House of Representatives
13 May 1966

25th Parliament · 1st Session

  1. House of Representatives
  2. 25th Parliament
  3. 1966

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. Sir. John McLeay) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., and read prayers.

page 1857

QUESTION

EUROPEAN COMMON MARKET

Mr WEBB:
STIRLING, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Has he seen a statement by the Australian High Commissioner in Loneon critical of Britain’s joining the European Common Market? Does he agree that such action by Britain would have the effect on our relations with Britain which has been forecast by Sir Alexander Downer?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
Prime Minister · HIGGINS, VICTORIA · LP

– 1 have seen Press reports of what Sir Alexander is alleged to have said in a speech made in London. I have also seen one Press report which attributes certain reactions to me. I do not know from where the writer of the latter report derived his information, because I certainly made no comment on the matter nor indicated any attitude to it. My former ministerial colleague is a man of considerable ability, judgment and experience. He is a devoted son of Australia and a staunch friend of Great Britain. Anything he would say on a matter of such importance to our two countries would be said in a helpful spirit and as a statement of the facts as they appeared to him. We have learned to be wary in this place of Press truncations of substantial speeches. Therefore, Sir, I make no further comment on the matter.

My colleague the Minister for Trade and Industry is proceeding to London shortly for the purpose of discussing important matters of trade between the two countries, and no doubt he will be able to canvass to some considerable degree with the United Kingdom the question of Britain’s general intentions in relation to the Common Market. There is no question that Britain’s entry to the Common Market could have quite serious effects, as attributed in the reported statement of Sir Alexander Downer, for certain specific Australian industries, quite apart from the overall effect. Sir Alexander is reported to have mentioned dried fruits, canned fruits, dairy products and various other primary products. This is well known to members of the House, but I am sure that we can feel confident that the United Kingdom would not go into the European Common Market without having weighed very carefully the effect on various members of the Commonwealth of Nations and having provided those members with adequate opportunities to exchange views on these matters.

page 1857

QUESTION

CIVIL AVIATION

Mr KELLY:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question is addressed to the Minister for Civil Aviation. Is it a fact that the cost per mile per passenger for the economy class Qantas fare between Sydney and Honolulu works out at 7.63 cents, whilst the cost between Honolulu and San Francisco is 4.1 cents? As passengers fly along the route in the same aircraft and with the same pilots, and are often greeted by the same air hostesses, will the Minister explain the difference in the cost per mile?

Mr SWARTZ:
Minister for Civil Aviation · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · LP

– I can vouch for the accuracy of the figures given by the honorable member because I provided them in a letter I sent to him only a few days ago. The subject of average fares between various centres and over total routes is a fairly difficult and delicate one. Basically the fares are arranged originally and agreed to by the countries concerned after discussions in the International Air Transport Association. Perhaps the honorable member has seen some reference lately to publicity by Qantas and Canadian Pacific with regard to fares over Pacific routes. This matter will be discussed at great length at the InterAir Transport Association conference which will be held in September. I know of the honorable member’s interest in this subject after the travel conference he attended overseas recently. 1 cannot comment on the actual basis of calculation because this is a matter that is discussed at great length in the International Air Transport Association and agreed to by the various countries. It is a matter for negotiation between the countries and involves many other matters. I think I should point out that the average fare from Sydney to London and Sydney to New York, taking cents per mile as a basis, is actually lower than the average fare from New York to London. However, I can assure the honorable member that the question of fares in the Pacific area will be looked at very closely in September.

page 1858

QUESTION

CONSCRIPTION

Mr CALWELL:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

– 1 ask the Prime Minister a question. He will recall that recently a referendum was held on the proposal for a reserve price for wool, and that before the referendum was held the Government printed a pamphlet giving both sides of the case. Is the refusal of the Government to hold a referendum on the question of sending conscripts to Vietnam to be attributed, first, to the Government’s fear that the referendum proposal would be rejected, so that it does not wish to give the people an opportunity to express their views on this vital issue, and secondly, to the fact that if a referendum were held the Government would be bound, under the provisions of the Electoral Act, to print a pamphlet stating both sides of the case for despatching voteless conscripts to Vietnam? Finally I ask: Is wool more important than human life?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
LP

– 1 remember quite vividly that just before the last Senate election the honorable gentleman campaigned on the basis that the election was to be, in effect, a referendum on the issue of national service. He campaigned quite vigorously on that theme.

Mr Calwell:

– I am still campaigning.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– Of course he is still campaigning. He has also said that conscription will be made an issue at the forthcoming general election. Yet the honorable member apparently wants to have a referendum campaign sandwiched between these events. The people will be able to express their judgment on the choice available to them, both of policies and of Government, within a reasonably short space of time. I suggest to the honorable gentleman that now that he has been confirmed in his leadership he exercise a little patience so that these matters may be clearly perceived and a considered judgment delivered on them. As to the pamphlet, as I indicated yesterday I would have thought it not impossible for a political party to get its views clearly stated to the public. The honorable gentleman apparently-

Mr Luchetti:

– The Government is using public money.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– We are using public money for the purpose of public information on a matter which is. Government policy involving the security of the nation and the well-being of many thousands of young Australians abroad. 1 made it clear yesterday that the Government had no wish to obscure in any way the attitude of the Labour Party. Any obscurity proceeds from the Labour Party itself. Indeed, even in this latest effusion which has come from the honorable gentleman he seems now to have turned full circle. The version which he gave last night is very different from that which he gave on “ Four Corners “, as anybody who saw that programme will be able to confirm. As to the final part of the honorable gentleman’s question in which he asked whether the Australian Government places wool above human life, it is so typically contemptible, coming from the honorable gentleman opposite, as not to merit a serious reply.

page 1858

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH OFFICES. MELBOURNE

Mr WHITTORN:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA

– I ask the Minister for the Interior a question. In view of the dilapidated condition of the Federal members’ rooms in Melbourne and the fact that a fire occurred in the old lift well during this week, necessitating the evacuation of people from the building, will the Minister tell Victorian members of the Parliament when their new accommodation will be ready for occupation? Last year in the present building there were rats in the drinking water. The lift is often out of order. The toilets are really primitive. The need to finalise the new accommodation is now urgent.

Mr ANTHONY:
Minister for the Interior · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– There was a small electrical fire in the Commonwealth Offices in Melbourne during the week. The only damage it did was to cause a blackout in the building. Knowing the rather lower standards of office accommodation that honorable members have to endure in Melbourne - I sympathise with them - I am sure that a blackout would not have caused much inconvenience. The Government has made a decision which has been announced. The old Customs House will be converted into office accommodation for members of Parliament and some ministerial staff.

Mr Calwell:

– When will it be ready for occupation?

Mr ANTHONY:

– We are awaiting completion of the new Customs House so that officers of the Department of Customs and Excise may move into their new building. Then we will immediately begin renovating the old building. It is difficult to say when the renovations will take place because we do not know when the new Customs House will be ready for occupation.

page 1859

QUESTION

REFERENDUMS

Mr WHITLAM:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister for the Interior: What was the cost of preparing the pamphlets for the “ Yes “ and “ No “ cases in the constitutional referendums authorised by the Parliament and abandoned by the incoming Prime Minister? Further, what was the cost of letting out the work of addressing envelopes and of preparing the pamphlets for despatch to electors?

Mr ANTHONY:
CP

– Some months ago a reply to a question on the notice paper gave exact details of the costs, but whether that answer was given in the Senate or in this chamber I do not recall. The actual cost involved to the point arrived at in preparing for the referendum was in the vicinity of $200,000. To hold a referendum in Australia generally costs $H million. This includes the cost of preparing the case and its distribution, the rental of halls and the payment of the electoral officers required to carry out the referendum.

page 1859

QUESTION

TELEPHONE SERVICES

Mr IAN ALLAN:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES

– The PostmasterGeneral will be aware that subscribers on rural automatic exchanges are sometimes obliged to carry out considerable private construction in connection with their services while other subscribers do not have to do so. Will he study the situation to see whether it would be possible to extend the length of departmental construction and so bring the benefits of telephone connections to rural subscribers at an equalised cost?

Mr HULME:
Postmaster-General · PETRIE, QUEENSLAND · LP

– This matter has been considered on a number of occasions within the Department. The cost of providing telephones in some of the outlying areas is far greater than it is in the metropolitan areas or in areas closer to high density population. We believe that the present arrangement is equitable as between the general body of telephone subscribers and those who live in the distant areas. We regret the need to throw a responsibility on to persons who must provide some of their own lines, but it must be realised as well that these people enjoy a considerably reduced rental compared with subscribers in the high density population areas.

page 1859

QUESTION

UNITED NATIONS

Mr GRIFFITHS:
SHORTLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I address a question to the Prime Minister. Is it a fact that the Secretary-General of the United Nations Organisation, U Thant, frequently moves about the world in his search for world peace? Has an invitation ever been issued to this outstanding world personality to visit Australia? If not, is there any special reason for the Government not doing so, or is it the view of the Government that no good purpose would be served by such a visit? ls it also a fact that considerably interest is always shown both inside and outside the Parliament in the work of the United Nations Organisation? Will the Prime Minister consider inviting the Secretary-General to come here so that all members of the Parliament as well as members of other organisations may have the opportunity of meeting and hearing his views on world peace?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
LP

– I am not aware whether any specific invitation has been directed to the distinguished statesman to whom the honorable gentleman refers. For my part, he would be welcome at any time to make a visit to Australia if he found it convenient to do so.

Mr Beaton:

– Will the Prime Minister invite him?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– I shall be glad to discuss the matter further with my colleague the Minister for External Affairs.

page 1859

QUESTION

VIETNAM

Mr HUGHES:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I direct a question to the Prime Minister. I ask: In view of the fact that the Opposition’s Parliamentary Caucus publicly announced in February 1965 that the American decision to undertake air bombing of targets in North Vietnam was then deserving of “ sympathetic Australian understanding”, can the right honorable gentleman inform the House, in the light of his recent visit to South Vietnam, whether there has been any change in the military situation since February 1.965 such as would justify last night’s volte face by the armchair strategists of the Opposition in telling the Government of the United States of America to stop such bombing?

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member is out of order if he comments. 1 call the Prime Minister.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
LP

– 1 think the change to which the honorable member-

Mr Calwell:

– Mr. Speaker, you have ruled the question out of order. Is it right that the Prime Minister should answer the question?

Mr SPEAKER:

– I point out to the Leader of the Opposition that the honorable member ceased making comment; therefore his question is in order.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– I would have thought that the Leader of the Opposition would welcome some wider public dissemination of the decision that apparently was taken with the authority of his caucus last night. It appears that the caucus has now finally caught up with the original version of the statement of policy that came from the Leader of the Opposition. In answering the question, I would say that the change is not so much in the military situation as in the situation inside the Australian Labour Party. The Australian Labour Party of today and ils policies are clearly very different from those of the period to which the honorable gentleman refers. Perhaps one of the more significant symptoms of this change was the recent decision of the Federal Executive to remove from the Foreign Policy Committee of the Australian Labour Party-

Mr Jones:

– Mr. Speaker, I take a point of order. You have continually ruled that the Prime Minister is not responsible for the administration of the Liberal Party. I ask: Is he responsible for the administration of the Australian Labour Parly and entitled to comment on it?

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! I remind the honorable member that 1 have invariably ruled that I cannot direct a Minister how to answer a question.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– 1 do no” want to take up the time of the House unnecessarily. Quite clearly, the implications of the statement made by the Leader of the Opposition last night must not only be most carefully studied but must also be the subject of extensive comment. If the policy proposed by the Leader of the Opposition, with (he full authority of his Party, were to be implemented at any future time, the effective functioning of the Australian Army in theatres of military operation would be destroyed. This must be clearly understood by the Australian people. National servicemen are part of regular units of the Australian Army and are engaged in theatres of war, not merely in Vietnam but also in Borneo and elsewhere. The military structures in these areas would be completely disrupted and, if the 30 per cent, national service component - taking the overall figure - were to be hastily removed, as the honorable gentleman proposes. Australia would not have an effective fighting unit, in any of these areas in which our own national interests are involved.

Mr REYNOLDS:
BARTON, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I regret that 1 must ask the Prime Minister a question. Has the Prime Minister seen yesterday’s reported statement by the United States Secretary of Defence to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to the effect that desertions and defections from the South Vietnamese Army are running at a “ very, very high rate “ and the problem is serious? How many more Australian mothers’ sons are to be conscripted to fill the widening gaps in the ranks of the South Vietnam Army? Why are Australians expected to shed their blood in a cause in which so many of the defending country’s citizens apparently have so little faith? The Prime Minister speaks about withdrawing Australians from this theatre of war. What about the citizens of this country withdrawing from the war?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– The honorable gentleman clearly reveals his ignorance of the situation in Vietnam. Not only have the South Vietnamese been fighting a struggle for their own independence for something approaching 20 years, but today literally hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, including women in certain situations, are engaged in this struggle for survival. What the honorable gentleman ought to realise is that these so-called desertions are not desertions as we understand the term. Honorable members opposite are interjecting. I know that this is all very funny to them, but that is because they refuse to make any responsible or realistic appreciation of the situation there. Tens of thousands - perhaps hundreds of thousands - of those serving there have been drawn from agricultural pursuits in that country. From time to time considerable numbers of them return to their own village at the harvest period. They then return to the forces after his job has been done.

Mr Clyde Cameron:

– Who told the honorable gentleman this story?

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! I ask the right honorable gentleman to resume his seat. I point out to the House that this is question time and is not a time for debate. Interjections are out of order. There has been a continual barrage of interjections and this is unfair to other honorable members who sit with decency and dignity.

Mr Jones:

– What about last Tuesday night when the Leader of the Opposition-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member for Newcastle will remain silent.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– For anybody who has studied the situation in that war ravaged and unhappy country to throw that sort of smear over the people of South Vietnam when they have been fighting what is for this country a crucial battle for freedom throughout South East Asia reveals what I have reluctantly come to discover that although from week to week the Labour Party has been sinking lower and lower its members now show that they have reached the lowest depths in their party’s history.

page 1861

QUESTION

ARMY RECRUITMENT

Mr TURNER:
BRADFIELD, NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Minister for Defence. Have the relevant officers in his Department made any assessment of the effect on voluntary recruitment of proclaiming the war in Vietnam to be dirty, unwinnable and immoral? Further, should this view of the war in Vietnam be endorsed by the Australian electorate, can he say whether any assessment has been made of the strength of any Australian force that might be maintained on a voluntary basis in Vietnam under these conditions, apart, of course, from the logic of maintaining any force there at all in such circumstances? Finally, can he say whether his military planners have given any thought to the consequences of this development for the A.N.Z.U.S. alliance and any alternative defence arrangements that might have to be made for this country?

Mr FAIRHALL:
Minister for Defence · PATERSON, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– I think it will be understood that it is almost impossible to make an assessment of the effect of statements such as those which have come from the Opposition during the last two or three months; but if must also be understood, I am sure, that this continues to sow confusion in the public mind. Confusion in the public mind is just as powerful a weapon in aid of the Communists as anything they have in the field. I am sure that it will equally be understood that if the policy announced by the Labour Party last night were to be put into effect - 1 sincerely hope it will not be put into effect and 1 believe it will not because the public of Australia will understand the issue too clearly - inevitably we would be required to reduce our commitment to Vietnam to a point which would certainly be not an adequate response to our treaty obligations. These things will be watched very carefully. But the Government would stand appalled at the effect on our allies, the effect on our treaty obligations and the long term effect on the safety of this country if we were forced by the acceptance of the Labour Party’s policy virtually to withdraw our effort in Vietnam.

page 1861

QUESTION

ELECTORAL

Mr CURTIN:
KINGSFORD-SMITH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. I ask: Since the Government insists on carrying out its cradle snatching policy of conscripting young, baby faced, voteless boys and sending them into the filthy jungles of South East Asia, from which they may never return, and holds the view that Australia’s security is at stake in Vietnam, will the right honorable gentleman inform the House why the Government parties continue to select young sons of wealthy parents as Government candidates at the forthcoming Federal general election, when, according to the Government’s present policy-

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! A Prime Minister is not responsible for the choice of those whom the Government parties select as electoral candidates. If he were, it could even be that I would not have been a member of this place. If the honorable member continues to comment, he will be out of order.

Mr CURTIN:

– Government candidates

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member will resume his seat.

page 1862

QUESTION

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
LP

– I ask that further questions be placed on the notice paper.

Mr Calwell:

– There was no arrangement that questions be limited to half an hour.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– I thought there was.

Mr Calwell:

– No. I was told that questions would continue for three quarters of an hour and I have not heard anything to the contrary until now. The agreement that 1 had was for three quarters of an hour.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– It was reported to me that an arrangement for half an hour had been agreed to.

Mr Calwell:

– No such arrangement was agreed to. 1 told the Leader of the House that the Opposition would not agree to such a proposal.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– At any rate, Mr. Speaker. I think that the Australian Labour Party could usefully expose itself for another quarter of an hour. I agree to the continuation of question time for that period.

page 1862

QUESTION

MEDAL FOR SERVICE IN VIETNAM

Mr ROBINSON:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question, which is directed to the Prime Minister, relates to the Government’s decision to award a service medal to those who participate in the war for freedom in Vietnam. Can the right honorable gentleman say when the medal will be issued and can he make known to the Parliament any other details concerning it?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
LP

– I am glad to be able to tell the House that while in South Vietnam I was able to take some action to expedite the release of the ribbon to be worn by those returning from that country after a qualifying period of service. I found that it was necessary to obtain the approval of Her Majesty the Queen for the design, and that matter was then being considered. However, I believed that it would be reasonable to gamble on approval being given for the design submitted, since failure to place orders for the weaving of the fabric might have delayed the issue of the ribbon until after the impending return of the Australian battalion from Vietnam. I am happy to say that this gamble was justified in the result, because Her Majesty has since signified her approval of the design of the ribbon. I hope that it can be made available by the time the battalion that is about to return reaches Australia’s shores. I am not well informed about the present stage of the design and making of the medal itself, but I shall see whether I can obtain information promptly for the honorable gentleman.

page 1862

QUESTION

TRADE WITH COMMUNIST CHINA

Mr COPE:
WATSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to ask the Minister for External Affairs a question. Does he consider Communist China to be an enemy of Australia? If the answer is in the affirmative, why has the Government not introduced legislation concerning trading with the enemy?

Mr HASLUCK:
Minister for External Affairs · CURTIN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– Australia is not in a state of hostilities with mainland China and we do not regard that country as being an enemy in that technical and legal sense. Imports and exports of strategic materials, however, are subject to control. There is no reason in our legal and technical relationship with China to apply any other control to trade.

“EMPRESS OF AUSTRALIA.”

Mr COCKLE:
WARRINGAH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Minister for

Shipping and Transport advise the House whether the number of passengers and the amount of cargo carried by “ Empress of Australia “ in the Hobart trade are satisfactory for this time of the year? Are the voyage returns showing a profit or loss? Further, is it a fact that the Australian National Line plans to take “ Empress of Australia “ off the Hobart trade during the winter months and put her on the trade in North Queensland for passengers and roll-on roll-off cargo?

Mr FREETH:
Minister for Shipping and Transport · FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– To the best of my knowledge, the passenger and cargo trade of “ Empress of Australia “ between Sydney and Hobart is profitable. I have not seen the figures recently, but there is certainly no suggestion at the present time that she is to be taken off that run and put on the North Queensland trade. I should add that, inevitably,’ there is a falling off in passenger trade during the winter months, but, fortunately, “ Empress of Australia “ derives far greater profit from her regular cargoes of goods than she does from the passenger trade. If she were to rely on passenger trade alone, I doubt whether, except for a brief period of the year, she would be able to run at a profit.

page 1863

QUESTION

VIETNAM

Mr JAMES:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Prime Minister tell the House whether any of the younger, physically fit members of the Government parties have sought leave from the Parliament to join the armed forces and serve in Vietnam?

Mr. HAROLD HOLT__ I think that of any democratic parliament in the world this side of this House probably contains a higher proportion of men who have served their country in war.

page 1863

QUESTION

SOCIAL SERVICES

Mr BOSMAN:
ST GEORGE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister for Social Services whether in his submissions for the new fiscal year, he will give consideration to the value of raising the permissible income for class A widows - widows with dependent children - from £26 to £78 a year. More particularly will he consider the value of including an educational allowance for dependent children?

Mr SINCLAIR:
Minister for Social Services · NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

-I know that for many years the honorable member for St. George has had a close association with an organisation known as the Association for Civilian Widows and that, as the member for St. George and as a member of the Apex movement, he has been very active in making representations to this Government for the extension of benefits to civilian widows. 1 can assure him that the two additional extensions of benefit which he has mentioned this morning will be considered in the general budgetry context within the next few months.

page 1863

QUESTION

VIETNAM

Mr HANSEN:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

– I address a question to the Prime Minister. Is it possible for the right honorable gentleman to indicate to the House the persons with whom he had discussions on his recent visit to Vietnam? In particular, can he tell us the names of the leaders, both military and civil, with whom he spoke? Did he have the opportunity to have an interview with the Mayor of Da Nang, a person who was allegedly a Communist but was later proved to be not a Communist?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
LP

– I shall examine whether it is practicable to supply a list which will be sufficiently comprehensive for the honorable gentleman. I can clearly enough point to a number of leading military and diplomatic figures with whom I had discussions, and I shall see to what extent I can comply with the honorable member’s request. Quite obviously, it was neither practicable nor desirable to do this in my statement, which already has been criticised by the Leader of the Opposition as being too detailed in other respects. The honorable gentleman asked about talks with the civilian or military leaders outside the ranks of the Government. This, of course, was clearly not practicable in the time available to me in the countries I visited. He asked me specifically about the Buddhist leader who lives some hundreds of miles from Saigon. There is in this country a great variety of groups. Where does one begin and end? Does one seek to talk to a whole range of people - trade union officials, representatives of the Catholic Church and other religious groups, of which there are many? Clearly that was not practicable. In the time available I informed myself as fully as I could. I believe I have returned to Australia very much better informed than I would have been in the absence of any such visit.

page 1864

QUESTION

NATIONAL SERVICE

Mr NIXON:
GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA

– My question to the Prime Minister follows on an answer he gave to the Leader of the Opposition. There has been a charge made that the people of Australia have not had an opportunity to vote on the national service training issue. Is it a fact that this Government was returned with strong support at the last Senate election? Is it also a fact that the issue at that election was chosen by the Leader of the Opposition and, to use his words, was the conscription issue? Is it true that the Leader of the Opposition stumped the countryside urging a conscience vote on this issue and that the Labour Party was rejected by the people of Australia?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
LP

– What I think could be added to what I said earlier on this matter is that not only in relation to the Labour Party was the Government strongly supported but also, on this issue, the Democratic Labour Party fully supported the Australian Government and when the combined vote for the Government parties and the Democratic Labour Party is taken into account it will be seen that there was a substantial majority in favour of the policy which this Government had adopted. The honorable gentleman leading the Opposition has stated the grounds on which he will come to electoral battle. I can assure him that honorable members on this side of the House, who, in both panics and both Houses of this Parliament, have been unanimously behind the Government in its policies in relation to Vietnam and national service training, will face that issue with the greatest confidence.

page 1864

QUESTION

VIETNAM

Mr HAYDEN:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND

– I would like to ask the Prime Minister a question. Is it a fact that the horribly brutal physical tortures which are inflicted on Vietcong prisoners by Vietnamese Government troops so frequently have been inflicted in the presence of Western military personnel, and quite frequently at a time when those Vietnamese Government troops are under the command of Western military personnel; that this type of torture inflicted on prisoners has been established as a crime at the Nuremburg War Trials, and is contrary to the principles we have endorsed under the Geneva arrangements relating to prisoners of war? What action has the Government taken, or will it take, to dissociate itself from this type of thing and to prevent these horrible tortures continuing? I conclude by pointing out that I am well aware that the Vietcong are not completely virtuous in this regard but we are not being asked to fight lor the Vietcong.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:
LP

– I am not surprised that this question should have come from the particular source that it has. I have never heard the honorable gentleman attack the Vietcong for the butchery of tens of thousands of innocent-

Mr Whitlam:

– Did not the honorable gentleman listen to the question?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– Yes. I am going to answer this question. I have never heard him attack the Vietcong for the butchery of tens of thousands of innocent Vietnamese citizens, village leaders and others who could give some help to the Vietnamese people.

Mr Hayden:

– I claim to have been misrepresented.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member will resume his seat.

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– The honorable gentleman asked a very long tendentious question. If he wants to ask that sort of question he has to be prepared to take the answer he is going to get.

Mr Webb:

– Does the Prime Minister support the butchery?

Mr HAROLD HOLT:

– I do not support butchery on either side. I have already stated, only yesterday, Australia’s own adherence to the Geneva Convention in relation to prisoners of war. I am able to say that Prime Minister Ky has given his assurance to the United States authorities that the troops coming under the command of his Government have been clearly instructed that the terms of this convention are to be strictly observed.

page 1865

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr SPEAKER:

– 1 call for the presentation of papers.

Mr Hayden:

– Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member is out of order and will resume his seat.

Mr Hayden:

– But, Sir. 1. have stated that I wish to make a personal explanation.

Mr Clyde Cameron:

– Mr. Speaker, I. desire to take a point of order.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! I have called for the presentation of papers.

Mr Clyde Cameron:

– But I desire to lake a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My point of order is that when a person is misrepresented he is entitled to stand up and be heard, that is, to be given the opportunity to say how he has been misrepresented. You will recall, Sir, that while the Prime Minister was misrepresenting the honorable member for Oxley the honorable member made an attempt there and then to be heard and you sat him down, on the perhaps correct interpretation of the Standing Orders that a person who wishes to correct a statement that has misrepresented him has to wait until the honorable member making the misrepresentation sits down. The honorable member for Oxley observed that procedure. He now seeks the opportunity to correct the misrepresentation.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! I call the honorable member for Oxley.

Mr Hayden:

– The Prime Minister in his reply completely evaded the question I asked and implied that I am a protagonist of the Vietcong forces and their activities in Vietnam and that I am a total opponent of the Vietnamese Government. I do not stand for either of these things. I am of the belief that there are certain moral considerations involved in this war and I feel that not all right is on our side because we have no-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member will not be allowed to debate the matter. He may refer only to the way in which he claims to have been misrepresented.

Mr Hayden:

– The point is that in the question that I asked I included a rider that the Vietcong also have much of which they are guilty, but that I believe that the side on which we are fighting is the side that we should see upholds international morality. I should like to quote-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member will resume his seat. He has already made his personal explanation.

page 1865

HOUSING AGREEMENT BILL 1966

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 10th May (vide page 1628), on motion by Mr. Bury -

That the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr WHITLAM:
Werriwa

.- In the last two years there have been many debates on the subject of housing. There have been debates on two Homes Savings Grant Bills, one Housing Loans Insurance Bill, three Loan (Housing) Bills and we are to have one on this amendment to the Housing Agreement Act with which we are dealing today. There have also been two debates on the estimates for the recreated Department of Housing. During all of these debates members of the Labour Party have directed attention to the principal field in which the Commonwealth has responsibility for housing - that is, under these arrangements with the States. It is in this field that the Commonwealth appropriates most of the money for housing. It is in this field, too, that the Commonwealth can exercise the greatest say in the way housing funds are spent.

The Bill sets forth the conditions under which the Commonwealth will make money available to the States for housing purposes for the next five years. The debates which have taken place on the eight occasions I have listed might just as well never have taken place. The Bill before us, in fact, merely extends for another five years, without any substantial alterations, the arrangements which the Government made 10 years ago with the States and in which it made some changes from the conditions first laid down by the Labour Government in 1945.

To recapitulate and summarise the deficiencies which the Labour Party discerned in this Bill I move -

That all words after “ That “ be omitted with a view to inserting the following words in place thereof: - “ whilst not in any way opposing the passage of this Bill, this House is of opinion that the Bill will not adequately meet the housing needs of the Australian people unless Commonwealth advances are increased at least by amounts equal to those allocated to building societies in the current financial year and the Housing Agreement is also amended to provide that -

the rate of interest is reduced to that charged under the War Service Homes Act;

advances are made for the provision of houses for aged and disabled persons and rental rebates are restored to such persons and to others in needy circumstances;

subsidies are paid to tenants or pur chasers who through bereavement or injury become unable to meet a prescribed economic rental or repayment, and

advances are made for slum clear ance, land development and town planning “.

In the last 10 years there have been notable changes in conditions in housing in Australia. The cost of land has gone up greatly. Interest rates have gone up. The distances that new houses have to be built from places of employment have increased. The districts in which houses are now being built are generally more lacking in civic amenities than those elsewhere. In the last 10 years - the years that the expiring Agreement covered - it has cost more to obtain housing. It has taken longer to get between home and place of employment. It has meant that for recreation and community activities people have to spend more time and money. The Bill meets none of these changes and challenges.

The Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr. Bury) took satisfaction in referring to the changes which were made between the first 10 year Agreement - the Labour Government’s 1945-56 Agreement - and the Agreement which his predecessor, Sir William Spooner, made in 1956. He referred to significant differences. He said that it was easier to buy houses under the new Agreement. That is certainly a change, but the present situation is, however, that three houses are let by Housing Commissions over the whole of Australia for every two that the Commissions sell. It may be that Australians do buy their own houses. The important thing is that Australians should have a choice whether they want to buy or rent a house.

It is impossible for very great numbers of our people to buy houses except from the Housing Commissions, lt is impossible for very great numbers of our people, not only because of means but also because of the mobility associated with their occupations such as teachers and engineers, to rent houses except from the Housing Commissions. The consequence - not only of the last ten years of operation of this Agreement but also of other developments in the housing field - has been that it is now more difficult to rent a house in Australia, and more expensive to buy a house, than it has ever been. Australians now have less choice in the matter of renting accommodation and more burdens in buying accommodation than have people in North America or Western Europe. Housing is more difficult for Australians to obtain than it is for citizens of any of the countries with which we compare ourselves, whether they have unitary or federal systems.

The other significant change which was made by the 1956 Agreement is that for the first two years, 20 per cent, of the overall funds, and ever since, 30 per cent, of the overall funds, has been diverted to building societies. The first portion of my amendment makes available to the Housing Commissions at least as much money as is now made available by the annual Loan (Housing) Acts for both them and the building societies. At the same time we believe that the Government should not only .make available to the building societies as much money as is now made available to them by the Loan (Housing) Act, but should require the banking and insurance systems to make available to them the same proportion of money as in earlier years.

The point we make is that the funds available for the persons to be catered for by the Housing Commissions should not be cut down in order to provide for the building societies. The building societies certainly need at least as much finance as they get now. We believe they should get more than they get now. They would get more if the Commonwealth Government properly exercised its powers over banking and insurance and superannuation funds. The Housing Commissions need all the money that is provided each year under the Loan (Housing) Bills. They used to get all the money provided under those Bills until and including 1955. The Housing Commissions in fact received more to spend in 1953-54 than in any financial year before or since. They built more houses in 1954-55 than in any year before or since. In that year the Housing Commissions built 17 per cent, of the new houses in Australia; last financial year they built 9 per cent.

Until this year the Housing Commissions never had as much to spend as they had in the last year of the 1945 Agreement. They are still unable to build as many houses in a year as they built annually during the last three years of that Agreement. So there can be no doubt that the Housing Commissions are meeting to a decreasing extent the needs of the people whom they are supposed to serve.

The building societies similarly are serving fewer of the people they are supposed to serve, lt is not easy to get the figures with regard to building societies over the period that this Government has been in office. Only in New South Wales has there been a State wide organisation to give figures showing the finance available to building societies. The building societies in some of the other States are still quite rudimentary, as this Agreement acknowledges. The New South Wales building societies received more funds by way of loans from banks, insurance companies and superannuation funds in 1949-50 - the year in which this Government came to office - and in 1950- 51, than they have received in any year before or since. Despite increasing sums diverted from the State Housing Commission to building societies over the last 10 years, the New South Wales societies still finance fewer houses than they did in 1949- 50 and only two-thirds as many as they did in their peak year in 1951-52. Honorable members will realise that houses are usually completed in the year after that in which the funds are made available. Accordingly, the two great fields with which this Agreement deals, that of Housing Commissions and that of building societies, are in fact providing fewer houses than they did when the Government concluded this Agreement in 1956.

Sir John Cramer:

– The honorable member is talking a lot of sheer nonsense.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member will have his opportunity later.

Mr WHITLAM:

– Yes, to talk nonsense. It is easy for honorable members to make interjections, civil or otherwise, as the venerable gentleman has done. Every year my colleagues and I place questions on the notice paper - addressed until a couple of years ago to the Minister for National Development and since then to the Minister for Housing - seeking information on all the financial, constructional and other aspects of housing under this Agreement and the other Acts for which this Parliament is responsible. The figures I have quoted as regards Housing Commissions and those that I shall quote later have been supplied in answers given by the various Ministers to our questions. The figures I give for building societies come from the official publications of the New South Wales association of building societies. It is unfortunate that the public in general and members of Parliament are unable to secure statistics on building of houses except from ministerial answers to the questions placed on the notice paper by members of the Labour Party.

Despite our pressure for it no annual report has been published of the operation of this Agreement. We will be moving at the Committee stage for the publication of such an annual report. It takes some time for the various State departments, trusts and commissions to produce their annual reports. None of those reports for last year is yet in the Parliamentary Library. No reports are made to the Parliament and Ministers tell those of us who question them that they do not know the number of houses built for sale or rent by the building societies. Accordingly honorable members can only speculate on many aspects of demand or cost in the community in general. They can, however, rely on figures given by State departments as to demand, after some lapse of time; they can, furthermore, derive from answers to questions some ideas of cost.

The Parliament is to be given annual reports under the Homes Savings Grants Act and the Housing Loans Insurance Act. It has for a long time been receiving reports each year under the War Service Homes Act. lt does not receive reports under the Disabled Persons Accommodation Act or the Aged Persons Homes Act. Honorable members know the benefits that can be derived from an annual report as distinct from an answer to a question. An answer to a question must be limited to a few factual matters. Matters of opinion, views of experts and qualified officers cannot be elicited by questions; they can be gleaned only from reports. Accordingly 1 hope that the Government will belatedly but gracefully accept our proposition that the Parliament should receive an annual report from the Commonwealth Department of Housing in time for it to be debated while we are discussing the estimates provided for that Department and the most comprehensive piece of housing legislation in Australia providing for the largest governmental appropriation for housing in Australia.

This Agreement . is designed to provide money for the erection of dwellings, primarily for families of low or moderate means. It is only from Housing Commissions that persons of modest or low means in Australia can reasonably buy a house on a small deposit - between £50 and £150. All of the answers to questions are expressed in pounds, shillings and pence, so on this occasion any figures that I use will not be in dollars. It is only from Housing Commissions that persons can rent houses at a rental which is designed to cover just the capital, interest and maintenance costs.

There have been articles in economic and social journals on the incidence of poverty in Australia. One such speech was made in April last year by Dr. Appleyard of the Australian National University on pockets of poverty in Australia. He draws on similar papers given by other persons in the social welfare or economic fields. The theme which runs through his whole speech is that the greatest burden which is encountered by people in all these pockets of poverty is the cost of housing. He lists four pockets of poverty in particular. The first is the field of persons on low incomes. Here he relies on a booklet by Miss Elaine Martin entitled “ High Rents and Low Incomes “ - a research project of the Brotherhood of St. Laurence in 1964. Miss Martin pointed out that families earning less than £20 a week are particularly vulnerable to poverty unless they have secured low cost, housing. Quoting from the latest statistics supplied by the Commissioner of Taxation, she said that in 1960-61 there were 181,920 taxpayers earning less than £20 a week. Of that number 68.000 had a dependent spouse and one dependent child. Another 55,000 had a dependent spouse and two dependent children. The remaining 58,000 had a dependent spouse and three or more dependent children. Miss Martin reported on the poor housing conditions of many of them and, in particular, that such persons had to suffer bad bathroom and toilet facilities, crowding and lack of privacy.

Secondly Dr. Appleyard refers to the poverty of age pensioners. Here he relies on a document prepared by Mr. W. L. Robb and Dr, Rivett entitled “ Needs Among the Old”, produced in 1964 covering the Municipality of Marrickville in the electorate of the honorable member for Grayndler (Mr. Daly). They surveyed the housing conditions of typical pensioners in the Marrickville Municipality at the time. Tens of thousands of single pensioners paying rent are in dire circumstances. In 1964 1,200,000 persons in Australia were receiving pensions. Many were wholly dependent on their pensions. Those who had the supplementary allowance would be dependent on 10s. more than the amount of the pension. In addition, the means test has not been relaxed for 14 years.

The third pocket of poverty which Dr. Appleyard reports on is that of widows. Here he relies on a booklet by Miss Jean Aitken-Swan entitled “ Widows in Australia “, produced in .1 962 by the Council of Social Services of New South Wales. Miss Aitken-Swan reported that many widows are forced to work, to the detriment of their homes and families. They are unable to support themselves on the widow’s pension. If they obtain any amount of meaningful work they disqualify themselves for the widow’s pension. Miss Aitken-Swan found that one third of the non-working widows in her survey had incomes so low that after paying for rent and a low cost diet they had less than 10s. a head for every other item of expenditure.

The fourth and concluding pocket of poverty which Dr. Appleyard mentioned was that among part Aborigines. He found that they are generally on low incomes and that they have poor employment prospects. They lack the incentive and opportunity to get better housing. Left to their own bad housing and sanitation, they become socially unacceptable. Through all the four pockets which Dr. Appleyard reported, there runs the common problem of housing, lt is therefore important, we believe, that the Commonwealth should recognise its responsibility to provide housing for those in greatest need and, through rebates, ensure that it is within their capacity. in my amendment 1 have referred to the interest rate. The average cost of a Housing Commission house, derived by dividing the number of houses completed by the Housing Commissions into the sum of money allocated to them, is £6,500. We know from the annual reports of the War Service Homes Division that the cost of a house and land to persons who secure finance from the Division has more than doubled in the last 15 years. The effect of our amendment would be to reduce by half of 1 per cent, the rate of interest which the States must pay to the Commonwealth, making it equal to the rate paid by persons obtaining advances for a war service home. On a loan of £6.000, repayable over 30 years, a reduction in the interest rate of half of 1 per cent, would mean a monthly saving of £1 16s. 2d. and a saving over 30 years of £651. If the loan were being repaid over 45 years the monthly saving would be £2 0s. 6d. and the total saving £1,094. One can imagine what the saving would be if interest rates were reduced to the level of the 1945 Agreement. Total repayments for Housing Commission houses would be a couple of thousand pounds less and the weekly repayments would be some pounds ‘ess. This is the consequence of interest rates.

Mr Stokes:

– What was the long term bond rate then?

Mr WHITLAM:

– This matter ought to be divorced from the question of the long term bond rate. We have always taken the attitude that persons receiving advances from the War Service Homes Division should pay the same interest that they have paid for the last 20 years. There has not been nor should there be any increase. We believe that at this length of time after the war the persons who are catered for by the Housing Commissions- the persons of low or moderate means - are just as much deserving of public assistance as are the persons who receive assistance from the War Service Homes Division. Furthermore the people to whom I have referred - the persons who receive the basic wage, those who live wholly or partly on pensions, widows and part Aborigines - require assistance from this Parliament just as much as do the persons who served 20 years or more ago in the Services. Servicemen who have served overseas since the war also benefit from the War Service Homes Act and they are being assisted under this Agreement while they are in the Services.

I have quoted the interest rate to show the benefit there would be to such persons just by reducing the interest rate by the i per cent, involved in the amendment.

In the 1945 Agreement there was provision for rental rebates. If the income of families occupying Housing Commission houses was less than five times the amount required to pay back the capital, interest and maintenance, then the Commonwealth Government and the State Governments between them agreed to make up the difference. These rebates apply now only in respect of houses which were occupied before the end of June 1956. A year ago 6,850 persons received these rebates which cost the Governments £618,605. The only people who can now secure rebates are those who secure the tenancy of houses which were already occupied before the end of June 1956. No other postwar houses are available to persons in these pockets of poverty to which 1 have referred except those occupied before the end of June 1956 and which become vacant.

People can secure Housing Commission houses now only if they can pay the full amount required to meet capital repayment, interest and maintenance if they are to be tenants or if they can meet repayments for the whole cost of the capital and interest if they are to be purchasers. Accordingly no houses are being built in Australia today which are available to the people of low and moderate, indeed extremely meagre, means. The demand for Housing Commission houses has increased over the last five years - the five years during which the 1956 Agreement was extended for another period. During that period the State

Housing Commissions report that their waiting lists increased from about 70,000 to 75,000.

I have dealt with the plight of those persons who have to rely on the Housing Commissions - the persons of low and moderate means for whom commission houses are built for rental or for purchase. I have dealt with the diminishing opportunities, despite the diversion of funds under the Agreement, for persons who rely on the building societies, which are building fewer houses than they used to build. Housing Commissions, too, are providing fewer houses than they used to provide. The Minister stated that his colleague in the other place, whom he represents, is continuing to give consideration to the needs of aged persons for adequate minimum housing on reasonable rentals and to the problems that arise from rehousing those living under slum conditions. These are two matters which the Slate housing Ministers have raised for many years past. Nobody can suggest that the State Governments have funds sufficient to carry out slum clearance work or to build houses for pensioners and for aged or disabled persons, but the Commonwealth Government could provide the funds for them.

It is true that such housing would cost governments more money than Housing Commission houses cost at the moment. Fewer houses would be provided with the annual allocations and statistics would look worse than they do. If houses are built now for pensioners the pensioners will be unable to pay sufficient rent to pay back the capital and the interest over the 53 years that the Commonwealth loan funds cover. Whatever the interest rate, pensioners would be unable to pay a rent sufficient to pay back the capital sums. It is impossible now for citizens, except those in affluent circumstances, to meet the repayments which would be required on houses built in slum clearance projects. In a slum clearance project the greatest cost is not the cost of the house but the cost of resumption, compensation, demolition and clearing, lt is impossible, except for affluent persons, to meet the cost of such proposals. Accordingly in every country - in North America and Western Europe - national governments are assisting with the housing of retired and superannuated persons and with slum clearance. This is so in the federal systems of West Germany and the United States of

America just as much as it is in any of the unitary systems and in Canada, lt is possible for the Commonwealth Government, just as it is possible for the federal governments in the United States, Canada and West Germany, to make grants to State governments, provincial governments or Lander authorities. It requires national resources to resume and clear the centres of the big industrial cities. Thereafter, through ordinary means, State, municipal or Lander authorities, or the various insurance companies and banks, can proceed.

The concluding subject of my amendment concerns new suburbs. As I have said before in these debates, we rely almost entirely on private enterprise to develop new housing suburbs. Inevitably, private enterprise will charge what the market will bear. In no other country, in North America or Western Europe, is this so. In all those countries now governments share the responsibility, ft is as inevitable that governments should share the responsibility for land development as it is that they should accept the responsibility for housing finance. The Commonwealth, through its banking and insurance powers, through this Bill and through the other bills that I have mentioned, regulates 90 per cent, of the money that is found for housing in Australia. It provides most of the money for communications in Australia. Accordingly, this Parliament can determine the conditions in the new suburbs, the ex-urban areas. This is a responsibility that is accepted by every national government, let me repeat, in North America and Western Europe. It is accepted by the federal governments, particularly in the United States. The United States Housing and Home Finance Agency is being renamed to accent the urban responsibilities that the Federal Administration there accepts.

This Agreement is, as I commenced by saying, a great disappointment to members of the Australian Labour Party, who, for two years, have urged that in this Agreement more enlightened, comprehensive and contemporary housing responsibilities should be accepted by the Commonwealth, which provides or regulates 90 per cent, of the money that is found for housing in Australia. The Commonwealth must care how this money is spent. It ought to see that it is possible - no other authority can make it possible - for persons of low or moderate means to secure housing. We ought to see that the areas that have degenerated as housing areas are re-created. We ought to see that the new housing areas are equipped with all the civic amenities, that they are as convenient and as beautiful as any other housing areas in Australia are. Whether this is in our metropolises or in decentralised areas, the Commonwealth, through its powers, principally over finance, for communications and housing, has the major responsibility to decide how and where people will live. This Agreement demonstrates that for another five years the Commonwealth will fall down on that responsibility. The Government’s thinking has not moved beyond the stage it reached in 1956. The policies of three successive Administrations in the United States - those of Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson - show how much, can be done even in a federal system with its constitutional difficulties, to ensure that people live economically, aesthetically and comfortably anywhere in the country.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:
LYNE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the amendment seconded?

Mr L R Johnson:

– I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak later.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:
Bennelong

. -I do not want to take too much time this morning, because I am quite sure that all honorable members want to get away. However, I would like to treat with some of the principles of the Bill, because it is one of our periodic five year changes to the original legislation. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Whitlam), who always speaks for the Opposition on this subject, regaled us again today with almost the same speech as he has made during the last three or four years. I do not think there is need to take him to task for the whole of his speech. The theme of his speech is identical with the course his Party followed when it was in power. We can, in effect, refer back to the original Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement of 1945 if we want to see the principles in which the Opposition believes.

I think I should refer to one or two statements that he made. He tried to impress on the House that only the Housing Commissions in Australia can sell on a low deposit or provide a house on an economic rental basis. This is, of course, completely false. Legislation introduced by the Government only a short time ago provided for advances of up to 95 per cent., leaving a deposit of only 5 per cent. I know in the practical sense that throughout Australia many organisations are selling houses on deposits of £100, with the balance on favorable conditions. So it is quite false to say that only Housing Commissions can provide houses on low deposits and it is wrong to give this impression.

I am sure that the Government could not possibly agree with the amendment moved by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. It is interesting to analyse the amendment. The first part gives no consideration to building societies; it seeks to provide more and more money for bigger and bigger Housing Commissions. In other words, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition wants the whole of the activities from a governmental point of view to be entrusted to Housing Commissions, which will build for sale and for rental. This is his thesis. He is not very much concerned about whether the building societies are provided with money for their operations. If he only looks past the tip of his nose he will realise that the same amount of money provided to the building societies will produce at least 20 per cent, more houses than if it were provided to Housing Commissions. The figures are available to anyone who wishes to see them. If the Government provides a certain sum of money to building societies, the money provided by the purchasers is added to it. The figures show that the net cost to the Government for the provision of homes by Housing Commissions is considerably less if the money is provided to the building societies rather than to the housing commission.

The other matters dealt with by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the amendment are quite ridiculous. He spoke of the subsidy that was granted under the original Act. He knows full well that the original Act provided for a subsidy and that the interest rate was the same as the long term bond rate. That was the original Agreement which was brought in by the Labour Party. The interest was at the long term bond rate. This Government has seen fit to reduce that rate of interest to a rate which is 1 per cent, below the long term bond rate. This provides revenue for the States to use as they wish as a subsidy. I think it must be agreed by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that, fundamentally, in these matters we cannot interfere too much with the principle of housing by the States. We must allow them to carry out what is their function.

It would be interesting to go back to the original history of the Agreement. I do not believe that many honorable members have the Agreement or, if they have it, that they have even bothered to read it. I refer to the 1945 Agreement which was assented to on 11th October of that year, lt is quite true to say that the Agreement arose because the Labour Party, which the Deputy Leader of the Opposition now represents in this debate, failed in its attempt to set up a Commonwealth-wide housing commission. This is why we have the present Agreement. The Labour Party in 1944 and 1945 attempted to set up a Commonwealth housing commission to take complete control of the operations of building and the provision of houses for the people of Australia on a completely socialist basis. In a debate in this place Mr. Dedman, the Minister at that time, was challenged in relation to this attempt and he said in reply that his Government - a Labour Government - did not want to build a nation of little capitalists. That Agreement provided for rental only. The same thought is still in the minds of members of the Labour Party. They do not want home owners; they want only a renting community. I shall read, because otherwise it may be challenged, the preamble to the 1945 Agreement which stated -

Whereas at Conferences of Commonwealth and State Ministers held during the months of August, 1944, and August, 1945, proposals were agreed upon relating to the carrying out of rental housing projects by the States. . . .

The whole Agreement was based upon rental housing. There was no intention to give people the right to own their own homes.

Even running through the speech made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition this morning is the thought that he is not very concerned about the big principle of giving an opportunity to families to own their own homes. He is concerned only with rental projects. This is where we join issue and where the Government is diametrically opposed to the policies and prin ciples of the Labour Party. Under the 1945 Act it will be seen that although a State was able to build a house and sell it, the whole of the proceeds of the sale had to be paid back to the Commonwealth at once. The State would not retain any of that money and there was, therefore, no inducement to the State to sell. The whole scheme was on a rental basis. The present Government was bound hand and foot by this obnoxious and horrible 1945 Agreement which would have completely destroyed in Australia the ambition of young people to own their homes. This ambition would have been destroyed completely had Labour been returned in 1949.

So the Government was bound by that Agreement in 1950 when it came into office because there had been, in that year, a renewal of the Agreement after its first five years of operation. The Government was bound until 1956 to carry out the terms of the 1945 Agreement.

Mr L R Johnson:

– It did not have to be bound.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:

– We had to carry on.

Mr L R Johnson:

– You carried it on.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:

– The Agreement was there and we had to carry it out. obnoxious though it was. Then in 1958, which was the earliest possible date at which the Government could rectify this dreadful mess that the Labour Party had created, a complete change of policy and principle was made. 1 had much to do with this change at the time. It was agreed then that 20 per cent, of the money provided to the States under the new Agreement would go to the building societies for home ownership for a period of two years and that after that two years 30 per cent, of the money provided would go to the building societies for the remaining three years of the Agreement. That provision for 30 per cent, still exists and is being paid to the building societies throughout Australia.

Because of the provision of this 30 per cent, of the money provided under the Agreement we have inspired the creation of the building society movement right throughout Australia whereas previously it was of any consequence only in New South Wales and to a smaller extent in Victoria.

But because of the Agreement in 1956 the building society movement was inspired to spread right throughout Australia and has provided immeasurable benefits to the people of Australia. On the question of home ownership it would be interesting in the time at my disposal to give just a brief statement of the record of this Government in housing. 1 do not believe the public at large is fully aware of the really magnificent record of this Government when compared with that of the government of any other country.

Mr Irwin:

– Tremendous.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:

– It is; it is staggering. If honorable members will look at some of the figures in relation to housing and make some comparisons they will see that in the four years after the Second World War when Labour was in power 145,000 houses were built. That represented a rate of only 36,000 houses each year throughout the whole of Australia. This was Labour’s performance in housing - about one house for every 4.5 people increase in population. This Government came to power in 1950 and, since then, has built well over one million houses in Australia. This figure is a year or two old and the number may be greater than that.

Mr Irwin:

– A million houses?

Sir JOHN CRAMER:

– Yes, more than a million. It has built an average of more than 80.000 houses each year. In other words, one house for every 2.6 people increase in the population, including immigration. This Government has the greatest record in housing. In less than 16 years it has erected about 40 per cent. - this is a staggering record - of the total stock of houses that have been erected in Australia’s 170 years of history. In that period more than $6,000 million has been spent on housing.

Mr Irwin:

– That is tremendous.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:

– Yes, and more than $2,000 million of this has been provided by this Government or its instrumentalities.

Mr Peters:

– The population has increased by 50 per cent.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:

– That may be. In the current financial year, Mr. Deputy

Speaker, this Government is to provide $240 million for housing. The change in policy, under which the savings banks will now be able to invest more in housing, will make available from that source a further sum of about $140 million. Another interesting thing may be noted in the field of war service homes. In the 15 years of which I speak, the present Government has spent approximately $800 million on war service homes. This represents more than 90 per cent, of all the money spent on war service homes since 1919. This Government has provided more than 180,000 homes for ex-servicemen in 15 years compared with 54,541 provided by all governments in 30 years. If these figures do not constitute a compelling commendation of the record of this Government, I do not know what interpretation can be placed on them.

I hope that the Agreement that is the subject of this Bill will carry on the established principle which has existed in the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement since 1956 and which the Menzies Government put into effect. I agree that this principle must be carried on, but I would prefer a big change in the manner in which the provision of housing by State housing authorities is administered. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition a little earlier gave certain figures concerning the needs of people who depend on rental housing. The only really big problem in housing in Australia today arises in the provision of rental housing for indigent people - those who are unable to pay economic rents. An associated problem, of course, is the provision of the finance that is required more and more as time goes on to encourage home ownership in various fields of housing. But the major problem, as I have said, arises in the provision of rental housing by government authorities. I agree that in this field there should be some assistance, either State or Federal, in certain instances, and that kind of assistance is given at present. But in my opinion the State housing authorities should confine their activities to the provision of rental housing for what I describe as the indigent section of the community. I do not believe that those authorities have any place in the field of the construction of houses for sale in the normal way. I do not unnecessarily criticise the architects and builders responsible for the construction of government built dwellings.

But one has only to travel about Australia and look at such dwellings to see they all have the imprint of government housing.

Mr Irwin:

– One can tell them a mile off.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:

– Yes. But a house is more than just a place to live or a shelter. It is a home. It is the cell on which the national body depends. It is the source of the ideals and standards to which we all try to adhere. I believe, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that we should approach housing from this standpoint and, in relation to the allocation of funds to the State housing authorities for the provision of homes for indigent people, make arrangements separate from those for the provision of home ownership finance through the building societies. 1 believe that if there were an entirely separate scheme for home ownership finance the building societies would receive much more than 30 per cent, of the allocated funds as provided for under the terms of the Agreement. I see that the Deputy Government Whip (Mr. Kelly) is looking at me.

Mr Kelly:

– Anxiously.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:

– He is looking at me anxiously in order to get me to conclude my speech, but I shall not do so until I have made one more point. If I may say so, I am very disappointed at the way in which some State Governments, including Liberal Governments, are administering housing. I am deeply disappointed at their approach. I cannot for the life of me understand why they continue to perpetuate legislation that does not help in the provision of housing for those who need it. I cannot understand why you, Sir, and I and all the rest of the taxpayers should have to put our hands in our pockets to subsidise housing for people who have no need for subsidised housing. It is true that a tenant who goes into a subsidised Housing Commission home may need a house badly at the time. But many Housing Commission dwellings are now 20 years old and thousands of tenants in such homes are well able to pay economic rents. The occupancy of Housing Commission units by these people is only preventing the occupation of those units by indigent people who need the assistance that the State housing authorities can give. The States are not living up to their obligations in this matter. That is the respect in which I criticise them. I believe that if subsidised houses are to be provided for indigent people, a means test should be applied to government housing.

I believe it is wrong for the State Governments to continue to allow the occupation of government homes by people who are well able to go out into the open housing market and pay an economic rent. Throughout all the States today, tens of thousands of people who should not be entitled to the benefit of subsidies paid out of the taxes contributed by all the taxpayers, including you and me, Mr. Deputy Speaker, are receiving that benefit. This situation represents a weakness in the administration of housing by the States. I put it to you, Sir, that if this anomaly were adjusted and if those States in which rent controls still exist were to allow complete freedom for the charging of economic rentals, there would be no shortage of houses in Australia and very few indigent people would be unable to get satisfactory subsidised accommodation. So we are, in a sense, creating our own problems. This is happening because, in some instances, the States unfortunately are making housing a political plaything. This is a scandal that should not be allowed to continue, for housing is too important to the people for such a situation to prevail any longer.

I agree that the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement must continue. However, as I have said, I would prefer to see it changed so that there would be a separate scheme for the allocation of funds to the States for the provision of homes for indigent people. 1 do not want to interfere in any way with the provision of funds for that purpose. But I believe that finance for home ownership should be entirely separate. I would like to say much more on this subject, Sir, but, in deference to the Deputy Government Whip, who has one eye on me and one on the clock, I shall leave the matter there. I conclude by saying that I hope that the States will carefully check the circumstances of people who occupy houses that arc subsidised by the taxpayers of Australia.

Mr L R JOHNSON:
Hughes

– Mr. Deputy Speaker, it would take me a long time to answer the unfounded contentions that have just been put before us by the honorable member for Bennelong (Sir John Cramer). I am inclined to ignore them and to co-operate with the Whips on both sides who are anxious to see the proceedings terminated by a prescribed time. However, I would not want anyone to get the impression that the preparedness of my colleagues and me to co-operate with the Whips indicates any incapacity to answer the wild, flamboyant and unjustifiable assertions that the honorable member has just made.

The purpose of this Bill is to ratify the execution by the Commonwealth of a new Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement providing for the allocation of funds under prescribed conditions for five years after 1st July next. This is the fourth Agreement of this kind, the others having been entered into in 1945, 1956 and 1961. The first Agreement was initiated by the Chifley Labour Government. We will not be advantaged by reminiscing about the past, but 1 regret, as does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Whitlam), that the latest Agreement does not include provision for some of the most idealistic, forward looking and humane concepts which were embraced by the first Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement. Foremost amongst these deficiencies is the provision for rental rebates. There is not much need for me to enunciate the purpose of rental rebates. I think that everyone in this House, and the people at large, clearly understand that it was the Labour Government’s intention to make assistance available to the States so that people who did not have the financial capacity or resources to pay a deposit on a house, or even pay the economic rental for a house, might be accommodated.

If the honorable member for Maribyrnong (Mr. Stokes) wants to provoke me to answering the lengthy interjections he is making, then let him say so and I shall be very happy to oblige him; but I am trying to co-operate with the Government Whip by keeping my remarks as brief as possible.

The amount paid by the Commonwealth Government in 1964-65 for rental rebates under the 1945 Agreement amounted to $552,000. Obviously the States have to carry a great burden. Many of them are not continuing with this rebate system, except in respect of houses that come under the provisions of the 1945 Agreement. Tn four of the States - New South Wales, Queens land, Victoria and Western Australia - rebates totalling £618,000 were paid in the year 1964-65. These rebates were paid with respect to 6,850 tenants. Those figures give some indication of the importance of this work. If the provisions of the 1945 Agreement had been continued, many needy people would have been assisted to rent, and indeed purchase, homes. That is the first important omission from the new Agreement.

The second omission is special assistance for slum clearance. I suppose most honorable members are aware that slums persist in most of our capital cities. The various State Ministers for Housing have pleaded with this Government over the years, at special conferences, for special assistance to eliminate the scourge of underprivileged housing in the inner city areas. In 1964, the conference of State Ministers for Housing carried this resolution -

That continuous representations be made to the Commonwealth for a money grant to the States with which to acquire slum properties and clear areas for slum development; the finance to be a grant and not a loan.

Resolutions of this kind have been supported by Liberal Party leaders in a number of States. In Sydney, where 74 acres of the worst slums were cleared by the State Labour Government, the resumption costs averaged £60,000 an acre, as against something like £1,000 an acre in the outer city areas. It will be appreciated, therefore, that special assistance is needed for this purpose; but no such provision is made in the historic five year Agreement which is the subject of the legislation now before the House.

The third matter I want to mention is the fact that no special assistance is to be given for homes for aged persons. Most honorable members will concede that this is a problem which justifies the urgent attention of the Government. The previous Minister for Housing, now the Minister for Labour and National Service (Mr. Bury), indicated without any ambiguity that the situation was serious when, in answer to a question that was asked of him on 19th May 1965, he stated that in New South Wales alone 6,676 aged persons were seeking special accommodation from the Housing Commission in that State. In Victoria, the number was 2,731; in Western Australia it was 420, and in Tasmania 115. Apparently the other States did not have figures available for that year. But the fact is that there were 9,942 aged persons who had applied unsuccessfully to the various State housing authorities.

Of course, there could be many more in need of accommodation because it has to be appreciated that elderly persons are discouraged from even applying for assistance. They come to my office in Sutherland, where I conduct my interviews, just as they must go to the offices of other honorable members, and ask whether they have any prospect of receiving accommodation from the State housing authority. I say to them: “ Yes, if you fill in an application you will probably be entitled to an aged person’s home in five or six years time “. The position varies from State to State, but how many more applicants would there be if these people had reasonable expectations? I should like to deal more fully with the omission of special provision for aged persons but, unfortunately, time will not permit this. Suffice it to say that, as evidence of the infertile imagination of members of the Government collectively, we have the fact that, 21 years after the original Agreement was put into operation, not one skerrick of enlightenment can be found in this 1966 Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement which is to be the backbone of the Australian housing programme until 1971.

Are there no new ideas among the Government members to overcome the many serious housing problems prevailing throughout Australia? Is the Holt Government as bereft and bankrupt of ideas as this new five year housing Agreement suggests? Let me illustrate the cause of my disillusionment and my disappointment by giving a brief summary of the few unimportant and infinitesimal innovations provided for in this legislation. The variations between the new Agreement and the preceding Agreement are but minor. Honorable members may judge for themselves how important they are after I have explained them. A thorough search through the Bill and the Minister’s second reading speech revealed these to be the only additions: Firstly, the definition of “ Members of the Forces “ is extended to include certain members of the forces on special service in South Vietnam and Malaysia. They will now be able to get assistance under the provisions of the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement. I admit that it is important for them to have houses, but only a handful of people are involved. Let me emphasise at once that we do not quibble about this addition, but it is not by any means a world shattering innovation.

I see the honorable member for Malice (Mr. Turnbull) sitting there like a hawk waiting to warp, twist and distort anything that I may say in a hurry today as a result of my preparedness to co-operate in the Government’s efforts to shorten this debate. But I do not intend to leave myself open to his ruthless exploitation. If the honorable member for Mallee can be encouraged to behave himself for a brief time, 1 shall deal with the second departure from the previous Agreement. This relates to the removal of the provision restricting the erection of flats exceeding three stories in height outside the metropolitan area. No-one would regard that as important although some would think it a pity that this provision has been removed.

The third innovation relates to Service dwellings. The Agreement will now provide that special features may be included in the houses built by the State housing authorities for serving members of the forces. These include such things as storage space, flyscreens, blinds and linoleum, which the serviceman cannot be expected to provide for himself because of the transient nature of his employment in that he may be transferred from camp to camp. The fourth innovation relates to the provision of homes in rural areas. This is important. We have always considered it necessary to make funds available for homes in rural areas; but it must be appreciated that the building societies are to have their allocations cut by10 per cent, so that these homes can be provided in rural areas.

Mr Irwin:

– That is not right.

Mr. L. R. JOHNSON__ Then I shall take another five minutes to answer the honorable member.

Mr Stokes:

– Where did you get that from? On what page is that?

Mr. L. R. JOHNSON__ It is contained in the Minister’s second reading speech. Does the honorable member want me to dig it up for him?

Mr Irwin:

– You carry on and I will look it up.

Mr. L. R. JOHNSON__ I shall do that.

The clear fact is that 10 per cent, of the allocation to Home Builders Account is to be diverted to providing houses in rural areas. The honorable member for Maribyrnong, who, having been an estate agent before entering this Parliament, knows a little bit about housing, will admit that what I am saying is correct. Where no building societies are available, up to 10 per cent, of the money available to building societies can be diverted to public lending authorities such as the Rural Bank of New South Wales, the Victorian State bank and others of that kind. Am I right or wrong?

Mr Stokes:

– Dead right.

Mr L R JOHNSON:

-I could have saved five minutes of my time if the honorable member for Maribyrnong had been a little more reasonable. This is the situation. This is the sum total, the aggregation of all the enlightenment gained so many years after the first Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement was introduced. This Government can do no better. It rejected the Opposition’s proposal made last year and earlier this year that an all party committee should be appointed to investigate all aspects of housing, with particular attention to rental rebates, to slum clearance, the provision of homes for aged persons, to land development and town planning principles. There are so many things that could have been looked at so that a decent agreement might have resulted and might have been the subject of this debate today. Such an all party committee of inquiry would have given regard to the need for the forward acquisition of sites and capital advances to the States so that they could buy sites before they became expensive as a result of replanning and redesignntion. It could have had regard to environmental factors associated with housing projects such as the availability of parking space, community centre sites, parks, playing fields, and things of this kind involved in town planning considerations, together with the relationship of transport and employment and shopping complexes for every housing settlement.It could have had regard to the effect of interest rates and to project development finance.

What we do in this Parliament is to take a great interest in ensuring that money is available at a reasonable rate of interest.

All honorable members on this side of the House admit that the rate of interest is still too high. But having made comparatively cheap money available, we do not seem to have regard to the fact that in many cases it is used to buy a dear product. That is to say, too many people building houses on a large scale secure their finance from sources other than, say, the Development Bank. They often have to get money at 8 per cent, or 10 per cent, interest. When the War Service Homes Division and other housing authorities are financing homes, they find that the cheap money provided from Government sources and as a result of Government legislation is simply being transferred over in order to buy a dear product. Not only is the house purchased with dear money but so are all the services such as the provision of roads and the whole subdivision process.

SoI make the point that so much more could be said about housing today which so obviously should have been the subject of careful consideration. There are many other matters which could be considered. The availability and the cost of land should have been looked at; also the bona fides of builders and whether or not they are qualified to build. If the Government is to make money available to the States then it should ensure that the people who are building these houses are competent and that the houses that are constructed will stand the test of time. The uniformity of building codes could have been encouraged. There could have been an examination of building techniques. There could have been an examination of the need to encourage pre- fabrication of housing in Australia, as is done to some extent. The honorable member for Maribyrnong will admit that prefabrication is used in Victoria, to a fairly successful degree. We could have had a look at the potentials of high density housing. We could have examined fees associated with housing, such as transfer fees, duties on real estate, and other such things which add up to a great deal of expense on a collective basis and which cause delay. These things could have been carefully examined.

There have been firm proposals from such eminent persons in the housing field as Dr. Hall that the Commonwealth would do well under a Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement to indemnify those States which eliminate the costly processes of stamp duty and transfer fees. We are told that if this were done houses would noi be unoccupied for so long; that this would reduce this waiting time before you move into a house by 5 per cent. As a result, an additional 30,000 homes would become available in Australia at any given time. There are so many other things which could be considered. 1 am skimming through them in this superficial way. They should have been the subject of a careful examination. instead, they are objects of indifference to this lazy and inept administration. I think of the Building Research Division of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation - that great organisation - and the need to encourage research by project builders and manufacturers of building materials. There are many other things of this kind which I will not have the opportunity to elaborate upon.

At the present time there are 62,586 people waiting for State housing authority homes throughout Australia. There are many others waiting for homes under other headings; there are about 6,000 waiting for loans from the War Service Homes Division; there are about 15,000 migrants in migrant camps. There is an obvious need for urgent action to be taken. This is not an impressive record for this Government which is slavishly copying the worst parts of the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement.

My colleague, the honorable member for Cunningham (Mr. Connor) had intended to speak on this subject today. I share part of the Wollongong area with him. A recent survey produced for the visiting Minister for Housing (Mr. Bury) indicated that in that area alone there are 290 people living in camping areas, 1,650 living in temporary dwellings such as garages, workshops and the like, 12,500 people occupying overcrowded or substandard dwellings and 1,300 in migrant hostels. That makes a total of 15,740 in Wollongong alone. Situations of that kind can be pointed to in many parts of Australia. I do not know how much extra time I have in which to speak because of the interruptions. I suppose I have about five minutes.

Let me also indicate that there is some concern about the building society movement. One of the things that happened to the Labour concept of the CommonwealthState Housing Agreement was that 30 per cent, of the funds made available were diverted by this Government into building societies. The Opposition does not regret that or resent building societies being given adequate funds, but we believe that there is another way of going about it. I say that because when you take funds from the State housing authorities they are being deprived of the money they need to build houses for low income earners in the community. We regard it as a very desirable thing, when going about this problem, to encourage the insurance companies to maintain the rate of lending which they had undertaken previously, if not to increase it. Let me say that the building society people are tremendously concerned with the spasmodic support given to them by this Government. The President of the Association of Co-operative Building Societies of New South Wales Ltd. said in his last report -

Over the past 15 years the rise and fall in funds to Building Societies has been extreme. In 1951 we held £12 million - in 1956 it was £6.6 million and last year £18.5 million.

We maintain that this fluctuation is reprehensible and shows a lack of awareness of a National duty to the small income-earner by some Banks and Insurance Companies.

Without going into the figures, it can be established without doubt that the insurance companies abandoned the obligation and the responsibility which they had when this Government diverted some of the CommonwealthState Housing Agreement funds to building societies. It is particularly interesting to note that, in all, building societies received from insurance companies only £2.4 million in a period of three years. Over the last ten years societies have received £110 million in loan moneys but only £6 million from 24 insurance companies. Yet these same companies insured £77 million worth of business. In ten years 59 insurance companies made no loans to building societies at all. Yet these same companies handled £33 million of repeating business. The insurance companies are more content to invest their money in cattle stations, companies such as H. G. Palmer (Consolidated) Ltd. and hire ppurchase organisations. This Government has allowed them to do it and the Opposition expresses concern about it.

I had intended to talk about a number of other matters but I believe that I have had a fair crack of the whip in view of the shortage of time. I conclude by expressing very sincere regret that this Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement does not have regard for the housing needs of the Australian people. Let me say that the Opposition has a very firm intention to do something dramatic to overcome the housing problem that prevails in this country. We plan to emulate the war service homes concept for all Australians. There is no reason why the low interest rates obtaining in respect of war service homes cannot be extended to all; indeed, our policy is to do this. We will raise the limit on a loan for a war service home to £5,000 and extend the purposes for which supplementary loans can be made available at 3i per cent. All persons will be able to qualify by this kind of principle because we intend to establish a home finance division of the Commonwealth Bank incorporating architectural, inspection and insurance services to provide finance at H per cent, and up to 95 per cent, of the value of a couple’s first home to a limit of £5,000. Then we intend to reduce home mortgages by way of a Commonwealth grant of £100 in respect of each child born during the period of a marriage.

We intend to come to grips with the real basis, the real core of the housing problem in Australia so that young couples, elderly people, and everyone in between, will not be subjected to the difficulties they have encountered during the last 17 years in which this Government has been in office. Let me conclude by saying, in the words of Brutus -

There is a tide in the affairs of men

Which, taken at the flood, leads on lo fortune;

On such a full sea are we now afloat;

And we must take the current when it serves,

Or lose our ventures.

Mr STOKES:
Maribyrnong

.- One thing that the debate this morning has done is to highlight the different political philosophies of the Government and Opposition parties. I point out to the honorable member for Hughes (Mr. L. R. Johnson) that, as the honorable member for Benelong (Sir John Cramer) so well put it, one of the big barriers to housing indigent people is the rental rebate scheme. What happens under the scheme is that the rental a tenant pays is based on the actual earnings of the male breadwinner in the home. A tenant may pay a rental of £3-odd a week. Then his wife, his son and daughter go to work and there is, perhaps, at least £70 or £80 a week coming into that house, but he still pays only the original rental. If a periodic financial check were made each year, as is done in the case of social service recipients, these people would pay an economic rent and we would find that the rebate system would in many cases fall by the way and be applied only to actually indigent people. This matter is in the hands of the State Government.

As we know housing is a State responsibility. All that the Commonwealth is doing now is an aftermath of the system of uniform taxation. The Australian Loan Council fixes an overall amount to be borrowed in the ensuing financial year and each State sets the amount it requires for housing purposes. The total of the amount fixed by the respective States forms the Commonwealth’s part of the Government’s loan raisings and as such is made available to the States. Let us get this clear. These loans are amortised over 53 years, and the interest rate charged now is 1 per cent. less than the long term bond rate at the time the advances are made. We have seen a great deal of change from the original Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement made by the Chifley Government in 1945 to the Agreement that is being extended today. The original Agreement was one which had as its main concept, as honorable gentlemen opposite have said, the establishment of homes at low cost rentals. Wrapped up with this was a 60 per cent, subsidy for rental rebates to cover losses resulting from letting properties at uneconomic rents. This did nothing whatsoever to benefit home owners. The result was rather the reverse. It was a system, as I have shown, which has been capable of misdirection. I refer to the fact that people have obtained rebates to which they have not been entitled.

Later Agreements made provision for the sale of these former rental properties to the tenants at low deposits and over extended periods. The 1956-61 Agreement put conditions on the States over rental rebates and allowed the States to apply only concessional interest amounts for rental rebates.

It has been said that four States already do this. Other changes from the 1945 concept were in respect of land development, the sale of homes and the allocation of portion of the loan funds to provide finance for the private home builder. When the measure providing funds for the private home builder was introduced in 1956 the amount agreed upon by the States was 20 per cent. It was subsequently increased to not less than 30 per cent. Also a separate allocation of 5 per cent, for military housing was made.

There is no doubt that low rental housing will always be required, but it is plain that over the past 15 years there has been a definite trend away from this concept and the demand for housing assistance has yielded to the demand for private ownership. This has been reflected in the changes which have taken place in the reenactments of the Agreement from quinquennium to quinquennium. Originally the Commonwealth did not do a great deal in the housing field. Its interest was restricted until 1945 virtually to the provision of war service homes finance. Then came the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement. Later we had the Aged Persons Homes Act, and in 1964 we saw the creation of a Federal housing authority. With this came the introduction of the homes savings grants and housing loans insurance legislation. Then again the Commonwealth further intruded and made direct loans under the Loan (Housing) Act introduced last year of Si 5 million. In all the Commonwealth will have provided by the year 1965-66 more than S240 million for housing purposes. That is a pretty fair intrusion by the Commonwealth into the housing field. These changes which have been made suggest to mc that pressure is being applied for some breakaway between the public sector and the private sector. I believe that the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement in its present form does not fill the bill. Honorable members on both sides have said this, and I say it again.

I am pleased to learn that there has been set up in the Department of Housing a Bureau of Research. It is hoped that that Bureau will be able to complete a survey on which a demographic analysis can be made of our housing requirements. Further, the Secretary of the Department is leaving for overseas to obtain firsthand information about how other countries overcome their housing difficulties so that we can do something about our housing problems in the future. I suggest that one of the first steps must be to remove from the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement the provision of loan funds for the private sector and include in any new Act only those funds for which State Governments have a responsibility, restricted perhaps to slum clearance, erection of low rental housing and land development. There is no direct relationship as from State to State firstly in the total amounts which they apply for to the Australian Loan Council for what they consider their housing needs are and secondly, in the proportion within this amount which each State allocates to the Home Builders Account. The only restriction is the provision that not less than 30 per cent, must be paid to the Home Builders Account and most Governments as a matter of policy will bolster up the public sector and not give one whit more than 30 per cent.

I do not think the private sector should have to be worried by conflicting State policies and State interests. I believe the private sector should be financed directly by the Commonwealth Government, and in this connection I refer particularly to the Commonwealth decision to allow an extra $15 million to be raised by way of loans for housing purposes. This was an extra amount provided for housing in addition to the loan funds provided in the usual way under this Agreement. It was channelled into the economy per medium of the Agreement. It was the Government’s intention in making the grant to provide a quick stimulus to the economy per medium of the building industry. The purpose could have been achieved much more effectively if the money had been channelled directly into the private sector. What happened was that the bulk of the money - at least 70 per cent, of it, except in Queensland where the proportion was 60 per cent. - went into the public sector, and public spending is bottle-necked by regulations. The public authorities have projects pending while they wait for further funds, so that money provided in this way does not get into the economy as quickly as it would through the private sector in which building societies are waiting with numbers of private builders who can put the money to work for the benefit of the economy.

Direct grants are made by the Commonwealth in cases of national disaster - floods, bushfires, droughts or other such catastrophes - to the States concerned according to their needs. Surely the Commonwealth authorities should have their fingers on the pulse of the economy so that they can assess housing needs at a particular time and inject the necessary money into the economy directly, either through the public sector or the private sector, depending on where the down turn is evident. I believe that in the provision of finance, the public sector should be completely separated from the private sector.

Under the existing legislation there are many undesirable side effects. We know of the high prices paid in the inner areas of our capital cities for property on which some clearance projects are planned, and we know that in many cases this land is bought long before funds are available for its development. When the development does occur it is frequently in the form of four-storey walk-ups or multi-storey apartments in which children are denied a normal home environment. They have no backyards to which they can bring their mates. The tenants of those apartments have no gardens. These conditions induce adult laziness and juvenile delinquency. In one State the Government is actively competing with private industry in the field of land development.

There is one aspect of the housing situation which has been sadly neglected. In this connection I can speak with authority only of my own State, but 1 am sure that a similar situation exists in other States. I believe that the provision of rail transport in developing areas is as vital as the provision of roads, electricity or other utility services. In most capital cities the sprawl of development has followed the suburban railway lines. In Melbourne, which I know better than other cities, the result has been that dead pockets have been left in areas close to the city, and these are waiting to be developed. No new railway line has been built out of Melbourne in 100 years. The last line built was that of Essendon, a distance of six miles, and that was in 1860. There have been short extensions. The last was from Darling to Glen Waverley, a distance of about four miles, which was completed in 1929-30. There has been tremendous development over the whole 26 miles of the Melbourne to Frankston railway, but the areas to the north east and north west of Melbourne have been completely neglected. Templestowe, Doncaster, Bulleen in the north east and Keilor. Tullamarine, Airport West, Niddrie, Avondale Heights in the north west - all those places have been neglected.

The Essendon line that I spoke of was built in 1868 and was extended a further six miles or. so to Broadmeadows in 1872, but a large area of land within eight to twelve miles of the centre of Melbourne has not been properly developed and broad acres of it are awaiting development simply because there is no rail transport available. The recent plans to provide a rail link with the new Melbourne airport at Tullamarine have apparently been dropped by the State Government. 1 have introduced this matter because I feel that the provision of rail facilities is as much a part of the housing problem as slum clearance. This is a State matter and 1 suggest it is another reason why the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement should not cover both the public and private sectors. There are far more difficult matters to be attended to by the State Governments in the public sector than those that have to be attended to with funds provided directly for private housing. We should disassociate all Commonwealth assistance for private housing, whether by loan funds or direct grant, or through this kind of Agreement, from assistance given in the public field. Future agreements of this kind should be restricted to Government spending, both civil and military. Funds for slum clearance, land development, the provision of public transport by rail or other means, and of other utility services, as well as financial assistance in the private sector, should be considered by the Federal housing authority with due regard to the needs of each State. The money should be provided through the Home Builders’ Account or by some other suitable method.

Unfortunately we find ourselves committed to the extension of this Housing

Agreement for a further five years, with some minor amendments. I shall not comment on those. They have been mentioned in the second reading speech and, in the interests of expediency, I will not go over them except to say that I am not altogether happy about the removal from ministerial control of the restrictions that were previously placed in building flats of more than three storeys above ground level in areas other than inner city areas. This could lead ultimately to the development of slums in country areas. An industry might start up in a country centre and be followed by the provision of housing of a kind not normally provided in such a place.

I can only hope that within the five years covered by this Agreement, the Commonwealth Government will have completed its demographic survey of housing needs, so that it can decide the best way to provide assistance both in the public and private sectors. 1 hope it will make this decision long before the expiry of the Agreement so that we can introduce something that will really work and which will have a scientific basis. The amendment proposed by the Opposition again demonstrates the Socialist attitude of honorable members opposite. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said that houses could be obtained much more cheaply in other parts of the world.He overlooked the fact that 74 per cent. - I think that is the figure - of homes in Australia are either owned or being purchased by private individuals. No other country can match that record. The amendment shows the weight which the Opposition places on this subject of homes for rental. I point out again that when proper periodic checks are taken of the financial position of people living in rented Housing Commission homes we will see a change in the attitude of State housing authorities with regard to rental rebates.

Mr HANSEN:
Wide Bay

.- I do not have sufficient time to deal with all aspects of the Bill, but I should like to refer to a few points that have not been mentioned by other speakers in the debate. The honorable member for Hughes (Mr. L. R. Johnson) referred to one Roman. I do not think we can emulate another Roman - Pontius Pilate - and say that we are prepared to hand over the money and leave everything to the States. For this reason I regret that the Government has brought the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement before the House without following the suggestion made in an amendment moved on 3 1st March this year that a nation wide inquiry be held into housing needs before any fresh agreement was entered into. This is not the opinion only of the Labour Party; people associated with the housing industry have put forward this point of view.

Perhaps it is a coincidence, but this week at Surfer’s Paradise, the Housing Industry Association has been holding a conference on housing needs. It may not be a bad idea to state some of the points of view that have been put forward by members of the Association. The Association was formed recently because of the instability of the housing industry, brought about by a series of booms and bursts. The irregular flow of finance in the industry - it was not as regular as the tides - led to irregular employment, which has had a disastrous effect on the industry and has contributed in no small measure to rising costs. Mr. K. J. Driscoll, Queensland President of the Association, said -

The most unsettling factor in forecasting whether loan money will be available is the variation in funds allocated for housing loans. Not one of the major lending authorities can say definitely how much, if any, finance they will have available for the next three months, six months or a year. For example, Federal Government allocations for housing are channelled through the States into building societies, but it is not known through which societies funds will become available until actual allocations are made.

I am sure that many honorable members have received protests from building societies, many of which use their allocations in the first six to eight months of the year. Contractors normally employed by the building societies have to look elsewhere for work. In many cases, tradesmen are lost. When finance becomes available again there is a mad rush to employ tradesmen, who in many cases must be enticed away from the employment that they have obtained during the temporary recession. This situation is having an effect on the training of apprentices in the industry. Contractors are tending not to employ apprentices and a regular number of tradesmen but rather to let contracts for the supply of labour only. This practice is frowned upon by building unions because of its disastrous effect. Many employers are adopting this practice in order to dodge their responsibility to train apprentices.

The major problem in housing today is lack of finance, particularly cheap finance. Our amendment proposes that the interest rate on loans made from money raised under the Agreement should be reduced to the level of the rate charged under the War Service Homes Act. lt is all very well to say that you can buy a home on a low deposit. No-one would know better than honorable members associated with the selling of homes, such as the honorable member for Mitchell (Mr. Irwin), who has had wide experience in this field as a bank manager, that it is not so much the deposit that worries prospective home owners as the repayments and the interest rate.

One of the depressing features associated with home ownership has been the increase in recent years in the cost of land. There may be some connection between this increase and the £250 home savings grant introduced by this Government recently. It is significant that since the introduction of the scheme, land prices have risen by as much as or sometimes more than the maximum grant. This situation has been brought to my attention by the practical booklet published quarterly on the housing industry, lt is interesting to note that although 30 per cent, of the money provided under this Agreement will be made available to building societies, there is no guarantee that they will lend home seekers up to 95 per cent, of the cost of the home - the amount guaranteed by the Housing Loans Insurance Corporation. I think building societies are rather like most banks. They would rather have 20 satisfied customers each getting 95 per cent, of the total value of their homes and 10 dissatisfied customers getting 60 per cent, or 75 per cent., than 30 partly satisfied customers all getting somewhat less than 95 per cent.

How times have changed as far as the deposit on a home is concerned is pointed out by the Queensland Secretary of the Housing Industry Association, who said -

But while the maximum loan available from the main lending bodies is $7,000, the most popular choice in Australia is a three-bedroom house in brick veneer which costs $8,000 to build.

Take an average price of $3,700 for the land and $8,000 for the house to make a total of $11,700.

In this case a 25 per cent, equity would amount to $3,000.

The Australian Labour Party believes that times have changed. We believe that it is time to increase the maximum loan available from building authorities. The Commonwealth should give the lead, particularly in respect of war service homes, where it could increase the maximum loan to $10,000. The Queensland Secretary of the Housing Industry Association pointed out that, taking into account other incidental costs associated with the building of a home, a prospective home owner would have to find 45 per cent, of the total cost before he would be able to set about owning a home. So much for those who are able to purchase a home. There are other members of the community who for various reasons would never have the opportunity of owning a home of their own. Many of the reasons were mentioned by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The situation of such people is well known to ail honorable members. They will never be able to purchase a home, so they have to live in a rented home. There are people who, possibly because of injuries sustained in an accident, have suffered a decrease in income and are unable to meet their weekly rentals. There are others equally worthy of consideration who could be assisted by way of rental rebate. It is true that rental rebates apply in certain States and I understand that one means of financing a rental rebate scheme is by increasing rents to other tenants of Housing Commission houses.

At the Housing Industry Association’s first annual convention the President. Mr. Driscoll, said that young married couples in Australia faced an almost impossible deposit gap if they wanted to build or buy a home. He asked -

How can a young couple be expected to have a family when they arc forced into living in Hats Cor $16 to $20 a week?

A wife frequently has to go out and earn money to help pay the rent. Often young couples are in the hopeless position of trying to build their resources to meet the necessary deposit for a home. Mr. Driscoll referred to the effect this is having on the birth rate. Most young couples hope to have a home of their own in which to settle before they start raising families. Mr. Driscoll pointed out that where once a young couple could have looked forward to building a home on a S400 to SI, 000 deposit they now need at least $3,000 as a deposit. Mr. Driscoll added -

Even then they would be lucky lo gel themselves a home.

Most of these difficulties would be taken care of by the Opposition’s amendment.

During the remaining time available to me I wish to indicate how Queensland, under a Liberal-Country Party Government, has gradually reduced the number of homes being made available for rental purposes. As soon as a house is constructed it is made available for purchase rather than for renting. With the concurrence of the House I incorporate the following table in “ Hansard “-

The Queensland Government has, by allocating a minimum of the Commonwealth money to the Home Builders Account, and by finding the balance from loan resources and from high interest debenture loan raisings, deprived home building societies of finance to the extent of $12 million during its nine years of office. While I am pleased with the allocation for rural home building I believe it will have some serious effect on Queensland’s allocation to building societies. For this reason the Labour Party has moved that the Commonwealth advance be increased by the amount to be allocated to home building societies. We feel that housing is of such importance to family life that housing loan remissions of SI 00 to $200 for each child should be granted to assist those in need of help. I support the amendment moved by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and thank the House for its indulgence.

Mr IRWIN:
Mitchell

.- This Bill authorises the continuance for five years, commencing 1st July next, of the arrangement under the 1956-61 Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement whereby the Commonwealth provides financial assistance to the States for housing purposes by way of funds advanced at concessional interest rates. That Agreement has been amended in minor respects on occasions. From time to time there is criticism of this Government’s allocation of funds. The Agreement does not define the amount of the allocation. The money to be made available for housing is the responsibility of each State. After a general survey of the financial resources the Loan Council determines an overall limit to the borrowing programme for the ensuing financial year. Each State nominates the amount it requires for housing and these amounts become part of the Commonwealth’s share of governmental loan raisings for the year and are made available by the Commonwealth to the States under the Housing Agreement. I trust that what I have said will clear up the misapprehension that exists about the Commonwealth’s role in respect of housing allocations, lt will be seen that the amount used for housing purposes is determined by the States. The better the management of State affairs the more money a State can apply to essential needs like housing and education.

The Chifley Government’s Housing Agreement of 1945 placed practically its entire emphasis on rental housing. In recognition of the fact that many families of low and moderate means desire to own their own homes, Liberal-Country Party Administrations entered into Housing Agreements whereby the States could sell, on liberal terms, dwellings constructed under the Agreements, and also eased the harsh terms applicable to the purchase of dwellings built under the 1945 Agreement. The Agreements entered into by the Liberal-Country Party Administrations were freely negotiated with the States and were the result of deliberations by Housing Ministers and housing officers of the Commonwealth and the States. The proposal to continue advances on practically identical conditions met with a generally favourable reaction from State Housing Ministers.

Under the Chifley Agreement of 1945 the Commonwealth meets 60 per cent, of the losses incurred by a State in the administration of dwellings erected under the Agreement. A major factor in such losses is rental rebates, but to obtain the benefit of the 60 per cent, contribution a State is obliged to comply with a number of conditions so stringent that only two States have been able to meet them in recent years. The 1956- 1961 Agreement, therefore, left it for the States to decide whether the concessional interest rate would be used to provide rental rebates. Some States do, in fact, use the concession for this purpose.

Clause 6 provides that loan funds advanced to a State shall be divided into two parts. At least 30 per cent. - it was 20 per cent, in 1956-57 and 1957-58 - is to be used to provide finance for private home builders by means of loans to building societies and other approved institutions. Clause 16 provides for the money to be distributed through a Home Builders’ Account. The remainder of the money is advanced to State housing authorities. It is expected that in the 10 years ending on 30th June 1966 the total amount of loan funds advanced to the States for housing will be $866,822,000, of which $267,881,400 will have been allocated to the Home Builders’ Account. The total then made available from the Account, however, will be about $307 million because of the accumulation of surplus funds in it. The Commonwealth also allocates funds for housing in other ways than through the Agreement. It makes tax free grants to young couples, amounting to more than $7 million in the first half of 1965-66; subsidises homes for the aged and infirm; provides housing and finance in the Territories under its control; provides loans of about $70 million a year through the War Service Homes Division; and provides funds for the erection of dwellings for serving members of the forces. The total funds to be made available by the Commonwealth from all sources in 1965-66 is more than $240 million.

The State allocation should not be reduced by the diversion of 30 per cent, to building societies. Results of the use of moneys available to building societies and other approved institutions compare very favourably with the results that would have been achieved by the use of the money by State housing authorities. Repayment of the Commonwealth advances is made over a period of 53 years, but the institutions have been required to repay loans from the Home Builders’ Account over periods not exceeding 31 years. This permits most advantageous use to be made of the housing moneys. As repayments by the institutions exceed the amounts required for repayment of the allocations to the Account, the excess is available for relending to institutions. The actuarial computation is that funds allocated from the Home Builders’ Account will be employed about twice over the 53 year amortisation period of the Commonwealth and State loans. The institutions require larger deposits than the housing authorities require from purchasers. This means that greater savings per house are effected in the case of the Home Builders’ Account, with the result that more houses will be financed by building societies with a given sum than if that sum were made available to the State housing authorities for building houses either for rental or for sale on low deposit by the States.

The combined effects of the revolving fund operation of the Home Builders’ Account and the provision, of larger deposits on loans by building societies over the nine year term of the 1956 and 1961 Agreements up to 30th June 1965 is shown in the following table -

Under the 1945 Agreement, homes in the main are built for people on low incomes and for indigent people. But what is the position in New South Wales? Members of Government boards and parliamentarians live in Housing Commission homes. If pride and shame do not make these people vacate the Housing Commission homes, the State Government should take action against them. I had an unfortunate experience about August of last year. I tried to get a home for a widow, who is about 23 years of age and who has six children.

She is an excellent person and had not committed any offence against society by gambling or by wasting her money. I went to the Housing Commission and implored it to give this woman a home, but I was told that no provision was made for such people. After four months of determined effort, I obtained a home for her. She and her six children were living on a verandah measuring 20 feet by 6 feet. Unfortunately, one child died before I could procure a home for her. This is an eternal disgrace to those of us who are at least normal Christians. The point I make is that affluent people, people who were well off when they went into Housing Commission homes, members of State boards and parliamentarians are living in Housing Commission homes to the exclusion of such people as the widow 1 have just mentioned. That is why I am sorry that this Agreement was not placed before us before the State and Commonwealth Ministers decided on the terms of it. I think both sides of the House deplore the situation that I have just outlined. We would not have allowed the Agreement to have continued while affluent people occupied Housing Commission homes to the detriment of low wage earners and indigent people.

Mr BURY:
Minister for Labour and National Service · Wentworth · LP

– There seems to have been a certain amount of misunderstanding as to the extent of the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement and the ground that it covers. This is typified by the remarks of the honorable member for Wide Bay (Mr. Hansen), who said that we should impose or consider various conditions before handing over Commonwealth money to the State. This is not, in essence, anything of the kind. This is a subsidy of 1 per cent, on the moneys that the States borrow under the Financial Agreement and they are loan funds accruing to the States. We subsidise by 1 per cent, the amount that the States allocate for housing purposes. Reference is also made to what happens in the different States. But of course the total amounts applied are decided by the States when determining their loan programmes. The whole of the moneys, which are really State moneys, cover only one-fifth, roughly, of the housing operations in Australia. So it would be quite inappropriate to tack on to an agreement of this kind conditions relating to all housing activities throughout the community. There is a very limited amount that this Agreement will carry. It will continue to finance the basic activities of the Housing Commissions and the terminating and permanent building societies. These bodies are all in operation. They require to be kept going and the Agreement will enable this process to continue.

The honorable member for Hughes (Mr. L. R. Johnson) raised, amongst other things, the question of some of this money going to building societies and suggested it should all go to the Housing Commissions. He deplored the fluctuation in the supply of money to building societies. With this, of course, we can all agree. But the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement provides a rock ‘bottom stability for the operations of building societies. The amount provided under the Agreement varies very little from year to year and it provides a good continuing basis, whatever the fluctuations in the funds available to them from other sources.

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Whitlam) continued to talk about the planning of suburbs and how we should lay out our future housing requirements and so forth. We all have our views on this subject and in many respects, of course, most enlightened people would agree in broad, general terms with this idea. There are such things as the planning bodies in New South Wales. The Victorian Government also is extensively interested in planning, and the position is similar in other places. These are essentially State matters. They certainly have nothing to do with the finance provided under this interest subsidy scheme. If we as a Commonwealth were to go to the States and say: “ We will give you this 1 per cent, interest below bond rate and in return you will submit to our ideas on how you should plan your cities, where you should put everything, and everything should be subject to Commonwealth control”, they would tell us to forget all about the Agreement. They would say: “ We will provide our Housing Commissions with funds from our ordinary loan moneys “. This proposition just does not ride.

The honorable member for Hughes (Mr. L. R. Johnson) talked about things with which everyone could agree in nice rosy general terms. He spoke of the desire for exploration of industrial building methods, improved prefabricated houses such as Victoria is evolving, uniformity of building codes in which much work is being done currently, stamp duties and transfer fees. These things, it has been suggested, should be tagged on to the Agreement and brought into the debate, but these are matters controlled by the States. Ti we tried to inject these features into an agreement of this kind the States would pull out. It would make no sense at all. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition mentioned an annual report to the Parliament. I understand that the Opposition intends to move an amendment at the Committee stage so I shall not deal with this matter now. However, I do deplore the fact that this Agreement, which covers a very limited field, is made the supposed vehicle for all kinds of other ideas which anyone might have with the implication that these things could reasonably be injected into the Agreement and still keep it in existence.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

– The immediate question is: “That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question “.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment negatived.

Original question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee.

The Bill.

Proposed new clause 3a.

Mr L R JOHNSON:
Hughes

– I move -

That the following new clause be inserted in the Bill- “3a. - (1.) The Secretary to the Department of Mousing shall, as soon as practicable after each thirtieth day of June, furnish to the Minister, for presentation to each House of the Parliament, a report on the operation of the 1956-1966 Housing Agreement during the year that ended on that date. “ (2.) The Minister shall cause a copy of each report of the Secretary to be laid before each House of the Parliament within fifteen sitting days of that House after the receipt of the report by the Minister. “ (3.) The first report under this section shall be furnished as soon as practicable after the thirtieth day of June, One thousand nine hundred and sixty-six, and shall relate to the period commencing on the date of commencement of this Act and ending on that thirtieth day of June.”.

The essence of the amendment is that we seek to require the Secretary of the Department of Housing to present to the Minister a report on the operation of this Agreement for subsequent presentation to both Houses of the Parliament. The amendment provides also that the report should be provided next year. It should be mentioned that, in another place, the Minister for Housing (Senator Dame Annabelle Rankin) said - 1 am not completely unreceptive of this idea of an annual report. I believe that the Parliament should be kept fully informed on these important matters and I agree in principle with the amendment for that reason.

The Opposition wants to have this matter dealt with because there has been tremendous difficulty encountered in gathering the reports of the six State housing authorities over the years.

It is known by many honorable members that there is a considerable lag involved in the production of some of these reports. I should mention also that under other legislation concerned with housing reports are made available. I refer to the War Service Homes Act, the Homes Savings Grant Act and the Housing Loans Insurance Act. I believe the exclusions are the Aged Persons Homes Act and the Disabled Persons Accommodation Act. It could well be that, although no reports are required under the last two mentioned Acts, this deficiency might be overcome in the same manner as the Opposition proposes that the deficiency in the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement should be overcome. I propose the amendment because I know that a report would be not only of tremendous benefit to members of both Houses of Parliament but also of great interest to people right throughout the community who have an active involvement in the housing problems confronting the people of this country. It would result in improved documentation because the officers of the State housing authorities do play such a tremendous part in the provision of houses in Australia.

Mr BURY:
Minister for Labour and National Service · Wentworth · LP

– The Government cannot accept this amendment. Although I say that one could sympathise with the views expressed and the desire of the honorable member for Hughes (Mr. L. R. Johnson) and others to obtain more detailed information on the operations of the State housing commissions in readily available form by a certain date, we do not think that the report within the Commonwealth compass could be very fruitful. All that the Commonwealth could do would be merely to report the amounts of money that had gone to the various States and very minor matters which had occurred between the Commonwealth and the States in regard to this matter. The information which is sought and which honorable members seek from time to time about the activities of State housing commissions, particularly by putting questions on the notice paper, is sought by the Department of Housing, but it has to be provided by the States. To what extent they will provide information and the nature of the information which will be provided is up to the States themselves.

There is a further complication that I can see. As the honorable member for Hughes would know, the housing commissions in each State are not by any means financed wholly under the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement, particularly in South Australia and Queensland, but also in other States. The States do inject a considerable volume of funds of their own into their housing activities. If we did accept this amendment we feel that the information which we could guarantee to provide would be too limited to be of any value. In any case this matter comes up each year in the House when legislation related to this Agreement is debated. The Commonwealth in this and other matters is not in a position to pry into State finances. The report suggested in the amendment could be effective only if the provision of all the information in the form required by the Commonwealth was made a condition of the Agreement. This has not been made a condition previously and it is a proposal which the States might reject. Each State through its housing commission operates in a rather different way. There are different conditions of tenancies, for example.

Information is made available by the States eventually in their own reports, but this is not a requirement which we could impose on the States. We are indebted to them for the amount of information they do supply. I have discussed this question with the Minister and she is prepared, as and when the opportunity arises, to discuss with the State Ministers whether it would be reasonable to compile all this information in each State and put it together in one document. Consequently, the Government cannot accept this amendment, not because it is hostile to the idea but because it is not really practicable for it to do so prior to discussing the matter with the States.

Proposed new clause negatived.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Third Reading

Bill (on motion by Mr. Bury) - by leave - read a third time.

page 1888

BILLS RETURNED FROM THE SENATE

The following Bills were returned from the Senate -

Without amendment -

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 1965-66. Supply Bill (No. 2) 1966-67. Loan (Defence) Bill 1966.

Without requests -

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 1965-66. Supply Bill (No. 1) 1966-67.

page 1888

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion (by Mr. Bury) agreed to -

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until a date and hour to be fixed by Mr. Speaker, which time of meeting shall be notified by Mr. Speaker to each member by telegram or letter.

page 1888

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Motion (by Mr. Bury) agreed to -

That leave of absence be given to every member of the House of Representatives from the determination of this sitting of the House to the date of its next silting.

page 1888

ADJOURNMENT

Retirement of Mr. W. I. Emerton - Beef Roads - Answers to Questions

Motion (by Mr. Bury) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon Sir John McLeay:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I wish to report to the House that Mr. W. I. Emerton, Secretary of the Joint House Department, attains the age of 65 on 20lh

May and will retire from the Parliamentary service during the next recess. Mr. Emerton entered the service of the Commonwealth on 21st May 1917, being then 16 years of age, and was first appointed to the Taxation Branch of the Treasury in Sydney. He remained with the Branch until 1926 when he received a promotion to the Public Service Inspector’s Office in that city. With the transfer of the Parliament from Melbourne in 1927, the position of Clerk and Accountant of the Joint House Department became available and Mr. Emerton applied for this position. Being successful, he took up duty in the Parliament on 24th October 1927. While he cannot claim to be one of the now select band who came with the Parliament from Melbourne, he was certainly one of the early pioneers of Canberra and the parliamentary service. In 1931 Mr. Emerton received a promotion to the Senate staff, occupying first the junior position and later rising through the echelon to become Usher of the Black Rod in 1942, and ultimately in 1950 to be appointed Second Clerk Assistant. During the war years he rendered valuable service as Secretary of the War Expenditure Committee. He served with distinction as Second Clerk Assistant under the then Clerk, the late Mr. J. E. Edwards, but in 1954 the opportunity to return to the Joint House Department, this time as its Permanent Head, occurred and Mr. Emerton accepted this position. Mr. Emerton has therefore occupied for nearly 12 years a position of considerable importance in the Parliament. His responsibilities have ranged over a wide field from the services provided in the Refreshment Rooms, through to the maintenance and operation of all services in the building and the handling of the increasing numbers of visitors who come to see the Parliament. The success of large banquets and balls and other functions held when royal visits occur or V.I.P.’s are entertained is due in large measure to the high efficiency displayed by Mr. Emerton in organising and planning the arrangements.

In the sporting field Mr. Emerton was prominently associated with cricket in the Australian Capital Territory, both as a player and as an administrator. He was a bowler of some skill in local district competition matches for a number of years, and later held office as President of the Australian

Capital Territory Cricket Association. Mr. Emerton retires in good health after a lifetime of loyal and efficient service to the Parliament and it is the earnest wish of all those whom he has served that he enjoys a long and happy retirement.

Honorable members. - Hear, hear!

Dr PATTERSON:
Dawson

.- Mr. Speaker, I wish briefly to discuss the Government’s decision not to proceed today with the debate on the Queensland Beef Cattle Roads Agreement Bill 1966. This decision represents a monstrous miscarriage of justice. The prime reason for the Government’s action is to avoid the acute criticism and embarrassment that must fall on both the Federal and the Queensland Governments if the measure were discussed. This action is all the more ominous because it is clear that the Government does not want this Bill debated before the Queensland State election. The Government’s action in refusing to allow this Bill to be debated is almost unbelievable when the facts are fully known. Firstly, despite the complete absence of any allocation of beef road funds in the last Budget, the Government was able to announce suddenly, on the eve of the Dawson by-election, the provision of an extra $4 million for beef roads in Queensland. This blatant vote catching action received considerable adverse publicity throughout Australia and was even condemned in editorials of responsible newspapers. The excuse given by the Government was that this was an urgent priority allocation to help Queensland with a continuity programme. Last week, the Minister for National Development (Mr. Fairbairn) introduced legislation into this House to authorise the allocation by the Commonwealth of $4 million, as announced in the Dawson by-election campaign, for the construction of priority roads in Queensland. Until today it was the intention of the Government to have this Bill debated before the Parliament went into recess. Now, for reasons known only to the Government, it has been withdrawn from debate in this sessional period.

The comprehensive analysis of road requirements throughout northern Australia, under a $200 million road programme, recently carried out by the Northern Division of the Department of National Development, revealed that of the hundreds of roads considered, seven roads were so urgently required for the cattle industry that they warranted immediate construction. Six of these roads were located in Queensland and one in the Northern Territory. All these roads have been included in the northern beef road programme except one - the Nebo-Mackay road, lt can easily be shown that this road is far more important to the cattle industry and to the economy of the country than many of the roads on which Commonwealth funds are now being expended. The reason why the Government will not have the Queensland Beef Cattle Roads Agreement Bill debated before the Queensland election is that it will have to reveal that one of the most important beef roads in Australia - the Nebo to Mackay road - has been completely omitted from the road programme. As the Minister for National Development has stated that the road programme has been drawn up after discussions with the Queensland authorities responsible for roads, the full blame for the omission of this vital development road must be shared by the Queensland authorities and the Federal Government.

The seriousness of the omission of this very important road is illustrated by the undisputed fact that Mackay is the only port, and the only coastal town in Australia with an export meat works, that does not possess a road to its hinterland. As those concerned with the cattle industry know, an effective road to the hinterland cattle country is essential for the efficient operation of a coastal meat works. No-one in the Commonwealth sphere would dispute the importance of the Nebo to Mackay road, but apparently the road authorities in Queensland do not believe it is important or that it should be constructed as a beef road with Commonwealth funds. It is perhaps of significance that the Queensland Minister for Main Roads resides in this district. The debate on the Bill would also have brought out the fact that very serious miscalculations were made in the costs of construction of certain Queensland roads and that within three years the original estimate of $18 million had been increased to $27 million.

As a consequence some roads which are now being constructed with Commonwealth funds would have had, in effect, a much lower priority if the true costs of construction had been originally known.

The other important point which would have been forcefully brought out is the method of financing these roads, now being adopted by the Commonwealth. The explanation given by the Treasurer (Mr. McMahon) in support of this new method is very close to deliberate fabrication. The Treasurer stated that the new beef roads would be financed by the State on the same terms as have applied in the recent years of the current beef roads scheme - half by grant and half by fully repayable interest bearing loan. The facts are that at no stage during the whole of the current beef roads programme was this method of finance ever agreed to by the State Government or, in fact, ever mentioned. The $16.6 million already committed was made up of grants of $10 million for the construction of roads to gravel standards, and $6.6 million in loan funds for sealing. This was the accepted method of finance between the Commonwealth and the State. It is in line with the grants paid to Western Australia for beef roads, and in accordance with the method of financing beef roads under the 1949 States Grants (Encouragement of Meat Production) Act.

As beef roads are essentially development roads in undeveloped areas of northern Australia, it is completely unjust for the Commonwealth to introduce this new method of financing for beef roads. At the same time it is most difficult to believe that a responsible State Government would agree to such conditions which, in turn, impose extra hardships on local authorities and people living in the northern areas of Queensland.

Mr FAIRBAIRN:
Minister for National Development · Farrer · LP

– The honorable member for Dawson (Dr. Patterson) has made some very wild accusations. Unfortunately, while he was speaking I was having a discussion with the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Calwell) and was not able to hear all that he said. 1 was waiting for the honorable member to speak on the motion for the adjournment last night, but, for some unknown reason, he did not do so. These matters have been thrown at us at the last moment.

All I can say is that the reason why we did not bring forward the Bill relating to Queensland beef roads was that the State

Government has adequate funds with which to carry on until we meet for the Budget sittings. Also, the Queensland Government must pass complementary legislation. This has not been done as yet. There will be no delay in the payment of the money when the Queensland Government wants it. The necessary legislation will be brought forward in this Parliament at the beginning of the Budget sessional period, and this will be in ample time to meet the needs of the Queensland Government.

Mr UREN:
Reid

– I apologise for rising at this time, but I have been trying since last Tuesday week to ask a question without notice.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honorable member will need to be careful if he is reflecting on the Chair.

Mr UREN:

– I assure you, Mr. Speaker, that I am not reflecting on the Chair; 1 am merely saying that 1 have been trying since last Tuesday week to get from the Government a reply to a question that I asked the Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Holt). On 22nd March, I asked this question of the Prime Minister -

Are national service trainees being requested to sign a document which includes a proposal that they arc prepared to volunteer for service overseas? The Prime Minister promised on that day to furnish me with a reply. The honorable member for Yarra (Dr. J. F. Cairns) asked a somewhat similar question on 30th March last. A promise was given to the honorable member that a reply would be forthcoming but he has received no reply as yet. I also sent an urgent telegram to the Prime Minister on 4th May, and still I have received no reply to my question. This matter was first raised by me on 9th December 1965. What I had to say then is recorded on page 3893 of “ Hansard “ of that date. On that occasion I said - 1 understand that they- that is, national service trainees, or conscripts - were asked to sign a document that embodied three propositions. 1 am not sure that I have the exact words, but 1 shall outline them as best I can. The first proposition was to the effect that (a) they should not disclose that they were going to Vietnam and (b) they should not disclose the timetable for their departure. The second proposition stated that they would be given pre-embarkation leave provided they pledged that they would return to their unit before the ship sailed. The third proposition is the great mystery. It was a statement that they agree to serve overseas. 1 know of instances in which young conscripts have refused to sign this document and have been subjected to intimidation tactics. Pressure has been brought to bear on them.

As I have said, that statement was made on 9th December last year. This was followed by a question without notice on 22nd March this year and a further question on 30th March. Finally, I sent a telegram to the Prime Minister on 4th May hoping to get a reply before the Parliament went into recess. This morning, 1 went to see the Prime Minister’s secretary. I notified him that I intended to raise the matter during the debate on the motion for the adjournment of the House today. I said that I did not expect the Prime Minister to come in to answer me but I hoped that he would send in one of his Service Ministers to provide an answer.

All I want to know is whether national service trainees are being requested to sign a document which includes a proposal that they are prepared to volunteer for service overseas. That is a simple question. Has any such document been placed before national service trainees? If one has been placed before them, I should like to know the details of it.

Mr. MALCOLM FRASER (WannonMinister for the Army) [1.2]. - There is no Government or Army Headquarters requirement for any national serviceman to sign any document saying that he is willing, or that he would like, to serve overseas. Honorable members should know that it is established quite clearly in legislation that has been passed by this House that national servicemen must be prepared to serve wherever the security of Australia demands and wherever the units to which they have been posted as individuals may be deployed in our own interests or to meet our own international obligations. However, to try and meet the wishes of individual national servicemen, some units in different commands did prepare, of their own volition, questionnaires asking national servicemen, after they had done their infantry training, which corps training they would prefer. For example, some might prefer infantry corps training while others might prefer to go into one of the other Army corps. We try to meet the wishes of individual servicemen in this regard as far as possible.

When asking this question as to the type of service the national servicemen preferred, some of the units also asked whether they had had any preference as to where they would like to serve. Reference was made in one or two of these questions to service overseas. Because of the misunderstanding to which a question of this kind is open, and because there is a clear requirement from the Government and from the Parliament that all members of the armed forces shall serve wherever Australia’s security demands, questions relating to areas in which they may or may not wish to serve will not be asked in future. But the Army will still do what it can to meet the wishes of individual national servicemen with respect to the corps training they would prefer to undertake. It was entirely a unit decision to ask this question, the motive being an endeavour to meet the wishes of individual servicemen as far as possible. There is no point in this. I have said what the position is. I have said that there has never been a government or an Army headquarters requirement for this. The law as it is spelt out is perfectly plain. Honorable members know that national servicemen are integrated with the Regular Army; that they must be so integrated if we are to meet the commitments before us and to answer the demands that must necessarily be met in relation to our own security.

Mr Calwell:

– I will ask the Prime Minister to make it available to me.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– I do not know what the honorable gentleman is referring to.

Mr Calwell:

– I said I will ask the Prime Minister to make available to me the documents to which the Minister has referred.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– The honorable gentleman is entitled to do so butI can see no good purpose being served in doing this.

Mr Calwell:

– Why is there any good purpose in suppressing it?

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– The facts of the situation have not been suppressed. The Leader of the Opposition has the facts of the situation. It is because of the kind of use that the honorable member for Reid (Mr. Uren) would like to make of this kind of question that these questions, which were designed purely to meet the wishes as far as possible of individual national servicemen, will no longer be asked.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 1.6 p.m. until a date and hour to be fixed by Mr. Speaker and to be notified by him to each member by telegram or letter.

page 1893

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE

The following answers to questions upon notice were circulated -

Trade Practices Legislation. (Question No. 1544.)

Mr Webb:

b asked the Attorney-General, upon notice -

  1. Which of the States have agreed to pass legislation complementary to the Commonwealth Trade Practices Act?
  2. What action is proposed to secure the support of the States which are reluctant to pass complementary legislation?
Mr Snedden:
Attorney-General · BRUCE, VICTORIA · LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows -

From time to time since 1961 there have been informal discussions in the Standing Committee of Commonwealth and State Attorneys-General concerning the possibility of State legislation complementing the Trade Practices Act 1965. The question whether there is to be complementary State legislation is one for the States themselves. By letters dated 4th April 1966, the Prime Minister asked each State Premier whether his Government proposed to enact complementary legislation. The Government of Tasmania has since advised that it intends to introduce appropriate State legislation. The form of the legislation will be determined by the Tasmanian Government after cortain legal difficulties, which are at present under consideration, have been resolved. The Governments of Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia have said that, at this stage, they do not propose to introduce legislation, and the Government of New South Wales has advised that the question is currently under close examination. The Government of South Australia has not yet replied to the Prime Minister’s letter. There is to be further discussion of the matter at a meeting of the standing committee on 21st and 22nd July 1966.

Australian Broadcasting Commission. (Question No. 1622.)

Mr Gibson:
DENISON, TASMANIA

n asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Has his attention been drawn to the newspaper report of a speech made on 2nd March 1966 by Mr. Alan Ashbolt, one of the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s Federal talks supervisors and President of the A.B.C. Senior Officers’ Association, Sydney, at a meeting of the Sydney University Socialist Club and to a letter under Mr. Ashbolt’s name appearing in “ The Australian “ newspaper on the 9th March 1966?
  2. If so, and in view of the relationship of this matter to Mr. Ashbolt’s official position, will he ask Mr. Ashbolt that he state the names of those Federal politicians whom he alleges use the old boy network of censorship of the A. B.C., or if Mr. Ashbolt be unable to do so, that he makes a complete public retraction of his allegation?
Mr Hulme:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows -

I have read the newspaper report of Mr. Ashbolt’s speech on 2nd March 1966 and also a copy of the letter which he sent to the editor of “ The Australian “ and which appeared in that newspaper in 9th March 1966. Mr. Ashbolt is an officer of the Australian Broadcasting Commission and is not subject to my control as Minister. I am sure the A.B.C. will consider this matter and take whatever action they may consider appropriate in accordance with the terms and conditions of Mr. Ashbolt’s employment as an officer of the commission.

Visitors’ Visas. (Question No. 1629.)

Mr Reynolds:

s asked the Minister for Immigration, upon notice -

  1. Has the Government received complaints regarding long delays in granting visas to intending visitors to Australia? 2.If so. do these complaints refer to persons from non-Communist as well as Communist countries?
  2. What is the average time involved between application for and grant of a visit for entry into Australia by nationals of (a) non-Communist and (b) Communist countries?
  3. Is he able to say how this period compares with the time taken for the issuance of visas by other significant countries?
Mr Opperman:
Minister for Immigration · CORIO, VICTORIA · LP

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

  1. In some individual cases, yes. If the complaint appears to be justified, the circumstances of the case are fully investigated, action to remedy the situation is taken, and recurrence is avoided if at all possible.
  2. Yes.
  3. No average time can be stated. Persons applying in non-Communist countries can often be granted visitor visas at very short notice but usually some days are required and in a minority of cases this can extend to some weeks. Applications by residents of Communist countries tend to take longer than others.
  4. A good many overseas countries allow visits to be made to their territory without visas at all. Australia, as a country of immigration, has been unable to dispense with the visa requirement and the screening it makes possible. The procedure for visitor visas is under constant review with the purpose of reducing formalities to the minimum consistent with Australia’s interests. The Department is at present examining the procedures at our visa-issuing posts in all major countries, and the procedures of other countries, with the objective of a systematic revision of visa requirements.

The need for prompt visa issue, in the interests of individuals and as part of the expanding business and tourist traffic, is fully appreciated.

Trade Practices Commissioner. (Question No. 1704.)

Mr Webb:

b asked the Attorney-General, upon notice -

  1. Is it his intention to appoint a trade practices commissioner?
  2. If so, when is the appointment to be made?
Mr Snedden:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows -

Yes, at an early date.

Electoral. (Question No. 1712.)

Mr Hansen:

n asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

  1. What is the minimum number of votes required to maintain a polling booth?
  2. Have polling booths been allotted to public and private hospitals even though the hospital authorities were unwilling to provide facilities for a polling booth because room was not readily available and the operation of the booth would interrupt hospital patients and routine?
  3. What recent consideration has been given by the Electoral Office to the provision of automatic or electronic voting machines to speed up the counting of votes?
Mr Anthony:
CP

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

  1. At least 20 ordinary votes are considered necessary to warrant the retention of a polling booth. However, special circumstances may exist where it is considered necessary to maintain a polling booth taking less than 20 votes.
  2. No. The departmental policy is that, subject to the concurrence of die hospital authorities concerned, polling booths are established at all hospitals which cater for 50 or more bed-patients.
  3. The possible use of automatic or electronic voting machines suitable for our preferential system of voting has been examined by my officers only recently, but indications are that the type of technical equipment which would be needed would be so costly that its installation is not warranted. Developments in the mechanical and electronic equipment suitable for electoral purposes are constantly reviewed.

Currency. (Question No. 1716.)

Mr Beaton:

n asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. Will the £ s. d. coins now being phased out of circulation cease to be legal tender in February 1968?
  2. Will the forging of these coins still be illegal after that date?
  3. If not, win counterfeits of valuable coins such as 1930 and 1937 pennies reap unearned rewards for counterfeiters and reduce sharply in value the collections of coin enthusiasts?
Mr McMahon:
Treasurer · LOWE, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

  1. By virtue of the Currency Act 1965, I s. d. coins will continue to be legal tender (in multiples of sixpence) for payment of amounts in decimal currency after the end of the transition period, which is expected to be not later than February 1968. However, it is expected that very few of these coins will then be in active circulation.
  2. and 3. The forging of £ s. d. coins will continue to be illegal after the end of the transition period.

Television. (Question No. 1743.)

Dr Patterson:

n asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

What are the individual priorities for the remaining high-powered national television stations, and what is the estimated time-table for the completion of each station?

Mr Hulme:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

The provision of National Television Stations is being carried out in accordance wilh a plan agreed upon by the Government some years ago when arrangements were concluded for the extension of National Television service to country areas. Whilst these arrangements did not visualise a strict order of priority as between the various Stations proposed, the plan did recognise the need to proceed with the overall project simultaneously in all States. The difficulties associated with the provision of roads and power to some mountaintop sites and the time required for the provision of long microwave relay systems for the transmission of programmes from the capital cities were determining factors regarding completion dates in some cases.

The time table for the completion of the remaining high-powered national television stations is now as follows: - By 30 June 1966- Southern Downs (Warwick), Queensland.

Albany, Western Australia. Griffith, New South Wales. By 30 September 1966- Cooma/Bega, New South Wales. Dubbo, New South Wales. Cairns, Queensland. (This will be a lowpowered temporary installation pending the building of an access road to the permanent site.) Late 1967 - Mackay, Queensland.

The delay in establishing this station is a direct result of conditions imposed on the Department by the National Park Authorities who control the site. A tourist quality road is to be provided to enable the area to be developed as a tourist attraction. It is expected from current progress that the project will be completed in about 18 months.

Superannuation. (Question No. 1750.)

Mr Beaton:

n asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. Will contributors to the Provident Account be advised of the amount of interest credited to them as a result of the Government’s decision to dispose of the surplus in the Commonwealth Superannuation Fund and Provident Account?
  2. What progress has been made in calculating the individual entitlements and notifying recipients?
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. lt is not customary for current contributors to the Provident Account to be provided wilh progressive advices of the interest added to individual accounts in the records of the Superannuation Board; interest is not due and payable until the contributor ceases duty. Accordingly, no action has been taken to advise the 15,000 contributors of the amounts of additional interest being credited to records as from 1st July 1957. Such a course would be impracticable, because it would impose an additional burden on the stall of the Board, which is already subject to heavy overtime in its efforts to arrange the distribution of further payments from surplus assets of the Fund to some 125,000 contributors and pensioners.

Individual contributors to the Provident Account may obtain advice of the new rates of interest, applicable each year since 1st July 1957, from Superannuation Board circulars already distributed to Departments, Statutory Authorities and employee organisations.

  1. Some 7,000 former Provident Account contributors who ceased duty between 1st July 1957 and 31st March 1966 have been advised of refunds totalling over $800,000. Many of them have returned claim forms, as a consequence of which cheque payments to the value of $750,000 have been authorised to date. Over 750 notifications have been returned unclaimed while claim for amounts ranging from SI to $525 are awaited from over 600 former contributors to the Provident Account.

Steel. (Question No. 1758.)

Mr Hansen:

n asked the Minister for Territories, upon notice -

  1. What quantities of steel for structural and other purposes were imported into the Territory of Papua and New Guinea during the years 1960 to 1965, inclusive?
  2. From what countries was this steel imported?
  3. How does the landed cost of steel from other countries compare with the cost of that from Australia?
  4. What is the freight cost on steel shipped to the Territory from the east coast of Australia?
Mr Barnes:
Minister for Territories · MCPHERSON, QUEENSLAND · CP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follows - 1 and 2. Imports of steel and iron arc -

  1. About the same but for Australian orders placed through traders to obtain prompt delivery, prices are higher.
  2. $25-$30 per ton.

Repatriation. (Question No. 1759.)

Mr Barnard:
BASS, TASMANIA

d asked the Minister representing the Minister for Repatriation, upon notice -

  1. How many Repatriation pensions have been granted in each State at the intermediate rate since the inception of this rate in 196S?
  2. What has been the total additional pension cost involved during the corresponding period?
Mr Swartz:
LP

– The Minister for Repatriation has supplied the following information -

  1. As at 30th April 1966-223.

New South Wales- 82

Victoria - 34

Queensland - 63

South Australia - 12

Western Australia - 20

Tasmania - 12.

  1. lt is not possible, without detailed examination of cases, to furnish the total additional pension cost involved. The intermediate rate of pension is $20.25 a week and, of the 223 mentioned above, the majority would have already been receiving a pension at some proportion of the full general (100 per cent.) rate, which is $12 a week.

Repatriation. (Question No. 1760.)

Mr Barnard:

d asked the Minister representing the Minister for Repatriation, upon notice -

  1. How many appeals were heard and determined by each of the four War Pensions Entitlement Appeal Tribunals during (a) each of the years 1963, 1964 and 1965 and (b) 1966 to 30th April?
  2. Where were the appeals determined, and how many were (a) allowed and (b) disallowed by each Tribunal?
Mr Swartz:
LP

– The Minister for Repatriation has supplied the following information -

The following statistics have been compiled from the Annual Reports of the War Pensions Entitlement Appeal Tribunals -

Comparable figures for the current financial year will be available later from the annual reports of the tribunals for the year ending 30lh June 1966.

Army Land at George’s Heights. (Question No. 1762.)

Mr Cockle:

e asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

  1. Has there been any development in the negotiations which have been proceeding for a period of time between his Department and the New South Wales State Government in respect of the original proposal to transfer Army land at George’s Heights, Mosman, to the State Government for use as a recreation and parkland area?
  2. Can he give any indication as to when the negotiations arc likely to be concluded and the land transferred?
Mr Anthony:
CP

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

  1. Representations have recently been made to the Prime Minister by the Premier of New South Wales concerning the terms and conditions on which surplus defence lands at George’s Heights and elsewhere in the Sydney area should be transferred to the State. The State Government’s veiws as expressed by the Premier are at present receiving consideration.
  2. No, but the matter will bc determined as expeditiously as possible.

Public Service. (Question No. 1547.)

Mr Clyde Cameron:

n asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the Commonwealth Public Service Board refuse to appoint officers who have passed the necessary clerical examination for

Third Division status even though the Board is still advertising in the “ Gazette “ and in the Public Notices for clerks? If so, why?

  1. Will consideration be given to granting preference to Fourth Division officers doing Third Division duties regardless of their position in the selection test?
  2. Are these problems confined to South Australia. If so, why?
  3. Who is responsible for marking the results of selection tests, and are they marked on the day of the test, or are they sent to Canberra for marking?
  4. Cun the returned service preference be invoked in favour of officers who fail the selection test?
Mr Harold Holt:
LP

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

  1. From time to time throughout the year the Board advertises in the “ Gazette “ and in Public Notices with the objective of continuously recruiting Third Division Clerks of the highest possible quality. Applicants, whether school leavers or officers of the Fourth Division, are required to have achieved a minimum education level and, if otherwise eligible, are thereafter selected for appointment or transfer on the basis of open competition. For this purpose the applicants arc ranked in order of merit by means of the Commonwealth Selection Test introduced upon the recommendation of the Committee of Inquiry into Public Service Recruitment (The Boyer Committee). In any particular period, those applicants low in the order of merit may not be appointed or transferred either because the number of eligible applicants exceeds the number of available vacancies or because of better quality applicants becoming available.
  2. The question of preference to Fourth Divi sion officers was considered by the Committee of Inquiry into Public Service Recruitment (The Boyer Committee). The Boyer Committee’s recommendation was that selection for entry to the Third Division should be openly competitive as between outside candidates with the Leaving Certificate and candidates eligible for transfer from the Fourth Division. However, Fourth Division officers have the advantage that they are eligible for transfer until they reach retiring age whereas those seeking appointment from outside the Service must be under 28 years of age.
  3. No.
  4. The marking of Commonwealth Selection

Tests is carried out in the offices of the Public Service Inspectors in the States and is usually completed within a few days.

  1. Under the Act ex-service preference applies only on first appointmentto the Service and when the place in the order of merit is equal.

War Service Homes. (Question No. 1600.)

Mr Webb:

b asked the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, upon notice -

What is the waiting period in the respective States for an applicant desiring to purchase a War Service home?

Mr Bury:
LP

– The Minister for Housing has supplied the following answer to the honorable member’s question -

There is no waiting period for finance in respect of applications for assistance under the War Service Homes Act to purchase a home in S’tates other than New South Wales and Victoria.

In these two States there is no waiting period in respect of applications for assistance to purchase a new home but, at present, the following waiting periods apply in respect of applications for assistance to purchase existing homes -

New South Wales - 6 months.

Victoria - 4 months.

Housing Loan Insurance. (Question No. 1639.)

Mr Devine:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

e asked the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, upon notice -

  1. What amount of loans has been insured in each State by the Housing Loans Insurance Corporation?
  2. What financial institutions or co-operative societies are making loans of up to 90 per cent, of purchase price as a result of the housing loans insurance scheme?
  3. Does the Commonwealth Bank grant housing loans up to 90 per cent, of purchase price; if so, does this come about as a result of insurance effected under this scheme?
Mr Bury:
LP

– The Minister for Housing has provided the following answers -

  1. and 2. 1 have previously explained in answer to a question on notice that it would not be appropriate to divulge publicly in detail the extent and sources of the Housing Loans Insurance Corporation’s business: the Corporation is a commercial undertaking operating in a competitive field, lt can be said, however, that many lending institutions are making high-ratio loans in all States. The monthly volume of insurance proposals received by the Corporation has risen to more than $1 million and the total value of loans insured now exceeds $3.5 million. In assessing this achievement, it should be noted that, although the Corporation formally opened for business on 26th November 1965, it did not become effectively operational until normal real estate activity resumed after the Christmas holiday season.
  2. My colleague, the Treasurer, has advised that the Commonwealth Savings Bank, in the ordinary course of lending under Part VI of the Commonwealth Banks Act, makes loans up to 75 per cent, of the bank’s valuation of a house property, or the prescribed amount of $7,000. whichever is the less. Since the establishment of the Housing Loans Insurance Corporation, the Commonwealth Saving Rank has made insured loans, in appropriate cases, up to 90 per cent, of the bank’s valuation of a properly with a maximum loan limit of $7,000. In almost all of such cases, the purchase price and the bank’s valuation were the same.

Supply of Books to Schools by Government. (Question No. 1642.)

Mr Whitlam:

m asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

In what circumstances and to what extent are books supplied by governments for (a) schools and/or (b) pupils in each State and Territory?

Mr Harold Holt:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

NEW SOUTH WALES

Books Supplied by Government -

Pupils at government primary schools are provided with items such as work books, primers, scripture stories and the “ School Magazine “.

New government schools are provided with the nucleus of a library varying in value with the sire of the school from$1 00 (for a oneteacher school) to$1 , 000 (for a high school).

Non-government schools may purchase the “ School Magazine “ and a number of other publications from the New South Wales Government Printing Office.

Financial Support for the Purchase of Books -

Secondary school pupils at both government and non-government institutions receive a text book allowance as follows - Forms I and II - $4, Form III - $6, Form IV-$10 and Forms V and VI-$16.

Government schools at both primary and secondary levels receive a subsidy of 50 per cent, on the purchase of library books up to a maximum which varies from $28 for a school of 70 or less to 40c per pupil in a primary school and 60c per pupil in a secondary school with more than 70 pupils; expediture in excess of this rate attracts subsidy at the rate of 40c in $1.

VICTORIA.

Books Supplied by Government -

A range of school readers is supplied at low cost to both government and non-government schools and is provided free to children in necessitous circumstances and certain special schools (e.g. those at migrant camps).

Financial Support for Purchase of BooksSecondary level pupils at government schools receive a book allowance if in necessitous circumstances. This varies from $14 to $34 per annum.

Broadcast booklets are subsidised to the extent of half the purchase price.

Government schools library purchases are subsidised on a 50 per cent, basis except in small primary schools where a 2.1 ratio is used. The maximum amount of the subsidy in a given year varies according to the size of the school - from $50 for a small primary school to $200 for a high school with more than 700 pupils.

N«w government schools are entitled to a special subsidy for library books at the rate of $200 for primary schools with an enrolment of over 150 and of $300 for secondary level schools.

Certain special schools (e.g. for the mentally handicapped, migrant camp schools, psychology and guidance centres) receive annual grants for books varying from $30 to $100 p.a.

QUEENSLAND.

Books Supplied by Government -

Primary school pupils at government schools receive a range of free textbooks.

Books printed by the Government Printing Office are available in bulk to non-government schools at reduced cost.

Financial Support for Purchase of Books - Secondary level pupils at all schools receive a book allowance of: Grades 8 and 9- $4; Grade 10 - $6; Grade 11- $20.

A $ for $ subsidy is payable to government schools on money raised for the purchase of library books.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA.

Books Supplied by Government -

Secondary pupils in necessitous circumstances at all schools receive free books in 1966.

Commencing in 1967 all primary school pupils will receive approved textbooks free of charge (to be returned at close of year).

Certain textbooks are available to nongovernment schools at the same price as to government schools.

Financial Support for Purchase of Books - All secondary students making satisfactory progress receive a book allowance of $16 per annum up to Intermediate level, $18 in Leaving Year and $20 in final year.

Government school libraries are subsidised on a $-$ basis.

WESTERN AUSTRALIA.

Books Supplied by Government -

A range of publications is issued to primary and secondary pupils and many of these are also provided for non-government schools.

Each newly established government high school receives books to the value of $200 as each year group from 1st to 5th is established.

Certain reference books and physical education publications are issued free.

Small schools, mission schools and special groups receive circulating selections of library books and annual issues of library books.

Financial Support for Purchase of Books - A library subsidy on a $ for $ basis is payable to all schools up to a maximum of $400 for large secondary schools and from $80 to $160 for primary and smaller high schools.

A special subsidy of $60 p.a. is payable to agricultural high schools for library books in agriculture.

TASMANIA.

Books Supplied by Government - Textbooks are provided free to all children ini necessitous circumstances.

Non-government schools may purchase textbooks and readers at the same prices as government schools.

Financial Support for Purchase of Books -

A $ for $ library subsidy is paid to government schools up to a maximum of between $300 (for large high schools) and $60 (small primary).

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY.

Books supplied by Government -

The same arrangements apply as are set out for New South Wales.

Financial Support for Purchase of Books - All secondary schools receive a $2,000 grant towards the setting up of a textbook hiring service.

All secondary schools receive an allowance to assist in provision of textbooks (for student hire) of $4 for Form I and II students, $6 for Form III students, $10 for Form IV students and $16 for Form V and VI students. $1,000 is provided to government schools for the establishment of school libraries and library purchases are subsidized on a 40c-$ basis.

NORTHERN TERRITORY.

Books supplied by Government -

For schools conducted by South Australian authorities, similar arrangements as for South Australia.

At Administration special schools for aboriginal children, all necessary books are provided.

Financial Support for Purchase of TextbooksArrangements as for South Australia.

Design of School Science Benches. (Question No. 1666.)

Mr Reynolds:

s asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Have complaints been made to the Commonwealth Scientific Advisory Committee regarding the design of the scientific island bench approved by ii?
  2. Has it been suggested that the bench design, particularly the narrow space between the front edge of the bench and the supporting cupboard and also the inconvenient location of the bookshelf, would compel incorrect sitting posture?
  3. Is the thermosetting plastic specified for the top of the science bench prone to serious damage by concentrated acids, and docs it provide a glossy surface which sets up undesirable classroom reflections?
  4. For what schools are these benches designed?
  5. Did the Committee consult any Stale education authorities regarding the design?
Mr Harold Holt:
LP

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

  1. The Commonwealth Advisory Committee on Standards for Science Facilities in Independent Schools has received no complaints from any schools using any of the science benches designed or approved by it.
  2. One State official has expressed a personal criticism of one design of island bench along the lines suggested by the question. The Committee does not agree that this criticism is valid. In the absence of Australian human posture standards the science island bench was designed in accordance with human posture standards set out in the standard American publication “ Architectural Graphic Standards” by Ramsey and Sleeper.
  3. There is no evidence that the thermo-setting plastic bench top surface, which is one of the surfaces recommended by the Commonwealth Advisory Committee, is prone to serious damage by concentrated acids or that its surface sets up undesirable classroom reflections.
  4. The bench designed by the Committee may be used by any independent secondary school to which a Commonwealth Science Laboratories grant is made.
  5. The Commonwealth Advisory Committee consists of experienced and practising science teachers and university professors drawn from all States and familiar with various laboratory designs in all States. Most members are in touch with State Education Departments for the exchange of ideas on design but there is no requirement for them to consult, or receive agreement from State Education Departments, before approving a design.

Trade with North Vietnam. (Question No. 1681.)

Mr Whitlam:

m asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

When and where did the Minister for Trade and Industry indicate the Government’s attitude on trade with North Vietnam to which he referred in his answer to me on the 31st March - “Hansard ‘”, page 797.

Mr Harold Holt:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

My colleague, the Minister for Trade and Industry had supplied the information in discussions at which I was present. It was my understanding that these facts had subsequently been given publicity. I find on enquiry that they had not. However, both the Minister for Trade and Industry and my colleague, the Minister for External Affairs, have since furnished information about and explained the Government’s attitude in relation to this question - “ Hansard “, page 1204, 27th April 1966, and page 1357, 28th April 1966. The situation is, as my colleagues indicated, that Australian trade with North Vietnam had in fact ceased.

Taxation. (Question No. 1699A

Mr Webb:

b asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. Were donations to the Freedom from Hunger Campaign allowed as deductions for income tax purposes up to the 30th June 1964?
  2. If so, why have these donations since been disallowed as deductions?
  3. ls it a fact that donations to this campaign are helping in the field of international relationships?
  4. If so, will he take steps to allow this concession to apply to these donations for the financial year 1965-66?
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. and 2. In 1960 the Government agreed to a proposal from the Executive Heads of F.A.O. and U.N.I .C.E.F. that a joint public appeal for funds be held in Australia, the proceeds to be divided equally between U.N.I.C.E.F. and the F.A.O. Fredom from Hunger Campaign. The appeal was to be held in 1961, but was conducted mainly in 1962-63 and 1963-64. Having regard to the Commonwealth sponsorship of this appeal, it was agreed that donations made to the Australian National Committee of the Freedom from Hunger Campaign up to 30th June 1963 should be allowed as deductions for income tax purposes, and section 78 of the Income Tax and Social Services

Contribution Assessment Act was amended accordingly. When the appeal was not completed by 30th June 1963, the Government agreed to extend the concession to donations made up to 30th June 1964, and the Act was further amended to give effect to this decision. Commonwealth patronage was considered to be at an end when the joint appeal was completed in 1963-64. 3 and 4. The committee organising the appeal was subsequently reconstituted as a purely private body. The appeals it has organised in that capacity are private appeals. Representations to have the taxation concession extended to gifts made to appeals conducted by the new appeal committee after 30th June 1964 were considered by my predecessor who decided against granting the extension. Representations along similar lines have recently been made to me by the committee. The Government recognises that international aid financed by private appeals can be of value in promoting international relationships. It docs not follow, however, that private appeals of this nature should, as a matter of course, be assisted financially by the Government especially at a time when the Government is already making very large and growing amounts available for international aid. In these circumstances, I have reiterated to the committee the advice given by my predecessor that deductions for income tax purposes will not be allowed in respect of donations to the appeal currently being conducted.

Vietnam. (Question No. 1705.)

Mr Webb:

b asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Has the Government at any time indicated that it disapproves of the torture inflicted on prisoners by the South Vietnamese?
  2. If not, does the Government approve of such action?
  3. If it does not approve of such action, has any objection been made to the South Vietnamese Government?
Mr Harold Holt:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows -

The Australian Government has repeatedly made clear its firm view that the treatment of prisoners of war should always conform to the dictates of humanity and the principles embodied in the various international conventions on this subject, and has informed the Government of the Republic of Vietnam of its attitude. For its part, the Government of the Republic of Vietnam has confirmed its willingness to observe the Geneva conventions on the treatment of prisoners and to co-operate with the International Commission of the Red Cross to this end. It has also issued specific instructions to its forces enjoining humane action towards prisoners and adherence to the spirit of the Geneva Conventions. See also the answer given by Sir Robert Menzies on 3rd December 1965- “ Hansard “ page 3638.

Public Service. (Question No. 1711.)

Mr Hansen:

n asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Are all applicants for positions in the Commonwealth Public Service finally appointed only on their passing a medical examination to establish their eligibility to become contributors to the Commonwealth Superannuation Fund?
  2. If so, does this discriminate against persons with physical defects?
  3. What consideration has been given to accepting for appointment to the Commonwealth Public Service persons with physical defects who are otherwise eligible?
Mr Harold Holt:
LP

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

  1. Yes, but a person may also be accepted for permanent appointment as a contributor to the Provident Account under the Superannuation Act. 2 and 3. Some people with physical disabilities are not acceptable for appointment. As announced by my predecessor on 16th May 1962, the Public Service Board, subject to the over-riding requirement to maintain the efficiency of the Service and on the basis of careful selection and placement, has given particular consideration to the appointment of physically handicapped persons who were not previously eligible. By way of illustration it has been estimated that during the year ended 31st December, 1965, more than 800 physically handicapped persons were accepted for permanent appointmnt as contributors to the Provident Account.

War Service Homes. (Question No. 1713.)

Mr Hansen:

n asked the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, upon notice -

How many applications for a second war service homes loan were (a) received; and (b) approved in each of the States during last year,

Mr Bury:
LP

– The Minister for Housing has supplied the following answer to the honorable member’s question -

  1. The number of applications for a second War Service Homes loan received in the various States during the year ended 31st December, 1965, were as follows -

New South Wales- 299

Victoria - 164

Queensland - 86

South Australia - 9

Western Australia - 10

Tasmania - 27

  1. During 1965 the following number of applications for a second War Service Homes loan were approved -

New South Wales- 18

Victoria - 14

Queensland - 1 1

South Australia - 8

Western Australia - 2

Tasmania - 6

Double Taxation Agreements. (Question No. 1718.)

Mr Peters:

s asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. With what countries and when has Australia made double taxation agreements?
  2. What has been the taxation received by Australia each year from these countries since the operation of the respective agreements?
  3. What taxation would have been received by Australia in each year from these countries if no double taxation agreements operated?
  4. What effects do double taxation agreements have upon exports and imports?
  5. Will a full statement setting out the details of advantages to Australia and to its partners m double taxation agreements be made to Parliament before any such agreement is made with Japan or any other country?
Mr McMahon:
LP

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

  1. The countries with which Australia has concluded double taxation agreements, and the dates on which those agreements were signed, are as follows: -

    1. United Kingdom- 29th October, 1946
    2. United States- 14th May, 1953
    3. Canada- 1st October, 1957
    4. New Zealand- 12th May, 1960
  2. Australian taxation collections are not classified according to the country of residence of the taxpayer. The income tax assessed to non-residents is reported annually to Parliament in the report of the Commissioner of Taxation.
  3. Statistics are not available which would enable estimates to be made of the tax which would have been payable by the residents of the countries mentioned in the answer to 1. above in the absence of the double taxation agreements.
  4. The primary purpose of double taxation agreements is to relieve double taxation on income flowing from one country to another, and the conclusion of a double taxation agreement between two countries does not necessarily involve any change in the volume of their mutual trade. However, double taxation agreements can remove or mitigate taxation deterrents to international trade and investment.
  5. Legislative action is required before double taxation agreements negotiated by Australia have the force of law. Should Australia negotiate further agreements, therefore, they would come before the Parliament, which would then have the opportunity for detailed consideration of them.

International Sugar Conference. (Question No. 1730.)

Dr Patterson:

n asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice -

What were the names and occupations of all personnel who travelled overseas towards the end of last year to attend the International Sugar Conference?

Mr McEwen:
Minister for Trade and Industry · MURRAY, VICTORIA · CP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

The names and occupations of the members of the Australian Delegation to the United Nations Sugar Conference held at Geneva in September/ October, 1965, are as follows:

Leader -

Rt. Hon. John McEwen, M.P., Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry.

Deputy Leader - Hon. G. F. K. Nicklin, M.M., M.L.A., Premier of the State of Queensland.

Alternate Representatives - Mr. A. J. Campbell, O.B.E., Deputy Secretary, ‘Department of Trade and Industry Canberra.

Dr. W. A. T. Summerville, Agent General for Queensland, London.

Mr. O. Wolfensberger, Chairman, The Sugar Board, Brisbane.

Mr. L. R. Kentwell, Assistant Secretary, Department of Primary Industry, Canberra.

Mr. M. A. Bassett, Senior Australian Trade Relations Officer, London.

Mr. C. Dawson, Senior Project Officer, Department of Trade and Industry, Canberra.

Mr. P. N. Hutton, First Secretary, Australian Permanent Mission to the European Office of the United Nations, Geneva. Advisers -

Mr. A. B. Henderson, Secretary, Australian Cane Growers’ Association.

Mr. K. F. Pharr, Costs Adviser, Queensland Cane Growers’ Council.

Mr. E. T. S. Pearce, C.M.G., General Secretary. Australian Sugar Producers’ Association.

Mr. J. A. Desmarchelier, Economist, Australian Sugar Producers’ Association.

Mr. P. T. Wheen, Assistant General Manager. The Colonial Sugar Refining Co. Ltd.

Mr. R. W. Harvey. Deputy Chief Manager, Sugar Marketing Division, The Colonial Suagar Refining Co. Ltd.

Mr. J. G. Campbell, Marketing Officer, The Colonial Sugar Refining Co. Ltd.

Secretary to the Delegation - Mr. W. J. Byrne, Department of Primary Industry, Canberra.

International Sugar Agreement, (Question No. 1731.)

Dr Patterson:

n asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice -

What is the earliest date in 1966 that the Australian sugar industry can expect an announcement regarding the results of a re-negotiation of a new International Sugar Agreement?

Mr McEwen:
CP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

Subsequent to the United Nations Sugar Conference held in Geneva in September and October last year, discussions have been proceeding within the International Sugar Council and elsewhere with the objective of setting the stage for an early resumption of negotiations for a new International Sugar Agreement. A Consultative Committee comprising representatives of the leading sugar exporting and importing countries has been established by the Secretary General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development to try to reconcile differences of views and advance negotiations to the stage where the calling of a further Conference would be warranted. The first meeting of this Committee was held in March and a further meeting has been convened for 16th May. Australia is a member of the Committee, lt will only be possible in the light of the outcome of meetings such as these to judge whether a resumption of the negotiations would be warranted in 1966.

New Zealand-Australia Free Trade Agreement (Question No. 1740.)

Dr Patterson:

n asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice -

Can explicit provision be made in the regulations governing the operation of the New ZealandAustralia Free Trade Agreement for the prohibition, at all times, of butter entering Australia from New Zealand within the terms of the Agreement?

Mr McEwen:
CP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

Before the negotiations with New Zealand commenced it was made clear that Australia could not agree to a free trade agreement which involved the export of New Zealand butter to Australia. This consideration was basic to the whole negotiations.

Pensions. (Question No. 1754.)

Mr Birrell:
PORT ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

l asked the Minister for Social Services, upon notice -

  1. How many wives of age pensioners are ineligible for the pension because they have not reached 60 years of age?
  2. How many of these wives are receiving a pensioner’s wife’s allowance?
  3. How many married age pensioners are in receipt of the additional $1 per week single pensioner allowance because their wives are ineligible for a pension?
  4. How many married age pensioners are in receipt of the S2 per week single pensioner supple*mentary assistance, or part thereof, because their wives are ineligible for a pension?
  5. What would be the overall annual difference in cost if all wives of age pensioners, regardless of age. were granted a full pension?
Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

  1. Precise information is not available. In addition there are other qualifications required apart from age, such as residence, nationality, etc. However, based on the results of a survey conducted in one State, it is estimated that there are some 14.000 wives of age pensioners who are not in receipt of pension. This number includes those who are in receipt of wife’s allowance.

    1. Wives’ allowances are currently payable to 3,935 wives of age pensioners.
    2. 14,000 - the pensioner husbands of the wives referred to above.
    3. Precise information is not available, but based on the survey mentioned above it is estimated that there are some 3,000 married age pensioners receiving supplementary assistance whose wives are not in receipt of pension.
    4. On the basis that these pensions would be subject to the means test and that the other conditions of eligibility applied, it is estimated that the additional annual cost would be of the order of $6 million.

Repatriation. (Question No. 1763.)

Mr Cockle:

e asked the Minister representing the Minister for Repatriation, upon notice -

  1. Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to an allegation by sections of the community that national servicemen are not entitled to the same repatriation benefits as members of the Australian Regular Army even though serving alongside them in Vietnam and other prescribed war areas?
  2. Will the Minister clarify the position by stating the main repatriation rights of national servicemen in prescribed war areas?
  3. When do these entitlements become effective, and at what stage during a national serviceman’s tour of duty do they cease to apply?
  4. Is a national serviceman who serves in a prescribed war area entitled to the benefits of the War Service Homes Act?
Mr Swartz:
LP

– The Minister for Repatriation has supplied the following informations -

  1. No such allegation has been made directly to me, but I know there is considerable community interest in the rights of national servicemen under repatriation legislation.
  2. There is no distinction between national servicemen and other members of the Australian Regular Army so far as access to repatriation benefits is concerned. Relevant legislation in respect of current overseas service is the Repatriation (Special Overseas Service) Act, under which the range and rates of repatriation benefits in respect of war caused death or incapacity are on the same basis as for ex-servicemen of the 1939-45 War, war pension and medical treatment being the main benefits. Vocational training is available for disabled members as a part of medical rehabilitation and for war widows where it is necessary to enable them to follow a suitable occupation.
  3. These entitlements, which relate to periods of “ special service “ outside Australia, commence and terminate as follows -

For a serviceman allotted from Australia to special duty in a prescribed war area, eligibility begins from the time of departure from the last port of call in Australia; for a serviceman allotted when already outside Australia, eligibility commences from the time of allotment.

When a serviceman is allotted from special duty, and returns directly to Australia, his period of special service terminates on arrival at the first port of call in Australia on return, when the serviceman is allotted from special duty but remains outside Australia, his period of special service terminates when he takes up the new duty in the place to which he is allotted.

In addition, a separate provision in the legislation provides cover for a person who, although not allotted, nevertheless does suffer incapacity or death in an area outside Australia by reason of the activities of hostile forces.

  1. A member of the forces, including a national serviceman, who has served on special service as defined in the Repatriation (Special Overseas Service) Act, i.e. who has served on “special service” outside Australia ls eligible for War Service Homes benefits.

Rule of the Road. (Question No. 1766.)

Mr Whitlam:

m asked the Minister for Shipping and Transport, upon notice -

Has the Bureau of Roads given consideration to the cost and nature of alterations to Australian roads if vehicles were required to be driven on the right-hand side of the road?

Mr Freeth:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

No. As I indicated in reply to a question without notice from the honorable member for Mackellar on 27th April last, no proposals have been advanced at the Australian Transport Advisory Council suggesting that the left-hand rule of the road should be changed. In the circumstances, there are at present no immediate reasons for undertaking an examination of the costs and nature of the alterations to Australian roads that would be involved in such a change. In any case, these costs constitute only part of the overall costs of a change - there would be additional costs in respect of motor vehicles as well as traffic signals and road signs and markings.

The Bureau’s primary commitment at this stage is in surveying the overall Australian road situation. This survey may well provide information in respect of some of the problems in the context of roads which would arise in changing the rule of the road.

Double Taxation Agreements. (Question No. 1770.)

Mr Ian Allan:

n asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

In view of the restrictions announced by the United Kingdom Chancellor of the Exchequer to be imposed on the export of capital to Australia, will he facilitate the entry of Japanese capita] to this country by arranging for a double taxation agreement and the establishment of a branch of the Bank of Tokyo as recently sought by the Japanese?

Mr McMahon:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

The Government has for some time past been considering the possibility of further double tax agreements with other countries, including Japan. In the case of Japan, preliminary talks have taken place at the official level with the Japanese, and the Japanese authorities have indicated that they would like to proceed to formal negotiations. However, it may be that negotiations of any further double tax agreements will need to await re-negotiation of our agreement with the United Kingdom which will be necessary in view of recent changes in the British taxation system, particularly the introduction there of the Corporation Tax.

With regard to the question of the establishment of a branch of the Bank of Tokyo, it is longstanding Government policy not to authorise overseas banks to open branches to conduct banking business in Australia. The establishment of such branches is not considered necessary as a means of facilitating the entry of overseas capital.

Pensions. (Question No. 1778.)

Mr Uren:

n asked the Minister for Social Services, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that war and repatriation pensions are not treated as income for tax purposes?
  2. Does his Department treat war and repatriation pensions as income when determining age and invalid pensions?
  3. If so, when framing the Budget proposals, will he seek to have income from war and repatriation pensions excluded from the assessment of income when determining eligibility for age and invalid pensions?
Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. War pensions are taken into account as income in the assessment of age and invalid pensions under the Social Services Act. A person may not receive at the same time a service pension from the Repatriation Department and on age or invalid pension from the Department of Social Services except where the service pension is being paid on account of tuberculosis.
  3. In accordance with the customary practice the whole field of social services will be reviewed in connection with the preparation of the Budget. The question of the exclusion of war and repatriation pensions in the assessment of income when determining eligibility for age and invalid pensions will he included in this review. Any changes that are considered desirable and financially practicable will be announced by the Treasurer in his Budget Speech.

Restrictive Practices: Shipping. (Question No. 1779.)

Mr Whitlam:

m asked the Attorney-General, upon notice -

  1. From which shipping companies did Commonwealth Police take documents about March 1964?
  2. Were proceedings later instituted against any of these companies?
  3. If so, what was the nature of the proceedings?
  4. What has been the result of the proceedings?
Mr Snedden:
LP

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

  1. On 3rd February 1964 Commonwealth Police obtained certain documents from the Chairman of the Australian-Eastern Shipping Conference. 2, 3 and 4. 1 later instituted proceedings in the High Court against Mr. N. M. Speyer, the Chairman of the Conference and against the China Navigation Co. Ltd., a member of the Conference. The proceedings were for the recovery of pecuniary penalties for alleged offences against sections 4 and 9 of the Australian Industries Preservation Act 1906-1950, and for injunctions restraining the defendants from repetition or continuance of the alleged offences. The proceedings have not yet come to trial. Some delay was caused by an interlocutory application by the defendant and further delay occurred when questions that could arise in the proceedings came before the High Court in other proceedings. Those questions were decided by the High Court on 3rd March 1966, and the possible effect of the Court’s decision on the proceedings is now being considered by counsel for the prosecutor. The future course of the proceedings will be decided in the light of counsel’s advice.

Dental Health. (Question No. 1802.)

Mr Daly:
GRAYNDLER, NEW SOUTH WALES

y asked the Minister for Health, upon notice -

  1. Has his attention been drawn to a statement by Peter F. Lazar, Director, Dental Health Education and Research Foundation, Sydney, that 98 per cent, of Australians suffer from tooth decay and only one in five visits a dentist regularly?
  2. If so, will he have an investigation made to ascertain the reasons for this alarming position?
  3. Will he also give consideration to the introduction of a national dental scheme to provide a full coverage of all Australians ‘in this important requirement for good health? ,
Dr Forbes:
Minister for Health · BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. The Australian Dental Association has submitted to me a proposal that an epidemiological survey bc carried out to assess the dental needs of the nation. This is curently being examined in conjunction with a number of other proposals by that body.
  3. I can assure the honorable member that the Government has, from time to time, examined closely, the possibility of introducing a voluntary dental insurance scheme to provide financial assistance towards meeting the cost of services rendered by dentists. However, there are a number of very real economic problems inherent in the operation of any such scheme and, until satisfactory solutions can be formulated, the Government has not considered it advisable to implement a dental insurance programme.

An additional factor which has to be taken into account is that the question of providing Commonwealth assistance in respect of dental services must be considered in relation to the effect such a scheme would have in connection with other services, such as nursing, optometry and physiotherapy, which do not at present attract Commonwealth benefits. The honorable member will realise, I am sure, that any proposal to extend the National Health Scheme to provide Commonwealth assistance towards the cost of dental treatment must necessarily involve consideration of the desirability and practicability of covering those other ancillary services -also under the National Health Scheme. Any extension of the Scheme along these lines would naturally place an additional burden on the Australian taxpayer, and this is a further reason why the Government has decided not to increase the Commonwealth’s already heavy commitments in the health field at this stage.

In the circumstances, I cannot foresee an early move towards an extension of the National Health Scheme to provide for Commonwealth benefits for dental services.

Drugs. (Question No. 1803.)

Mr Daly:

y asked the Minister for Health, upon notice -

  1. Has the attention been drawn to a report in the journal o£ the American Chemical Society that a human growth hormone - -HGH - had been discovered, and that a number of children, apparently doomed to be dwarfs, had, after treatment with a drug at the University of California Medical Centre, grown normally as a result?
  2. If so, is he able to state whether the drug has been fully tested and whether it will be made available in Australia?
Dr Forbes:
LP

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

  1. Yes. Full details of the reports are being sought from the drug control authorities in the United States of America.
  2. The drug is in the early stages of clinical trial and as yet it is not possible to assess its clinical value. Availability in Australia will depend on the results of clinical trials being undertaken in the United States of America.

Education.

Mr Harold Holt:
LP

t.- On 21st April the honorable member for Shortland (Mr. Griffiths) asked me a question in reference to a statement by my colleague, the MinisterinCharge of Commonwealth Activities in Education and Research about the relationship of additional Commonwealth assistance for education to the constitutional responsibilities of the Commonwealth and all the States? My colleague has supplied the following outline of the remarks he made on the recent public occasion which apparently prompted the honorable member’s question - “There are a number of people who urge that the Commonwealth Government should make increased grants to the States for education ‘.

If this refers to an increase in general grants then the Commonwealth, even if it increased general grants, would have no constitutional power to direct that the increase in the general grants was spent on education. We have no constitutional power to direct States as to how their general grants should be spent or as to the priorities they decide on.

The only way that the objective advocated by these people could be attained would be by the making of special grants, under section 96 of the Constitution, directed to a particular area of education and under laid down conditions.

Even then the objective of these advocates would not be attained unless one of the conditions laid down was that the level of State spending on education should not decrease and also that the annual level of increase in money spent on education because of an increasing State Budget should continue.

Either this action, or an amendment of the Constitution, would be the only way the objective of these advocates could be attained “.

Supplies to Red China.

Mr Harold Holt:
LP

t.- On 24th March 1966 the honorable member for Lalor (Mr. Pollard) asked me if I had any information concerning a reported proposal to supply Communist China with a modern steel works? In reply I said that our posts in the United States of America and West Germany were making inquiries and that if any authoritative information could be obtained I would make it available.

I have since been informed that the sale of a steel processing complex has been negotiated, although not yet concluded, between Communist China and an international consortium including Federal German, French, British, Italian and Swiss firms.

The project consists of a warm and cold rolling mill to produce steel for the building industry, tin plate, and sheet steel for car bodies. It is estimated to cost approximately SI 55 million, the German share being about S62 million, and credit terms over a period of five years are envisaged.

It is expected that the construction of the mill will be completed in two years and processing should begin in about five years.

The mill is not among those items which Western countries have agreed should not be exported to Communist China.

National Service Training. (Question No. 1696.)

Mr L R Johnson:

son asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice -

  1. Are Australian citizens who have had six months’ residence in the Territory of Papua and New Guinea exempt from any obligation to register for national service training?
  2. Has his attention been drawn to a recent report in a Sydney Sunday newspaper that 19 and 20 year old Australians were flooding into Papua and New Guinea to dodge national service call-ups and that the Territory had become a happy haven for draft dodgers?
  3. Is it a fact that since national se nice training was introduced, the number of 19 and 20 year old persons from Australia seeking jobs in the Territory has more than trebled?
Mr Bury:
LP

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

  1. Australian citizens who are living in Papua and New Guinea when their age group is required to register for national service are not, by virtue of residence in Papua and New Guinea, exempt from any obligation to register for national service; they are required to register within 14 days of return to Australia.
  2. Yes.
  3. My Department docs not keep statistics of persons from Australia seeking employment in Papua and New Guinea.

Carriage of Rum on Aircraft. (Question No. 1746.)

Dr Patterson:

n asked the Minister for Civil Aviation, upon notice -

Why is under-proof or over-proof rum never carried on commercial aircraft operating throughout Australia and more particularly Queensland?

Mr Swartz:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

The space available in an aircraft for liquor stowage is very limited. Both Ansett-A.N.A. and Trans-Australia Airlines have provided rum on their aircraft for trial periods extending over some months, the last occasion being by T.A.A. in 1964. However demand for rum was nol sufficient in the airlines’ view, to warrant its continued carriage.

Kalgoorlie Airport. (Question No. 1795.)

Mr Collard:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

d asked the Minister for Civil Aviation, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the Government has decided not to carry out the improvements to the

Kalgoorlie Airport which would enable it to handle jet aircraft including Boeing 727’s?

  1. If so, does this mean that the Government will not be spending the $500,000 on the Kalgoorlie Airport that was promised in January 1963 by a former Minister for Civil Aviation?
Mr Swartz:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows -

The extent of the improvements needed at Kalgoorlie Airport to serve as an alternate for jet aircraft operating on the service to Perth will not be known for some months. No decision has been taken not to carry out such improvements.

Public Service: Retirements to contest Elections. (Question No. 1303.)

Mr Whitlam:

m asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Which officers have retired from the Commonwealth Service in the last 10 years in order to become candidates for election as members of a House of the Parliament of the Commonwealth or of a State?
  2. Is he able to state which political party endorsed each of them?
  3. What positions did each of them hold at the time of (a) endorsement, and (b) retirement?
Mr Harold Holt:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows -

Schedules giving the information sought regarding officers retiring to contest elections have not been maintained. However, a special compilation was undertaken and the schedule below gives the names of those officers who are known to have retired to become candidates for election as members of a House of the Parliament of the Commonwealth. The schedule also contains the officer’s Department, designation, divisional status and salary classification as at the time of retirement.

Education Costs. (Question No. 1494.)

Mr Whitlam:

m asked the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Is he able to say -

What is the capital cost per pupil place in building or extending government (i) primary and (ii) secondary schools in each State and each mainland Territory?

What is the current cost per pupil place in maintaining and staffing government (i) primary and (ii) secondary schools in each State and each mainland Territory?

What is the cost to each State government and each mainland Territory administration in training new teachers in teachers’ colleges?

Mr Harold Holt:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows -

  1. ” Capital cost per pupil place in building or extending government schools in each State and mainland Territory “ has been taken as the sum obtained by dividing the total cost of new schools constructed in a particular period, by the total number of pupils which those schools are designed to accommodate. The following information has been provided by the education authorities in the States and mainland Territories but it is emphasised that the Commonwealth takes no responsibily for the accuracy of the information so supplied, and that the bases of calculation used in each case are not known to be comparable. Unless otherwise stated, the figures quoted give the position as it existed in 1965 or early 1966. 1 - Government primary schools -

2 - Government secondary schools -

  1. ” Current cost per pupil place in maintaining and staffing government schools in the States and mainland Territories “ has been interpreted as the sum obtained by dividing the total current expenditure on primary or secondary schools over a period, by the mean number of pupils enrolled in nil the schools in that category in that State or Territory during the period. Unless otherwise stated, the figures quoted give the position as it existed in 1965 or in early 1966. Again it is emphasised that the Commonwealth takes no responsibility for the accuracy of figures supplied by the Slates, and that the bases of calculation used in each base arc not known to be comparable.

Note. - No separate costs in respect nf primary and secondary schools in the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory are available. The combined costs are -

  1. The following details giving costs of teacher training in each State have been published in Annual Reports of the respective Ministers for Education. They include salaries paid to teacher trainees by the State Government and which vary considerably from State to State. Again the bases of calculation used in each case are not known to be comparable.

Note. - Although at any point in time most teacher trainees are in teachers’ colleges some are in full-time attendance at universities and others are attending both university and teachers’ college. Information is not available to distinguish expenditure in respect of each of these categories.

There are no teachers’ colleges in the Northern Territory or the Australian Capital Territory.

Miners Pension Scheme. (Question No. 1524.)

Mr Hayden:

n asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice -

  1. Has the Miners’ Federation made representations for changes in the miners’ pension scheme to provide for the scheme to be based on an excise imposed on coal production and paid by mine proprietors?
  2. ls one of the reasons for the request for a changed system the fact that the present pension scheme is becoming increasingly expensive to maintain in relation to the present system of subscriptions and is developing to a point of being actuarily unsound?
  3. Can he say whether the Government proPoses to make any alterations to the scheme to improve its operation?
Mr Fairbairn:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows -

Miners’ pensions schemes, covering bituminous coal miners, have been established under State legislation in all States except South Australia where no bituminous coal is mined. The Commonwealth is not in any way associated with the establishment or operation of these schemes and any initiative for modification of the schemes lies with the States. However, following representations made to me by the State Minister for Mines in the former Labour administration in New South Wales and repeated to me by the present Minister for Mines, it was agreed that a report on the structure and operation of the schemes be prepared by the Chairman of the Joint Coal Board. This report was completed and discussions followed between the Joint Coal Board and the States. In March last, however, the Slate Ministers concerned met but agreement was not reached on the action to be taken. If and when the States reach agreement they will presumably make an approach to the Commonwealth.

Bauxite. (Question No. 1617.)

Mr Hayden:

n asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice -

Is he able to supply the following statistics with respect to the countries of the world which have proven commercial deposits of bauxite -

What is the extent of the deposits in each country?

What quantities were extracted from the deposits in each of these countries during each of the past five years?

What quantity of the amount extracted was exported as bauxite from each country in each of those years?

Mr Fairbairn:
LP

– The answer to the honorable member’s questions is as follows -

  1. The most recent comprehensive summary to hand of world bauxite reserves is that contained in “ Estimates of World Bauxite Reserves and Potential Resources “, by S. H. Patterson, Article 41 of United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 475-B, 1963, pp. B158-B159. The more important countries are listed in the following table. The Australian reserves quoted do not include deposits occurring in the Kimberley region (W.A.), on leases held by United States Metals Refining Company, a subsidiary of American Metal Climax Inc.; the extent of these deposits has not yet been assessed.

Most figures in the above table are in metric or long tons; however, many estimates used in compilation failed to designate the type of tons quoted. (b), (c) Production of bauxite in the above countries, during the five years 1960-1964 is given in

Table 2. Data for J965 is noi yet available. E.t- are given in Table 3; 1964 statistics in this respect ports from these countries during the same period are incomplete. Further details regarding minor producers may *bc* obtained from the latter two publications. {:#subdebate-24-34} #### Special Aircraft. (Question No. 1660.) {: #subdebate-24-34-s0 .speaker-6V4} ##### Mr Daly: y asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Does the Government maintain a special aircraft for the use of the Prime Minister and V.I.P.'s? 1. Lt' so, what V.I.P.'s other than the Prime Minister used this aircraft during the past twelve months? 2. *In* respect of each such flight during this period, what was the (a) name of the V.J.P. who used the aircraft, (b) name of any other passenger, (c) destination, (d) cost and (e) purpose? {: #subdebate-24-34-s1 .speaker-009MC} ##### Mr Harold Holt:
LP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No. 34 (Special Transport) Squadron of the Royal Australian Air Force has this role. 1. The V.I.P.'s other than the Prime Minister who have used No. 34 Squadron aircraft during the last twelve months include Her Majesty the Queen Mother, His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, His Excellency the Governor-General, the Prime Minister of Thailand, the President of the Philippines, His Royal Highness the Crown Prince of Laos, the President of Malagasy, the United States Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defence, the Indian Minister for Food and Agriculture, the British Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, His Royal Highness Prince Bertil of Sweden, the Thai Deputy Minister for Defence, the Chinese Foreign Minister, the New Zealand Deputy Prime Minister, the British Lord Chancellor, the British Minister for Fisheries and Agriculture, the British Minister for Aviation, the Argentine Minister for Agriculture, the New Zealand Minister for Defence, and several other dignitaries from overseas. Some Commonwealth Ministers, and the Leader of the Opposition have also used aircraft from the Squadron. 2. (a), (b) and c) Passengers' names are recorded only so that aircraft may be safely and properly loaded. After a flight is completed the list of names is of no value and is not retained for long. For similar reasons, no records are kept of the places to which aircraft in the V.I.P. flight have taken V.I.P. passengers. The answers to these questions are thus not available. {: type="a" start="d"} 0. The cost of operations by No. 34 Squadron is inextricably included in the overall costs of running R.A.A.F. Base Fairbairn (which has several other units) and of maintaining the R.A.A.F. as a whole. The cost of individual flights cannot therefore be given. 1. Although, as explained above, it is not possible to set out in detail the various specific purposes for which the V.I.P. flight has been used, the purpose of transporting the Governor-General and Ministers is to permit them to attend to Government business and to discharge their public duties in places and at times which would be impossible if they were tied down by particular airline schedules. Distinguished visitors carried by the Squadron's aircraft are mentioned in the answer to question 2. The Leader of the Opposition has also used an aircraft from the Squadron during the last twelve months. {:#subdebate-24-35} #### Government Aid to Private Schools. (Question No. 1679.) {: #subdebate-24-35-s0 .speaker-KYS} ##### Mr Reynolds: s asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - >What is the current cost to each State of the various forms of assistance which it gives to private schools and which his predecessor set out in his replies to me on 18th August 1964 (" Hansard ", page 334), and 12th October 1965 (page 1719). {: #subdebate-24-35-s1 .speaker-009MC} ##### Mr Harold Holt:
LP -- The answer to the honorable member's question is as follows - >The honorable member will recall that in his original answer on 18th August 1964 my predecessor emphasised that the information being supplied by him represented the current position as obtained from Slate publications, and that only the responsible State would have complete and up-to-date details of the various measures listed. The same is true concerning the current cost of the various forms of assistance given by each State Government to non-government schools and their pupils. Neither of these matters is the responsibility of any Commonwealth Minister and consequently no responsibility can be taken for figures obtained from State publications. > >The information which follows has been collected from the most recent State Budget Papers and other official reports as indicated. It is far from comprehensive because for many activities the State accounts do not distinguish between government and non-government schools or pupils. > >New South Wales - > >Interest payments on loans raised by independent schools for approved building projects - $200,000 in 1965-66. (Source- Stale Budget Papers.) > >Victoria - > >Subsidy on interest payments by independent schools on loans raised for school buildings - $25,000 in 1965-66. (Source- State Budget Papers.) > >Conveyance of pupils - $.1,057,166 in 1964-65. (Source- AuditorGeneral's Report 1964-65.) > >Bursaries and scholarships - $172,496 in 1964-65. (Source- AuditorGeneral's Report 1964-65.) > >Total net expenditure by Education Department on registered schools in 1964-65 - $2,329,286. (Source- Auditor-General's Report 1964-65.) Queensland - Annual subsidy to grammar schools - $16,000 in 1965-66. (Source- State Budget Papers.) Additional payments to grammar schools - $148,400 in 1965-66. (Source- State Budget Papers.) South Australia - Transport of students, boarding and book allowances - $324,000 in 1965-66. (Source- Slate Budget Papers.) Western Australia - Subsidies for equipment- $68,000 in 1965-66. Tuition fees subsidy- $536,000 in 1965-66. Assistance to private schools - $86,000 in 1965-66. (Source- State Budget Papers.) Expenditure on pupils in non-government schools 1963-64*- * (Note. - Some of this may be included in the Budget Estimate item - " Assistance to Private Schools ".) (Source - Minister of Education. Report 1963-64.) {:#subdebate-24-36} #### Government Aid to Private Schools. (Question No. 1680.) {: #subdebate-24-36-s0 .speaker-6U4} ##### Mr Whitlam: m asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - >How much is expected to be spent by governments on (a) private schools and (b) their pupils in each State and mainland Territory in the present financial year? {: #subdebate-24-36-s1 .speaker-009MC} ##### Mr Harold Holt:
LP -- The answer to the honorable member's question is as follows - >It is expected that spending in the present financial year by the Commonwealth and by the States from special purpose grants provided by the Commonwealth on (a) private schools, comprising grants under the science facilities scheme, interest reimbursement in the Australian Capital Territory and grants to mission schools in the Northern Territory, and (b) their pupils, comprising Commonwealth scholarships, text book and transport subsidies in the Australian Capital Territory, and text book, boarding and transport subsidies in the Northern Territory, will be as follows - > >Expenditure by the State Governments for the purposes stated in the question is not the responsibility of any Commonwealth Minister, and I am not in a position to supply the information requested in respect of the States, except to the extent set out in my answer today to Question No. 1679 from the honorable member for Barton **(Mr. Reynolds).** {:#subdebate-24-37} #### Immigration Publicity Films. (Question No. 1794.) {: #subdebate-24-37-s0 .speaker-JZX} ##### Mr Collard: d asked the Minister for Immigration, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it a fact that films are used to supply information to potential migrants? 1. If so, can he say whether some of the films are more suitable for attracting tourists than people who may be considering making Australia their new hope? 2. Who decides which features of country towns should be filmed, and arc opinions of local Good Neighbour Councils or local governing authorities sought in this regard? 3. If not, will he arrange for this to be done in future? {: #subdebate-24-37-s1 .speaker-KMB} ##### Mr Opperman:
LP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The Department of Immigration distributes many films to its overseas posts and to migrantcarrying ships. They cover many aspects of daily living, work and leisure, of interest to prospective settlers. The films are intended to supplement, as far as is possible visually, the more detailed printed fact pamphlets on these subjects which are distributed to all prospective settlers. The films are mostly shown at specially arranged film and information evenings at which officers of the Department are present to answer questions. 1. The Department does not buy or sponsor the production of films aimed solely at attracting tourists. Tourist attractions are not included in films made for the Department. The representative of tourist authorities on the Australian National Film Board has been informed of this approach which applies particularly to the Department's series of 12 "Life in Australia" films, each of which deals with daily life in a capital city or country centre. The series includes a film on Perth and another on Geraldton. All films in the series show housing, shops, transport, hospitals, local industries and work opportunities as well as sporting, cultural and other leisure activities. A similar series of shorter 8mm films designed to be shown in window displays and exhibitions overseas also includes many of these features. This series includes films on Kalgoorlie and Bunbury. 3 and 4, The aim of films dealing with country centres is to show intending settlers that it is possible to find work and to live comfortably and happily in many places outside the cities better known to people overseas. As the films are made to be shown in many countries of Europe, as well as Britain, they feature local residents generally rather than solely migrants from specific areas. This also maintains the original concept of the films, which is to show how Australians live. Features of country towns included in the films are determined broadly by advice from the Department's posts overseas about what prospective settlers want to know and by what emigration authorities in migrant source countries suggest should be shown. State and local government authorities, the Department of Labour and National Service, Good Neighbour representatives and local residents are normally consulted on appropriate points when surveys are made of the towns as a preliminary to filming. {:#subdebate-24-38} #### Immigration. (Question No. 1801.) {: #subdebate-24-38-s0 .speaker-6V4} ##### Mr Daly: y asked the Minister for Immigration, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Has he made any official statement on figures recently released respecting migrants returning home after completing two years in Australia? 1. If not, will he make a statement? 2. If a statement has already been made, will he make a copy available to all honorable members? {: #subdebate-24-38-s1 .speaker-KMB} ##### Mr Opperman:
LP -- The answer to the honorable member's questions is as follows - >When on 4th May 1966, the Commonwealth Statistician released the statistics of overseas arrivals and departures for the quarter and year ended December 1965, 1 authorised my Department to make the following statement: " Although the Former Settlers Departing figure has increased in recent years, the net settler gain has been increasing at a much faster rate. > >While settler departures increased from 8,500 in 1962, to 14,800 in 1965, the net settler gain (after allowing for departures) increased from 82,000 in 1962, to 132,700 in 1965. > >There is a tendency in migration, arising from greater prosperity, for migrants no longer to regard their migration as irrevocable. Increasing prosperity in Europe is an important factor in this. > >Good wages earned in Australia have meant that many migrants can afford to return to Europe if they wish. Greater availability of low-cost travel is also a contributing factor. > >The departure figure of 14,803 is not, by international comparison, a high figure. > >Although this rate is not regarded as a matter for *undue concern,* through the Commonwealth Immigration Advisory Council, an inquiry is being undertaken into all aspects of the returnee situation, lt is not expected that the Advisory Council will complete its inquiry for some time." {:#subdebate-24-39} #### Taxation: Educational Concessions. (Question No. 1810.) {: #subdebate-24-39-s0 .speaker-JO8} ##### Mr Barnard: d asked the Treasurer, upon notice - >What was the total amount of concessional deductions in respect of educational costs allowed for income tax purposes during the year 1964-65? {: #subdebate-24-39-s1 .speaker-009MA} ##### Mr McMahon:
LP -- The answer to the honorable member's question is as follows - >Amounts of education expenses allowed as deductions for income tax purposes have not yet been tabulated for the 1964-65 income year. > >The latest year for which information is available in relation to education expenses is the 1961-62 income year. For that year deductions approximating a total of £80,000,000 ($160,000,000) were allowed in assessments. Information for the 1963-64 income year will be tabulated within the next few weeks, and will be included in the next report to Parliament by the Commissioner of Taxation. Northern Territory: Credit Requirements. (Question No. 1690.) **Mr. Beazley** asked the Minister for Territories, upon notice - >Did the investigations of **Mr. Macphillamy** into the credit requirements of the Northern Territory cover, amongst other things - > >the credit needs of individual Aboriginal business men and Aboriginal economic enterprises; > >the types of security available to poten tial Aboriginal borrowers; and > >what title over Aboriginal reserve lands would be required in order to be acceptable security for loans from the Development Bank? {: #subdebate-24-39-s2 .speaker-JOA} ##### Mr Barnes:
CP s. - The answer to the honorable member's question is as follows - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. **Mr. Macphillamy's** enquiry was a general investigation into the demand for credit by any individuals or enterprises in the Northern Territory for the purposes of economic development; and of the means available for supplying such demand for credit; 1. there is no restriction on the holding of leasehold or freehold land by Aborigines and therefore potential Aboriginal borrowers have the same types of security available to them as any other potential borrower; 2. leases for special purposes may be granted over Aboriginal reserves. These leases may be tor a term of years or in perpetuity, lt would be a matter for the lending institution in each specific case to decide whether such a lease was a satisfactory security for a loan. {:#subdebate-24-40} #### Volunteers for Military Service. (Question No. 1706.) {: #subdebate-24-40-s0 .speaker-KXI} ##### Mr Webb: b asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many volunteers were there for service in (a) World War I and (b) World War II. and what was the population of Australia at the commencement of each of those wars? 1. How many volunteers have there been for the undeclared war in Vietnam, and what is Australia's present population? 2. Is he able to say whether the present reluctance to volunteer is an indication that the Australian people do not endorse the undeclared Vietnam war; if not, what is the reason for the lack of volunteers? {: #subdebate-24-40-s1 .speaker-KEN} ##### Mr Fairhall:
LP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. There were 417,000 volunteers for Service in World War I, and 721,000 for World War U. Australia's population was 5 million at December 1914 and 7 million at December 1939. In the Second World War voluntary enlistments were supplemented by an extensive compulsory call-up of persons under Part IV of the Defence Act for service with the Citizen Military Forces. The Defence (Citizen Military Forces) Act of 1943, authorised the employment of these members of the C.M.F. in operations in the south west Pacific area. {: type="1" start="2"} 0. The Government seeks volunteers for service as required anywhere in the world with the permanent forces and not for service in any particular country or campaign. Of the 4,500 personnel currently being deployed to South Vietnam more tiran two-thirds are personnel who have voluntarily enlisted in the Regular Army or the Royal Australian Air Force for service either within or beyond the territorial limits of Australia. Australia's present population is 11.5 million. {: type="1" start="3"} 0. In both 1914-1918 and 1939-1945 Australia was engaged in total war and recruiting on the scale referred to in (1) was necessary for the raising and maintenance of large expeditionary forces. This situation is not comparable with Australia's present limited participation in operations in South Vietnam. All practicable steps are being taken by the Government to attract an increase in volunteers for the permanent forces. However, in the present time of full employment and intense competition for manpower, it has proved not possible to obtain by voluntary means the necessary increase in the effective strength of the Army in the time required. It is in these circumstances that the Government has found it necessary to supplement voluntary enlistments in the Army by a scheme of national service. {:#subdebate-24-41} #### Public Service: Arbitration. (Question No. 1719.) {: #subdebate-24-41-s0 .speaker-6V4} ##### Mr Daly: y asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Has he received from the Public Service Arbitrator Determination No. 17 of 1966 which was made on 15th February? 1. If so, does he intend to table this Determination in the Parliament pursuant to section 21 of the Public Service Arbitration Act? 2. If he has not received this Determination will he ascertain the reason for its non-receipt and seek to have it tabled in the Parliament without further delay? {: #subdebate-24-41-s1 .speaker-009MC} ##### Mr Harold Holt:
LP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No. 1. See answer to Question 3. 2. I understand the Public Service Arbitrator takes action under section 21 (2a) (a) of the Public Service Arbitration Act when the Commission has decided that an appeal does lie. {:#subdebate-24-42} #### Papua and New Guinea. (Question No. 1751.) {: #subdebate-24-42-s0 .speaker-6U4} ##### Mr Whitlam: m asked the Minister for Territories, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many Administration employees in the Territory of Papua and New Guinea were previously employed by colonial administrations in Africa? 1. What are their present duties'? {: #subdebate-24-42-s1 .speaker-JOA} ##### Mr Barnes:
CP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Thirty three. 1. Architect - two Clerk - three Education Officer - three Engineer - two Geologist - two Livestock Officer - one Patrol Officer - one Police Officer -eighteen Stock Inspector -one. {:#subdebate-24-43} #### Australian War History. (Question No. 1755.) {: #subdebate-24-43-s0 .speaker-YF4} ##### Mr Cross:
BRISBANE. QLD s asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many volumes have yet to be published in the series " Australia in the War of 1939-1945 ", and what are their titles? 1. Who are the proposed authors? 2. When was the contract entered into for each book, and what are the proposed dates of publicaon? 3. How many people have subscribed to the full series, and what funds are held in trust on account of unpublished volumes? {: type="A" start="J"} 0. In the case of Civil Volume 11 "The Government and the People 1942-1945 ", will he arrange for the author to complete his volume, or make other appropriate arrangements? {: #subdebate-24-43-s1 .speaker-BU4} ##### Mr Anthony:
CP y. - The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - 1 and 2. Four volumes are yet to be published. These are - " Tobruk and El Alamein " - Barton Maughan. " Royal Australian Navy, 1942-1945 " - G. Hermon Gill. " The Government and the People, 1942- 1945 "-Paul Hasluck. " War Economy, 1942-1945 "- S. J. Butlin. {: type="1" start="3"} 0. Barton Maughan - contract signed 18th March 1955; volume should be published during 1966. G. Hermon Gill - contract signed 12 th March 1946; one volume published 1957; the second should be published in 1967. Paul Hasluck - contract signed 18th November 1947; one volume published in 1952; the second volume is in draft form, but it is not possible to give a publication date at this time. S. J. Butlin - contract signed 21st August 1947; one volume published in 1955. It is not possible to give a publication date for the second volume at this time. 1. The Australian War Memorial holds 2,054 subscriptions for the full series, and the sum of $21,414 is held in trust on account of unpublished volumes. 2. Every effort is being made to have all outstanding volumes published as early as practicable. Papua and New Guinea: Sale of Motor Vehicles. (Question No. 1769.) **Mr. Peters** asked the Minister for Territories, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many motor cars were sold in the Territory of Papua and New Guinea during each of the last four years? 1. How many of these were (a) Holdens, (b) Japanese cars and (c) other types? {: #subdebate-24-43-s2 .speaker-JOA} ##### Mr Barnes:
CP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - Tertiary Education: Capital Grants. (Question No. 1774.) **Mr. Reynolds** asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Have the various States accepted the Commonwealth's offer of specific conditional interim capital grants for 1965 and 1966 in respect of certain colleges as recommended by the Committee on the Future of Tertiary Education in Australia? 1. What are the details of the grants already made and those proposed to be made? {: #subdebate-24-43-s3 .speaker-009MC} ##### Mr Harold Holt:
LP t. - The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Assuming the honorable member is referring to colleges of advanced education the answer is " Yes ", although there were two variations to the recommendations made by the Committee on the Future of Tertiary Education in Australia and accepted by the Commonwealth. At the request of the Western Australian Government $123,000 will be provided by the Commonwealth for works at the School of Mines of Western Australia at Kalgoorlie, and the $1,000,000 recommended for the Western Australian Institute of Technology was adjusted by a like amount. No provision was made for Commonwealth grants to new Colleges at Bathurst and Wagga as the New South Wales Government has no proposals for these Colleges at present. {: type="1" start="2"} 0. To date a payment of $750,000 has been made to New South Wales for work at the New South Wales Institute of Technology. Stales are proceeding with their approved projects and the remainder of the grants will be paid as set out in the Schedule to the Slates Grants (Advanced Education) Act 1965 (No. 102 of 1965) when requested by the States concerned. {:#subdebate-24-44} #### Education. (Question No. 1777.) {: #subdebate-24-44-s0 .speaker-KYS} ##### Mr Reynolds: s asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What States have established institutes of colleges as recommended by the Committee on the Future of Tertiary Education in Australia? 1. What States have (a) established boards of teacher education as recommended, (b) indicated that they would establish such boards if given the Commonwealth support recommended by the Martin Committee and (c) formally indicated that such a proposal is unacceptable? {: #subdebate-24-44-s1 .speaker-009MC} ##### Mr Harold Holt:
LP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Victoria. 1. As far as 1 am aware - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. no State has established a board of teacher education; 1. no State has indicated its intention to establish such a board, if given Commonwealth support, and no State has formally indicated that such a proposal is unacceptable. Army Recruiting: Advertising Costs. (Question No. 1781.) **Mr. Whitlam** asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice - >What has been the cost of advertising for recruits for the Services in each month since June 1963? {: #subdebate-24-44-s2 .speaker-KEN} ##### Mr Fairhall:
LP l. - The answer to the honorable member's question is as follows - Steel. {: #subdebate-24-44-s3 .speaker-009MB} ##### Mr McEwen:
CP n. - On 28th April 1966, the honorable member for Newcastle **(Mr. Jones)** asked me the following question, without notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Are steel makers in Australia curtailing the production of various types of sheet steel and sections? 1. Has this reduced production resulted in increased unemployment in Newcastle and Port Kembla and a serious loss of confidence in the future of the Australian steel industry? 2. Has this state of affairs been brought about because of substantial and uncontrolled imports of motor vehicles and of iron and steel? 3. Has Government assistance been sought for this important basic Australian secondary industry? 4. When was the request received? 5. Has the Government taken any action? 6. When can we expect a decision? 7. Where will the steel rails come from for the construction of the new Hamersley. Mount Newman and other Western Australian iron ore railways? The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. There has been some reduction in the output of some types of steel produced by the Broken Hill Pty. Ltd. but overall steel production for the ten months ended March 1966 was higher than for the sa me period of the previous year. Sales of sheet steel by John Lysaght (Aust.) Ltd. in 1965 were reported to be about 7 per cent, below record sales achieved in 1964. 1. The increase in the number of persons registered for employment with the Commonwealth Employment Service in Newcastle and Wollongong at the end of March 1966 is the result of a number of factors. There is no question of any loss of confidence in the steel industry. Its overall expansion programme is continuing. 2. Imports of fully assembled motor vehicles and iron and steel, which are subject to protective tariffs, were at a lower rate in the nine months ended March 1966 than in 1964-65. 3. There has been no general request for assistance. Following an inquiry by the Special Advisory Authority temporary duties were recently imposed on imports of stainless steel. The duties on all high carbon and alloy steels, including stainless anod electrical steels, have been referred to the Tariff Board for inquiry. A request has also been received for action against imported steel sheet and plate under the Customs Tariff (Dumping and Subsidies) Act. 5 to 7. The formal request for action under the Customs Tariff (Dumping and Subsidies) Act was received on 13th December 1965. The departmental investigation has been completed and a decision can be expected shortly. 4. Decisions on the source of supply of steel rails are matters for the companies concerned. It is known, however, that imports of rails and fittings have been made from Japan for several of these railway projects. {:#subdebate-24-45} #### Federal Cabinet. (Question No. 728.) {: #subdebate-24-45-s0 .speaker-2V4} ##### Mr Clyde Cameron: n asked the Prime Minister, upon notice - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it a fact that the Premier of South Australia, **Sir Thomas** Playford, expressed a view to the Conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers held in Canberra on the 2nd and 3rd July 1964, that the State of South Australia had no rights because it had no Minister in the Federal Cabinet? 1. If so. will he say what he intends to do to rectify the South Australian complaint? {: #subdebate-24-45-s1 .speaker-009MC} ##### Mr Harold Holt:
LP -- The answer to the honorable member's questions is as follows - >Any decision on the composition of Cabinet must have regard to a wide variety of factors of which State representation is only one. There is continuous consultation between all Ministers on practically all subjects and the fact that a particular State has no ministerial representative in the Cabinet certainly does not mean that the interests of that State are overlooked.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 13 May 1966, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1966/19660513_reps_25_hor51/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant