss of orders on hand, or immediately in prospect; it would mean the loss of the goodwill, which, if it once disappeared, it might take a very long time to recover, if, indeed, it ever were recoverable. The fact is that wars are not only won with arms and men ; they are won with the reserves of resources and credit. That is what we mean when we speak of the " staying power " of a nation. "Staying power " depends upon the maintenance of those commercial and industrial, activities. When we. glance over our past history, we see that our " staying power " has made important contributions to victory. From these considerations, I draw the conclusion that in a period of protracted and heavy expenditure, such as we are passing through now, we must be careful to preserve our economic and industrial stability. What was true on that occasion in Great Britain concerning the agitation by people who desired to close down nonessential industries in order to concentrate upon the defence work, is equally true in relation to Australia. If the Commonwealth does not take the opportunity which the war situation has presented to it to foster wealth-producing industries - they are loosely-termed nonessential because they are not directly associated with war production - we shall invite a collapse on the home front. We cannot continually divert our industries to produce weapons of destruction unless we create from other industries a reservoir of wealth, with which to carry on the work. Having had an opportunity to examine the Government's war effort in most of the States, I consider that the country will be in danger of economic collapse if it adopts the Prime Minister's policy to destroy so-called non-essential industries. In them will reside the ability of the country to meet the war effort which will be required of it in future. Anything that interferes with commercial and industrial stability will deal a vital blow at the heart of Australia. {: #subdebate-44-1-s1 .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY:
Lilley .-Every honorable member will agree with the emphasis placed by the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear)** upon the necessity for sound home defence. I remind him, however, that Empire defence is, for Australia, home defence. If the British Empire falls, we shall soon be without a country to defend. I listened with interest to the speeches of the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** and the Minister for the Army **(Mr. Spender),** relating to the campaigns in Greece and Crete. All honorable members are most concerned about the unfortunate circumstances surrounding those ventures; but as the Minister indicated, Australia had no alternative other than to send its troops to Greece. The suggestion by the honorable member for West Sydney that Australia should in future have a voice in determining movements of that kind should be heeded. The Minister for the Army stated that the Prime Minister's presence in London brought about an improvement of the position. That suggests the advisability of Parliament having in London a responsible representative who would be consulted upon such matters and have a voice in deciding them. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- Does not the honorable member consider that affairs would be conducted equally well if he were not there ? {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- Circumstances suggest, that his presence would be valuable. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- Does the honorable member suggest that this Parliament should send one of its members to assist **Mr. Churchill** ? {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- That is not my suggestion. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- Then what does the honorable member mean? {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- I stated that the suggestion of the honorable member for West Sydney that Australia should in future have a voice in deciding important troop movements should be heeded. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- Does the honorable member consider- {: #subdebate-44-1-s2 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: -- Order ! The honorable member for Melbourne must not argue every point of the speech which is being made by the honorable member for Lilley. {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- The debate upon the Prime Minister's statement about his mission abroad has become stale. My remarks upon it will be confined to a few brief observations, because too much has already been spoken upon the subject. The time has arrived for us to clear the decks for action and proceed full speed ahead with a more vigorous war effort. The Empire is fighting an enemy who acts before talking. Australians are only waiting to be told what to do, and they will obey. If the Government will show that it means business, it will give an impetus to the war effort and to recruiting. How can we expect men to respond to the call when honorable members are continually arguing as to what should be done. {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- The meagre rates of pay is a deterrent! {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- Rates of pay will not deter our nien from responding to the call. I am gratified that the Government proposes to revise the list of reserved occupations. The fact that so many men are protected in this manner causes a good deal of ill feeling. Many men hesitate to enlist when others are exempt. No time should be lost by the Government in revising this long list of reserved occupations, so as to free the men to take an active part in the war. Greater co-ordination and co-operation must exist between the Commonwealth and the States if Australia is to achieve a maximum war effort. I regret that the conference of Commonwealth and 'State Ministers held recently in. Canberra with the object of improving the financial relations of the Commonwealth and the States proved abortive. The problem of finance is one of the most serious questions confronting Australia to-day, and agreement in regard to it must be reached between the Commonwealth and State governments. *It* is futile simply to suggest that the State governments should vacate certain fields of taxation in order to enable the Commonwealth to raise sufficient revenue to meet its requirements. We must be prepared to make provision for the State governments to meet their obligations. They are called upon to undertake many very important responsibilities, and they are charged with the control of a number of social services. I emphasize that in these negotiations we cannot, and must not, overlook the responsibilities of the States. {: .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr Fadden: -- The Commonwealth never intended to do that. {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- It has been suggested in certain quarters that the Commonwealth Government should exercise its powers to collect all the revenue it requires, leaving the States to look after themselves. That would be a very foolish policy indeed. It is a tragedy that, at this critical period in the history of the nation, the Commonwealth and the States are not able to act as one authority. In my opinion, whether we like it or not, the financial burden alone will force the issue of unification in Australia before very long. We cannot engage in a complete war effort unless we have closer cooperation and co-ordination between the Commonwealth and the States on the important subject of finance. More serious efforts should be made to spread the manufacture of munitions throughout the Commonwealth. The honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear)** has pointed out that practically the whole of the manufacture of munitions is concentrated in Victoria and New South Wales. In common with other honorable members, I was supplied by the Government with a list of munitions establishments in the Commonwealth. An invitation was extended to us to visit these factories at our convenience during parliamentary recesses. Looking down the list, I found a large number of munition factories and works in Victoria and New South Wales, a certain number in South Australia, none in Western Australia and Tasmania, and only one projected in Queensland. I am not suggesting that the Commonwealth Government is neglecting the interests of the people of the States in the matter of employment. I believe, however, that it is dangerous to concentrate a large number of artisans and tradesmen in the thickly populated parts of Australia. The Government has promised the establishment of munition works at Rocklea, near Brisbane. At first it was said that the works would be established in a short period, but as the months went by nothing was done. It seems now that at least twelve months will elapse before anything worth while will have been done there. Shortly after the outbreak of war I asked the Prime Minister if he would give serious consideration to the need for the establishment of munition works in the various States, in order to avoid the serious problem that may arise in the future as the result of the concentration of large numbers of artisans and tradesmen in thickly populated parts. I again urge the Government to give more serious consideration to the problem in the future than has apparently been given to it in recent months. During the course of his broadcast speech the Prime Minister referred to the proposed establishment of a number of parliamentary committees. If these committees work as they should do, they should be of great assistance to the Government, and to the Parliament. I have urged for some considerable time that the Public Accounts Committee should be reconstituted. I understand from the Prime Minister that, whilst the War Expenditure Committee, as it is at present proposed to be constituted, will not consider all phases of governmental expenditure, he has no real objection to its inquiries extending to any substantial field of expenditure outside of that directly and strictly related to the war. All governmental expenditure should be reviewed and examined by a committee of that kind. It is impossible in these days for Parliament to undertake anything like a thorough examination of the huge items of expenditure contained in the budget. I desire briefly to refer to some comments made yesterday by the honorable member for Adelaide **(Mr. Stacey)** in regard to these committees, because I fear that some members of the community may be misled by what the honorable gentleman said. I am strongly of the opinion that no fees whatever should be paid to their members, and that most of their work could be carried out in Canberra, the Seat of Government. {: .speaker-KQB} ##### Mr Scully: -- Does the honorable member contend that almost the whole of the work of these committees should be done in Canberra 1 {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- I said that a good deal of their work could be done here. {: .speaker-KJQ} ##### Mr James: -- Does the honorable member believe that Cabinet Ministers should not receive extra emoluments? {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- I am not now dealing with the remuneration of Cabinet Ministers. {: .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr Drakeford: -- Did the honorable gentleman express any views on that subject when the Ministers of State Bill was before the House? {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- Ministers are called upon to-day to carry very heavy responsibilities, and they are entitled at least to some extra remuneration for the work they do. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- Does the honorable member think that members of committees should be paid travelling expenses? {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- Yes. I do not object to the payment of actual out-of-pocket expenses for travelling, but I do object to what may be regarded as unnecessary expenditure in that direction. As far as their travelling expenses are concerned, members of committees should be prepared to incur expenditure on the same scale as if they were travelling on private business. I say that deliberately, because I believe that a fee of £2 10s. a day for travelling expenses is exorbitant. {: .speaker-KJQ} ##### Mr James: -- It is only chicken feed. {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- It is not chicken feed. {: #subdebate-44-1-s3 .speaker-JVR} ##### Mr SPEAKER (Hon W M Nairn:
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA -- Order! This discussion is getting beyond the subject before the House. Reference may be made to the subject of committees, but it should not be discussed in detail. {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- I have said all I want to say on that matter, except that one good reason why honorable members ought to be prepared to assist this country by serving on committees associated with the war effort is that Parliament meets so infrequently. In the present circumstances this country needs not more legislation but better administration. {: #subdebate-44-1-s4 .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL:
Melbourne -- The Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** returned to Australia with something which he had not previously possessed, a sense of the dramatic. We met here for three days and heard him at length tell the story of his visit abroad; and at a secret meeting we heard what he had to say on the lessons of the war as he had learned them. Then the country heard two broadcasts, the last one over every national and commercial broadcasting station in Australia, in which he outlined the charter upon which this country is to work in a 100 per cent, war effort. He called this Parliament together on the 18th June and proposed later that it should go into recess on the 4th July. We met on the anniversary of the Battle of Waterloo, and we shall go into recess on the anniversary of the American Declaration of Independence. {: .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr Fadden: -- Not a bad day either. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- I agree, but it seems strange that we should have to take solace from one of the greatest defeats in the history of the British Empire. The 18th June was also the anniversary of the signing of the German Naval Treaty by **Sir Samuel** Hoare in 1935, a happening for which history will not pass very favorable judgment upon the Government responsible for it or the people whose actions had led up to it. We went into recess after the last sessional period on the 3rd April, after a very brief period of sittings and I charge the Government with not being ingenuous in its treatment of this Parliament, because of the manner in which it failed to disclose important information that it had in its possession at the time. The day after Parliament went into recess, the Government called a meeting of the Australian War Advisory Council and told it that Australian troops were in Greece. It knew that Australian troops were in Greece when Parliament was sitting, and yet it failed to disclose that information to the Parliament. I have sought in formation from the Department of External Affairs and have been advised i at, whilst no exact information is available as to when the Australian troops went into Greece, they went there about the second week of March. The Government deliberately failed to place before the House that information, because it did not desire a discussion on the subject of whether Australian troops ought to be involved in conflict in Greece, just as the Prime Minister failed originally even to tell the Advisory War Council that our troops were there, and agreed to do so only after the representations of the Treasurer **(Mr. Fadden)** that it was a fair thing to inform that body which accepted equal responsibility with the Government in advising on war happenings. The Government, having failed to do its duty by Parliament in April, has successively failed to disclose all the information in its possession about the conduct of affairs in Greece and Crete since then. There is an official story which has yet to be told about the whole matter of the sending of Australian troops into Greece and Crete. The attitude of the Government to the war is on a par with its original attitude, and that attitude was well stated in a boardcast from London by the Right Honorable R. G. Casey, then a member of the Commonwealth Ministry, on the 21st November, 1939, a few weeks after the war broke out. This is the nonsense that the right honorable gentleman told the world - >I have told the British people of the immense war effort which is being made by Australia, not only by the expansion of defence forces, but also by the huge volume of industrial output in munitions, supplies, and modern highperformance aircraft. That sounds incredibly stupid in the light of subsequent events. Just imagine a member of the Ministry talking two years ago about a huge volume of industrial output in munitions, supplies, and modern high-performance aircraft! The fact of the matter is that we have not yet produced a sufficiency of aircraft for our own defence and that there has not been a huge volume of anything produced when you consider our own responsibilities for the defence of this nation and the added responsibilities that are ours to assist to the maximum of our capa city the other parts of the British Commonwealth of Nations, in the fight against Nazi-ism. The Government protests that it has done all that it can do and that for years before the war it acted as any responsible government ought to act in regard to defence measures. The Minister for the Army **(Mr. Spender)** said to-night that we all were to blame for the present unfortunate state of affairs. The honorable gentleman may speak for himself and for the parties on the Government side, but the Labour party accepts no responsibility for the country not being ready to defend itself. The 1937 general election was lost by the Labour party because of the malpractices of the financial group, which dominates the Government parties, in misleading the people as to the intentions of the Labour party. We were the only party to put forward a proposal for the development of the Royal Australian Air Force. {: .speaker-JY7} ##### Mr Duncan-Hughes: -- Who did away with universal training? {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- A Nationalist Government temporarily suspended compulsory military training immediately the last war ended. {: .speaker-KNC} ##### Mr Marwick: -- Compulsory training was suspended by a Labour Minister for Defence, the late Honorable Albert Green. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: **- Mr. Green's** action as Minister for Defence followed nine years after the initial action taken by the Nationalist Minister for Defence, and not once during those nine years was there any advocacy of the restoration of compulsory training from responsible Nationalist quarters. I remind honorable members that the Labour party has not had an absolute majority in both Houses of this Parliament since the Minister for the Navy **(Mr. Hughes)** deserted it in 1916. Consequently, we refuse to accept responsibility for any lack in our defences since that year. I remind the honorable member for Wakefield **(Mr. Duncan-Hughes)** that the late General **Sir John** Monash said in 1920 that we had not enough ammunition in Australia to defend this country for a fortnight. Anti-Labour Governments in this Parliament made no attempt to rectify that position until after the present war actually broke out. Up to that time we were hopelessly unprepared, not only to give aid to Great Britain, but even to defend ourselves. Indeed, we are not yet able to defend ourselves effectively. For that omission, history will hold this Government responsible. In the last election campaign the United Australia party opponent of the right honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin)** was reported in the *Age* of the 19 th September as having traced the development of aircraft production in Australia and said that, in 1935, **Mr. Essington** Lewis suggested to the. Lyons Government that we should manufacture aeroplanes in Australia. When he made that statement an interjector said, " It took you a long time to wake up ; didn't it ? " As a matter of fact, the Government did not wake up to the necessity for producing aircraft in Australia until after the outbreak of this war. Financial interests on the other side of the world prevented the manufacture of aircraft in this country. Up to the outbreak of war, the big financial and manufacturing interests in Great Britain defeated any move to manufacture aeroplanes or aeroplane engines in Canada . or Australia, because they wanted all of the profits for themselves. Those interests can never invisage a war without profit to themselves. The idea that they should make sacrifices in a time of war never occurs to them. They hate to be reminded that, from sheer necessity, they may be obliged to make such sacrifices. I wish now to reply to the honorable member for Barker **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** who seems to entertain very mixed ideas concerning the Labour party's attitude towards the present conflict. The attitude of this party is plainly set out in documents. For the purpose of this debate the relevant plank of the Labour party's defence platform is : - >The Labour party stands for the necessary provision for reinforcements of the Australian Imperial Force divisions, the extent of European participation by a volunteer army to be determined by circumstances as they arise, having regard to the paramount necessity of Australia's defence. Shortly after the outbreak of war, the honorable member for Barker spoke airily of sending not five, but ten divisions overseas. Whether they should be properly equipped did not occur to him except as a mere afterthought. As the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear)** pointed out, the heroism of the Australian soldier should not be pitted against the mechanized forces of Germany. Flesh and blood are no match for tanks, nor .303 rifle3 for tommy guns. The Minister for the Army refused this evening to face issues which are pertinent to the subject under discussion. I wanted him to elaborate the point as to whether the plans of the Government's military advisors were not interfered with politically. What was the reason for **Mr. Anthony** Eden's visit to Egypt? Was he responsible for the despatch of Australian forces to Greece? Did he decide upon the despatch of Australian troops to Greece in order that we might attempt to gain some diplomatic victory in Turkey and the United States of America? Were Australian lives gambled with in order that he might make a diplomatic coup? These questions are germane to a discussion of this kind; but the Minister replied to all interjections and observations by honorable members of this side by challenging them to say what they would have done in similar circumstances and in the light of the same advice from military experts. I believe that the advice of the Government's military experts was subordinated to political interference by the British Foreign Secretary. One reason why the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** wants to return to London i.« because he feels that unless a responsible Australian Minister is at hand in London the British Cabinet will make quite a number of mistakes involving the lives and safety of Australian soldiers. One. can draw no other conclusion from hi« earnest advocacy that he should return to London. If that be not the explanation, then the case for his return to London falls to the ground. Later, I shall have a few observations to make upon the composition of the British Cabinet, and as to whether that body should be entrusted with decisions involving the lives and future of Australian troops. It has been said in certain circles that General **Sir Thomas** Blarney was not particularly enamoured of the Grecian venture, am! that his final reply was, " If Australian troops must go into Greece, I will lead them ". The inference to he drawn from that statement is that the project was decided not on military but on political grounds. I have complete confidence in the capacity of the General Officer commanding the Australian troops in the Middle East. I charge the Government with lack of frankness in this debate. The House of Commons has held secret sessions to deal with a number of most important issues, including losses of shipping in the Atlantic and the caIn.paign in the Middle East. In all of those debates, members of that Parliament have been particularly frank and outspoken in their criticisms. But this Government vouchsafes no worthwhile information to members of this Parliament. The Minister for the Army adopts the attitude that it is useless to discuss the campaign in Greece now that it is all over. Every justification exists for such a debate. It should not be used for the purpose of finding scapegoats, or attacking individuals in responsible positions, but purely in order to evoke observations which honorable members are entitled to advance, because, in the final analysis, Parliament is charged with the responsibility of the administration of the war. Cabinet is the servant, and not the master, of Parliament in this matter. "We will be held responsible for whatever has been done. It has been said that the British High Command made a mistake in regard to the disposition of the forces and strength of the enemy f orces in Libya, but I am not prepared to accept such a condemnation of the British High Command. I believe that General **Sir Archibald** Wavell was forced to agree to proposals elaborated by **Mr. Anthony** Eden. I am reinforced in this belief by a report which appeared in the Sydney *Daily Telegraph* on the 14th March, several weeks before the Germans attacked our forces across the desert. Under prominent headings that report stated - >Information reaching London confirms Axis claims that large German forces have landed at Tripoli (Libyan capital), says the London *Daily Telegraph.* Official quarters state that at least three German divisions (about 45,000 men) are now in the Tripoli area, the paper adds. One division is said to be completely mechanized. Observers suggest that these troops have the dual aim of blocking the final conquest of Libya by British and Australian troops, and of keeping the large British forces pinned down in Libya. The Germans made no attempt to hide the fact that they were landing strong reinforcements in Libya, for on the 7th March the *New York Times* published the following unconfirmed report: - >Germany already had 100,000 troops, including Panzer (armoured) divisions and 1,000 tanks in Libya, but this report was not confirmed. If the enemy could tell the world, and neutral observers at Tripoli could see for themselves, that strong German forces were available for a campaign in the Western Desert, it is beyond belief that the British High Command was ignorant of the fact, or that it consented to being left with only one armoured division to protect our recent gains in that area. I do not accept the story that the British High Command agreed to the Greek venture because it had made a miscalculation of the strength of the enemy forces. 1 could cite many passages from newspaper reports to demonstrate quite clearly that there was ample evidence of severe criticism even in Great Britain of the occurrences in Greece and Crete. There appears to be a desire in this country to talk only about things that are pleasant, and to overlook difficulties; but that policy will not save the nation in the event of Germany succeeding in its eastern drive. I have an unhappy feeling that if the Germans reach Moscow we might be confronted with new enemies, with the result that our holding of this country may become very difficult. In replying iu the House of Commons to strictures by **Mr. Lloyd** George in connexion with the Greek campaign, **Mr. Churchill** said - >Our honour as a nation is clear. I say this, that even with the knowledge we have to-day. we would do the same thing again. Those remarks are typically " Churchillian ". **Mr. Churchill** is accustomed to gambling with the lives of men. He did so in the last war, and it is quite natural for him to do so in this war. In dealing with the Middle East, **Mr. Lloyd** George said - >We have suffered severe wounds. They have not been fatal, but they will be grave if they are neglected. The nation will have to do a great deal more to help, but it must first have facts - real facts. British people never do their best until they have been told the truth. I contend that it is the duty of this Government to tell our people the truth about the present position. **Mr. Lloyd** George also said - >Our greatest defeats have been diplomatic. There has never been a war in which diplomacy counted so much. What **Mr. Churchill** did during the last war is evidence of his general attitude towards naval and military strategy. It is notorious that he continually interfered with naval and military strategy during the last war, and that he was largely responsible for the Gallipoli adventure. If honorable members desire some authoritative information on the subject I refer them to *The Life of Lord Fisher, of* *Kilverstone,* written by Admiral **Sir Reginald** Bacon. Lord Fisher was First Sea Lord when **Mr. Churchill** was at the Admiralty prior to the outbreak of the war of 1914-18 and, after the outbreak of war, returned again to that office. Lord Fisher took a strong dislike to the Dardanelles project. On this point **Sir Reginald** Bacon wrote - >To emphasize Lord Fisher's point of view it is well to reproduce the statement that he prepared for the chairman of the Dardanelles Commission, and which he wished to appear in their report. After the report was published, this paper was found not to have been included. Lord Fisher was extremely angry, and he always considered that he had been most unfairly treated by its omission. The statement that Lord Fisher desired to have included in the report contained the following sentences - > **Mr. Churchill** and I worked in absolute accord at the Admiralty until it came to the question of the Dardanelles. T. was absolutely unable to give the Dardanelles proposal any welcome, for there was a. Nelsonic dictum that " any sailor who attacked a fort was a fool . . . even with military co-operation, the operation was mighty hazardous "... I was the only member of the War Council who dissented from the project; but I. did not. carry my dissent to the point of resignation because I understood that there were overwhelming political reasons why the attempt at least should he made. Ti will he seen that a complete analogy 11 1. 'iv be drawn between the Dardanelles and the Greek compaigns. The military reasons against each venture were overruled by political considerations. On the 7th October. 1916, ten months after Gallipoli had been evacuated, Lord Fisher stated - >Perhaps I may be allowed to say that as regards the opinion I held I was right. I believe that when the full facts of the Greek compaign are published it will be found that they compare remarkably with the facts of the Gallipoli campaign. To illustrate the futility of that campaign I call attention to the following official figures showing our losses on Gallipoli - The British figures include English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh soldiers as well as soldiers from some of the dominions. There is, therefore, historical precedent for any criticism that we may care to offer of the actions of the Prime Minister of Great Britain. I do not deny that **Mr. Churchill** has just claims for recognition for his great qualities. He possesses the remarkable power of being able to rally the people for defensive action. He was placed at the head of the British Government at a time when the exigencies of the times were such that Britain was in a very difficult position following the evacuations from Narvik and Dunkirk. His mastery of the art of the graphic phrase and his capacity to inspire others are undoubted, but, when it comes to taking offensive action against the enemy, I have grave doubt whether he is the right man to be entrusted with the task. We had Antwerp, Gallipoli and Archangel in the last war, and we have had Narvik, Dunkirk, Dakar, Greece and Crete in the present war. I suggest that when the time comes- for the British Army to take the offensive, it will need to be done under another Prime Minister who does not interfere with the High Command to the extent that **Mr. Churchill** does. In the American Civil War, President Lincoln learnt that no president should interfere with grand strategy. It was only when he left the fighting to the men who understood it that the northern forces made headway against the perhaps more ably led troops of. the southern army. The Conran on wealth Cabinet was not entirely happy about the campaign in Greece. The Minister for the Army **(Mr.** Spender) made a stirring defence of the action of the Government. He accepted full responsibility for his attitude, and said that the campaign was justified. He claimed that our army in Greece was fully equipped, but, immediately Greece was evacuated, the Minister for the Navy **(Mr. Hughes),** who is usually absent from debates of this nature, said that the reason why our forces were defeated in Greece was that they were not properly equipped. When the Cabinet asked him to explain what he meant, in order to save it from public obloquy, he apparently consented to issue a new version of his remarks. He said that when he talked of equipment he meant to refer to warships and aircraft. The Australian press, like the press of Great Britain, has had something to say regarding the lessons of Crete, and the observations of the press are in marked contrast to the comparative silence of the Government on the matter. The Melbourne *Age* on the 28th April last stated - >While Britons and Anzacs are writing the last chapter of the Greek epic every London newspaper devotes columns to soul-searching and suggested reforms to ensure that the sacrifice will not be in vain. This widespread demand for industrial, military and diplomatic re-organization and re-orientation reflects the view of the common man and woman whose one desire is to play a vital part in winning the war, which is impossible unless there is more intelligent direction. . . . I ask Ministers what comment they desire to pass regarding that criticism. Are they so apathetic towards public criticism that they think it is not necessary to reply to it, or are they satisfied that the protection afforded to our troops could not be improved upon? The article continues - >The obvious lesson of Poland and Dunkirk was that man-power was pitifully useless against mechanized divisions, but the lesson was only partly understood. Greece has driven it home. Hence the insistent demands for speedier mechanization and trebling of the output of tanks, guns and planes. This Parliament still awaits an assurance that all necessary steps have been taken. Two days after that article appeared, the Acting Prime Minister **(Mr. Fadden)** made the following statement, which was published in the *Sydney Morning Herald* of the 30th April:- >Many of our troops have now left Greece. . . Unfortunately, we cannot hope to avoid casualties and must be prepared for them. The nation will be told the full story as soon as possible. To-day is the 2nd July, and the nation has not yet heard the full story. *[Leave to continue given.)* I have not indulged in carping criticism or personal reflections on anybody charged with the responsibility of directing the affairs of the nation, but I hope that I have offered constructive criticism of one of the most vital happenings in the history of the people of Australia. Apparently, some members think that the sooner we forget about those occurrences the better it will be, but we shall not be able to make the necessary preparations for the defence of Australia by forgetting what has already happened, and a full and open discussion is desirable in order that we may realize the truth. There is a tendency to place some men on pedestals, and think that they are the apotheosis of all the virtues. That is a very dangerous practice, as was well illustrated in the case of the late Prime Minister of Great Britain, **Mr. Neville** Chamberlain. When he returned from Munich, one member of the House of Commons said - >There should he full appreciation of the fact that our leader should go down to history .as the leading statesman of this or any other time. **His** subsequent fate reminds me of Browning's poem : " The Patriot ". The late **Mr. Chamberlain** was cheered in 1938, but he was attacked and driven out of office in 1940. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- Why was he cheered? I thought that the people were misled. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- I join issue with the honorable member, and I think that history will show that whatever may be said against his general policy cannot truly be said, against himself._because he inherited his policy from two previous Prime Ministers who had let the country down. History will certainly deal more kindly and more justly with the Right Honorable Neville Chamberlain than did his contemporaries of Narvik and Dunkirk. To the greatest degree of his ability, he endeavoured to place Great Britain in a state of preparedness from 1938 to 1939. The whole of the evil in regard to the conduct of British diplomatic affairs occurred in the years from 1983 to about 1935. During that period the late Right Honorable Ramsay MacDonald and the present Right Honorable Earl Baldwin were in control of the destinies of Great Britain. I suggest that the people who are cheering **Mr. Churchill** to-day may be attacking him to-morrow. After all, he has had a most picturesque and extraordinary career. I have only to cast my mind back five years to recall that the present Prime Minister was probably the most hated man in English politics, particularly when he was alleged to be attempting to form a King's party to save King Edward VIII. from abdication. If honorable members will reflect, they, too, will recall that he was held in very great disfavour, not only in England, but also in Australia and the rest of the British Commonwealth of Nations. I give to him his due in regard to the qualities he undoubtedly possesses, and the warnings he has sounded from time to time. He was unquestionably right as to the evil of Nazi- ism and the growth and development of the challenge to democracy throughout the world. For a period, on his own side of the House, his was almost a lone voice. But because I believe these things, I am not thereby obliged to trust him implicitly in respect of military ventures in the Middle East, which seem to have for him a fatal fascination. Dealing with the Greek campaign, our own Prime Minister is reported in the Melbourne *Age* to have said - >Debates and recriminations about strategic decisions and technical dispositions, the results of which are still literally being fought out, cannot do good at present. If not now, at what time may this Parliament discuss the whole of our operations in the Middle East? Later, the right honorable gentleman said: - >Although military considerations must always be taken into account because of the measure of hazards to be undertaken, it cannot judge international action in war solely according to military rules. It is a terrible situation if international action is not to be judged according to military rules. If political considerations are able to override military rules, we shall have grave unnecessary sacrifices. This Parliament ought to say very definitely that it does not agree with the Prime Minister's contention in that regard. On the 24th April, the Melbourne *Age* published Lieutenant-General **Sir Thomas** Blarney's Order of the Day issued on the previous Monday, which contained the following sentences: - >The Anzac Corps and attached troops have carried out a magnificent withdrawal. . . . The withdrawal was continually harassed by enemy air bombing along all roads. . . . Our small air force has done well. The responsibility rests on the Government to explain to this Parliament why there was a small land force; and also, why there was not a large air force. From time to time, the press publishes the statement that aircraft production in Australia is rapidly increasing, almost to the point of sufficiency. I have a cutting from the Sydney *Sunday Sun* of the 11th May of this year. I suppose it is perfectly obvious to honorable members by now that I have been saving up a lot of press cuttings for use in this or a similar debate. In that newspaper, under the heading " Australia exports aeroplane engines ", an article was published which stated - >Not only is Australia now producing all the engines of these Tiger Moth training planes that she needs, but she has become a source of supply for other Empire countries. {: .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr Fadden: -- They are training planes, not fighters. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr CALWELL: -- The point is, that we not only are producing all that we need, but also have become a source of supply for other Empire countries. The article proceeded - >Deliveries of engines are now being made to England. This level of production has been reached in eighteen mouths. The Melbourne *Sun Pictorial* of the 5th May published the statement by a correspondent of a Japanese newspaper, that under a Sino-British military pact which was to be signed by the British Ambassador and representatives of General Chiang Kai-shek's Government at Chungking, a number of British officers were to be despatched to China to train and strengthen the Chinese army, and that Britain would also send vast quantities of munitions, including war planes and machine guns, to Chungking. If such newspaper stories are not true, surely the censor should forbid their publication! They give rise to the impression in the minds of the Australian people that there is an ample sufficiency of aeroplanes. If there is only a modicum of truth in the statement, some explanation is due to this Parliament as to why there was only a small air force in Greece. To me, it all sounds terribly pathetic. The London *Times* stated at about this time that " during the ordeal of the retirement, high distinction was won by the Tank Brigade, which formed the main body of the United Kingdom contingent, and the Anzac divisions, which provided most of the infantry ". The London *Daily Mail* stated - >The British Government should understand the grave uneasiness in Britain owing to recent events in the Mediterranean. Germany knew about the Imperial Expeditionary Force when she was still at peace with the Greeks. *Yet* this Parliament was not told on the 3rd April, or at any time from the second week in March, anything about the contemplated venture in Greece, or that Australian troops were then actually in Greece. The article continued. - r.!.he British had yet to learn why they were kept in the dark and why the diplomatic effort was so tardy. . . . It is not that we should have withheld support from Greece, but that our effort, both diplomatic and military, was too feeble and too late. Perhaps the Government may tell us precisely why it was both too feeble and too late. The Treasurer, discussing the evacuation from Greece, was reported by the Melbourne *Sun Pictorial,* of the 25th April, to have said - >Australia has not hitherto faced a position which is fraught with so much danger. In spite of that, this Parliament did not meet until nearly a month after Greece had been, evacuated. I believe that a strong prima facie case has been made out against the Government in connexion with its handling of the whole matter, and that something more than a spirited defence of a certain phase of the criticism by the Minister for the Army is due to this Parliament before it hastens into recess. May I quote, finally, two opinions, the first by the military commentator of the London *Daily Mail,* who, I understand, holds quite a high place in the opinion of competent military circles. It is as follows: - >Our prospects of holding Cyprus are correspondingly greater, provided that methods and means are bettor adjusted to the present tempo of. warfare. We must shake our minds free from the slow -ti me habit of the Great War. The second opinion is from the London *Times,* which, in a leading article, says - >We cannot afford in Cyprus a repetition of events in Crete. It was not general inadequacy of equipment -which lost us Crete, although the equipment may not have been all it ought to have *been.* To almost every observer it appeared from the first that success in the defence of Crete depended to a very large extent upon constant air support. That is a point where criticism deserves an answer, and one essential question is whether, and at what moment, it was known that the defence would have to bo conducted without that support? I hope that before this debate concludes some spokesman of the Government, the Minister for Air, or the Minister for the Navy, or the Prime Minister himself, will give a more detailed and reasoned reply than was given by the Minister for the Army. {: #subdebate-44-1-s5 .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN:
Bendigo -- I had not intended to take part in this debate until I heard the remarks made by some members of the Opposition regarding the campaigns in Greece and Crete, and the advance of the Australians and the British to Benghazi. It is my considered opinion that when General Wa vell took the risk of sending one Australian infantry division and one armoured British division against at least twelve Italian divisions he achieved one of the most brilliant military successes in the history of the war. Honorable members opposite were prepared to bask in the reflected glory of the Australians at that time. They said, "We belong to one of the greatest fighting races in the world. Even we would fight if there were no risk." But when we met reverses, when our men were fighting gallantly against the armoured divisions of Germany, when they were betrayed by the Yugoslavs who gave away the pass that was a vital part of our defence plan, honorable members opposite began to squeal. It was not squealers who made the name of the Australian Imperial Force in the, last war, and it is not squealers who will win this war. There are some members of the Opposition whom I admire. Some of them took their part in the last war, and others have sons righting in this war, but there is a section in the centre1 who are a disgrace to their country. {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- They have not drawn £1,000 a year in excess of their Parliamentary salary for holding down an army job in this country. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- Neither have they served in the military forces of this country for 30 years, nor have they marks on their bodies received when facing an enemy that the honorable member for East Sydney **(Mr. Ward)** would never have the guts to face. The honorable member for East Sydney for even £1,000 would never take the risk that I took one morning at Lone Pine, and I would remind him that I have received less than £360 for my military services in the last year. {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- Will the honorable member tell us about it? {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- It is not necessary. {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- I just thought he might want to do so. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- We have enjoyed the protection of the British Army and the British Navy for 150 years, and to-day, when Britain is pushed into a corner and is fighting for its life, surely we are not going to stand back and allow the British people to fight alone. We have decided to send forces to their assistance, and, having done that, we have no right to interfere. All we have a right to ask is that the men are reasonably well equipped. I know that our forces in North Africa and in Greece were reasonably well equipped as an infantry division. Some people think that an infantry division is armed only with rifles and bayonets. That is not so. It is also powerfully supported by artillery, and is equipped with anti-tank guns and antiaircraft guns, so that it is able to put up a fight even against a Panzer division, but not seven or eight divisions. That is what our men had to face in Greece. We met with reverses there, not because the plan of campaign was wrong, but because the Yugoslavs had been white-anted by Hitler. Instead of fighting the Germans, they fought among themselves, and allowed the Germans to come through the Monastir Gap, thus outflanking the Greeks, and the British, Australian and New Zealand forces. In every war battles have been won by surprise, by superior generalship or by the fighting qualities of the troops, but never by men thousands of miles away talking politics. No battles have been won by political commissars. I wonder whether we are doing the right thing in sending to the Near East a man who is a representative of the War Council. If he is the right man he will be a source of strength, but if he is not the right man, and tries to interfere with the strategy of the commander, he will be a source of weakness and a danger to our men. Every Commanderin'Chief has a QuartermasterGeneral who is responsible for supply. If he does not do the job properly the commander should get rid of him and put some one else in his place. No one will resent ministerial interference with a commander more than the men fighting under him. In the last war I served under General Allenby, probably the greatest commander on the Allied side, not excepting the late General Monash. We would have resented very strongly any interference with General Allenby in the conduct of that campaign just as I am sure that the men on the Western Front would have resented interference with the strategy of Lord Haig or of General Monash. People say that a risk was taken when our troops were sent to Greece because there was no certainty of a victory there. During this debate, the name of " Pompey " Elliott has been mentioned. When " Pompey " Elliott went to VillersBretonneux in 1918 a victory looked impossible, but brilliant generalship, and the wonderful fighting qualities of the Australians who, I believe, constituted the greatest fighting force the world has ever seen, carried them through. Had the troops been an untrained force or had the generalship been poor, the force would have been annihilated. At Beersheba, in Palestine, a risk had to be taken in order to obtain water. The men had travelled 80 miles and had fought all day, but General Allenby said : " I must have Beersheba and its wells by sunset, even if it costs a desert corps ". **Sir Harry** Chauvel launched five squadrons of light horse containing 600 or 700 men against an infantry brigade which was dug in. The Australians should not have advanced to within 500 yards of the enemy, but the attack proved successful. It was a gamble. To-day, that achievement is held up as a great feat of generalship ; but had it failed, the people would have looked for a scapegoat, just as some persons in the community are seeking a scapegoat to-day. Even if only ten men had been left out of the five squadrons, those ten men would have resented criticism and the attempt to find a scapegoat. We believed that the objective was sufficiently great to justify the risk. Similarly, I believe that the objective in Greece and in Crete was great enough to justify the risk. Could we have stayed out of Greece with honour? We had encouraged the Greeks to resist the German advance, and we knew that Greece was a small and poorly armed nation. Yet the Greeks fought a magnificent fight against an army almost ten times their number. The allied troops were exhausted ; they had rough country to traverse with primitive means of transport; but that the Yugoslavs held their positions our men would have had a chance to get back. Had they done so, their achievement would have been attributed to magnificent generalship, just as was the advance to Benghazi. Australians safe at home would have said: "We are a marvellous people; the Australian Imperial Force is unbeatable ". But as soon as our troops are defeated, or suffer a reverse, there are people in the community who squeal. That is not the way to encourage an army to fight. When our men in Palestine and Syria hear that some people in Australia are squealing, they will wonder whether we are worth fighting for - and their questioning would be justified. When the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear)** quotes authorities on tactics he does not quote Napoleon, but some half-baked war correspondent, about 32 years old, who has never fought in his life and has probably never seen army head-quarters. I admit that he writes a good story; indeed, *Grimm's Fairy Tales* are almost as good as his stories. He mentions a fellow named Amati who is the editor of a so-called newspaper in Sydney. In my opinion, he should be growing tomatoes. 1 am informed that he is, in fact, an Italian who is subject to Italian law. He is the man who, when the Australian Imperial Force returned from Crete, said that our men should be withdrawn to India in order to be re-equipped. I suppose he thought that before the German Panzer divisions got over the Himalayas they would be frozen, so that the Australian Imperial Force would have a good win. That is the kind of person whom the honorable member for Dalley regards as an authority on strategy. Should the honorable member for Dalley ever go to war, he will doubtless select such a man as his leader because he will know that such a leader will lead him away from the enemy at such a pace that any one who wants to catch him will need an aeroplane. {:#subdebate-44-2} #### Thursday3, July 1941 The honorable member for Melbourne (Mr.Calwell) had a good deal to say about the late **Mr. Neville** Chamberlain. I dislike making references to a man who is dead, but what I propose to say now I said when **Mr. Chamberlain** was alive. It has been said that were it not for the twelve months' respite obtained by **Mr. Chamberlain,** we should have been in a much worse position to-day. I say that when the British people betrayed Czechoslovakia - and I use that term without hesitation - they gave away 32 of the best regular divisions in Europe, as well as 1,200 aeroplanes, without firing a shot, to say nothing of the Skoda Works, the third largest in Europe, and one of the most efficient in the world. Had those who betrayed Czechoslovakia said to those in control of big industries in Britain : " You must give up your foreign trade, and do everything you possibly can to build up a great army, and equip it thoroughly, because only our maximum effort will enable us to defeat this man Hitler ", we might have been better prepared when war came. They could have said to the people of Czechoslovakia: " We know we let you down, but we could see nothing else for it at the time. However, we shall do our utmost to strengthen our forces in order to help France to defeat Germany, and in time you will regain your liberty and be free." But they did nothing of the kind. They did not attempt a full war effort until France crumpled. It is true that they attempted to capture the boot trade of Czechoslovakia and that country's foreign trade. They did all sorts of things, but they did not attempt to make a full war effort until the defeat at Dunkirk. Hitler was right, although he may have slightly exaggerated the actual position when he said : " Chamberlain claimed that this seven or eight months' delay has given England a chance to defeat us,but for every tank that she has built, I have built four; for every three planes that she has built, I have built five; and while she has produced an army of seven divisions, I have produced an army of seventy ". It is significant that Hitler's boast has never been denied. The person who could convince me that we were in a better position to fight when we went to the assistance of Poland than when Czechoslovakia was betrayed would have to be a greater orator than Alfred Deakin. {: #subdebate-44-2-s0 .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- I believe that. The honorable member for Melbourne said to-night that the Government party was responsible for discontinuing compulsory military training, but he knows that that is not so. The Labour party discontinued compulsory military training, and if this country were attacked by an enemy, the Labour party would have to answer to the people of Australia for its action. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr Forde: -- For eight years, the Lyons Government was in office, but it did not re-establish compulsory military training. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- The Deputy Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Forde)** knows that the Scullin Government not only abolished compulsory training but, also did untold harm to the Defence Department by dismissing many well-trained officers from the Army, Navy and Air Force. Men cannot be trained in a day in military and naval strategy. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr Forde: -- The honorable member refers to happenings of ten years ago. The United Australia party and. the United Country party must answer for the unpreparedness of Australia. When the Labour Government was in office during the depth of the depression, the deficit was considerable and Great Britain advised that a world war was unlikely to occur for at least a decade. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- When the military organization was broken down, it was most difficult to rebuild. The honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan),** who stated that the defence vote should be constantly and substantially reduced, expressed the view of many members of the Labour party. He also asserted that the Germans infringed the neutrality of Norway because a British warship had entered Norwegian territorial waters for the purpose of removing prisoners from the German prison ship *Altmark.* Now he will probably say that Germany invaded Russia only because the British did not send a fleet into the Black Sea for the purpose of preventing them. {: .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr Dedman: -- The honorable member would not attack the honorable member for Batman if he were in his place to answer him. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- I am not afraid to attack the honorable member for Batman or the honorable member for Corio **(Mr. Dedman).** We must stand behind the Australian Imperial Force, and abolish some of the stupid restrictions upon recruiting. Many people who are engaged in reserved occupations, are of no particular value to the country except as members of the community. Although they are playing no outstanding part in the prosecution of the war, they are exempted from military service. During the last war my regiment, only 260 instead of 580 strong, was ordered to undertake a task that would normally have been allotted to a full regiment. The present members of the Australian Imperial Force will be required to perform similar feats if they are not adequately reinforced. When we occupied positions on hillsides near Jerusalem, wearing clothes which, suited to desert warfare, gave us no protection from the rain and snow, we received word that the waterside workers in Sydney had refused to load our Christmas mail and parcels. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: -- That statement is not correct. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- The facts speak for themselves. They are unanswerable. Our trooDS did not receive their Christmas mail parcels. Personally, I do not believe in conscription. During the last war I did not vote for it, and specific reasons have prompted me to adopt this attitude. For example, a general in battle will take the best weapon that comes to his hand and will use it again and again. If Australia had four divisions in the field with an unlimited supply of reinforcements, they would be employed repeatedly and this country would be "bled white". That statement will not be popular with many people. Some branches of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League of Australia disagree with it. The day may come when in despair we shall be forced to make that decision as our last hope. But I believe that 500,000 men will volunteer to serve in the armed forces of the Commonwealth, provided we treat them properly. That number is the most that, in my opinion, Australia as a nation can afford to put into the field and take its share of the losses. I yield place to no one in my loyalty to the British Empire. I recognize that Australia must accept its share of responsibility and risk just as it accepts its share of the benefits of membership of the Empire. When the Prime Minister returned to Australia he had a wonderful opportunity to gain the support of all sections of the community. Had he declared that the Government would assume control of all concerns engaged in the production of munitions and armaments, including the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited and Imperial Chemical Industries of Australia and New Zealand Limited, the public would have acclaimed him. The terms under which they should be operated by the Government should include the payment of interest at the same rate as war loans bear, and the presentmanagerial staffs should continue to exercise control. If they were not prepared to work under those conditions, the leaders, together with such men as **Mr. Thompson,** Secretary of the Victorian Builders' Union, **Mr. Neilson,** and a few other union secretaries who are causing trouble, should be put in a barbed wire enclosure. Ultimately the Government must adopt that policy. Our boys who are fighting for their lives overseas expect us to do so. If we hesitate, we shall let them down. A commander-in-chief should be appointed to co-ordinate defence throughout the country. He should be capable of building up a staff to function in the field. If that appointment be not made, I recommend the Government to read the book entitled *Guilty Men.* When an invader has attacked our shores it is too late to attempt to co-ordinate the defences. Successful resistance is impossible unless we make one man solely responsible for the job and appoint a staff to work under his direction. {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- Whom has the honorable member in mind for the position? {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- Whilst I shall not mention names, I consider that two or three men are capable of performing the duties. One of them is an outstanding soldier. {: .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr Drakeford: -- Do not create interstate jealousy. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- There is no argument between Victoria and Queensland. It is the responsibility of every honorable member in this House to see that when our men return from the war they get a fair deal. It is our responsibility to see that they get preference in employment. Members of the Labour party opposed the granting of preference to returned soldiers during the last war. Honorable members opposite will have to change their tune this time or members of the 1st Australian Imperial Force and those who are fortunate enough to return from this war will change it for them. {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- Will there not be plenty for every body under the new order? {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- To-day we should be looking for opportunities to commence great national works. Prisoners of war should be employed on water conservation schemes, the standardization of our railway gaugesand the irrigation of the Mallee and other marginal areas in Australia. {: .speaker-JVA} ##### Mr Morgan: -- No money is available for those projects. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- We have unlimited supplies of cement and sand for the erection of concrete barrages for water conservation. Every prisoner of war in this country should be made to work just as many of our young men are being made to work in Italy and Germany today. I have been informed by an engineer of good repute that the Waranga, Mallee and Lake Lonsdale schemes would provide sufficient water to give a stock and domestic supply and to irrigate ten acres on every farm in tlie Mallee. The honorable member for Wimmera **(Mr. Wilson)** has said that if the Mallee country were irrigated it would be worth living in. Those who took up blocks in that area after the last war do not find it worth living in today. Never again should returned soldier settlements be established in undeveloped areas. The people in the big cities will have to change their selfish outlook. A fairly large proportion of our heavy industries will have to be established outside of Melbourne and Sydney. We must have a second line of defence. No general in the world to-day could hope to hold an enemy with but a single line of defence. Shadow factories should be established at Broken Hill, Mildura, and in the west of Queensland because, if the British Navy were defeated and this country were attacked, the heavy industries established on the coast might >e wiped out -in a few days. {: .speaker-JVA} ##### Mr Morgan: -- How would the honorable member finance these schemes? {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr RANKIN: -- I suggest that the honorable member might finance it by bringing in refugees at so much a head ! We have a job to do ; we should get on with it. We have fighting for us some of the most gallant young men the world has ever seen. I saw our troops in action during the last war and I know something of the valour and worth of the Australian soldier. We should be proud to belong to the race from which they sprang. Regardless of party or creed we should stand behind the men of the Australian Imperial Force until they achieve the victory which their magnificent courage should assist to secure. *Sitting suspended from 18.30 to 12.50 a.m.* {: #subdebate-44-2-s1 .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS:
Herbert -- I have met in the last ten days some of the men who have returned wounded from the battle of Greece. Their regret ia not that they were there, but that they cannot be back there in order to be, as they say, in at the kill. They concede that they were equipped, that is that they were equipped with rifles and bayonets, but declare that rifles and bayonets were not sufficient to counter the mechanized forces of the enemy, whom they described as " Jerry ". What they have said bears out the contention that the campaign is Greece was waged by us with equipment that is inferior, judged by modern standards of warfare. Ever since 1937, this party has been advocating a policy under which our armies would have been equipped, and anything said by the honorable member for Deakin **(Mr. Hutchinson)** to the effect that the Labour party has to accept its share of the responsibility cuts no ice. In 1937, when the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** put forward Labour's defence policy, Ministers jeered that they were satisfied that he was sincere in what he was saying, but that he was not acquainted with the facts. The then Minister for Defence **(Mr. Thorby)** told u3, as we were told by British Ministers, that we had nothing to be afraid of and that we were well equipped. As a matter of fact, he gave us to understand that we were better equipped then than we are now. If notice had been taken of the Labour party's contentions at that time, a different story might have been told to-day. The honorable member for Bendigo **(Mr. Rankin)** accused the Yugoslavs of twisting or slipping out on us. The Yugoslavs had no chance of doing any more than they did. That is true of the Rumanians also. Had they resisted, the Germans would have cut through their countries like a knife through cheese. It is easy to fight when there is equality, but not when the odds are heavily against you. The men who have returned from Greece are not telling fancy stories or crying because they were sent to Greece when they say that they had no chance against the Germans because they had no equipment. The Minister for the Army **(Mr. Spender)** said to-night that the men would not have been sent into battle without equipment. No doubt, he said that in good faith, but it would have been better for Greece if there had been no battle there. At least, the country would have been kept intact, and many thousands of lives saved. We are entitled to make that- statement when we are told what happened. The honorable member for Bendigo accused the Labour party of squealing. I have relatives fighting abroad. Some of my relatives lost their lives abroad in the last war. Thousands of families which mourned losses in the last war are mourning fresh losses in this war, and in fairness to them the story should be told officially. They should not have to obtain it second-hand from returned soldiers, as I have had to obtain it. These men are telling every body why they were defeated. They were defeated, not altogether hecause of aerial assault, although they admit that the Luftwaffe was a terrific weapon against them, but because they had no equality of equipment. It may be, as the Minister for the Army contends, that as an infantry division, our troops were well equipped, but the Germans have not kept secret the strength of their mechanized forces. On the contrary, they have abundantly proved to us that they have been able to go through countries with the utmost ease. The value of their subversive tactics is admitted, but the fact remains that the German war machine is well organized and greased. {: .speaker-JNM} ##### Mr Badman: -- "Will the honorable member tell us how the Germans are to be stopped. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- There is need for a good deal less talk about the things that have been done and for more activity to get other things that we ought to have. In 1937, the honorable member among others in this House did not support the suggestion made by the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin).** {: .speaker-JNM} ##### Mr Badman: -- When the honorable member voted against the Defence Bill. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- I hurl that interjection back in the honorable gentleman's teeth. I did not vote against the Defence Bill. I am as loyal as he is. I should be sorry to descend low enough to say to the honorable member such a thing as he has just said to me. The honorable member well deserves the name bestowed on his forbears. {: #subdebate-44-2-s2 .speaker-JVR} ##### Mr SPEAKER (Hon W M Nairn: --Order ! {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- If I am not protected against vile insinuations, I shall hit back. I have not voted against any defence bill, but I have not been favorable to some of the things done. In 1937, the Leader of the Opposition stressed the need for a strong air arm with a complete ground organization, and he said that we did not need outside, experts to tell us what to do, and that there were many in each of our own services who could advise the Government much more effectively than outsiders, because of their knowledge of the peculiar conditions of this country. I believe that we have in our forces men who are equally as expert as any men in the defence services of other countries. We do not need to bring men from outside to train us. We were not at war when the Labour party made its suggestion, and if it had been adopted by the Government, we would have had to take an equal share of the responsibility for the expenditure of money on things which were not then needed. I remember that at that time, the honorable member for Barker **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** agreed with the Leader of the Opposition that aeroplanes would play an important part in the next war, whenever it came, in reconnaissance work. Even now the honorable member does not believe that the aeroplane is the valuable fighting machine that it is believed to be by military men overseas. Those men can tell us that the Royal Air Force has done a wonderf ul job of work, better than the job done by any other of our fighting forces. I want to see this country able to defend itself. It is not in the position of being able to do so to-day. Munitions and aircraft are being exported. We are told that the aircraft are merely training planes - Wirraways. So far as I know, we have not one modern bomber in. Australia. {: .speaker-JNM} ##### Mr Badman: -- Do not make that mistake. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- Well, we have made a few planes. The honorable member, as a supporter of the Government, may have some inside information on this matter which the Government will not give to the Opposition. But we have no ground organization worth speaking of. Even if we had the tanks, which we are talking of manufacturing, we have not the roads to facilitate their movement. I suppose that the honorable member will tell me that we are building plenty of tanks in this country. Seven years ago the Labour party emphasized the necessity for establishing a strong air arm. We also contended that efficient tank forces should be established, and that reserves of oil- should be stored, not in white tanks on the seaboard presenting easy targets to a possible invader, but in places where they would be readily accessible but beyond the reach of an attacker. At this time of day, we should have a transport system capable of transporting large bodies of troops together with their equipment from point to point in the shortest possible time. But what is the position? We have one pair of rails running in three gauges from Cairns to Perth. If an invading force were to land in Western Australia to-morrow, we should find it a physical impossibility to transport sufficient numbers of men to that State to resist the attacker. The plain fact is that we have not sufficient rolling stock to transfer large bodies of troops and equipment expeditiously from point to point. When several honorable members of this House desired to participate in a by-election in Western Australia we were informed by the Commonwealth Commissioner for Railways that we would not be able to secure berths for our return journey until the end of- January, because all railway accommodation had been fully booked up to that date. We should have the one gauge throughout our entire railway system, and, in addition, a network of first-class roads. But, the suggestion made by the Premier of Queensland some time ago that a strategic road be constructed through the west of Queensland to Darwin, was laughed to scorn. In answer to questions I have asked in this House, I have been informed that the Commonwealth is co-operating fully with the State authorities in the manufacture of munitions. We find, however, that many small engineering and machine shops have not been co-opted in the production of war materials which the Government says we must have as quickly as possible. In this crisis we cannot afford to concern ourselves with the point as to whether this or that industry should, or should not, be carried on. Our sole objective must be the utilization of the services of every man who is capable of making some contribution, however small, in the production of war material. In many of these small works for which no place has yet been found in the war programme, men just as capable as any to be found in many big factories and engineering establishments are available. We hear a lot of talk about the decentralization of industry ; but no real attempt has yet been made to give effect to that policy. Surely this Government can do something to utilize the services of the thousands of men, who are anxious and willing to participate in our war effort, but who, to-day, are taking no part in that work. I have received letters from owners of small workshops in my electorate stating that their offers to do work for the Government have been rejected because of the cos* of transporting any material which they manufacture. If the Government handled this matter determinedly, the cost of transport would not be regarded as an obstacle to the utilization of these workshops. If need be, we can transport material from one end of Australia to the other irrespective of cost. Iron ore is carried from South Australia to the eastern States, and copper from Cloncurry to the southern States. Neither does the high cost of transport constitute an obstacle to the carriage of rum and sugar from northern Queensland to the southern States. Some time ago the managements of various s>ugar-mills in northern Queensland offered to place their machine shops at the service of the Commonwealth Government. Those shops contain some of the' finest machinery in this country. Departmental experts have said that it could be used in the production of certain war material. Nevertheless these offers have been rejected on the ground that the mills could not continue producing war material the whole year round. Some of these mills are idle for seven months and others for eight months of the year. Surely in those periods they could make a valuable contribution to our war effort. But those mills are not now utilized in that way. I do not subscribe to the opinion that the men whom the Government has placed in charge of our war industries are doing that work purely from patriotic motives. All of them hold seats on the directorates of big companies. I believe that they are sabotaging our war effort, insofar as they are prepared to hold up contracts until such time as the companies with which they are affiliated are able to take them in addition to those which they are already carrying out. The big monopolies have not made the services of those men available to the Commonwealth from purely patriotic motives. They are paying those men to look after their interests in the spheres in which they now exercise such powerful sway. I am not so foolish as to believe that these industrial leaders are performing this work for nothing. The Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies),** in the course of a speech in this House, told us what he proposed to do in order to discipline the trade unions; but he had nothing to say about disciplining the buccaneering monopolies. The honorable member for Bendigo **(Mr. Rankin)** declared that honorable members on this side knew that the waterside workers refused to load consignments of supplies and equipment for our soldiers overseas during the last war. The trouble to which the honorable member referred arose because the waterside workers believed that, certain flour which they were asked to load would find its way to Germany. They did not know that the flour was being despatched by the Red Cross Society. Indeed, the Waterside Workers Federation promised to load that flour free of cost if it could be shown that the Red Cross Society was the consignor. Consequently, the allegation made by the honorable member is entirely false. I know that the waterside workers refused to load scrap iron because it was consigned to Japan; and they were condemned by this Parliament for their action. At that time the Melbourne *Age* stated that the waterside workers were justified in. going on strike in normal circumstances, but not when the country was at war. But the right of the employers and exploiters of labour to shut down their works at any time was not questioned by that newspaper. {: .speaker-K2A} ##### Mr Rankin: -- Will the honorable member deny that one of the leaders of the waterside workers in Sydney characterized members of the Australian Imperial Force as " six hob a day murderers "? {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- I know that one alleged leader of the Seamen's Union, whom a government politically akin to this Government attempted to deport from this country, is to-day a bosom friend of honorable members opposite. I know something about the industrial movement. I also know that some honorable members opposite have said harder things about the Labour party and its supporters than the individual mentioned by the honorable member for Bendigo is alleged to have said about our soldiers. If the statement was made that our soldiers are " six bob a day murderers " it was entirely stupid. The Government is not doing all that could be done to stimulate our war activity nor it is being so well advised as it could be. It has too many experts on the job, and not enough men who really know their work. I have said on a previous occasion, and I repeat now, that I do not believe in this expert fetish. I believe in putting a man to a job that he knows. I do not believe that politicians should attempt to organize armies. If a person who knows nothing about armies happens to be in a position of authority in the Government he should be prepared to leave the marshalling of our forces to the men who have given years of study to the work. Politicians should stick to their job and the generals should stick to theirs. The Gallipoli campaign was a politicians' holiday at the expense of the working classes of this country. It was stupidly conceived and stupidly executed. I remember that **Sir Ian** Hamilton, a wise soldier, expressed in unmeasured terms his views of that illfated campaign, when he told the politicians that they had no right to intervene. A politician has no right, in my opinion, to place a soldier in supreme charge of an army and then tell him how to do his job. If he is capable he should be left to do his own work. There can be no doubt in the mind of any honorable member that if our soldiers in Greece and Crete had been equipped properly they could have beaten off the attacks by the Germans, and I believe that they would have done so. {: #subdebate-44-2-s3 .speaker-KFW} ##### Mr GUY:
Wilmot .- I believe that an overwhelming majority of the people of Australia consider that too much of the time of Parliament is being occupied by parochial and comparatively unimportant matters. Local affairs should be dealt with in local centres. Many of the matters discussed in this House could be dealt with more efficiently and expeditiously if honorable members would bring them directly to the notice of the Ministers concerned. The time of the national parliament should be devoted to matters of national importance. It will be universally agreed, I believe, that in this war, time is of the essence of the contract. "We have no time to lose in organizing a 100 per cent, war effort in this country. Our people are demanding more action and less talk. Consequently, I shall not detain honorable members for very long in speaking on this motion. The latest war news of the invasion of Russia by Germany and of the apparent success of the German armies makes it more imperative than ever that we should apply ourselves completely to the desired 100 per cent, war effort. The defences of a nation are only as strong as their weakest link. The weakest link in the defences of the Commonwealth is undoubtedly the island State of Tasmania. It has been declared repeatedly by people qualified to express an opinion that Tasmania would afford an excellent base for operations by an invading army. I am not qualified to express an opinion on the accuracy of such a view, and the members of the Government are, no doubt, in a better position than private members of the Parliament to say whether Tasmania is in a position to defend itself; but it appears to me that to a serious degree Tasmania is vulnerable from the sea and the air. To the best of my knowledge, we have only a couple of guns on the island, apart from the warlike relics of the last war that are to be seen outside of council chambers and other public buildings in many country towns. I suggest that those obsolete weapons could be used to advantage as scrap metal. It has been stated that a foreign power could take Tasmania practically without firing a shot. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- Does the honorable member consider that he should give such information to the enemy? {: .speaker-KFW} ##### Mr GUY: -- I shall offer no objection to the elimination of my remarks from *Hansard,* but I think that the information that I am placing before honorable members should receive their serious attention. Such important works in Tasmania as the electrolytic zinc enterprise, the copper-mines and the textile mills, which are engaged in work of national importance, could quickly be put out of action by an invader. "Worse still, an invader might take over these enterprises in order to produce materials for use in fighting against our own kith and kin. I therefore urge the Commonwealth Government to give serious attention to the provision of adequate defence measures for Tasmania. I am aware that in these matters the Government must be largely guided by its experts, but I request that the views I am expressing be brought to the notice of the experts without delay. I understand that attempts are being made to decentralize our munition factories, and I urge that considerably more money should be expended on munition works in Tasmania, for that State is an integral part of the Commonwealth and its resources could be used to far better advantage than at present. Tasmania is also entitled to a bigger share of the Commonwealth defence expenditure. In the present exceedingly grave and perilous position of the British Empire, it is highly desirable that the members of this Parliament should think nationally and abandon, for the duration of the war, at any rate, all idea of party manoeuvring. Our job is to make our full contribution towards ensuring the security of the British Empire. These desperate times demand action, not talk. If we are to achieve a 100 per cent, war effort, we must show ourselves, both inside and outside of this Parliament, to be united. We need an Australian WaT Cabinet. I emphasize that it should be " Australian ". It should have at its service the best brains, not only of this Parliament, but also of the whole community. For my part, I would co-opt the services of men with special qualifications in relation to our war effort, whether they be members of the Parliament or not. During the war, party politics should be taboo. Our main and, in fact, our only business should be to take our full part in the winning of the war. I am afraid we may be threatened with the spectacle of attempts to make political capital out of war decisions ; but I suggest that this is no time for post mortems regarding such matters, because, in any case, it will be impossible to pass accurate judgment upon those decisions until after the war. I remind honorable members of the following words of the Prime Minister of Great Britain, **Mr. Churchill:-** >The battle of Crete is only one part of a very important and complicated campaign which is being fought in the Middle East, and to select one particular sector of our widely extended front for parliamentary debate is a partial, lop-sided and misleading method of examining our conduct of the war. > >The vast scene can only be surveyed as a whole, and it ought not be exposed and debated piecemeal, especially at a time when operations which are related to one another are wholly incomplete. It is regrettable that, despite our deadly peril, the will persists to talk instead of to act. I agree with the sentiments expressed by the honorable member for Barton **(Dr. Evatt),** who stated quite recently - >While our soldiers are in such peril abroad those who are not prepared to help the nation to defend its integrity, deserve no consideration from the nation, The selfish notion of individual security must be abandoned and the higher and nobler principles of national and world security accepted. I believe that an overwhelming majority of the people of Australia subscribe to those sentiments. We must put aside party politics, personal ambitions and suspicions, and unite in the service of our country. Some people will say that the burdens imposed on the community to-day are harsh, but I remind them that our own kith and kin on the war fronts are carrying much heavier burdens than ours and are not complaining. The people of Britain, too, are suffering great hardships without a murmur. We all are called upon to make sacrifices, and I believe that the people are prepared for them and expect to make them. Unity is necessary if we are to have a 100 per cent war effort. The Prime Minister's recent speech provides the foundation for political, commercial and industrial unity in Australia, and if, and when, implemented, will give a definite lead to the people. Its implementation rests with the members of this Parliament. The people of Australia demand a strong and virile leadership, and the immediate mobilization of our national resources for war, as well as ruthless action against all subversive elements that may hold up important industries or reduce the rate of war production. The people of Australia are ready for rigorous discipline and heavy sacrifices. They crave leadership that will fit them into a war machine as ruthless as that which threatens us with annihilation. In the words of **Mr. Churchill,** I would say, "Let us go to it while we still have time". {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- I rise to a matter of privilege. I have just been advised that all references in the press to the debate this evening, and all remarks made by the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley),** the honorable member for Dalley (Mr.Rosevear), the honorable member for Bendigo **(Mr. Rankin),** and myself have been censored. I should like to move that the Government be requested to lift the censorship on this debate. It seems that some people outside this House have acted unfairly in doing what they have done, and that the Government should see that a fair and accurate report Of this debate is published in the press. {: .speaker-K6Q} ##### Mr Bernard Corser: -- *Hansard* will provide that. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- The people are entitled to know what takes place in this Parliament. Such a ruthless censorship was not exercised with regard to speeches made in the British Parliament. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- It would be absurd to say that the enemy does not know the facts that the debate to-night has revealed. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- The honorable member's speech may also he censored. {: .speaker-A48} ##### Mr Chifley: -- Some of the remarks that have been made ought to be censored. {: .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: -- The whole of the speech made by the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley),** who is not here to defend himself, has been excised from the press, and I think that the Treasurer should intervene. Mr.Fadden. - The statement by the honorable member for Melbourne **(Mr.** Calwell) conveys news to me. I took certain steps following my remarks in connexion with a statement by the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear).** I brought that statement under your notice, **Mr. Speaker,** and also took action to see that it was deleted from the press, but that action applied only to that specific statement, as far as I am concerned, and not to the general debate. I shall be very surprised if the censorship has been applied to the debate as a whole, and, particularly, to the remarks of the honorable member for "West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley).** I shall make inquiries regarding the matter when I am able to leave the chamber in order to do so. {: #subdebate-44-2-s4 .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr DRAKEFORD:
Maribyrnong -- I agree that it would be unfair to censor the speeches of members because they criticize the conduct of the war. I hope that the censorship will be lifted. We ought to be able to speak freely. I agree that it might be inadvisable to publish some specific part of any speech, because it might be of benefit to the enemy. I have had to wait a very long time in order to get this opportunity to make my speech on the Prime Minister's statement, but I support the view that censorship of this character is unwarranted. The Prime Minister's statement on his mission abroad has afforded to honorable members of this House an opportunity to express their views in respect of war policy. I appreciate the preparedness of the Government to make that opportunity available. I believe that the criticism offered to-day may be of considerable benefit to the Government and the country. In my view, the Government has failed, in the twenty months that has elapsed since the war began, to have the administrative machinery working properly. This must have caused a good deal of dissatisfaction among its own supporters, as well as among honorable members of the Opposition. It has had every opportunity to put into operation any policy it favoured, but it seems merely to have spent a good deal of time in reconstructing the Ministry. Let us hope that the recently-made additions to the Ministry will infuse vigour into its administration. I listened with keen interest to the speech of the honorable member for Bendigo **(Mr. Rankin),** which seemed to be a curious mixture of advanced democratic views and sympathy with certain phases of totalitarianism. The honorable member offered piebald support of the existing state of affairs, for which the Government stands, and criticism of its followers; with the latter part, honorable members on this side of the House can agree. On the other hand, he made certain allegations, which in some degrees have been dealt withby the honorable member for Herbert **(Mr. Martens).** I merely emphasize that, it is entirely wrong for honorable members opposite to cast aspersions on those who are associated with the trade union movement, when they know that it is absolutely essential for the Government to have trade union support in order vigorously to prosecute the war. During the period of the last war, many accusations of this kind were made which were without proper foundation and were used for purely party political purposes. The allegation that the wharf labourers prevented material from being despatched to our men who were fighting overseas was entirely unwarranted, and I regret that it was made. When the honorable member for Herbert placed the facts before the honorable member for Bendigo, he did not accept them and express regret for the misstatements he had made. If charges of that kind are bandied about in this House, the workers, who are called upon to make a maximum war effort, will be considerably discouraged. I agree, however, with that part of the speech of the honorable member for Bendigo, which states that this Government, is dominated by outside private interests. There is not a shadow of doubt about that. As a matter of actual fact, the honorable member " stole some thunder " from members of the Opposition. I have recently had opportunities to investigate matters of this kind, and have found that the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited exercises tremendous influence on the war effort. I am not saying that that influence is always adverse; but in the very nature of the capitalistic organization this company, which is a vast monopoly, cannot help doing things which are in its own interests and not necessarily in the interests of the nation. Let ns consider one cause for criticism. It was suggested that certain railway workshops were charged with not keeping up to the mark with respect to production. When it became possible ro investigate the position it was found that there was no lack of effort mi the part of the Department as of the trained men, of whom there is a large number, but that there wa3 a shortage of the supply of billet steel, tor which the Brokn Hill Proprietary Company Limited, as the manufacturer nf the basic material was responsible. For a considerable time these workshops produced the shells of the kind that were most needed. They were asked to change from one kind of shell-making to another, and had to alter substantially the tooling of their equipment. Having done so, they found that they were not being supplied with the quantity of raw material which would enable them to maintain their output. It was entirely wrong, as most honorable members on both sides of the House would agree if they were acquainted with the facts, to charge this Government institution with inability to maintain its proper share of production, in comparison with outside industries. The Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited, Australian Consolidated Industries, the Colonial Sugar Refining Company Limited, Imperial Chemical Industries Limited, and the newspaper combine, exercise, in my view, too great an influence on the policy of this Government to enable satisfactory progress to be made towards a maximum war effort. When the change-over to a munition of a more modern kind was required, the only people capable of producing the requisite materials to enable that to be done were not able to come up to the scratch. I suppose it must be admitted that in wartime some difficulties are bound to arise, whatever government may be in power. I have no wish to pretend that if the Labour party were given the responsibility of government, hitches would not occur. What I complain of mostly is that full advantage was not taken of the opportunities the Government has had to achieve maximum production. What has it done towards providing an alternative supply of iron or steel in the event of the works of the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited at Newcastle and Port Kembla being damaged by enemy action? That is quite possible and if it happened we should be left without any source of supply. Another source of suitable iron and steel supplies which could bc utilized for tool-making has been suggested to the Munitions Department. If existing works were successfully attacked and damaged, Australia would be short or iron and steel for tool-making; yet at very small cost, alternative supplies could be provided in other places, although not in very great quantity. When we have evidence that that is not being done, there are grounds for criticism. It has frequently been stated that Victoria has virtually been given a monopoly of the manufacture of munitions. Investigation has shown that that i3 not the case. In consequence of the head-quarters of munitions production being in Victoria, and that State being more highly developed industrially than other States, it was able to meet the sudden demands of war. Any failure to obtain orders by the neighbouring State of New South Wales was due to the lack of organization of the people concerned rather than to any desire to prevent them from engaging in production. That has been proved quite conclusively. I sincerely trust that the Government will follow the policy of decentralization, which has been advocated from this side of the House for the last four or five years and was never attempted until the war began. As the honorable member for Maribyrnong, I have stressed the undesirability of having the whole of the explosives, ordnance and munition factories concentrated in the few square miles in which they are now located, yet not until the war began did the Government make any move in the direction of decentralization. It should have been spread over all States as widely as possible. In the policy that the Leader of our party placed before the people in the election campaign of 1937, and on different occasions from this side of the House, views have been presentedwhich might very well have been acted on with advantage to the whole of the people of Australia. Charcoal furnaces could be established at places such as Nowa Nowa for the production of tool steel, and blast-furnaces could be erected well away from the coast for the production of pig-iron needed in the manufacture of munitions. The lignite coal deposits could be used for war purposes. We cannot get enough aluminium in Australia for the manufacture of aeroplanes. The production of aluminium is in the hands of a world combine. Of the total amount of 531,000 tons produced annually in 1938, the year before the war, 165,000 tons were produced in Germany. Now the Commonwealth Government is negotiating with the aluminium trust, and it appears likely that that combine will soon have a grip on Australia. If the Government allows that to happen, it will earn the condemnation of every citizen. We have aluminium deposits in Australia, and we should work them ourselves with local capital and technical skill and labour. Although it is 22 months since the outbreak of war, no attempt has yet been made to produce tanks in Australia. We have talked about manufacturing them, but nothing has been done. I recognize that there have been changes of design, and that the engine units have been altered in the light of war experience gained. But the job has not yet been tackled. {: .speaker-KUW} ##### Mr Stacey: -- It is not correct to say that no tanks have been manufactured in Australia. {: .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr Dedman: -- The honorable member is thinking of Bren gun carriers. {: .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr DRAKEFORD: -- Some people mistake Bren gun carriers for tanks, but they are not the same. So far as I know, we have not even attempted to build tanks here, yet there is no reason why they could not be made in the railway workshops of Victoria and New South Wales, where the heavy machinery necessary for their manufacture exists. They are eminently suitable for such a task and it is doubtful if any establishment other than railway workshops are ready to undertake the manufacture or could do it. It is necessary that our troops should be equipped with the best material it is possible to procure, and a government which fails to ensure that they are provided with such equipment is failing in its duty. We may have to meet an attack at any time - perhaps sooner than many people think - and the Government should take advantage of every opportunity to equip our forces adequately. It appears that this Government will be famous in history for the things it has not been able to get done. This applies to small things as well as the great. In February, I was interested with an application by a shire council in my electorate to borrow £10,400, and from the Treasurer an acknowledgment of a letter which I wrote was received. I wrote again some time later, and received a reply from **Dr. Roland** Wilson, in another department, advising that certain procedure should be followed. As a matter of fact, the Council had followed that procedure. I found it necessary to make a public statement regarding the delay, and when I was in Adelaide, I received a telegram stating that the matter had been referred to the CoordinatorGeneral of Works. I have since made further inquiries, and this is the reply which I received in this House - > *Re* Braybrook Shire Council. - Applica tion for Authority to Borrow £10,400 for Street Construction. > >The Commonwealth Actuary wrote to the State Treasurer, Melbourne, on 6th May re this matter. He rang him on the 14th May, and was informed that it had been submitted to the Co-ordinator-General of Works. > >No further information has yet come to hand. The council wanted to borrow the money for the purpose of building roads in an area where it was proposed to erect houses for munition workers. That was known to the authorities, but although the application has been under consideration since February, or early in March, no decision has yet been given. That is typical of much of what goes on in Government Departments. I regret having to say these things, because I have a high regard for the Treasurer **(Mr. Fadden).** {: .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr Fadden: -- Surely I am not to blame for it. {: .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr DRAKEFORD: -- His officers should be able to discover what is blocking it. Many munition workers in that district are unable to obtain houses, and are paying as much as £2 a week for board, and yet authority cannot be obtained to borrow money to make land available to build houses. Another cause of dissatisfaction is the influence which some of the big companies are exerting in the management of the munition factories. Skilled technical officers, with many years' experience, are being superseded by men from outside firms. One officer, who was treated in this way, possesses the following qualifications : - >Technical training - {:#subdebate-44-3} #### Adelaide School of Mines {:#subdebate-44-4} #### Birmingham Technical School {:#subdebate-44-5} #### Morton Technical School, United States of America {:#subdebate-44-6} #### Diploma, American Society Engineering. Experience - Apprentice five years engineering Forward, Down and Company, Adelaide. Toolmaker, three years, aero engines, 4c, Vickers Limited, Birmingham, England. Senior Instructor, engineering one year, Education Department, South Australia. Principal Trade School, two years, Education Department, South Australia. Toolmaker, tool designer, foreman, six years, various firms, including Chrysler, William Brothers Aircraft, American Tool Company, United States of America. Enthusiastic co-operation cannot be expected when competent men who have grown up in industries which produce munitions are superseded by men from other firms at higher salaries. This action in bringing outsiders in must result in numbers of men seeking employment elsewhere at higher rates of pay, and their skill and experience will be lost to the Government factories. The man to whom I refer did not leave, and he is still on the same salary as before the war, excepting for a small war-time allowance. The men who have come in from outside are paid more than he receives. I could say a great deal concerning his qualifications, but shall, owing to lack of time, content myself by stating that he was employed in the welding shop in which was produced the first * all-welded " armoured cars manufactured in any part of the world. He also had experience in the sheet-metal shop in the manufacture of all types of light metal components. He was also employed in the plate section in the fabrication of steel plates, such as are used for gun mountings, armoured cars, 9-ton box girder bridges, travelling platforms for guns, large furnaces, &c. He receives a salary of £546 a year, plus a war allowance of £30 and £4 cost-of-living allowance. He has had no rise of status since March, 1938, whereas the two men who were brought in over his head are on a salary range of £636-£708 and are classed as senior engineers. According to the Public Service Arbitrator's award - " Senior engineer " means an employee who, under the general direction of the manager and assistant manager, supervises and directs the work of a section or sections, and, in addition, carries out such duties of a special or advisory nature as, in the opinion of the Munitions Supply Board, involve more responsibility than those of Grade 2 engineer; and who may be charged with the supervision of Grade 1 and/or Grade 2 engineers. For a man who is engaged in supervising the production of work of a value of approximately £1,000,000 a year, the salary paid to him is a poor reward, particularly as he is expected to instruct the men who are now to supersede him. These are things which affect our war effort. I say nothing against the men who are being brought in from outside; they may be clever men possessing high qualifications. I understand that one of them is being brought in from Knox Schlapp and Company and the other from Powell Gas Producers Company, both of Sydney. I agree that, under our system, it may be necessary to bring some men from outside in order to get the co-operation of other industries, but that should not be used as an excuse for superseding capable and experienced men by those brought in from outside business firms. I join with the honorable member for Macquarie **(Mr. Chifley)** in paying tribute to the public servants employed in producing munitions. Among them are splendid men such as **Mr. Brodribb** and **Mr. Jensen.** At the outbreak of war, the Government should have taken over the whole of the works necessary for the production of munitions, and nationalized them. In my district there is a deficiency of transport for munition workers; but in South Australia, where new factories are being erected, the railway is being extended to the factories. There should be no difficulty in doing the same at Maribyrnong. If rail transport to and from the works were provided, hundreds of thousands of gallons of petrol could be saved in freighting materials as well as providing better transport facilities for the shift workers. I feel very strongly on this subject. These matters have been brought to the notice of the Government; not only by me, but also by various unions to which the men belong, so that the Government cannot say that it has no knowledge of the subject. I do not wish to make it appear that the Government has not done anything. In some directions, as in South Australia, it has done a good job, and has made proper provision for transport. I submit that what has been done in South Australia can be done elsewhere. Investigation has shown that, whilst it may be difficult to hand over certain work to small garages, other work could be undertaken by them for assembling later at central depots. Unless something of this kind be done, our country districts will be denuded of their population, and it will be difficult to get the people hack again. Already men are coming in considerable numbers from Tasmania and Western Australia, to South Australia and Victoria. A government with a nationwide outlook would have foreseen that turn of events long ago, and would have taken steps to prevent, or at least minimize, it. Unless the reconstituted Cabinet tackles these several problems vigorously, I shall refer to them, and also to other matters on other occasions. I ask the Treasurer to give his attention to the matters which I have raised. To return for a moment to the case of the expert officer being superseded by men from outside firms. Men under him in less responsible positions of authority receive more money than he does. They are paid overtime, while he does not receive it. He, being a salaried officer, works overtime for no payment at all. The Government may think that these details are not important from the point of view of the country's war effort, but I am convinced that, unless a remedy for them be found, conditions in industry will not be satisfactory. The efficiency of those who are engaged in various war efforts is hampered by lack of proper housing. The Minister for Labour and National Service has announced in the press that the Government, intends to build 300 houses in the neighbourhood of my electorate. For many months I was in communication with various departments on this matter. First, I wrote to the Department of the Interior, but I did not get much satisfaction there. I then communicated with the Department of Social Services, but then, as I did not receive a satisfactory reply, I was referred to the Department of Labour and National Service. I had dealings with four different departments before I got any satisfaction. Recognizing the Government's difficulties, I refrained from criticizing the delays in the press; but when, finally, the Minister concerned dealt with the representations of the local members of the district, he made his statement to the press without informing us of his intentions until after the announcement. All we knew about it was what we read in the newspapers. We could not tell our constituents what was being done. That was not courteous treatment. I regret that I have been obliged to raise what may appear to some to be trivial matters upon an important debate of this kind, but they show that the Government is not functioning properly. If the Cabinet team cannot do better work after the transfusion of new political blood, we cannot do our full share to win the war. The Government should display more vigour and give greater attention to important details than it has done in the past, and I leave the matter there for the present in the hope that the Government will do better work in future. Question resolved in the affirmative. {: .page-start } page 777 {:#debate-45} ### ADJOURNMENT Man-power and Resources Survey Committee - Munition Manufacture - Production of Aluminium - Cement Industry - Authority of **Mr. Essington** Lewis - Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation - Wasp Engines - Whyalla' to Port Kembla Rail Charges. Motion **(Mr. Fadden)** proposed - >That the House do now adjourn. {: #debate-45-s0 .speaker-JVA} ##### Mr MORGAN:
Reid .- I regret that the House will adjourn before the report of the Man-power and Resources Survey Committee has been laid upon the table of the House, because it doubtless contains voluminous information of benefit to the war effort, and honorable members wish to examine it. Many small manufacturers are anxious to assist in the manufacture of munitions and armaments. When a deputation representing them waited on the former Minister for Supply and Development **(Senator McBride)** and the Assistant Treasurer **(Mr. Anthony)** recently, its members were promised certain war orders. Although a number of orders have since been allocated, difficulties have arisen in obtaining credit facilities. One of the manufacturers concerned was given specialized work, but he requires an advance in order to enable him to purchase the raw materials and to employ additional labour to work extra shifts. From the Board of Area Management he received the following reply: - >Referring to your letter of" the 14th ult., your request for a bank guarantee in connexion with proposed extensions to your plant has been considered by the board. > >In view of the fact that there is considerable unused capacity in this State for this type of work for which your plant is suitable, this board regrets that it is unable to favorably consider your application. Evidently, credit facilities will not be provided with the result that a considerable volume of unused capacity will not be availed of to increase war production. Among the smaller manufacturers exists considerable uneasiness as a result of the Prime Minister's prospectus, which has greatly discouraged them. They feel that war work will be concentrated in the factories of the big monopolies, and that their works will be put out of operation for the duration of the war. Consequently they stand to lose their valuable goodwill. The Government should avail itself of the services of these manufacturers, because the whole scheme of mass production involves the utilization of small engineering shops for the making of a variety of parts, which are assembled in a common plant. In that way, our enemy has established his vast organization of mass production. The attitude of the Capital Issues Advisory Board does not encourage business men to develop their industries. A firm in my electorate which manufactures machine tools applied to the board for permission to increase its capital. It did not seek assistance from the Government, but proposed to raise the capital privately and to distribute among its employees a free issue of shares so that, to some extent, the works would be operated on a co-operative basis. The industry manufactures lathes, without which munitions and guns cannot be made. Meanwhile, the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation has been granted nearly £1,000,000 by the Commonwealth, which is not represented on the Board or Directors and has no formal agreement with the enterprise. That is evidence of discrimination. The same applies to the Australian Aluminium Company Proprietary Limited. The manufacture of aluminium from Australian bauxite has been retarded for two years because the company which had a virtual understanding with the Government that it enjoys a monopoly of the production intended to import aluminium in ingots, and it has now discovered that it cannot obtain supplies of ingots from overseas and must secure them from local sources. The Government now proposes to expend £1,500,000 upon the establishment of an industry to develop local deposits of bauxite. I do not know whether the Government proposes to advance the money to the Australian Aluminium Company Proprietary Limited or to establish its own organization to undertake the work. If the Government has decided to grant a loan to the private company, it should ensure that on this occasion it has adequate representation on the Board of Directors. Personally, I hope that .the deposits will be developed by the Government. From time to time, honorable members have revealed that persons interested in the exploitation of local deposits of bauxite have been discouraged because a Director of Materials in the Ministry of Munitions, **Sir Colin** Eraser, is associated in the Australian Aluminium Company Proprietary Limited, and the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation. The Australian Aluminium Company Proprietary Limited is linked with the international cartel. When the company was floated in 1936, it was styled British Aluminium (Australia) Proprietary Limited, and the shareholders included the British Aluminium Company of England, the Aluminium Union Limited of Canada, the Electrolytic Zinc Company of Australasia Limited, Metal Manufacturers Limited and Aluminium Limited of Geneva, Switzerland. Since 1936, the Australian Aluminium Company Proprietary Limited has been reconstructed and the interests of Aluminium Limited of Geneva, Switzerland, have been taken over by the remaining groups. Aluminium Limited of Geneva, Switzerland is still connected with IndustrialGeselschaft (I-G) of Germany, and the whole ramifications of the industry show that it is controlled by a huge international cartel. Recently the Minister for the Interior in the United. States of America, **Mr. Ickes,** described this combine as " the most perfect monopoly ever devised by man ". Certain proceedings are being taken against members of the cartel in the United States of America because it can be proved that it has been holding up supplies and controlling the price of aluminium. The government of the United States of America is taking steps to break that monopoly and to establish eight new plants because of the very grave shortage of aluminium in the democracies. I trust that the Government will see that the control of this important industry is not left in the hands of one group. Almost a stone's throw from this concern at Granville an attempt was made to establish another important industry. To show that there is discrimination in dealing with these industries, I propose to give the history of this concern. About three years ago StePS were taken by certain people interested in the production of cement to establish a new company known as Atlas Portland Cement Company. They obtained land on the Parramatta River with wharfage facilities and raised £100,000 to finance the venture. The capital issue was underwritten by Churchills Limited. The company arranged to get its supplies of limestone from Marulan. After the company had been floated the cement combine made representations to the New South Wales Railway authorities through the Government of the day, with the result that the freight rates on hulk limestone from Marulan were increased to the rate applying to cement. The effect of this was to increase the cost of the raw materials required by the company by approximately £1 a ton. The company then endeavoured to get its supplies from the limestone deposits at Kempsey. It was proposed to ship the raw material to Sydney. Further representations were made to the Government of New South Wales by the cement combine, as a result of which wharfage charges on limestone at the company's wharf were almost trebled. In that way all efforts to obtain local supplies were frustrated. The company then took steps to obtain a lease of limestone deposits in Tasmania, but before the works could be opened, war broke out. Further, the delivery of certain machines ordered from Germany, and at that time unprocurable here, was held up because of the war. The company had already paid £28,000 to the Sydney agents of the German firm which was to supply the machinery, and on the outbreak of war that money was confiscated by the Commonwealth Controller of Enemy Property, who declined to return it to the company. In the meantime the company had been able to secure blueprints of the machines and ascertained that they could be manufactured in Australia, and application was made to the Commonwealth Treasurer of the day for approval to increase the capital of the company in order that the necessary machinery could be installed. The Treasurer declined to sanction the new capital issue and referred the company back to the Controller of Enemy Property, who said that nothing could he done until after the war. Finally, the company went into liquidation. The assets of the company have since been sold and I find that the works are now being used for the production of plaster under the control of the combine. If that company had been permitted to continue- its operations it would have become an important supplier of cheap cement to the Government. In New South Wales alone it is estimated that it would have saved the Government £500,000 a year. I ask the Government to ascertain why that industry was allowed to be closed down. Information has been placed in my possession which shows that, in order to smash the company, the cement combine raised a levy of 6d. a ton on cement and in that way build up a political fund of £15,000. The Government should either consider reopening these works for the production of cement, thus saving millions of pounds to the country in its war costs, or restore them to their original owners. The same thing has happened in other parts of the world. {: #debate-45-s1 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member's time has expired. {: #debate-45-s2 .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr FADDEN:
Treasurer · Darling Downs · CP , - *in reply* - Despite the very late hour, I take this opportunity, which will probably be the last during this period of the session, to reply to some of the statements made by the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Morgan).** In this House, on the 19th June, the honorable member, referring to **Mr. Essington** Lewis, said : - >The Prime Minister told us that **Mr. Lewis** is given a completely free hand. In fact, he enjoys the unique privilege in this country of being entitled to write cheques for £250,000, not once hut as often *as* he wishes, on the resources of this country, without being subject to question. **Mr. Lewis** has power to authorize expenditure up to £250,000 in urgent cases. In no case, however, has he exercised that authority until the project has been approved by the War Cabinet or the Minister for Munitions. The system provides that expenditure recommendations are prepared in one branch of the department and then passed to a secretariat for examination in order to ensure that they are in accord with projects approved by the War Cabinet or by the Minister. The secretariat is responsible for submitting recommendations to **Mr. Lewis** for approval. They are then passed to the Director of Finance to be implemented. **Mr. Lewis,** in whom the Government has the utmost confidence, has always received Cabinet or Ministerial approval before incurring expenditure. That shows how baseless is the charge. The honorable member also said : - >The Commonwealth Government has provided nearly £1,000,000 for the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation's works at Lidcombe in which the Broken Hill Proprietary is interested and which is controlled by the .Baillieu group as its directors. There is nothing in any of the agreements entered into to protect the people of this country, and the Government is not even represented on the board of directors of the concern. When the Assistant Treasurer, **Mr. Anthony,** asked whether it had been suggested there had been corruption in the use of that money, the honorable member for Reid replied - >The honorable gentleman is so simpleminded that I shall not answer that question but will leave it to his imagination. In view of that statement I shall state the facts: - The aircraft engine factory at Lidcombe has been directed by Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation on behalf of the Government. The entire undertaking is the property of the Commonwealth and the corporation has acted purely as an agent of the Commonwealth which has financed, from month to month the erection of the building and has provided in the United States of America the requisite funds for the purchase of machines, tools, engine parts and raw materials. Local purchases have also been financed in. the same manner. For its services in connexion -with the establishment and operations of the Lidcombe plant, Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation will receive an establishment fee and an annual management fee. This matter is now being discussed, in consultation with the Director of Finance, Department of Munitions, by the Aircraft Production Commission with the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation. The manufacture of Twin Row Wasp engines was introduced by. the Government to the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation for the reason that this was the only concern in Australia manufacturing high power engines and consequently had the technical and manufacturing experience necessary to undertake the production of such engines, many parts of which were similar to the Single Row Wasp engine already being manufactured by the corporation. In these circumstances, the corporation was formally advised of the Government's decision on the 15th November, 1939, and authorized to complete, on behalf of the Commonwealth, the manufacturing licence and to proceed with the erection of a factory, equipped with all necessary machinery, tools and plant and for the procurement of engine components and raw materials necessary to ensure the early delivery of complete engines. The terms of the arrangement were accepted by the company in a letter, dated the 21st November, 1939, and the production of engine parts was commenced in March, 1941. Close supervision over the carrying out of the undertaking has been exercised on behalf of the Government by the Aircraft Production Commission which has examined and approved the building plans, costs, &c, as well as all commitments incurred by the corporation. The total expenditure involved to date in the establishment of that factory is £1,160,300. The interests of the Commonwealth have been and are fully protected. The corporation's accounting system has been examined and is in accordance with recognized commercial practice. The system of internal control of expenditure has also been examined and approved, and an officer of the commission visits the factory each month to verify expenditure incurred during the previous month. Progressive internal checking is being carried out "with physical stores and stocks against the record cards maintained by the corporation's accounting department. The whole of the company's operations and related expenditure are, and have been, subject to check by the Commonwealth AuditorGeneral. The honorable member also stated that recently the Government had agreed to subsidize the Broken Hill Proprietary Limited up to an amount of £3 million a year in connexion with rail freight charges from Whyalla to Port Kembla and Newcastle in consequence of shipping difficulties; but the public had not been told the facts and its interests had not been protected in any way. I am informed that the Department of Munitions and the Department of Supply and Development have no knowledge of any transaction whereby the Broken Hill Proprietary will benefit by up to £3 million a year in connexion with rail freight' charged in respect of operations at Whyalla. Neither **Mr. Essington** Lewis nor any officer in these departments, I am informed, has authorized any expenditure whatever in connexion with rail freight charges or shipping difficulties. {: .speaker-JVA} ##### Mr Morgan: -- Is the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited not getting a reduction of rail freight charges? {: .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr FADDEN: -- If it is getting a reduction of rail freights it is getting it from the South Australian Government in the same way as Mount Isa Mines Limited gets a freight concession from the Queensland Government. Question resolved in the affirmative. {: .page-start } page 780 {:#debate-46} ### PAPERS The following papers were pre sented : - Canned Fruits Export Control Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1941. No. 108. National Security Act - Butter and Cheese Acquisition Regulations - Order - Acquisition. National Security (Rabbit Skins) Regulations - Order - Returns. Rabbit Skins Export Charges Act - Regulations - Statutory Rules 1941, No. 107. Seat of Government Acceptance Act and Seat of Government (Administration) Act - Regulations - 1 941 - No. 3 (Building and Services Ordinance). War Service Homes Act - Regulations - . Statutory Rules 1941, No. 142. House adjourned at 2.24 a.m. (Thursday). {: .page-start } page 780 {:#debate-47} ### ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS *The following answers to questions were circulated: -* {:#subdebate-47-0} #### Civil and Military Pay : Pay-roll Tax {: #subdebate-47-0-s0 .speaker-BV8} ##### Mr Calwell: l asked the Treasurer, upon *notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it a fact that a considerable sum of money is being paid by governments, semigovernmental authorities, corporations, firms and individual employers to make up the difference in civil and military pay of those of their employees enlisted for service abroad and at home? 1. Is itA fact that such payments, which Are in the nature of *ex gratia* payments, are subject to the imposition of the pay-roll tax under the child endowment scheme? 2. Will he give favorable consideration to the exemption' of such payments from the operation of the pay-roll tax when preparing his 1941-42 budget proposals? {: #subdebate-47-0-s1 .speaker-F4T} ##### Mr Fadden:
CP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Employers are in some cases making up the difference between the civil pay and the military pay of their employees who arc engaged in military duties. The Government has no information as to the amount involved. 1. Such payments are subject to pay-roll tax. The information before the Taxation Department shows that the payments, though voluntarily assumed, are made to the employee in his capacity as employee and are wages. As such they are allowable as deductions for income tax purposes. If the payments were gifts they would not be so allowable. Consistency requires that the payments must also be treated as wages for pay-roll tax purposes. As the rate of income tax payable by most of the employers concerned is 2s. in the £1 and the effective rate of pay-roll tax is under 6d. in the £1, the treatment of these payments for taxation purposes as wages and not as gifts is the more favorable for the employers. 2. The question will be considered in the course of the preparation of the 1941-42 budget. At present, however, 1 cannot visualize the possibility of excluding the payments from the definition of wages for payroll tax purposes whilst regarding them as wages for income tax purposes. {:#subdebate-47-1} #### New Guinea : Timber Resources ; Mining Conditions {: #subdebate-47-1-s0 .speaker-KJQ} ##### Mr James: s asked the Minister for External Territories, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. . Is it a fact that large quantities of valuable hoop pine, cedar and other timbers exist on the Morobe gold-field in New Guinea, and that such timber cannot be exported to Australia while aeroplanes provide the only means of transport between Salamaua and Wau? 1. If the Government is aware of the existence of the timber, what steps are being taken to get it to the Australian market? 2. Will the Government take steps to provide wharfage facilities at Salamaua and so displace the existing costly charges made by shipping companies in lightering all cargo from the ship's side to the shore? {: #subdebate-47-1-s1 .speaker-KQK} ##### Mr McDonald:
Minister Assisting the Minister for the Interior · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · UAP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. There are large quantities of hoop and Klinkii pines and smaller quantities of cedar and other species of timber in the Bulolo Valley in the Morobe District of New Guinea. The only means of transport between the area a nd the coast is by aeroplane. 1. Some time ago applications were invited for the purchase of a permit to confer the exclusive right to take certain timbers from thearea mentioned above. It was decided not to accept any tender and to defer the question of inviting fresh tenders until full information could be supplied as to the provision of road access between Salamaua and Wau. 2. The matter will receive consideration. On the 25th June, the honorable member for Hunter **(Mr. James)** asked the following questions, *upon notice: -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it a fact that the Morobe gold-field in the Mandated Territory of New Guinea, where thousands of persons, white and black, are engaged in the mining industry, has been left for months without an Inspector of Mines and Machinery to safeguard the lives of persons in the industry and to administer and prevent breaches of the law under the Mines and Works Regulation Ordinance and Regulations? 1. Have legal proceedings been taken against New Guinea Gold-fields Limited, for breaches of the Mines and Works Regulations Ordinance and Regulations, referred to by the coroner in summing up his findings into the circumstances surrounding the death of two miners in New Guinea, who were dashed to the bottom of a mine-shaft on which the winding engine-driver had been on duty for fourteen hours? 2. Has inquiry been made into the employment by that company of uncertificated mine managers. I now inform the honorable member that according to advice received from the Administrator the answers to the inquiries by the honorable member are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No. 1. No. It is expected that the results of inquiries that arc being made will be available early this month. 2. The deputy mine manager of the company mentioned is not certificated. Section 22 of theMines *and Works Regulation Ordinance* 1935-1936 and regulations 321 of the Regulations under that Ordinance permit the employment in certain circumstances of a manager and a deputy manager who does not hold a manager's certificate. Liquid Fuel For War Purposes. {: #subdebate-47-1-s2 .speaker-N76} ##### Mr Menzies:
UAP s. - Yesterday the honorable member for Hunter **(Mr. James)** asked me a. question, *without notice,* regarding a press report on the subject of the release of a French tanker bound for Casablanca (Morocco). I desire to inform the honorable member that the United Kingdom Government has informed the Commonwealth Government of the circumstances surrounding the release of the tanker mentioned. In accordance with the established procedure of consultation between the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Governments, the Commonwealth Government would be made aware of any further proposals of this nature. "A.B.C. Weekly." {: #subdebate-47-1-s3 .speaker-L0G} ##### Mr Ryan:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA asked the PostmasterGeneral, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What is the name of the firm which is printing the *A.B.C. Weekly?* 1. What are the profits of this firm over the last three years? 2. What are the profits the firm has made out of the *A.B.C. Weekly* under the original contract which it had for the printing of the journal ? 3. Is it a fact that since 1st January the firm has had an arrangement with the Australian Broadcasting Commission to charge cost plus 12½ per cent.? 4. Is it a fact that this printing firm has had to refund £3,000 over a period of six months? 5. Since the cost plus basis, how often, and by whom, has an audit of the cost taken place? 6. Has the commission applied for competitive quotations? {: #subdebate-47-1-s4 .speaker-K0D} ##### Mr Collins:
CP s. - The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Truth and Sportsman Limited. 1. I am not in a position to give this information. 2. See answer to No. 4. 3. Yes. 4. No refund as such took place but as a result of restrictions in newsprint the size of the journal was reduced from 72 to 56 pages and in consequence the basis of printing costs was redetermined. 5. All printing accounts are audited by an officer of the Australian Broadcasting Commission before payment. The frequency of the audit is dependent on when accounts are rendered by the printer. This usually occurs monthly. 6. Competitive quotations were received prior to establishment of the journal and the lowest of these was accepted. {:#subdebate-47-2} #### Price Control {: #subdebate-47-2-s0 .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: n asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. When will the Government issue an account of price control under the National Security Act 1939-1940 continuing the account begun in the publication of last August? 1. What increases in the prices of (a) food and beverages, (b) clothing, including head wear and footwear, have been made since the 23rd July, 1940? 2. Will the department publish and circulate to honorable members the Prices Commissioner's reasons for each increase? {: #subdebate-47-2-s1 .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison:
UAP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Consideration will be given to the question of preparing a supplement to the booklet on price control which was issued last year. 1. Figures supplied by the Acting Commonwealth Statistician show the following average increases in prices between quarters ended June. 1940, and March, 1941 : - Food and groceries, 0.32 per cent.; clothing, including head wear and footwear, 12.93 per cent. It would be impracticable to give individual prices for a range of goods within the general descriptions given. A wide investigation would be necessary to ascertain prices on the 23rd July, 1940, and the prices of identical goods to-day. Complete information is not in the possession of the department because except in regard to goods such as tea, sugar, dried fruits, &c, where specific price variations are permitted, traders are allowed under the averaging system to increase prices automatically in conformity with increases in costs. 2. Excepting in a few cases where increases are permitted in basic prices to enable traders to operate at a profit, the reasons for all price increases are increased costs. The publication of details of elements of cost and the extent of increase of each is not practicable without the disclosure of confidential information. {:#subdebate-47-3} #### Bauxite {: #subdebate-47-3-s0 .speaker-JVA} ##### Mr Morgan: n asked the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and Development,. *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Has the Government any plan's for the development of Australian bauxite deposits for aluminium production ? 1. What are the known sources of Australian bauxite and the available tonnage? 2. Why have these deposits not been opened up previously? 3. Will the proposed plant to treat Australian bauxite at Granville be a government or a privately controlled concern, and what will be the outlay of the Government thereon ? 4. Has the Government entered into any agreement in this matter ? {: #subdebate-47-3-s1 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender:
UAP -- The Minister for Supply and Development has supplied the following answers: - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The Government has decided to proceed with the production in Australia of ingot aluminium, using Australian bauxite as far as possible for this purpose. 2 and 3. The bauxite resources of Australia are at present being investigated by the Commonwealth Copper and Bauxite Committee. 1. Plana for the production of ingot aluminium from bauxite have not yet been completed. The plant at Granville is privately owned and has been established to fabricate metal from aluminium ingot, using various alloys. 2. No. {: #subdebate-47-3-s2 .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: n asked the Minister representing the Minister for Supply and Development, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How much bauxite has the Government contracted to import? 1. What is the estimated landed cost per ton of this bauxite. 2. What is the average cost per ton of Australian bauxite? 3. Has the Government now decided to use Australian bauxite for the manufacture of aluminium in this country? 4. If alumina for the manufacture of aluminium can be successfully produced from Australian bauxite, will the Government cancel shipments of foreign bauxite not yet delivered, and thus make available more shipping for phosphate rock for fertilizer manufacture? {: #subdebate-47-3-s3 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender:
UAP -- The Minister for Supply and Development has supplied the following answers: - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Twenty-five thousand tons. 1. Approximately £4 10s. 2. Comparable average costs of Australian bauxite are not yet available. 3. The practicability of producing the required quantity of aluminium from Australian bauxite is being fully investigated by the Commonwealth Copper and Bauxite Committee. 4. This matter will be kept in view and also the honorable member's suggestion concerning shipment of phosphate rock for fertilizer manufacture. {: #subdebate-47-3-s4 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender:
UAP r. - Yesterday the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Morgan)** asked, *without notice,* whether my attention had been drawn to a press report that a lady driver of a Packard car who had come from Port Kembla, obtained at the Double Bay Post Office ration tickets for 140 gallons of petrol for one month's supply for private purposes, and if so, would I announce the identity of the lady and state why she was able to obtain such a largo ration. I now inform the honorable member that the Minister for Supply and Development has furnished the following reply:- >The lady referred to was a **Mrs. Taylor.** It is true that an allowance of 140 gallons had originally been granted, the circumstances of which were as follows: - > > **Mrs. Taylor,** in making her original application in July of last year, declared that her husband, who is the proprietor of a hotel at Port Kembla, was crippled with arthritis and had to be conveyed between Sydney and Fort Kembla three times a week to attend **Dr. Roenne** of Macquarie-street. The facts were verified by **Dr. Roenne** and, in accordance with the originally approvedscheme, which provided that incapacitated persons dependent on the use of a vehicle for getting about should be granted the full ration allowance necessary, the State Liquid Fuel Control Board issued a licence for 140 gallons, calculated on the number of journeys which would have to be made. Nothing further occurred in connexion with this licence until this week, when the State Liquid Fuel Control Board called **Mrs. Taylor** into the office. At the present time full investigations are being made by the local Fuel Board as to why this allowance cannot be reduced, and whether or not some other arrangements in respect of medical treatment for **Mr. Taylor** cannot be made. Yesterday the honorable member for Griffith **(Mr. Conelan)** asked, *without notice,* what was the present ration of petrol for Drive Yourself Gars in Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. I now inform the honorable member that the Minister for Supply and Development has furnished the following reply : - >The ration for Drive Yourself Cars to 31st March was 66 per cent, of declared normal running prior to rationing. From 1st July the ration is 25 per cent, of the ration to 31st March. This applies to all the capital cities mentioned. Transport for Greta Miners. {: #subdebate-47-3-s5 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender:
UAP r. - On the 25th June the honorable member for Hunter **(Mr. James)** asked a question, *without notice,* concerning the provision of transport for miners from Swansea via Belmont to the John Darling, Burwood, Durham and other collieries, and referred to the use by troops of buses between West Maitland and Greta, which he claimed could be used for the miners if trains travelling from Newcastle to West Maitland could terminate at Greta. I now inform the honorable member that the Minister for Supply and Development has furnished the following reply: - >The whole position is being investigated. In the meantime sufficient petrol will be made available to miners to enable them to reach their work, pending the provision of other satisfactory means of transport.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 2 July 1941, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1941/19410702_reps_16_167/>.