House of Representatives
19 August 1970

27^th Parliament · 2^nd Session

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
PETITIONS
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Export of Merino Rams
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Kangaroos
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Social Services
- Education
- Education
- Social Services
- Town of Katherine
- Social Services
- War Service Homes
- Interest Rates
- Interest Rates
- Interest Rates
- Kangaroos
- Kangaroos
- Social Services
- Kangaroos
MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS
QUESTION
- SOCIAL SERVICES
QUESTION
- ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE
QUESTION
- SHIPPING
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH LAWS
QUESTION
- SHIPPING
QUESTION
- IMMIGRATION
QUESTION
- ABORIGINALS
QUESTION
- SOUTH AFRICA
QUESTION
- SOUTH AFRICA
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN CITIZEN IN GREECE
QUESTION
- SHIPPING
QUESTION
- DARWIN WATERFRONT
QUESTION
- RECEIPTS DUTY LEGISLATION
QUESTION
- DEMONSTRATIONS
QUESTION
- IMMIGRATION
QUESTION
- DRUG PEDDLING
QUESTION
- HEALTH INSURANCE
QUESTION
- DAIRY INDUSTRY
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH-STATE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIAN CITIZEN IN GREECE
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
CONFERENCE OF PARLIAMENTARY PRESIDING OFFICERS AND CLERKS
ADVANCE TO THE TREASURER 1969-70
- Statement of Expenditure
TAXATION
COMMONWEALTH EDUCATION PROGRAMME FOR 1970-71
- Ministerial Statement
- Teacher Education
- Scholarships
- Territorial Education
- Universities and Colleges of Advanced Education
- Other Developments
AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
- Appointments to Council
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORTS
AUSTRALIAN RURAL ECONOMY
- Discussion of Matter of Public Importance
ORDER OF THE DAY
- Discharge of Motion
- No. 6 - Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Bill 1970 - Second Reading - Resumption of Debate
SALES TAX (EXEMPTIONS AND CLASSIFICATIONS) BILL 1970
- Second Reading
COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATION
- Trinidad and Tobago Conference
ASSISTANCE TO THE WOOL INDUSTRY
- Ministerial Statement
COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATION
- Trinidad and Tobago Conference
STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE
- Report
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE
- Nuclear Reactors: Operating Costs (Question No. 1272)
- Former Members of Parliament: Positions Held (Question No. 1276)
- Papua and New Guinea: Workers’ Compensation (Question No. 1279)
- Wheat: Advance Payments (Question No. 1292)
- Commonwealth Public Service: Proposed Management Training Courses (Question No. 1301)
- Australian Army: Application Rejection Rate (Question No. 1311)
- Australian Army: Expenditure on Recruitment Activities (Question No. 1312)
- Department of the Army: Civilian Staff Content (Question No. 1313)
- Australian Army: Tests on Applicants (Question No. 1314)
- Plan for Australian Development (Question No. 1325)
- Oil Imports (Question No. 1326)
- Decentralisation (Question No. 1329)
- Hops (Question No. 1331)
- Pneumatic Shearing Equipment (Question No. 1334)
- Building Trade: Long Service Leave (Question No. 1340)
- Exposure to Asbestos (Question No. 1280)
- Stevedoring Industry: Communist Factions (Question No. 885)
- Aboriginals (Question No. 7)
- Former Prime Minister: Official and Personal Papers (Question No. 42)
- North Head Quarantine Station (Question No. 250)
- Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No. 465)
- Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No. 467)
- Public Service (Question No. 555)
- Quantitative Import Restrictions and GATT (Question No. 591)
- Defence Industries Mission to United States of America (Question No. 753)
- Dental Treatment of Pensions (Question No. 1048)
- Nursing Profession (Question No. 1049)
- Telephone Services (Question No. 1061)
- Queanbeyan Hospital (Question No. 1077)
- Arbitration Reports (Question No. 1092)
- Law Administration (Question No. 1098)
- Police Officers (Question No. 1099)
- Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority (Question No. 1127)
- Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority (Question No. 1238)
- War Service Homes (Question No. 1278)
- Postal Services (Question No. 1339)
- Doctors (Question No. 1351)
- Mortality Tables (Question No. 1352)
- Public Hospitals (Question No. 1354)
- Defence Contracts (Question No.761)
- Housing Ministers’ Conference (Question No. 825)
- War Service Hemes (Quest fan No. 894)
- Commonwealth Assistance to Hospitals (Question No. 901)
- Housing Loans (Question No. 923)
- Parliamentary Broadcasts (Question No. 963)
- Canberra - Health Survey (Question No. 1021)
- Ileostomy: Special Appliances (Question No. 1025)
- Telephone Service (Question No. 1047)
VICTORIA
QUEENSLAND
- Aboriginals: Discrimination (Question No. 628)
- Building Societies: Interest Rates (Question No. 1140)
- Housing: Maximum Loans (Question No. 893)
- Immigrant Families: Arrivals (Question No. 991.)
- Building Societies: Interest Rates (Question No. 1151)
- Mental Health Institutions (Question No. 1283)
- Federal Elections: Statistics (Question No. 1332)
- Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No.518)
- Commonwealth Industrial Court (Question No. 846)
- Post Offices: Western Australia (Question No. 1116)
- Repatriation: Vocational Counselling Services (Question No. 1147)
- Nuclear Power Station: Investigation of Sites (Question No. 1191)
- Nuclear Power Station: Discharge of Water (Question No. 1194)
- Air Pollution: Liquid Propane Gas (Question No. 1203)
- Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No. 1215)
- Education: School Libraries and Science Blocks (Question No. 1245)
- Nuclear Power (Question No. 1270)
- Nuclear Power Stations: Supply of Plutonium (Question No. 1273)
- Nuclear Power: Gas Cooled Reactors (Question No. 1275)

Mr SPEAKER (Hon. Sir William Aston) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 125

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

Mr SPEAKER:

-I desire to inform the House that a delegation of 8 members from the Diet of Japan led by Mr Asao Mihara is present in the gallery of the House. I am sure that the House would want me to extend to these honourable gentlemen a very warm welcome.

Honourable members ; Hear, hear!

page 125

PETITIONS

Social Services

Mr CREAN presented from certain citizens of New South Wales a petition showing that due to higher living costs, persons on social service pensions are finding it extremely difficult to live in even the most frugal way. The petitioners call upon the Commonwealth Government to increase the base pension rate to 30% of average weekly male earnings, plus supplementary assistance in accordance with Australian Council of Trade Unions policy and by so doing give a reasonably moderate pension. The average weekly earnings for adult male unit wage and salary earner means the figures issued from time to time by the Commonwealth Statistician and published quarterly.

The petitioners pray that the Senate and House of Representatives in Parliament assembled will take immediate steps to bring about the wishes expressed in the petition so that citizens receiving the social service pensions may live their lives in dignity.

Petition received and read.

Social Services

Mr BENNETT presented from certain citizens of New South Wales a petition showing that due to higher living costs, persons on social service pensions are finding it extremely difficult to live in even the most frugal way. The petitioners call upon the Commonwealth Government to increase the base pension rate to 30% of average weekly male earnings, plus supplementary assistance in accordance with Austraiian Council of Trade Unions policy and by so doing give a reasonably moderate pension.

The average weekly earnings for adult male unit wage and salary earner means the figures issued from time to time by the Commonwealth Statistician and published quarterly.

Petition received.

Export of Merino Rams

Mr FitzPATRICK presented from certain electors of New South Wales a petition showing that the decision of ihe Government to lift the 40-year ban on the export of merino rams will do irreparable harm to the present and future merino wool industry of Australia; that the initial quota of 300 rams will be sufficient to make any future protest worthless; that the production of fine-medium quality merino wool in cheap labour countries will put the Australian merino woolgrower and all connected with this industry out of business.

Mr SHERRY presented from certain citizens of New South Wales a petition showing that due to higher living costs, persons on social service pensions are finding it extremely difficult to live in even the most frugal way. The petitioners call upon the Commonwealth Government to increase the base pension rate to 30% of average weekly male earnings, plus supplementary assistance in accordance with Australian Council of Trade Unions policy and by so so doing give a reasonably moderate pension. The average weekly earnings for adult male unit wage and salary earner means the figures issued from time to time by the Commonwealth Statistician and published quarterly.

The petitioners pray that the Senate and the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled will take immediate steps to bring about the wishes expressed in the petition so that citizens receiving the social service pensions may live their lives in dignity.

Petition received.

Social Services

Mr WALLIS presented from certain citizens of the Commonwealth a petition showing that due to higher living costs, persons on social service pensions are finding it extremely difficult to live in even the most frugal way. The petitioners call upon the Commonwealth Government to increase the base pension rate to 30% of average weekly male earnings, plus supplementary assistance in accordance with Australian Council of Trade Unions policy and by so doing give a reasonably moderate pension. The average weekly earnings for adult male unit wage and salary earner means the figures issued from time to time by the Commonwealth Statistician and published quarterly.

Petition received.

Education

Mr LES JOHNSON presented from certain citizens of the Commonwealth a petition showing that (a) the Commonwealth Parliament has acted to remove some inadequacies in the Australian education system; (b) a major inadequacy at present in Australian education is the lack of equal education opportunity for all; (c) more than 500,000 children suffer from serious lack of equal opportunity; (d) Australia cannot afford to waste the talents of one sixth of its school children; (e) only the Commonwealth has the financial resources for special programmes to remove inequalities; (f) nations such as the United Kingdom and the United States have shown that the chief impetus for change and the finance for improvements come from the National Government.

The petitioners pray that the House make provision for a joint Commonwealth-State inquiry into inequalities in Australian education to obtain the evidence on which to base long term national programmes for the elimination of inequalities; the immediate financing of special programmes for low income earners, migrants, Aboriginals, rural and inner suburban dwellers and handicapped children;, and the provision of preschool opportunities for all children from culturally different or socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

Petition received.

Mr NIXON presented from certain residents of the State of Victoria a petition showing that our national symbol, the red kangaroo, is, through shooting for commerce, being reduced to a numerical level where, if the shooting is not stopped, the animal will become extinct. Reports from scientists, conservationists, tourists, graziers and shooters, confirm that State governments are unable to effectively enforce legislation to control shooting and that kangaroos are already extinct in many areas where they once were prolific. Science has established that kangaroos seldom come into direct competition for forage with sheep; there is therefore no reason why this unwarranted killing, which is branding us internationally as barbarians, should be allowed to continue. The residents of this nation want the kangaroo, which can be found nowhere else in the world, to be part of the Australian landscape. We believe that tourists, who will play an increasing part in the national balance of payments, want this too.

Petition received.

Social Services

Mr HAMER presented from certain citizens of the Division of Isaacs a petition showing that due ro higher living costs, persons on social service pensions are finding it extremely difficult to live in even the most frugal way.” The petitioners call upon the Commonwealth Government to increase the base pension rate to 30% of average weekly male earnings, plus supplementary assistance in accordance with Australian Council of Trade Unions policy and by so doing give a reasonably moderate pension. The average weekly earnings for adult male unit wage and salary earner means the figures issued from time to time by the Commonwealth Statistician and published quarterly.

Petition received.

Kangaroos

Mr BROWN presented from certain residents of the State of Victoria a petition showing that, because of uncontrolled shooting for commercial purposes, the population of kangaroos, particularly the big red species, is now so low that they may become extinct. There are insufficient wardens in any State of the Commonwealth to detect or apprehend those who break the inadequate laws which exist. As a tourist attraction the kangaroo is a permanent source of revenue to this country. It is an indisputable fact that no species can withstand hunting on such a scale when there is no provision being made for its future.

Petition received.

page 133

MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS

Mr GORTON:
Prime Minister · Higgins · LP

– Mr Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the Minister for Education and Science, Mr. N. H. Bowen, will be leaving Australia tomorrow for Venice to lead the Australian delegation to the UNESCO Inter-governmental Conference of Ministers on Cultural Policies to be held from 24th August to 2nd September. Mr Bowen is expected to return to Australia on 13th September and during his absence the Minister for Health, Dr Forbes, will be Acting Minister for Education and Science.

I also wish to inform the House that the Minister for External Territories is ill and will be unable to attend the House for a week or 10 days. During the Minister’s absence I will represent him in this House.

page 133

QUESTION

SOCIAL SERVICES

Mr WHITLAM:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask a question of the Minister for Social Services. After the presentation of last year’s Budget, the honourable gentleman told me that the single age pension rate announced in that Budget represented 22.3% of average male weekly earnings for the March quarter of that year, which was the period covered by the most recent figures then available. The new rate announced in this year’s Budget represents only 21.7% of the average male weekly earnings in March of this year. Will the honourable gentleman confirm these figures? If not, will he state how much the drop has been in the last 12 months?

Mr WENTWORTH:
Minister for Social Services · MACKELLAR, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– I will have the detailed figures looked at and confirm the figures given by the Leader of the Opposition, or not confirm them, as the case may be. I do point out to the honourable gentleman that the figures that he quotes would seem to indicate that average male earnings have risen faster than prices. This is to say that real wages throughout Australia have been rising. I would hope that the honourable gentleman, like myself, would consider this a matter for some satisfaction.

page 134

QUESTION

ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE

Mr STREET:
CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

– I ask the Minister for Defence a question. Is it a fact, as alleged in some reports, that the claims of Royal Australian Air Force flying personnel for increased flying pay have been ignored or rejected?

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– It has been quite widely reported in the last few days that the claims of Royal Australian Air Force flying personnel regarding flying pay had been ignored or rejected. I do not think that those reports are accurate, and because this is important to an understanding of Royal Australian Air Force personnel in different bases, I wanted to say what had happened.

It has been alleged that the reasons for the decision which led to an increase of 100% in flying pay were not divulged. The reasons were known to the head of the Department of Air who, of course, is a party to the decision and on the committee making the recommendation. It has been alleged also that the advice of uniformed personnel had not been sought before the decision was made. In fact, before the recommendation was a recommendation - when it was still just a proposal - the advice of the Chief of the Air Staff was sought. He concurred in the figures. It is the figures which are important. He should well know the position in his own service. I am quite certain that he does. It has been alleged also that the rates that were agreed finally were below those which were considered reasonable by the Department of Air. I find this allegation difficult to understand when the Permanent Head of the Department of Air was party to the recommendation, which was a unanimous one, to the Treasurer and myself and when the Chief of the Air Staff had known previously of the figures, had been consulted about them and had concurred in them.

I can well understand the morale problem and the difficulty that people in the RAAF would have with the reports that have been circulated widely - and not only in the Press, because I understand that the Press reports were based on messages which had been widely circulated throughout Royal Australian Air Force bases in Australia. It has been suggested that the rates should have been the same as those for the Department of Civil Aviation personnel. 1 do not wish to comment in detail on the reasons for this, but I wish to make one point.

Mr Uren:

– You are taking a long time.

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr Uren:

– The Minister is making a statement.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– This is a matter in which I think quite a number of people have an interest. Royal Australian Air Force pilots and Department of Civil Aviation pilots have one ability in common, that is, an ability to fly sophisticated aircraft. But Department of Civil Aviation personnel also have other responsibilities not generally found in the duties of Royal Australian Air Force personnel. These responsibilities include forming, maintaining and policing the rules and standards of civil flying. These are duties additional to those related to RAAF pilots. However, the increase that the RAAF pilots gained was a 100% increase.

page 135

QUESTION

SHIPPING

Mr BARNARD:
BASS, TASMANIA

– I ask the Minister for Shipping and Transport: Does the Australian National Line operate at a satisfactory profit level and has it substantial reserves? If so, why was it necessary to impose a 12±% freight rise on the Line’s operations? Is the Minister aware of the severe impact this increase will have on the cost structure of Tasmania? Is it considered jost that the Line should maintain its profit rate at the cost of dislocating Tasmanian industry and trade? Will the Minister vary the provisions of the Australian Coastal Shipping Commission Act to emphasise effective services and not the maintenance of the ANL profit rate?

Mr SINCLAIR:
Minister Assisting the Minister for Trade and Industry · NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– Unfortunately, the profits of the Australian National Line are not at a satisfactory level and it is as a result of the decline in profitability that it has been necessary to adjust the freight structure throughout Australia. It is interesting to note that since 1959, when there was an initial reduction of some 45% in the tariff charged by the Australian National Line which was followed in 1961 by a further 15% reduction, the freight forwarders, who are the largest customers of the Australian National Line in servicing the Tasmanian trade, have seen fit to increase their freight by some 441%. Over the period during which the ANL through the introduction of new types of cargo vessels and unit cargo handling has been able to stabilise the freight structure between Tasmania and the mainland, freight forwarders have found it necessary to increase their rates by some 441%. There must be some limit beyond which the ANL can no longer absorb these cost increases. In only the past few years increases in the wharfage dues, levied by the port authorities on both sides of Bass Strait which mean an average additional 13c per 40 cubic feet of cargo have been absorbed by the ANL. There is also the problem that the wharfage dues levied by the Tasmanian ports are substantially higher than those levied by the mainland ports.

None the less, the Government does recognise the peculiar significance of the trans-Bass Strait service to the shippers, producers and people of Tasmania. It is for that reason that the increase in freight passed on to other trades in the ANL service was not immediately applied to the Tasmanian service but instead was deferred so that discussions could be held with the Tasmanian Government and interested Tasmanian persons to determine the impact. Only on Monday of this week the General Manager of the ANL, the permanent head of my Department and I went to discuss with the Premier of Tasmania, the Tasmanian Minister for Transport and with interested persons in industries there the general question of the impact of the freight increases. There were quite a number of anomalies which, having been discussed, have now been removed. There were in some instances areas where the impact was apparently higher than the 12i% increase but this has now been reduced so that overall substantially only a 12i% increase applies to the Tasmanian trade. It is recognised that shipping costs and, indeed, costs of all sorts must have an impact on producers and consumers alike. However, to the extent to which the ANL has maintained the freight rate at a stable level in Tasmania over a long period of time it has itself been suffering and it cannot continue operating as it does under a charter which requires it to operate on a commercial basis and sustain losses incurred in any sector indefinitely.

page 135

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH LAWS

Mr DRURY:
RYAN, QUEENSLAND

– I ask the AttorneyGeneral whether, in view of the anomalous position that has arisen in the States following a recent High Court decision, he will consider the desirability of introducing Commonwealth legislation to overcome the present situation under which State criminal law cannot apply to Commonwealth property within a State?

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · BEROWRA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– I answer the question in the affirmative. The question of legislating to overcome the difficulties created by Worthing’s case received close attention at the last meeting of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General in luly. At that meeting 2 committees were set up. One was a committee of draftsmen or - on a Commonwealth level - parliamentary counsel, and the other was a policy committee. They are committees representative of the Commonwealth and of the States. They have met frequently both alone and together. Indeed, I understand that there is a meeting of both committees in Melbourne this week. Out of their deliberations I expect that there soon will come to me and to my colleagues in the States proposals for legislation. I shall consider those proposals as a manner of urgency, of course, because a situation of very considerable difficulty is posed by the decision in Worthing’s case.

page 136

QUESTION

SHIPPING

Mr DAVIES:
BRADDON, TASMANIA

– My question to the Minister for Shipping and Transport is supplementary to that asked of him by my colleague, the honourable member for Bass. The Minister will recall that losses incurred on the Darwin run and on our entry into the overseas trade are clearly indicated in the last annual report of the Australian National Line. Will the Minister inform the House of the profits made by the Australian National Line on the roll-on roll-off services between Melbourne and northern Tasmanian ports which offset the losses to which I have referred and resulted in an overall profit for the Australian National Line of some $lm?

Mr SINCLAIR:
CP

Mr McMAHON:
Minister for External Affairs · LOWE, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– When I read in one or more of the Australian newspapers that Mr Vrettos had been placed in custody by the Greek police I immediately instructed officers of the Department of External Affairs in Athens to make inquiries with the Athens police and Mr Vrettos personally in order to ensure that his maximum rights as an Australian were protected. The Greek police informed my officers that he had been placed under supervision because of his strenuous actions at a basketball match between Greeks and Poles. He was in fact strenuously supporting the Poles against his native country. My officers also interviewed Mr Vrettos, who said that there seemed to be far more worry back home about his welfare and whereabouts than he had himself. He said that he was quite all right and satisfied. His passport had been returned to him.

Early this morning I heard from other sources that Mr Vrettos had been again detained. My Department immediately telephoned our embassy in Athens and instructed the officers there to interview Mr Vrettos at his hotel. Our embassy was also told to do all in its power, to ensure that his civil rights were protected. Mr Vrettos could not be contacted then, because it was 2 or 3 o’clock in the morning. Nonetheless, at daybreak or as soon after as possible my officers would see him and ask him whether he wants any protection. The only other information I can give the House is that I have been informed by some members of the. Press that they have been in contact with Mr Vrettos. I again assure the House that my officers will contact him as soon as they can.

page 138

QUESTION

SHIPPING

Mr SHERRY:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

– My question to the Minister for Shipping and Transport is supplementary to the questions which were asked of him by my colleagues the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the honourable member for Braddon. The Minister is no doubt aware of the intense feeling of the people of Tasmania with regard to the impost of a 121% freight increase on ships of the Australian National Line which trade between the mainland ports of Australia and Tasmania. I ask: Is the Minister aware of the fact that the whole economic fabric of Tasmania is now in jeopardy as a result of this increase because the State depends almost entirely on sea communications for its continued survival? Will he indicate, by reversing this decision, that the welfare of all the people of Tasmania is far more important than the profitable trading of the ANL?

Mr SINCLAIR:
CP

– The honourable member for Franklin has demonstrated an irresponsible attitude towards the way in which the Government should try to assist the people of each of the States of the Commonwealth. Over the period in which the Australian National Line has reduced its freight rates - initially by 45% and then by 15% - the freight forwarders have -increased their charges by 441%. Port authorities in Tasmania average nearly twice the port dues - in fact, in some instances it is nearly 3 times - of the port of Melbourne in relation to the same services. However, within other sectors affecting the movement of goods from Tasmanian producers to the mainland and goods purchased on the mainland by Tasmanian consumers there are elements which have moved against the cost factor at a rate substantially higher than the 121% increase which is being applied to goods carried by the ANL. Some dispensations are available within ANL charges in areas of specialised stacking. I would refer in particular to a method of cargo handling referred to as top stocking which, if it is used by shippers - and I have been told that it is available to many shippers but it is not being used to any extent at the moment - we will more than negate the present increase in freight charges. While it is true that Tasmania has substantial disadvantages compared with the mainland States in the movement of goods to and from its principal market, it is also true that other elements in the freight chain have moved substantially against the interests of Tasmanians, and. speaking comparatively, to a greater extent than has the Australian National Line. Indeed, it is only because of the stabilisation that the Australian National Line has produced through the introduction of new types of cargo handling that the freight charges to Tasmania - and hence the interests of Tasmanian industry - have been protected for so long.

page 138

QUESTION

DARWIN WATERFRONT

Mr CALDER:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

– Is the Minister for Shipping and Transport aware of the long history of irresponsible action by the wharf labourers of Darwin which has resulted in serious inconvenience to and higher freight charges for Territorians and heavy financial losses to the Australian National Line? In view of the absurd stoppages on the first visit of the new vessel, ‘Darwin Trader’, will the Minister confer with his colleague, the Minister for Labour and National Service, to see whether something can be done to provide a responsible work force on the Darwin waterfront?

Mr SINCLAIR:
CP

– It is regrettably true that in the movement of goods around the Australian coast the general unreliability of waterfront labour has created substantia! difficulties in the turnround time for conventional vessels. Because of this uncertainty in turnround time an accelerated move has been made into new forms of cargo handling. This has involved a lessening in the work force but at the same time has provided a more specialised nature crf employment and, by giving the opportunities for more specialised training, it has provided opportunities for more remunerative employment for waterside labour. The ‘Darwin Trader’, the new vessel operated by the Australian National Line to Darwin, was introduced specifically to try to accelerate the turnround in the port of Darwin and so contain the escalation of costs which affect the provision of the Australian National Line’s services there. The 4,500-odd tons of cargo for Darwin on the maiden voyage of the ‘Darwin Trader’ were discharged in about 38 hours at the port of Darwin, which was a very effective effort. But unfortunately, through industrial trouble at the port, the ship was delayed for about 9 days, making an additional cost of about $31,000 to the Australian National Line. Imposts in freight charges must necessarily reflect any undue burden of costs.

The Darwin and Tasmanian trades unfortunately suffer by the movement of costs and the residents of Darwin in particular are being prejudiced in their enjoyment of an economic and reasonable level of freight structure by the general unreliability of the waterfront labour in the port of Darwin. Accordingly, I will be happy to discuss with my colleague, as the honourable member for the Northern Territory has suggested, what methods might be adopted to improve the general position there. It might bc mentioned that the Government, through my colleagues, the Minister for the Interior and the Minister for National Development, is committed to a very substantial expenditure in the upgrading of the facilities in the port of Darwin. Without doubt this also will be prejudiced if the waterfront labour is not prepared to adopt a responsible attitude to ensure a quick turnround of both coastal ships and those operating into and out of Darwin from overseas.

page 139

QUESTION

RECEIPTS DUTY LEGISLATION

Mr CREAN:
MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA

– Was any undertaking given by the Prime Minister at the last Premiers’ Conference thai in the event of the failure to pass the receipts duty scheme of legislation the Commonwealth would reimburse the States the amount of revenue lost by their inability constitutionally to impose such taxation, which would amount to a sum of about $70m?

Mr GORTON:
LP

– I think that the sura was rather more than that which was mentioned by the honourable member, but we can look up the actual figures ourselves. I have no recollection of any undertaking being given. There is a transcript of the proceedings, but 1 have no recollection of such an undertaking. On the other hand, it must be fairly clear that should the measure not be passed then those who voted against it would be placing the States in an entirely untenable position and would be attacking the capacity of the States to carry out their responsibilities for schools, hospitals, roads and the other things which the community wants, and that would obviously require responsible people to see whether such irresponsibility could be repaired.

– I have personally examined every case of alleged incitement that has been brought to my notice. In considering the question which arises in each of such cases, whether a prosecution should be undertaken, I have at all times endeavoured to exercise a judgment based on caution, moderation and restraint, bearing in mind that a number of factors affecting the public interest are wrapped up in any question whether a prosecution should be launched for something in the nature - as these cases may be thought to be - of a political offence. I hope, and I firmly intend, that I shall continue in the exercise of my duty as Attorney-General to exercise the same caution, moderation and restraint because that is the only proper way to approach any question which is a question of exercising a semi-judicial discretion. However, I do assure the House that for my part I am determined that in cases that in my judgment are proper for prosecution in relation to alleged offences against Commonwealth laws, a prosecution will take place. I think I should inform the House that during the last few weeks I authorised investigations into a number of activities. Those investigations have been in progress and are continuing and may lead to situations in which 1 will consider it proper to prosecute for an offence or a number of offences against Commonwealth law. I share fully the concern of the honourable member for Balaclava in this question of law and order. I think all responsible members of the community do. I am very conscious of the public need for the preservation of law and order by all proper means.

page 141

QUESTION

IMMIGRATION

Mr COPE:
SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Minister for Immigration. The honourable gentleman is aware that there are over 200,000 migrants eligible for naturalisation who have not applied for same. Some of these people are willing to become naturalised but will not take an oath of allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen simply because they do not believe in monarchies. Would the honourable gentleman give permission to allow such migrants to take an oath of allegiance to the Commonwealth of Australia as a voluntary alternative?

Mr LYNCH:
LP

– The answer to the question is no.

page 141

QUESTION

DRUG PEDDLING

Mr FAIRBAIRN:
FARRER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to ask the Minister for Customs and Excise a question which concerns a recent statement by the Minister that Australia is being subjected to rapidly increasing international drug peddling operations and that this tragic and obnoxious trade is not being deterred sufficiently by the light sentences often handed out by the courts to those convicted. Will he confer with the Attorney-General to see if the laws for drug peddling and drug pushing can be altered so as to set a minimum gaol sentence for this offence as well as the present maximum sentence? While these laws are being reviewed, will he also consider amending the law so as to prevent people arrested with drugs in their possession from obtaining bail so that they will not be able to warn the distribution ring of their arrest?

Mr CHIPP:
Minister for Customs and Excise · HOTHAM, VICTORIA · LP

– I am unable to say to the honourable member after looking at all the cases over the last 2 years that in balance the sentences have been too light, too strong or satisfactory. What I can say and what I have said is that it is causing me deep concern that in a number of decisions recently where the evidence seemed to scream for some severe penalty very light penalties were imposed. In fact, in one case only a fine was administered. Whether or not the Government should consider imposing minimum penalties is a very serious matter. I know that the Attorney-General would share the view I have, and I suspect that the Opposition would also share the view, that responsible Government would impose minimum penalties for offences only where there are overwhelming reasons for so doing. I know that at least some of my State colleagues are becoming concerned at the statistics of the increase of drug smuggling. For example, in the 12 months ended this July we will have seized 20 times more hashish and marihuana than we seized in the preceding 12 months. Only a few weeks ago we seized 50,000 tablets of LSD imported from America, all of which were pre-sold. We have evidence that the importation and consumption of heroin is increasing in Australia.

As far as bail is concerned, this too causes us concern. We regard bail as a right of an accused under the British form of justice. But it is a right that is given to a person after a judge has, I believe, sensibly viewed all of the situation. Not only have the rights of the accused to be protected but the rights of the community must surely take some place in the judge’s mind. I am dismayed - I use that term strongly and advisedly - that notwithstanding strenuous opposition by the narcotics squad before the courts, in certain cases where we suspect collusion and that the accused will alert his colleagues and so on, our investigations have been upset because not only has bail been given but also bail amounting to $100 or S200 has been granted for offences that can bring 10 years gaol or a fine of $10,000, or both. For this reason I have asked my Department to submit to me a comprehensive report of the charges, convictions and sentences over the last 2 years so that I can make a balanced judgment on this and consult with my colleague the Attorney-General and the Stale Ministers.

page 141

QUESTION

HEALTH INSURANCE

Mr BERINSON:
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I ask the Prime Minister whether he has had the opportunity to consider the reported statement by Mr Justice Nimmo to ihe effect that the inquiry into health insurance over which he presided produced evidence of ‘appalling social and economic distress in this affluent country’? In view of this evidence arising from a Commonwealth inquiry which was not seeking it, will the Prime Minister give an undertaking to now consider the appointment of a committee of inquiry into poverty in Australia so that the fullest information and advice on this subject can be collated as a basis for further action?

Mr GORTON:
LP

– The Commonwealth, of course, and indeed the Parliament, has considered the report of Mr Justice Nimmo on how to best provide the best health scheme for the people of this country and the Government and the Parliament have taken action to do so. The other matters which the honourable member has raised I suggest come within the ambit of future policy.

page 142

QUESTION

DAIRY INDUSTRY

Mr ROBINSON:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Minister for Primary Industry. I ask: Has the New South Wales Government yet entered into a formal agreement with the Commonwealth under the terms of the $25m dairy farm reconstruction scheme legislation? If the answer is in the affirmative, when will the scheme begin to operate in New South Wales and what amount of finance will be available in the current financial year for this important rural reconstruction work? I further ask: What can be done to speed .up this important phase of rural reconstruction?

Mr ANTHONY:
Minister for Primary Industry · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– There has not been any agreement reached with New South Wales on the dairy farm reconstruction proposals. So far 3 States have accepted the proposals and arrived at mutual conditions. They are Western Australia, Tasmania and Queensland. After negotiations with the Queensland Minister for Lands about 2 weeks ago we reached complete agreement on all aspects and 1 hope that this agreement will be put into effect as soon as possible. A lot of noise has been made in New South Wales either for or against the scheme. In fact, at times I. wonder where that State stands on the proposal. There have been areas of difference between the Commonwealth and New South Wales. One of the areas of difference has been that the State has wanted to apply this money right across the whole dairy industry in New South Wales, including the whole milk area.

The Commonwealth, which has the responsibility in the manufacturing area of the industry, has rejected this proposal. However, the Commonwealth has been prepared to accept that there is a marginal area where people may have small quotas and it has allowed this money to be available to farmers who have 50% or more of their dairy products sold at manufacturing prices. Therefore, this will overcome quite a bit of the grey area. However, we have said to New South Wales that we would have no objection if moneys which it uses in its present farm build up scheme are applied exclusively to the milk zone. In fact, we would be prepared to make a grant to that State to assist it to use these moneys to write off some of the redundant improvements on properties. However, as yet, I have not been able to get even to negotiating terms with New South Wales. I only hope that I get word shortly so that some satisfactory conclusion can be arrived at.

page 142

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH-STATE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS

Mr GORTON:
LP

– I would like to add something to the answer I gave to the question asked by the honourable member for Melbourne Ports. I was not sure of the basis of the question. I do recollect a meeting of the Premiers - not the last one but the one before - in which the Premiers were assured by me that should their Budgets for the financial year which has just ended be severely damaged by failure to collect the money which they had budgeted for and expected to get from receipts duty then the Commonwealth would have to provide assistance to them in some way or find some means of assistance so that they would not have to sustain those losses. I will look at the transcript of the subsequent meetings but it occurred to me that that might have been what was in the honourable member’s mind. For the rest, I can only repeat what I said, that I have not a recollection of a subsequent meeting. But I will look at it.

page 142

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN CITIZEN IN GREECE

Mr McMAHON:
LP

– During question time today in answer to a question asked by the honourable member for Bennelong I said that I would let the House know as soon as f could what transpired at the interview between embassy officials and Mr Vrettos in Athens. Embassy officials spoke to Mr Vrettos in his hotel this morning at 5.20 a.m. Athens time. He was not under guard. He accompanied officials to the embassy and informed them that on 3 occasions he bad been interviewed by the Athens police and that he was asked to interview them again at 9.20 this morning. An embassy official will accompany him at the interview. He also informed us that basically he was all right. His main problem was associated with his passport which at that moment was not in his possession, lt was in the possession of the Soviet Embassy to which it had been banded in order that a visa could be given so that he would be able to go to Moscow. His main worry at the moment was that the visa had not been given because be wanted to leave for Moscow on Friday of this week. The only other information I can give is that Mr Vrettos is not under guard and is apparently free to move.

page 143

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr SCHOLES:
Corio

- Mr Speaker, I wish to make a persona! explanation.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Mr SCHOLES:

– Yes. During question time, when the Attorney-General was answering a question, i interjected to ask if his remarks included the Press and television personnel who were present during and prior to the entire episode and apparently took no action to prevent the invasion of his home, nor did they come to his assistance. The Attorney-General immediately accused me of supporting the attack. That is untrue, a fact which I believe the Attorney-General is well aware of.

page 143

CONFERENCE OF PARLIAMENTARY PRESIDING OFFICERS AND CLERKS

Mr SPEAKER:

– I present a report of the Third Conference of Presiding Officers and Clerks of the Parliaments of Australia, Papua and New Guinea, Nauru and Western Samoa held at Parliament House, Melbourne, on lst-3rd April.

page 143

ADVANCE TO THE TREASURER 1969-70

Statement of Expenditure

Mr BURY:
Treasurer · Wentworth · LP

– I present the following paper:

Statement for the year 1969-70 of Heads of Expenditure and the amounts charged thereto pursuant to section 36a of the Audit Act 1901-1969 (Advance to the Treasurer).

Ordered that the statement be taken into consideration in Committee of the whole House at the next sitting.

page 143

TAXATION

Mr BURY:
Treasurer · Wentworth · LP

– I present the following paper:

Taxation - Taxation Statistics 1968-69 dated 1st August 1970, supplement to the 48th Report of the Commissioner of Taxation.

Ordered that the paper be printed.

page 143

COMMONWEALTH EDUCATION PROGRAMME FOR 1970-71

Ministerial Statement

Mr N H Bowen:
Minister for Education and Science · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– by leave - I wish to provide the House with some further details of the Government’s education programme for 1970-71, as outlined by the Treasurer (Mr Bury) in the Budget Speech. In total the programme amounts to an estimated expenditure of $312,357,000 which is a 25% increase on the expenditure of $249,453,000 during 1969-70. This increase in Commonwealth expenditure on education results both from the introduction of new measures as well as the development of programmes which are already in operation.

Teacher Education

This Budget marks the commencement of further assistance to the States for the construction of teachers’ colleges. Over the 3 year period to June 1973 $30m in the form of unmatched grants will be provided by the Commonwealth. This is an increase of $6m over that which was made available during the past triennium. An amount of $llm has been allocated to this programme in 1970-71. It is expected that the funds made available during the first stage of the programme will provide 5,500 teacher training places with a further 6,000 places becoming available as a result of the grants during the triennium now commencing.

Whilst these funds are for construction and extension of State teachers’ colleges, at least 10% of the places attributable to the expenditure of these grants will be made available to students not bonded to State Education Departments. The arrangement, therefore, ensures that places are available to students who may wish to teach in nongovernment schools. I would like to provide honourable members with some details of the projects which will benefit from this extension of the grant. New South Wales proposes to use funds to complete stage 2 of William Balmain, Newcastle and Goulburn Teachers’ Colleges. In Victoria, in addition to extending a number of existing colleges, the new La Trobe College will be commenced. In other States the projects will include the commencement of stage 2 of Mt Gravatt College in Queensland, the construction of Murray Park College in South Australia, and of Churchland Teachers’ College in Western Australia. In Tasmania the Launceston Teachers’ College will be completed.

The programme forms only part of the Government’s policy to improve the size and quality of the teaching force. Honourable members will recall that the Commonwealth is now supporting teacher education in colleges of advanced education in New South Wales, Queensland, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory. Furthermore over 40% of government teacher trainees are in universities for which the Commonwealth shares fully both capital and recurrent expenditure. Expected sharp increases in primary enrolments from 1975 onwards, together with the increasing retention rate in secondary schools and the continued steady reduction in the pupilteacher ratios create a pressing need to increase substantially the number of places available to educate teachers for both government and non-government schools. The Government’s policy in teacher education will make a significant contribution towards meeting this need. In addition to supporting teacher education at the primary and secondary levels, the Government is, of course, making grants for the erection of pre-school teachers colleges.

I have already referred to Government support for teacher training in colleges of advanced education. Teacher education at the Canberra College of Advanced education begins in February 1971. The present plan is for an intake of approximately 100 students in a 3-year course of preparation for pre-school and primary teachers and a somewhat smaller number of university graduates to follow a 1-year course leading to a diploma of education which would prepare them for teaching in secondary schools.

As a further measure to meet the demand for trained teachers, the Government is establishing, for an initial period of 5 years, a programme of scholarships to encourage students to enter teacher education courses at the Canberra College of Advanced Education. These will be unbonded awards. The recipients will be free to make up their minds at the conclusion of their course as to where they will teach and whether they will teach in government or nongovernment schools. In addition to payment of fees, the scholarships will provide, subject to a means test, living allowances at the same rate as for Commonwealth advanced education scholarships. A sum of $50,000 has been included in the 1970-71 Budget for this purpose. These various aspects of the Government’s policy in teacher education clearly show our preparedness to join with the States in producing an increasing supply of highly qualified teachers.

Scholarships

Since the introduction of the Commonwealth scholarship scheme in 1951 the Government has pursued a policy of providing financial assistance for able students to further their studies. Its programme of student assistance has grown and diversified with the development of the Australian educational pattern; this year 27,150 new awards were available under 5 main scholarship schemes. These schemes cover a wide variety of courses at universities, colleges of advanced education, and technical colleges. The courses being taken by scholars range from the final years of secondary schooling to research studies leading to postgraduate degrees. The total number of students receiving assistance under these schemes in 1970 is 61,000 and scholarships expenditure in the last financial year was in excess of S32m.

The Government regularly reviews the adequacy of its scholarship schemes both in terms of the number of awards available and the scales of benefits provided. An increasing proportion of the appropriate age group is completing secondary schooling and proceeding to tertiary studies and scholarships available have for some years been increased in almost every Budget. The number of students holding Commonwealth university scholarships has risen by 50% from 20,570 in 1966 to 30,510 in 1970. Nevertheless, as I have mentioned, there is an increasing proportion of secondary school students obtaining matriculation qualifications. The continuing high standard of competition among these students for open entrance awards has made it apparent that there are many applicants of high quality at this level who merit assistance. To meet this demand the Government has decided to provide a further 1,000 open entrance university scholarships for 1971, bringing the total number of these awards to 8,500. Taking into account the 4,000 later year awards also available, new Commonwealth university scholarships available in 1971 will now total 12,500. In addition, of course, the Government will be providing 2,500 new advanced education scholarships in 1971.

Over the years the Government has also had regard to the level of benefits payable under the 2 tertiary schemes, both for scholars at universities and those at colleges of advanced education. Under these 2 schemes all compulsory tuition and other statutory fees are paid on behalf of each scholar. In addition, a living allowance is payable subject to a means test. At present the maximum rates of living allowance are $620 a year for scholars living at home and $1,000 a year for scholars living away from home. I have received representations that a further increase in benefits is desirable, and have studied a detailed report on this matter prepared by the National Union of Australian University Students. I expect to be able to make a statement on this matter before the end of the year. The growth in university enrolments at the undergraduate level has increased the numbers qualifying for and desiring to proceed to postgraduate training in research.

The Government recognises the value of these studies in providing a flow of highly qualified personnel into academic careers and into positions of responsibility in industry and to meet the need has established a Commonwealth postgraduate scholarship scheme. To date more than 3,800 students have received assistance under this scheme and at 30th June this year there were 1,730 holders of these awards. The Government has decided to increase by 50, to 700, the number of awards available in 1971 under the Commonwealth postgraduate awards scheme.

Within recent years there has been an important new development in universities not only in Australia but also in Britain and New Zealand in the form of the provision of high level specialised courses related directly to the needs of industry, commerce and government. These courses are at postgraduate level and generally lead to a master’s degree; they are normally of 1 year’s duration, although in some cases they extend over 2 years. They cover a wide range of fields, such as applied science, engineering, education, business administration, hospital administration, building science, architecture and economics. The Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee has proposed to me that the Commonwealth provide assistance for students taking these courses. The Government agrees that this is now the appropriate time to give additional encouragement to students to take these courses. The Government has therefore decided to establish a scheme of postgraduate awards for students undertaking full time study leading to a master’s degree by course work. In 1971, 100 of these new awards will be available. They will be tenable at Australian universities and the benefits payable each year to holders of these awards will be the same as those now provided under the existing Commonwealth postgraduate awards scheme. Students will hold the awards for the duration of the course which they enter, normally from 1 to 2 years.

It has also been decided that the number of awards available each year under this new scheme may be increased to 125 in 1972 following the establishment of a national school of business administration. I will be saying something of the proposed school of business administration later. The benefits at present payable to holders of Commonwealth postgraduate awards comprise a living allowance at the rate of $2,350 per annum and, where appropriate, a dependants’ allowance at the rate of S450 per annum and contributions towards the cost of thesis preparation, travel between cities and settling into new accommodation. As with university and advanced education scholarships, I hope to be able to make an announcement on allowances before the end of the year. Taken together, changes in the scholarship schemes are estimated to cost $ 1.69m in the financial year 1970- 1971 and $3.13m in the full year 1971. The total expenditure on the Commonwealth scholarships schemes is expected to rise from $32.21m in 1969-1970 to an estimated $37.39m in 1970-1971 and $39.45m for the full year 1971. When the effects of the new measures are fully operative, the total cost of the schemes is expected to approach $50m per annum.

Territorial Education

This financial year schools and technical colleges in the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory will together receive almost $30m. This expenditure is necessary to meet the need arising from a rapid expansion of enrolments. Tn 1969 enrolments in Government primary and secondary schools in the Australian Capital Territory were 50% above those for 1965 while the comparable increase for the Northern Territory was 60%. These rates of increase are well above that for Government schools in the 6 States which rose by 14% over the period. Honourable members will be aware of the decision of the South Australian Government to withdraw, over a period of 5 years, from the staffing of Northern Territory schools. I hope to be in a position later in the year to outline to Parliament the steps we believe are necessary for the Commonwealth to take as a result of this decision. We are working closely with the South Australian authorities to ensure that the interests of pupils and teachers are safeguarded.

The Government is conscious of the need to provide for a wider range of educational facilities in the Northern Territory and with this in mind it has accepted the recommendations contained in the first report of the Planning Committee which was established last year to advise the Government on the development of a community college in Darwin. I believe that the college will provide great assistance to developing industries in the Northern Territory and will also enable the technical and professional knowledge of Territory workers to be regularly updated. Significant expenditure on the college will not be incurred in this financial year but, as honourable members realise, the development of the college has substantial implications for the future financing of education in the Northern Territory.

Universities and Colleges of Advanced Education

The proposed Commonwealth expenditure during the financial year on universities and colleges of advanced education reflects its support for the continued expansion of tertiary education facilities. Grants to colleges of advanced education are expected to total almost $40m, which is more than 75% above the figure for 1969- 1970, while those to universities will total approximately $1 10m, as compared with just under $94m during the past financial year. With respect to the colleges, a significant development for which funds will be provided in the current financial year is the provision of residential accommodation at institutions in country areas. We are supporting the construction of these facilities at colleges in Toowoomba and Rockhampton in Queensland. Wagga and Bathurst in New South Wales, Bendigo and Ballarat in Victoria, the Roseworthy Agricultural College in South Australia and at the Kalgoorlie School of Mines in Western Australia. Residential accommodation will also be provided at the new Agricultural College at Orange in New South Wales, which will be commenced during the financial year. This provision will enable colleges in country areas to be viable institutions and to serve regions rather than particular cities.

I would like to take this opportunity to mention briefly the recent inquiry into the future provision of postgraduate education in business management and administration in Australia. The report of the Committee which undertook this inquiry has recently been made public. Among the Committee’s recommendations was the establishment of 1 national school of the highest quality. The Committee considered that it would be unwise at this juncture to attempt to establish more than 1 national school because of the scarcity of first class teaching staff and the heavy capital and recurrent costs involved. It recommended that this national school be placed in the University of New South Wales. It proposes that the school should aim at a 2 year fulltime course producing approximately 70 master of business administration graduates annually and should conduct annually 2 or 3 executive programmes of 8 to 10 weeks’ duration. The school should also conduct a small Ph.D. programme and maintain a significant output of research. The Commonwealth accepts the Committee’s recommendations in principle and is proceeding to discussions with industry and with the New South Wales Government and the University of New South Wales, concerning the establishment of a national graduate school of business administration.

Other Developments

During the autumn session I gave the House details of the new Commonwealth assistance for educational research. Under the programme support will be given for research projects, for the communication and application of research findings and towards measures for the training of research personnel. This will be the first year of the new scheme and a sum of $250,000 has been included in the Budget for this purpose. This will also be the first full year of the new Commonwealth measure for assisting the education of migrant children. Honourable members will recall that details of the scheme were announced early this year by the Minister for Immigration (Mr Lynch). Under it. assistance will be given in meeting the salary costs of teachers employed to teach migrant children in special classes and the necessary supervisory staff; special teaching courses for teachers in the method of teaching English as a foreign language; the provision of approved capital equipment of the language laboratory type for special classes; and the provision of suitable teaching and learning materials. The estimated expenditure on the Child Migrant Education

Programme during this financial year is S 1.64m out of an estimated expenditure of S4m on migrant education generally.

Nation-wide Survey of Educational Needs

It will be recalled that the Australian Education Council, which comprises the 6 State Ministers for Education, has during the past year been involved in a survey of educational needs over the next 5 years. Independent schools have also been involved. The Commonwealth has co-operated in the survey, in particular in respect of the future educational needs of the two territories. The results of the survey of needs of government schools were discussed at a special meeting of the Australian Education Council I attended in late May. The Ministers agreed to submit the findings of the survey to their respective governments.

The States’ needs in education formed a part of the Premiers’ Conference and Loan Council discussions and reference was made to the survey. As a result of the new agreement for financial assistance grants from the Commonwealth, the States will receive almost $800m more during the next 5 years than would have been provided under the previous agreement. These additional funds will greatly improve the capacity of the States to meet their responsibilities in the field of education. The Commonwealth is prepared to discuss the information disclosed by the survey of government schools and teachers’ colleges against the background of the intentions of the States themselves. These talks would be most appropriately at the Prime Minister/Premier level. Consideration requires to be given also to the needs of the independent schools, which are being assessed separately, and for which detailed material is not yet available. As to the publication of a report of the survey, I understand that the State Ministers are to meet on Friday of this week to discuss this matter and it is expected that a report will be released shortly after that.

Total Commonwealth Expenditure on Education

Details of Commonwealth expenditure on education from 1966-1967 to 1970-1971 are set out in a table which, with the concurrence of the . House, I incorporate in Hansard.

I present the following paper:

Commonwealth Education Programme for 1970- 71- Ministerial Statement, 19 August 1970- and move:

That the House take note of the paper.

Mr BEAZLEY:
Fremantle

– The Opposition welcomes the statement that has been made by the Minister for Education and Science (Mr N. H. Bowen). We welcome, of course, the 25% increase in Commonwealth expenditure on education but it may well be that the most significant part of the statement that has been made by the Minister occurs as late as page 11. There, under what is a very dramatic heading for anybody who remembers the controversies of the last decade, we have in a Government statement a heading ‘Nation-wide Survey of Educational Needs’. I am sure all honourable members who have spent the last decade in this Parliament will know how frequently we on the Opposition side have asked for a nation-wide survey of educational needs. The Minister for Health (Dr Forbes) who will act as Minister for Education and Science during the absence of the Minister for Education and Science at a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation meeting told us in the House that the Commonwealth would not conduct a survey of educational needs because if it did it would commit the Commonwealth Government necessarily to heavy expenditures because of the expectations it would raise. We now have the State Ministers for Education forming a body which will make a survey of Australian educational needs and that, if it is actually implemented and carried out, redeems any weaknesses that there may be in this paper.

The standing weakness In the Government’s statement on education is that it is another instalment in a series of piecemeal interventions into education instead of a systematic attack. It is true that as the Commonwealths intervention is increasing, the sporadic nature of its forays is ceasing to be a feature of its policy. It sporadically came into school libaries and it sporadically gave grants for private secondary schools. It has now come more significantly into teacher training. I hope that the Minister’s expectations about teacher training will be realised. I have not the least doubt that the quality of teaching will be raised as a result of the action which the Minister foreshadows. However, I have the gravest doubt about the quantity of teachers. In some of the States 47% of those who get a tertiary education get a tertiary education in teachers’ colleges and it is doubtful if a higher percentage of young people than that is attracted to the profession. The Minister has pointed out some of the difficulties in relation to this. There will be a sharp increase in primary enrolments. There will be an increasing retention rate of students in secondary schools. There is a continued steady reduction in the pupil/ teacher ratio. 1 feel that any additional teachers we get may well be cancelled out as a result of these other factors mentioned by the Minister.

The Commonwealth is entering the field of MBA, Masters of Business Administration, through 1 university, the University of New South Wales. It has recognised by this action a special need - a special weakness, if you like - in Australian commercial education. I wish that in all its teacher scholarships it would look at other special weaknesses. A special weakness with a much more general effect is the shortage of teachers of science and mathematics, if the Commonwealth would grant special teaching scholarships in science and mathematics it would be remedying a serious weakness developing in high school education. Surveys of education around the world have shown that Australia is deficient in its scientific and mathematical education and I do not need to stress to the House that this has significance for all education and for industry afterwards, because weaknesses in scientific and mathematical education depriving us of the numbers of students who should be getting advanced scientific and mathematical education in universities do have adverse industrial effects quite apart from Australia’s particular need for trained scientists. The teachers who can give the zest for that subject in the decisive secondary school period when many young people are making their decisions about the sort of courses they will undertake are extremely significant.

The news given by the Minister about the South Australian Government’s withdrawal from providing teachers for the Northern Territory is extremely important and it raises the question of the need for the Commonwealth to have its own teachers colleges, which it is doing to some extent with the College of Advanced Education, and to undertake seriously teacher training for its territories and for Papua and New Guinea. So long as the Commonwealth is beholden to the State of New South Wales for the staffing of schools in the Australian Capital Territory, and, even more importantly, so long as it is beholden to the State of South Australia for the staffing of schools in the Northern Territory, to that extent the Commonwealth’s capacity to vary its educational policy is limited. It is significant that in the same breath as the Minister is announcing South Australia’s gradual withdrawal from the staffing of schools in the Northern Territory he is announcing a very welcome diversification of Commonwealth educational policy and activity in the Northern Territory in the founding of a new educational institution in Darwin. If the Commonwealth has its own trained teachers and really takes full responsibility for education in its own territories it can make all the decisions that are needed for the type of education that should be offered in those territories. I think that there are special needs in the Northern Territory in particular because the children living there, in contrast with those living in the Australian Capital Territory, do suffer serious educational disabilities because of the very nature of the Northern Territory.

The Minister’s statement on the special aid being given to the States in relation to migrant children is also very welcome. The Commonwealth, of course, by its migration policy has created a crisis for the States. There is extreme difficulty in teaching children who do not have any English, children who do not have English as their background language yet come into Australian schools. However, the disabilities that the Minister mentioned also apply to another category of Australian children in many areas and special assistance to the States for them would have been very welcome. I am referring, of course, to Aboriginal children. They suffer great disabilities in coming from the kind of background that they have into schools which have the orientation that our schools have. They need special help, and in areas where there are numbers of Aboriginal children it would be good Commonwealth policy to give the States the special assistance that they need to help those children as well as migrant children.

The Minister’s remarks on teachers colleges follow very much along the lines of a statement he made earlier this year. His statement on scholarships is welcome. I hope that his remarks in relation to the National Union of Australian University Students, it having made certain submissions to him about scholarships, and his indication that he will consider them later in the year, do. not raise the hopes of the students falsely. The Minister said:

I have received representations that a further increase in benefits is desirable, and have studied a detailed report on this matter prepared by the National Union of Australian University Students. I expect to be able to make a statement on this matter before the end of the year.

I am sure that as a result of those remarks the students will expect the proposed statement to be favourable. I hope that they will not be disappointed. Generally speaking, we welcome very warmly the Minister’s statement. We add the hope that the nationwide survey of educational needs will mark the end of sporadic Commonwealth intervention in the field of education and lead to much more systematic assistance to education.

Debate (on motion by Mr Giles) adjourned.

page 151

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

Appointments to Council

Motion (by Mr Chipp) - by leave- agreed to:

That in accordance with the provisions of the Australian National University Act 1946-67 this House elects Mr Beazley and Mr MacKellar to be members of the Council of the Australian National University for a period of 3 years from this date.

page 151

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORTS

Mr KELLY:
Wakefield

– In accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, I present the reports relating to the following proposed works:

Mail Exchange Building at Adelaide, South Australia.
National Standards Laboratories, Bradfield Park, N.S.W.;
Development of Freight Aprons, Taxiways, Runway Extension and Engineering Services at Melbourne Airport.

Ordered that the reports be printed.

page 152

AUSTRALIAN RURAL ECONOMY

Discussion of Matter of Public Importance

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

– Mr Speaker has received a letter from the honourable member for Dawson (Dr Patterson) proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The urgent need for reconstruction of the rural economy including a constructive drought policy.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. (More than the number of members required by the Standing Orders having risen in their places)

Dr PATTERSON:
Dawson

– The latest available figures relating to the Australian economy show the very serious position of the rural sector of Australia, lt does not matter how much one might try to disguise it, the condition can be described only as serious. This fact was confirmed only last night in the papers released by the Treasurer (Mr Bury). As those papers will be discussed in detail at a later stage I shall ‘refer only to the relevant figures to prove the point that the farming sector of Australia, as distinct from the non-farming sector, is in a serious plight. Taking the last 4 years as an example, the gross national product of the farming sector at factor cost has decreased by $200m. The contrast in the non-farming sector is remarkable. That sector has shown an increase in the gross national product in the same period of 4 years of close to $7,000m. Those figures alone show clearly the very serious position in which primary industry finds. itself and the widening gap between the rural sector and secondary industry.

Words cannot describe the incompetence which has been displayed by the Government in its overall approach to rural Australia. At no time since the depression 40 years ago has rural Australia been in such an economic mess. Positive and courageous leadership in primary industry seems to have disappeared. Despite the criticism of primary producers throughout Australia the Government has failed in a dismal and even in a shocking manner to face the problems which exist and to promote and implement positive policies. The blame for the mess in which primary industry finds itself today must be borne by the Federal Government. The Opposition cannot be blamed because this Government has been in office for over 20 years. One of the main reasons why primary industry is in such a mess is that the Government has refused consistently to face the facts relating to international trade and the policies of overseas countries with regard to agricultural marketing, as well as the facts relating to domestic policies in Australia and those factors which are causing an insidious increase in costs and the cost price spiral.

The Government has allowed rural Australia to drift for year after year until now a crisis with frightening ramifications has emerged. We have a crisis in wool, a crisis in wheat, a crisis in dairying and, of course, a crisis in drought. Our export apple and pear industry is verging on crisis. Other aspects of primary industry are also involved. We have a crisis in the meat industry with regard to meat workers and meat inspectors which must be faced. This could grow into a very serious problem in the immediate future. The Government has a lot to say about strikes. There is one sector of the work force which would have every justification in striking. I refer to meat inspectors. Lel us hope that the Government will act positively to avert industrial problems in this field.

My investigations have shown that the crisis that already exists in this industry could worsen. On Monday morning there were reports in the Press of another crisis. The statement by the Leader of the Australian Country Party who is Minister for Trade and Industry was perhaps the gloomiest I had read for many a day. He reminded us that one-third of our exports of sugar go to Great Britain. The Minister said that the sugar industry could face serious problems. He also mentioned meat and canned fruits. Is this Government to sit back and wait until Britain joins the European Economic Community before it acts to protect our rural industries? lt is all right to say that Britain may not join the EEC but the Australian Government and the industries which would be involved if Britain did enter the EEC cannot afford to sit back and wait. We should act now. After all, we have known for a long time that a decision on Britain’s entry to the

EEC was pending. One of the first things that the Australian Government must have is a firm decision as 10 where Britain stands in regard to the Australian agricultural trade. The sooner this Government ascertains Britain’s policy the better for all concerned.

The Government’s whole approach to primary industry is analogous to its approach to drought. In 21 years of power the Government has not formulated a constructive national drought policy. The policy of the Government is to wait until a drought occurs and then try to solve the problem by handouts to the States. 1 cannot stress too strongly the importance of the rural sector to the Australian economy. Over a long period of years primary industry has been the financial and economic backbone of this nation and it will continue to be the backbone in the future. To put it bluntly, the economic health of this nation is dependent on prima rj’ industry and the mineral industry. Should Australia’s export income sector fail the result would be wholesale unemployment in almost every major secondary industry in Australia, most of which are located in the cities.

Mr Garland:

– Do you offer a solution?

Dr PATTERSON:

– You are a supporter of the Government. The wool fiasco is a glaring example of this Government’s attitude towards primary industry. Five years ago the wool industry experts recommended a reserve price scheme. The honourable member for Curtin has interjected and very shortly in this session I will test the morale and courage of the Country Party on the subject of wool. When the reserve price scheme was put forward it resulted in organised opposition by the vested interests and ruthless campaigns against the wool growers. Nothing was done by the Government after it was rejected. The Government has, over a number of years, consistently blamed the wool industry for not grasping the nettle and today we are in exactly the same position. After 5 years of study by the Government, and yet another expert report the Government still refuses to act on wool. We see the efforts of the Liberal Party to sabotage the wool marketing scheme just as it sabotaged the reserve price scheme. What will the Country Party do about this? Will it sit back and take it as it has done every other year when there has been a crisis in rural industry?

The Country Party appears to be frightened by the numerically powerful Liberal Party which without doubt represents the vested interests, the middle man, the overseas cartels and the very big growers who are in a position to dictate their own terms. What does the Government propose to do about wool? Surely it will not again submit the question of a single marketing authority to a referendum. As I have said before, if the Country Party is not prepared to act the Opposition will have no hesitation in putting the Country Party on the spot at a later stage and testing it before the people of Australia. How far is the Country Party prepared to act in defiance of the Liberals, who are doing everything possible to sabotage the wool industry in the marketing field?

Reconstruction of the wool industry is urgently required. Handouts simply delay the inevitable. What I mean by reconstruction is a complete re-organisation of the marketing and handling of wool and a forceful approach to the policies of overseas shipping companies with respect to freight rates. Let us not procrastinate any longer. The Government has had many years in which to act. It has had the advice of the best experts available, lt has the backing of the rank and file of the industry. Still we have no positive statement as to the Government’s intentions. We are all aware that there is a crisis in the wool industry. There is an urgent need to face up to the future prospects of wool. Let us have the truth. If it is considered that we must scale down our level of production of certain courser classes of wool, the Government should say so. If we have to increase our production of finer wools let the Government say so and pursue policies which will achieve this objective. Whatever happens, we must have action; we must have policies.

As I see the position, the greatest threat to wool and to every export primary industry are the vicious and insidious domestic policies which promote the cost price spiral and encourage the forces of inflation in this country. The wages and materials cost price problem is eroding the economic heart of our export industries. If costs continue to increase at their present rate the export minerals industry will be in trouble. The rumblings are already in evidence. Action to deal with the cost price squeeze in export industries must be regarded as one of our most important priorities. The Government has done nothing in the present Budget to control costs. Every manufacturer in Australia, heavily protected by tariffs, is free to raise his prices when workers obtain increased wages through arbitration.

In no primary industry has the Government’s failure to exhibit leadership been more apparent than in the butter industry. By his own admission the Minister for Trade and Industry has for 10 years warned the industry that it would have to do something to reduce butter production. But Australia is increasing its production of butter. The Government says that it does not have control over production. It controls the purse strings. It controls the level of subsidy, and under equalisation it has widesweeping powers. The Government must take action to curtail butter production. The wheat industry has had the same problem of over-production. For 3 years prior to the present crisis facing the wheat industry the rumblings were present. But the Government waited until the crisis occurred.

Despite the current drought conditions Australia will have at the end of this year a carryover of approximately 280 million bushels of wheat and at the end of next season the carryover, notwithstanding the drought, will- be approximately 170 million bushels. What is the Government doing with these surpluses? The Country Party is desperately kicking the mythical Communist can at every opportunity. Yet that same Party adopts, the hypocritical attitude of selling wheat to Communist China at a price .lower than is charged to owners of starving stock in Australia. I challenge the Government to disprove my statement. The Labor Party’s policy is to marry surplus grains production and our livestock. We all know that certain areas in Australia are susceptible to drought, yet we see hundreds of millions of bushels of unsaleable wheat attacked by vermin. At the same time as this is happening we find hundreds of thousands of sheep and cattle dying for the want of feed grains. It would appear as though my time has almost expired. I thought I had more time at my disposal. I conclude by saying that emergency grants are essential for the construction of desperately needed small scale water schemes for people, industry and established farmers whose economic livelihood is being threatened. I shall give 2 excellent examples. Day after day many people in Giru have had to fetch their water in buckets. Mt Morgan, where industry is involved, is another example. Large grandiose schemes are not needed at this point of time. All that is needed is a small scheme which will enable the people of these areas to survive economically. If any honourable member wants to ridicule my suggestion he should go to Giru and he will see what the farmers have to say. The wives of many farmers are going to the water points and carting buckets of clean water. This is an example of the sort of thing that is going on. Not a lot of money would be involved in overcoming this problem. A strategically located pipeline is a first priority. Why does the Government not act?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

Order! The honourable member’s time has expired.

Mr ANTHONY:
Minister for Primary Industry · Richmond · CP

– We have just listened to the shadow Minister for Primary Industry speaking for the Opposition on this matter of public importance concerning the state of rural industries, the need for reconstruction and the drought problem. Although he spoke for 15 minutes I did not hear him offer any new suggestions or say one thing that we do not know already. Rural industries are facing serious problems. I think the most penetrating part of the speech of the honourable member for Dawson (Dr Patterson) is what he did not say. He did not offer one suggestion as to how these problems might be tackled.

Dr Patterson:

– The Minister did not listen.

Mr ANTHONY:

– I did listen. During the past 2 or 3 months the honourable member has been roaming around Australia waving his arms about and saying vaguely that we must have a national policy, but that is as far as he has gone. There cannot be one all-embracing agricultural policy because the problems are vast and differ from industry to industry. Therefore it is necessary to have a wide range of policies for each sector of primary industry. There is no relationship between eggs, beef, cotton, coarse grains, apples and wool. Each one has to be examined separately and given whatever assistance is possible. But there are limitations on the assistance which can be given. There are financial limitations on the assistance which can be given by the Commonwealth and the States and there are constitutional limitations on what the Commonwealth can do.

I think it is unfair to take the point of view that there has been no leadership shown or courageous action taken because there have been more radical moves in the field of agriculture during the past 2 years than this country has ever known. For example, a wheat quota scheme - but it did not get much support from the Opposition - has been introduced. In fact, the honourable member for Riverina (Mr Grassby) did everything possible to try to sabotage the wheat quota scheme.

Mr Grassby:

– That is right. With pleasure.

Mr ANTHONY:

– If he had been successful the industry would have been in utter chaos.

Mr Grassby:

– Rubbish.

Mr ANTHONY:

– It does not seem as though this is the policy of the Australian Labor Party, but we will let the honourable member for Riverina speak for himself. The Government has brought about an international sugar agreement which will control the amount of sugar going on to the residual world market and it has limited Australia’s production accordingly. The Government has brought about an international grains arrangement in an endeavour to achieve the orderly marketing of grain. It has also got the dairying industry together for the first time in an endeavour *o impose certain restrictions on production. A new system has been introduced whereby a quota is applied to each State in an attempt to limit the total production to 220,000 tons.

The Government has also entered into a new field - farm reconstruction - which has received little support from some members of the Opposition. I exclude the honourable member for Dawson because he has been a strong advocate right through for farm reconstruction, but whispering campaigns have been conducted against it by some honourable members opposite. These

20734/70- R.2

honourable members have gone round the countryside saying: ‘The Minister for Primary Industry and the Government are only concerned about getting rid of the small farmers. They want to depopulate country areas. They do not care about the small farmers’. These honourable members have been saying this despite the fact that the whole objective of the Government’s dairy farm reconstruction proposals has been to maintain in the industry those people who wish to stay and give those who wish to leave it an alternative to diversify to other forms of production. Many measures have been taken to attack the problems which exist in every area of agriculture. So, any remarks to the effect that the Government is not concerned, worried or sympathetic are not genuine. The Government is concerned and it will continue to do everything possible to meet the problems which arise whenever they arise.

The honourable member for Dawson said that all the Government can talk about is sir ikes. A very serious strike is pending amongst meat inspectors in the meat industry. I have acknowledged that this is a serious situation. In fact, the honourable member for Gellibrand (Mr Mclvor) has contacted me many times about the problems of the large number of employees who work in the many meat works in his electorate. We have gone to no end of trouble to 117 to resolve the problem of insufficient meat inspectors by trying to improve the working conditions and wages of meat inspectors. Recently the Public Service Board, after negotiations with the meat inspectors, declared that all meat inspectors would become permanent Commonwealth employees and that many of them would be upgraded to second grade employees. However, the one problem which the Government has not been able to resolve is that of their opportunity to take their recreation leave. The rather shameful situation exists whereby some meat inspectors have not been on recreation leave for 3, 4 or 5 years because the Government has not been able to recruit sufficient numbers to make up for those who have left the industry.

Following recent negotiations between the Government and the meat industry agreement was reached to slow up the killing rate so that meat inspectors would be able to take their recreation leave and thereby avoid the national strike which was pending amongst the meat inspectors. The agreement of the meat industry was obtained. Unfortunately, the works and the unions are now complaining because some people have to work shorter hours and cannot have the same throughput. In fact, some employees have had to be put off. But the Government has done its best as a responsible government and the Department of Primary Industry has done its best as a responsible department to resolve this problem and to try to spread its impact as much as possible across Australia so that individual meat works will not be penalised. But to talk of the Government encouraging strikes is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. If there is one sector cf the Australian community which is putting an impost on primary producers it is the leaders of the industrial unions, who seem to call on strikes at any time.

A big problem facing primary industries is the cost price squeeze. There are some areas in which it is impossible for the Government to rectify the problems. I refer to the decline in world prices, the lack of access to different markets in the world because of tariff barriers, quotas and embargoes and substitutes replacing some of our agricultural products. The green revolution has resulted in an increase in the production of certain types of grains for which there are no longer big enough markets. The Government cannot do anything about this sort of thing except try to buffer their impact. But a government and a nation should be conscious of the need to do something about the cost increases which are occurring. The Budget which was brought down in this House last night was a deflationary one. There is a very large domestic surplus in it in an attempt to reduce liquidity in the economy. We have been compelled, reluctantly, to increase interest rates, to make money tighter in order to dampen down the tremendous demand that is developing in the economy. Any party which supports a proposal for shorter working hours can only bring absolute disaster to the primary industries which are battling for survival today. They are being strangled by increasing costs. The President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Mr Hawke, has publicly said that he is not going to take any notice of the wage impact on primary industries. What concern or sympathy for primary industries can there be amongst the Opposition when the leader of the unions which Opposition members come into this Parliament to represent takes this sort of attitude? It is sheer hypocrisy for members of the Opposition to get up and criticise the Government for the wage increases and the general cost increases which are having such an impact on the primary producers.

The honourable member for Dawson mentioned his concern about the drought in northern Australia, mainly in northern New South Wales and Queensland although it has also been very severe in Western Australia during the past 12 months. Fortunately in some regions of that State the situation has eased somewhat. To say that the Government has no national policy on drought is again quite unfair. For dealing with drought it has established a set routine which did not exist until 3 or 4 years ago when we had a very severe drought in New South Wales and Queensland. The understanding between the State governments and the Commonwealth Government is that the first impact of drought will be met by the States. The incidence of drought can be regionalised. When the drought spreads and takes in a large part of the State or is Statewide the State governments come to the Commonwealth and make a request and we match them dollar for dollar. When the position is reached that the States can no longer continue their contributions the Commonwealth comes in and provides all the necessary money. Last year in Queensland the Commonwealth provided $14m. This year already it is committed to providing $llm for Queensland. On both occasions the Queensland Government has had to provide only the first $2m to match $2m provided by the Commonwealth.

The drought money is being provided to help relieve the freight impost on fodder and also the cost of moving stock into and out of affected areas. Loans are made available for carry-on finance. The amounts made available to Queensland farmers have been increased this year. In the case of a small farmer the amount has increased from $6,000 to $10,000. In the case of a larger farmer it has gone from $10,000 to $16,000. Re-stocking finance has been increased from $10,000 to $20,000. The Government has met every reasonable request from the Queensland Government. This year an additional request has been made for money for the reconstruction of properties in Queensland. So that it would be able to set up a reconstruction board or other authority the State requested the Commonwealth to amend the Bankruptcy Act. 1 would like to inform the House that the Attorney-General (Mr Hughes) has been examining this matter very closely in relation to amendments to the Bankruptcy Act. He has before the Government at the moment a submission that the necessary amendment be made. 1 hope that very soon - in the present session if possible - the amendment will be made, thus enabling the Queensland Government to proceed with the establishment of such a board to carry out the reconstruction.

As mentioned last night in the speech of the Treasurer (Mr Bury), I and my Department have been given the responsibility of examining in detail the general indebtedness of rural properties in Australia and of coming forward with recommendations as to how this problem might best be tackled, whether through Commonwealth agencies or on a State basis. 1 assure the House that this matter will be handled as urgently as possible as I believe that it is the most important, immediate aspect of the problem of rural industries and it must be thoroughly examined.

Mr GRASSBY:
Riverina

– 1 support the motion moved by the Opposition to direct the attention of the Parliament to the problems of the countryside. The honourable member for Dawson (Dr Patterson) put the facts and the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr Anthony) said: We know them.’ The Opposition then asked for further action and the Minister for Primary Industry said: ‘We have done a great deal.’ To illustrate the achievements of the Government and himself in the discharge of his duties he said: ‘Look at what we have done with dairying. Look at our achievement there. Look at the progress we have made in reaching towards and achieving reconstruction.’ That is an incredibly different story from the one that was put forward by the Minister for Lands in the Liberal-Country Party administration in New South Wales who, 1 might say. did not appreciate the reference by the Commonwealth Minister to the dairy industry being in absolute chaos, which the Minister for Primary Industry put down to gutless State politicians. In rebutting that, the Minister for Lands in New South Wales said:

. if the Commonwealth had agreed, as had been suggested on several occasions, that the Ministers concerned - Commonwealth and State - should meet to discuss this matter, I feel it could have been resolved many months ago. However, the Commonwealth apparently has nol the courage or the good sense to agree to such a meeting. In fact, Mr Anthony, either because of ignorance or rudeness, has ignored the Ministers in each Slate responsible for reconstruction schemes and keeps contacting . . . the wrong Ministers. This is a rebuttal of the claim thai there has been a great deal of progress on the part of the Government and the Minister for Primary Industry in that one section to which the Minister specifically referred.

Confronted with a depression in the countryside, and with the situation worsening daily, the Government came to the Parliament last night and told us, through the Treasurer:

The farm outlook is not encouraging but we can reasonably expect a good rise in non-farm productivity . . . Our external outlook is promising.

– The honourable member should just be careful. After all, I can say a few words about who will report whom for what. One of the things I think we ought to do in relation to wheat is to say quite bluntly and definitely that it is no credit to the Government that unpaid for wheat is being eaten by mice and weevils in major and temporary storages. It is there despite the fact that we did not reach our national quota last season. We will not meet it next season. But there is wheat there at the present time. If we take the Government’s word that the surpluses are tremendous then surely to goodness the one thing the Minister ought to do - I talk to the Minister particularly - is to bring the feed wheat to the stomachs of the stock that need it. That should not be beyond our ability at this time. When we turn to the future, if he is asking me whether we should have an orderly development of the wheat industry, my answer is yes, but it should not be based on panic decisions which are made at the last moment in the middle of a season, and it should not result in bringing in a system such as the one in New South Wales which the New South Wales Minister admitted to a meeting of 300 growers was rotten to the core because of the haste in which it was conceived and implemented.

The situation in relation to wool is extraordinary. We have wool and everyone has said it is still in great demand. After months of waiting a handout is being proposed which will average out at between $200 and S300 per head, which is not enough to feed the chooks on a good size property. If this is the solution to the problems of the wool industry I would suggest it would be rejected by the majority of the people in the wool industry. The wool grower has not asked for handouts. He has not asked for anybody’s charity. What growers have asked for unanimously - I say it has been asked for unanimously by the rank and file, and I stand to be corrected on it - is a proper marketing system, a just price and an end to the exploitation of his product to enrich others at his expense.

Mr Pettitt:

– What is your policy?

Mr GRASSBY:

– Our policy has been clearly spelt out in relation to wool. The honourable member who just interjected made one contribution to the wheat debate in which he advocated that people who had been to see Federal members of Parliament about problems of selling over quota wheat should be reported to the authorities. He should be thoroughly ashamed of himself. Let us have a look at the situation today in relation to wool. The Government promised urgent action back in

April. The Prime Minister (Mr Gorton) indicated this. What have we got? We have in fact no firm proposal before the Parliament now. We have in fact, apparently, a deaf ear to what the woo! growers have put up through their organisations and through major meetings. They have said that they want a change, a reformation, in the marketing system. In his reply on an urgent matter the Minister made no reference, no commitment, to it at all. Yet he comes here regularly and tells us: ‘Whatever the industry wants we shall do.’ We are waiting. Our policies are clear. They have been spelt out and I know the Minister has had the privilege of reading them in detail. 1 wanted to draw attention to the fact, in relation to wheat particularly, that because of the circumstances of the introduction of quotas last season we have a moral duty now to take in and to pay $1.10 first advance on all wheat that has been either delivered or is awaiting delivery. That should be done. The Treasurer (Mr Bury), who is not known for his generosity, at least has made sufficient money available to do this. There should be a tearing up at the present time of the bits of paper which say that people should be restricted this year when in fact the Minister has admitted that we have a roaring drought in most of the country. So those who are able surely to goodness should be permitted to grow and deliver with confidence and be paid. The 2 great needs of the countryside today are collateral and confidence. The Government could easily give the confidence by making firm decisions in relation to 2 matters alone, f will not comment on the dairy industry. Mr Lewis in New South Wales put that to the Minister and the Minister may reply to him directly. The Government could deal with wheat in a courageous way. It could deal with the drought by breaking the cycle of bureaucracy to which I have referred and it could take its decisions to the wool industry by reforming it now.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock)Order! The honourable member’s time has expired.

Mr KELLY:
Wakefield

– I was a farmer before I became a member of Parliament. I know from experience where the harrow tooth point goes. If the hon ourable members for Riverina (Mr Grassby) and Dawson (Dr Patterson) had been farmers and known what it is like to make decisions on which a living depends they would scorn to come into the House today and make the kind of political capital claptrap that we have heard. These are grievous times in which we are living. The problems that face us can be faced by a people and a Parliament that tackle their problems and think about them but do not abuse the opportunities to do that by coming in and performing in this way. We do face a problem of reconstruction. I think I ought to try to help solve it instead of carrying on as if I was in a circus. We are facing real and serious problems. Land aggregation is one and debt reconstruction is another. The object of the exercise, I presume, is to make viable economic units.

Let us look at this problem of land aggregation, lt will mean bigger economic units. In simple terms, it will mean that farms will become bigger. One of the fundamental reasons for this is that tractors have become bigger. We had farms of a certain size when we had horse teams. Honourable members opposite would not know that, but this is the kind of thing that governs the size of farms. As tractors came in the economic size of farms became bigger. Anybody who does not recognise this is just blinking the facts of life. I do not think we will have any great big takeover by company farms. I know that the economic size family farms in Australia will out-perform, in animal production at least and often in grain production, any large scale company farm. There are lots of advantages to be gained from living on your own property, which honourable members opposite probably do not know about. We go out to see our stock in the morning and we do not say: ‘1 will conic in and have a look at that ewe tomorrow.’ We go out and attend to it. We try to tackle the problem of reconstruction, and the dairy scheme is a gallant attempt by the Minister to do this. We have done it before in the marginal land scheme in the States.

I think we all ought to take a little time off and go back and look at the problems and try to puzzle out how we can adjust our past performance to our present situation, instead of running around with our mouths open. It will be difficult. If it was not difficult it would have been done years ago. One of the really difficult parts will be the decentralisation that will have to accompany it, because one of the things that is inevitable in the process is that some of the people will leave the farm. Where will they go? I hope they will not go to the cities. If we as a Parliament settle down, instead of slinging mud at one another, to work out some way of getting people economically and sensibly out of the city and not forcing these people whose properties have been reconstructed into the city we will be making a contribution.

We would also be making a contribution if we tackled the problem of credit adjustments. As with so many other things, it is easy to talk about this subject. But there is something fundamentally difficult about deciding what kind of credit structure would really suit the industry. I do not know the answer and I do not suppose many people in this House do. But I think that one of the things we should continually be turning orr minds to is a long term credit scheme, i do not think that subsidy of interest rates would be necessary in many cases. But let us have longer term finance for development and aggregations. It is easy to talk about these matters. It is easy to make a slick speech about what one would like to do. However, all I am saying is that the problems of the farming community are hard to resolve. The reason the problems still exist is that they are hard to solve.

I should now like to say something about reconstruction. How big should a sheep unit be? I do not know. How big should a sheep and mixed grain unit be? No-one knows. As a community we have to get to work and ascertain what kind of model reconstruction scheme we ought to have. I recommend to the Government and to the House that as part of that process we ought continually to look to the establishment of a rural industries board. We have to examine this question. We need to get the same kind of economic advice on rural matters as is given to secondary industry by the Tariff Board. We need to know what basis should be adopted for reconstruction. I hope that the Government will examine again the question of establishing a rural industries board. We also have to consider the administration of the reconstruction scheme. It is easy to say: Well, someone has to do it’. Eventually someone will have to do it. However, I have said in this House before that this will not be a job for the Government; it will be a job for the Government to make finance available but an outside institution will have to implement the reconstruction decisions.

One other thing ought to be said about reconstruction. It is easy to say that on one hand we should have a policy that farms ought to be bigger and on the other hand a policy that farms should be made smaller. I would like to quote an address given by Professor Lewis last Saturday at the National Rural Policy Symposium in Canberra. Professor Lewis said:

As a means of maintaining the shortage of public funds for essential development purposes -

I add in brackets here the words ‘and reconstruction’ - it would be difficult to improve on a programme of moving excess people out of agriculture with the one hand and, with the other hand, bringing new entrants into agriculture by means of closer settlement, land development and irrigation projects.

It is said that he is not a farmer. I did not know that academics are always wrong. The other thing we obviously have to be careful about is to use subsidies carefully when subsidies are given. Subsidies carelessly used may encourage people to stay in an industry when they may be tempted to get out of it.

I would now like to get back to drought. I happen to live in the driest State of the driest continent in the world. I suppose I have made more ensilage than most people in Australia. I happen to recognise that the fundamental person to tackle the problem of drought is the farmer himself. He is the man best equipped to tackle it. It is the Government’s job and duty to see that every possible incentive is given to the farmer. This can be done by way of taxation concessions and other forms of help. It is true that the farmer has had such help and I would like to compliment the Government on the wisdom of this assistance. Let us get away from the idea that anyone other than the farmer can tackle the farmer’s problems and the problem of drought. In most instances he is the one best equipped to tackle them. However, the drought is our problem as well. I speak as one who knows the fundamentalproblems. What is a farmer to do with his stock? He has to decide whether to sell bis stock straight away or to wait another 2 or 3 months and perhaps sell for half as much as it was worth before. But the fundamental problem of fodder conservation is a matter for the farmer. Drought is also the problem of the farmer, but he needs the Government’s active and sympathetic consideration and help to overcome it. Do not let us try to pass this problem off on to people other than the farmer. We have to see that the incentive remains for the farmer to make his own judgments. We should help him where we can.

We ought to be careful not to use the slick and easy argument that irrigation schemes are the answers to drought relief. We all know that they are not. We know that irrigation helps and that it takes the drought problem away from the man who farms the irrigation land. But to pretend that irrigation can solve the problem of feeding starving stock is to delude ourselves and prevent us from tackling the fundamental problems.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lucock:

– Order! The discussion is concluded.

page 161

ORDER OF THE DAY

Discharge of Motion

Mr LYNCH (Flinders- Minister for

Immigration and Minister assisting the Treasurer) - by leave - I move:

That the following Order of the Day, Government Business, be discharged:

No. 6 - Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Bill 1970 - Second Reading - Resumption of Debate

The provisions of the Bill have been incorporated in the Bill which I am about to present.

Question resolved in the affirmative

page 161

SALES TAX (EXEMPTIONS AND CLASSIFICATIONS) BILL 1970

Bill presented by Mr Lynch, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr LYNCH:
Minister for Immigration and Minister assisting the Treasurer · Flinders · LP

– I move:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this Bill is to amend the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications)

Act 1935-1967. The amendments proposed by the Bill will apply to the First Schedule to the Act which sets out the categories of goods that are exempt from sales tax. Two new exemptions which are proposed will exempt Australian-made motor vehicles for use by members of the armed forces of Canada and New Zealand stationed in Australia. The circumstances in which exemption will be allowable are to be prescribed by regulation, the intention being that they will parallel those in which exemption is currently available to United States and British servicemen.

In conformity with Australia’s obligations under the Status of Forces Agreement with the United States, the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act was amended in 1963 to enable United States servicemen stationed in Australia to purchase Australian-made vehicles free of sales tax. A similar exemption was subsequently provided in favour of British servicemen. The amendment now proposed will extend the exemptions to vehicles for Canadian and New Zealand servicemen. Comparable concessions are enjoyed by Australian servicemen stationed in those countries.

The Bill proposes to remove the specific exemption of goods for use by British Commonwealth Pacific Airlines Ltd (an airline no longer operating) and Qantas Airways Ltd. Other provisions of the sales tax law exempt such items of equipment as aircraft and aircraft parts, servicing equipment and tractors for towing aircraft. But in respect of goods not so exempted, it is considered that Qantas Airways Ltd should be in the same position as other airlines Qantas already is liable to Commonwealth taxes other than sales tax. This amendment is to be effective from tomorrow. 20th August 1970, so that on and from that date the specific exemption in favour of Qantas will cease to apply.

The Bill includes a provision to exempt goods for use, and not for sale, by the Anglo- Australian Telescope Board. This replaces a similar provision which was included in the earlier Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Bill 1970 which has just been withdrawn. The new exemption is supplementary to the AngloAustralian Telescope Agreement Bill 1970 under which it is proposed to set up the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board. This exemption is to commence on the date on which the Anglo-Australian Telescope

Agreement Act 1970 comes into operation.

The remaining provisions are of a drafting nature designed to restore certain exemptions related to provisions in the Customs Act. The exemptions were inadvertently rendered ineffective by amendments to the Customs Act that came into operation on 1st October 1969. It is proposed that these sales tax amendments should be deemed to have been in operation since that date. An explanatory memorandum on the various provisions in the Bill is being circulated to honourable members. I commend the Bill to the House.

Debate (on motion by Mr Daly) adjourned.

page 162

COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATION

Trinidad and Tobago Conference

Mr HOWSON:
Casey

– by leave- I present the report of the Australian Branch delegation to the 15th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference held at PortofSpain, Trinidad and Tobago, during October 1969 and move:

That the House take note of the paper.

In moving this motion I do so knowing that the task was originally to be performed by the late member for Chisholm, Sir Wilfred Kent Hughes. I take this opportunity of joining with other honourable members who spoke yesterday in a tribute to Sir Wilfred for the great work he has done for the Commonwealth of Nations. Over his lifetime he took a great interest in the Commonwealth and I know that he was glad to be present at the Trinidad conference last year. We remember also the way in which he took an interest in so many Commonwealth students who often stayed at his home in Melbourne when they had nowhere else to go. For that reason 1 pay a tribute to him. I wish that he were undertaking the task that I have been asked now to perform in his stead.

The report deals with the conference that took place in Trinidad and Tobaga, the meetings of the General Council and the general meeting of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association in October last year. I am glad that the House has given us an opportunity once again to mention the activities of the Association, because this has been a model for so many other Parliaments which are now following the example that was first set by Australia in tabling these reports and debating them. As I have moved around other branches of the Association I have said how important it is that members who go overseas at the expense of the taxpayer should return to their countries and by making reports to their parliaments on what they have learned and of the value it has been to their countries, justify the expenditure that they have incurred. So I am glad that we are doing this on this occasion. I am pleased also that the honourable member for Grayndler (Mr Daly), who has taken such an interest in the Association over the years, is prepared to join in this debate, because it is something in which both sides of the House are tremendously interested. We hope that we will, by this means, get a greater involvement in the work of the Association by the 7,000 members who now comprise our membership in 88 separate branches throughout the Commonwealth.

At the Conference in Trinidad and Tobago a number of interesting debates took place. These are summarised in the report. I should like, however, to quote from the opening speech of the Right Honourable Eric Williams, the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, who said:

Your Association is performing a vital task - that of maintaining a continuing dialogue . . . between the elected representatives of countries comprising a significant proportion of the population of the globe . . the opportunities presented by your Association for the sharing of ideas and experiences as between diverse peoples are no less valuable than the more publicised discussions which take place in more formal international bodies. It is for this reason that we in Trinidad and Tobago consider this to be one of the most important international gatherings that we have ever been privileged to host.

His words were echoed by the Governor-General a little later, during the opening ceremony. As always, the main debates were concerned with problems of the Commonwealth of Nations and world security. Here, of course, the Australian and Malaysian Government delegations spoke of the importance to the Commonwealth of the situation in Vietnam. There was also debate on whether Britain would maintain a force east of Suez. Other countries of the Commonwealth dealt with the importance of the Nigerian situation and particularly of Biafra. I think it is useful to remember that in the course of achieving independence many countries throughout the Commonwealth have each been split into a number of smaller countries. The dangers of Balkanisation are such that the whole world would suffer if this process went too far. This was one of the issues that we saw in the situation between the Federal Government of Nigeria and the attempted secession by Biafra. A similar situation is important in Kashmir. The issue of Kashmir to a great extent is whether parts of a country are to be allowed to secede at their own wish. If Kashmir seceded from India that might be the start of a process in which the whole of the present Indian nation would be split into a number of small countries. In the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association we have seen that the task is not to promote a splitting of countries but to try to see whether we cannot bring together in larger units some of the small countries that now exist as a result of independence movements that have taken place throughout the Commonwealth over the last 15 years. This was one of the main subjects that was debated in Trinidad.

We heard also of the troubles between Guyana and its neighbour Venezuela, and between British Honduras and its neighbour Guatemala. On the subject of aid throughout the Commonwealth it was interesting to observe how much of the discussion related to the problems that developing countries are now facing with debt servicing. The amounts they have to pay in interest and in repayment of former debts almost cancel out the benefits of new aid provided in 1970 by developed nations. This is one of the matters that we must look at as an Association during the coming conference in Canberra.

The new matters that had not been debated before in the Association dealt, first with the problem of race relations. During the debate that took place, of interest was not so much what was said as what was not said. For the first time Australia’s immigration policies were not criticised at an international level. This has great interest for Australia because there is a gradual realisation that mass population pressures in some of the densely populated countries either in the Caribbean or in Asia, such as in India, are not going to be solved by mass migration movements - which might have been the idea current in the early 1950s. Now, there is a realisation that population pressures must be controlled by family planning and birth control measures, and that if family planning is successful, the pressures on migration will become less and the Australian immigration programme, looking at it from our point of view, will be more widely understood. It is interesting to see what great achievements are being made already in places like Barbados, India and Fiji with family planning. Gradually, the elimination of population pressures, not in the immediate future, but over a 20 year period, will make a great deal of difference to some of the other major matters which affect those nations.

We also had a debate on the whole issue of parliamentary democracy. So many nations, in Africa for instance, have faced the very real question whether parliamentary democracy would survive. Takeovers by dictatorships have occurred in places like Sierra Leone and Ghana. Those countries have suffered under dictatorships and have been able to re-achieve parliamentary democracy. Those nations realise how important it is to build up the parliamentary democratic system and they look to other nations like ourselves to help them. In the debates that take place at our meetings, we try to help them to look at the essentials of parliamentary democracy and to see what are the important tasks of a member of parliament. One of the reasons why a near-revolution occurred in Trinidad a few weeks ago has been said to be because there was a weak Opposition and because members of parliament were not making known to the executive the grievances of their constituents, so that the Prime Minister and his Ministers did not know the troubles that existed beneath the surface. When a country has a weak parliament and when weak members of that parliament are not doing their jobs properly, the democratic system cannot operate properly. This was one of the matters examined at the last conference. So many people said how important it was that private members should be allowed greater opportunities to take initiatives especially on issues arising between elections and on which no mandate has been given.

Another vital debate took place on the subject of youth. We had a most interesting introduction by the honourable John Turner, Leader of the Canadian delegation. He called 1968 the ‘Year of the Student’ when a new phenomenon, the politics of confrontation, had been born in the universities. The root causes were the despair and crisis in values aroused in youth by the injustices which they saw in the established order. The politics of confrontation made them radical and communications media made the confrontation international. Confrontation and radicalism developed into the politics of demolition and gave rise to violence.

Mr Turner said that, approaching the 1970s, a new class was coming to birth, a counter-culture, which was youth in revolt. The distinctive features of the patterns of unrest could be characterised as, firstly, the influence of communications media in creating a generation consciousness; secondly, a crisis of legitimacy and a breakdown in the authority of any institution with which the youth generation disagreed; and thirdly, racial injustices and poverty. He said that it was essential, however, that the youth generation should feel that change was possible within the political process and by lawful means. The demand of the young was in particular for a political system that would create and preserve the individuality of man and the sense of community among men. What was seen at that meeting was the importance of involving youth in the affairs of society and the importance of seeing that parliament was able to incorporate the needs of youth without at the same time completely altering the parliamentary democratic system. These are matters which, I think, are important to all members of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and particularly to us in Australia.

Reference is made in this report to the meeting of the General Council of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association at which the President of the Australian Senate. Sir Alister McMullin. was elected Chairman of the Association for 1969-70. Meetings of the Executive Committee, which 1 attended as its chairman, took place. I will refer to those meetings in a moment. The Association resolved to hold the 1970 annual conference of the CPA here in Canberra. Finally, this report gives very sincere thanks to the host branch, Trinidad and Tobago, and particularly to

Mr Rex Latour, the Clerk of the House of Representatives there, who provided such extremely good organisation for all the delegates who attended the meeting.

Having dealt with the report, may I refer now for a moment to the forthcoming Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference to take place in this chamber commencing on 2nd October. As the House knows, after the Trinidad conference I visited Jersey to take the chair at the annual meeting of the Executive Committee of the CPA. The main thing that we did was to prepare the agenda for the Canberra conference. I wish to let honourable members know of some of the important matters that are to be debated here in a few weeks’ time.

First, on the international front, the situation in southern Africa will be considered and, in particular, the situation that has been developing as a result of Britain’s decision to send maritime arms to South Africa. This will create a wide measure of debate amongst the nations of Africa as well as those outside the African continent. The delegates from Malta have asked us to put the situation in the Middle East on the agenda. It is interesting that the representatives of India no longer wish us to refer to that area as the Middle East but as West Asia. 1 think we are beginning to realise that the expression ‘Middle East’ is an odd term for us living in Australia. For us the area is, if anything, the Middle West.

The second item for consideration is aid. The question of the effect on Commonwealth countries of Britain’s entry into the European Economic Community is gaining in importance. Once again, we have asked New Zealand to lead off in the debate on that subject. We shall be dealing also in greater depth with the matters to which I have just referred as having been discussed in Trinidad; that is, the whole working of the parliamentary system and the role of members of parliament. As last year in Trinidad we saw the importance of youth in revolt and the effect that this will have on the workings of parliament, so now we must see to what extent members of parliament are able to withstand pressure groups, moratorium marches, television programmes, opinion polls and the like to make certain that we maintain the role of the ballot box as the reason why members of parliament are elected to enter parliament, and that the pressures from the ballot box are the chief pressures to which they should react.

But, at the same time as we look at the way in which a member of parliament must be helped to withstand outside pressure groups, so also is it important to look at the whole structure of parliament and to see that parliament is moving with the times. We should not regard our Standing Orders always as so bound by tradition that they cannot be altered; we must see that we maintain in our Standing Orders and in our structure of parliament what is essential, while at the same time retaining the ability to move with the times. In this way, if moves come from outside for us to see whether we can improve the structure of our parliamentary system, we ourselves, as members of parliament, should examine that system. I think there is no better place for this to be examined than in the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association plenary conferences. India has asked us again to put on the agenda the question of population growth and the Caribbean has asked us to have another look at the problems of race relations, particularly the issue of Black Power in several countries of the Caribbean. This is certainly a matter of tremendous importance to them. I think the Canberra conference will be lively and topical and will be something that affects not only the 200 delegates that will be here but also most of the Australian members of the Association.

In Jersey we looked at some new developments of the Association that are now taking place. They are developing as the result of needs that have been shown over the last 3 years. First of all, there has been the development of regional conferences in Africa and in the Caribbean and there will be one for the new Pacific nations to be held in Wellington in February next year. There we will see whether we cannot build up through regional association moves towards new federations through, for instance, CARIFTA- the Caribbean Free Trade Association - and the East African Community. As nations have been split through independence so there is a move now to make them realise that there are advantages in coming together again voluntarily in new forms of association and this could well be of importance to the new nations of the Pacific which are close to Australia’s sphere of influence.

We have through the work of regional representatives on the executive committee found ways in which we can bring together and involve many more members of the Association than has been possible in the past. We have developed also a new system of seminars. For some time the United Kingdom has carried out parliamentary courses for members of parliament in these new independent nations. Australia has been asked to do the same and I hope that in the next year or two the Australian branch will be carrying out similar courses for people near our shores. There have been requests from smaller nations such as Grenada to have seminars in their countries where they can be helped to learn something of how a member of parliament should do his job more effectively. In India now each year both the parliament at New Delhi and the State parliaments come together in a seminar instructing new members of parliament in the tasks that face them. More important than that, taking place in Nairobi this week is a seminar at which delegates from nearly all the African countries as well as experts - older members of parliament from the House of Commons in Britain and from India - are meeting to discuss the whole issue of the Westminster model and how it should be modified to meet local conditions, what is essential to be retained from the model and what can be done without. I think it is useful at times when new countries come to independence and inherit the Westminster model that we should as an Association ask ourselves what is important in this whole parliamentary system. It is important, for instance, that we should see how vital is the role of the private member of parliament in making known the grievances of his constituents. I have stressed already the danger when this did not occur in Trinidad. We should see that we make question time more effective. I have seen many different forms of standing orders for question time and I think it is useful that we should learn from the experiences of other countries also.

Finally, in Jersey we looked at the work of this executive committee that has been operating for a period of 3 years. The committee was established as a result of moves by the Australian Branch and we should pay tribute to the Secretary of our Branch, Mr Alan Turner, for his wisdom in seeing the need for it. Now that it has been going for 3 years I should like to quote from the annual report which has just been published. It reads:

Indeed ils size and balance of membership had developed within the Committee a strong corporate feeling which hud been a major factor in the efficiency with which it had worked and the broad imaginative approach which it had adopted in reviewing the activities of the Association.

As Chairman, 1 have begun to realise that the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association has within its structure the seeds that Can be nurtured and, with imagination-, developed so that its international role can be truly significant. 1 have already referred to some of the developments that have taken place over these 3 years but in this period we have only gone part of the way towards making this Association a really effective force in world peace and security. 1 shall finish my term in October. I hope my successor will take this imaginative approach much further than it has been possible for me to do.

As 1 conclude. 1 remember the words of Mr Desai, a man in India for whom I have tremendous respect, who said that an important phase of this Association has been during this period in which the Empire has been changed into the Commonwealth. As independence takes place a period of tension always develops between the new independent country and the former colonial power; but as one moves further away in time from that moment those tensions decrease and a new sense of understanding emerges. In the older nations of the Commonwealth the period of tension is obviously over. It is obviously over in India, Ceylon and Pakistan but still exists in some of the newer countries in Africa and the Caribbean. Our task as an Association is to try to hold the Commonwealth together during this period of change because we will emerge at the end of that period with an Association that will be of even greater importance in the international world than it has been in the past. Those of us who have been to these Association meetings realise what a great task is being performed.

Mr DALY:
Grayndler

– I wish to support the motion moved by the honourable member for Casey (Mr Howson) and 1 do so in rather unusual and unfortunate circumstances. Two of the delegates to this Conference have now passed on, the Honourable G. C. McKellar and the Honourable Sir Wilfrid Kent Hughes. I express my sympathy to the relatives of those distinguished gentlemen. The other 2 delegates, Mr Harrison and Mr Peters, retired from the Parliament at the election that took place just after the Conference concluded. So today on behalf of the Parliamentary Labor Party I associate myself with the comments in regard to the activities of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and particularly the Conference at Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago. I was not at the Conference. Although I have been in the Parliament a long time 1 have attended only 1 Parliamentary Association conference, in the Bahamas in 1968. I endorse the sentiments that have been expressed by the honourable member for Casey on the valuable contribution that conferences make towards better understanding amongst the parliaments of the world and. ultimately, the people. We are fortunate that as on this occasion delegates from this Parliament represented it with dignity, impartiality and non-politically. That has been my experience of conferences that I have attended and I do not doubt that the gentlemen who attended this meeting also acted in that way. The festivities arranged for us and the hospitality extended to us by the host country were of the highest standard.

The conference was a very notable one. At the Bahamas conference I enjoyed particularly the stimulating agenda for discussion. No holds were barred. As the honourable member for Casey has mentioned, all subjects were contentious and some were very provocative. To use a term in a friendly way, one could say that it was on for young and old in some of the debates that took place. That is all to the good because I believe that tame cat conferences, while they may look well and make everyone feel congenial, are not what we want. If occasionally someone throws in a dead cat it helps the conference and improves the spirit, and provided delegates part as friends not much harm has been done. Only by open honest discussion at these conferences can we understand the problems of member countries be they racial, be they economic or be they political.

That ls why I think that in recent times the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association has adopted its present policy. I believe that it is a very sound policy. There is a wealth of things to discuss in the field of parliamentary democracy - new concepts in race relations, Commonwealth and world security and so on. It is fascinating to attend conferences of this kind with people from many and varied countries, some of them wealthy and some of them poor, and to hear their points of view. By that means we get a better appreciation of them.

We should place on record with a certain amount of pride our appreciation of the services rendered by the honourable member for Casey in his executive capacity in the Association. He retires from his position at the end of this year. He has followed distinguished Australians. I think that a former Prime Minister held a similar post on one occasion. My experience of the honourable member for Casey at the conference I attended was that not only was he a very good chairman and most impartial - he gave me the call on one or two occasions - but also that he was very well accepted by the delegates and that he upheld the high position he occupied, I think with great credit to himself and to this Parliament. I hope that the person who succeeds him will be able to live up to the high standard that he has set.

I do not wish to speak at greater length except to say that with other honourable members I will welcome the opportunity later in the year to attend the conference to be held here, Australia being the host country. It will be a good thing for the Parliament and for Australia. It will give a lot of people from overseas who probably do not understand us too well the opportunity to see at first hand what kind of country we have and what kind of people we are. Judged by the previous conference that was held here, I feel that the forthcoming conference will be second to none so far as hospitality and administration are concerned. It is pleasing too that the honourable member for Casey will still be occupying his official position for that conference. I hope that if a ballot is held it will not be until the final day so that he will occupy his high position as a member of the executive committee of the general council for the whole of the conference.

I understand that other matters are to be presented before the sitting is suspended so I shall not say more at this stage. It is to the credit of all governments in Australia that they have given great support to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the Inter-Parliamentary Union and international parliamentary conferences. I hope that the practice will continue, whatever government is in office, because it not only gives people the opportunity to meet and understand others but it also leads to a much better understanding of world issues and the great problems that we have to decide in the Parliament. I support the motion for the printing of this report and congratulate all associated with the conference - our delegates on their representation and the honourable member for Casey for the part that he played. I hope that the conference to be held here will be as successful as those that we have attended abroad.

Debate (on motion by Mr Lucock) adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 5.55 to 8 p.m.

page 167

ASSISTANCE TO THE WOOL INDUSTRY

Ministerial Statement

Mr ANTHONY:
Minister for Primary Industry · Richmond · CP

– by leave - The 1969-70 season was an exceptionally difficult time for the wool industry. A drastic fall in wool prices combined with a continuing rise in costs was compounded by severe drought in large parts of Australia which in some regions had reached a calamitous stage. The Government has been concerned at the plight of the industry not only because of the hardship suffered but also because of the great importance of the industry to the Australian economy. If wool is to continue to provide a major share of Australia’s export income as well as to remain the basis of livelihood for much of the rural areas of Australia, it is essential that the industry’s viability be preserved. The present crisis in the industry requires a comprehensive approach which involves both immediate and longer term measures. Prolonged drought and low wool prices have placed many wool growers in an almost impossible position where they require emergency financial assistance.

Honourable members will be aware that wool incomes have fallen markedly over the last year. Aggregate realisation on shorn wool sold has declined by some $100m to $687.2m in 1969-70. However, the severity of the fall for individual wool growers is not generally appreciated. Some 90% of this decline occurred in Queensland, Western Australia and New South Wales. In Queensland the wool cheque was 36% down, representing an average fall of about $8,000 per property. In Western Australia wool proceeds were 23% lower or $3,000 per property. These are only average figures with many wool growers faring much worse. Although Government aid has been of material assistance in drought areas, many producers have also had to bear costs of drought feeding, losses from forced sales of stock at low prices and the death of a proportion of their flocks. The Government has been giving detailed consideration to the problems being experienced by wool growers and the ways which are open to place the industry on a sound basis. The Government has before it a number of proposals. However the total approach is essentially long term. Further improvements to wool marketing, research into industry problems and debt reconstruction and farm adjustment necessarily take time. Short term urgent measures are clearly needed to prevent a loss of confidence in the industry, which would reflect throughout the whole economy.

The Treasurer (Mr Bury) has announced the decision to provide emergency assistance for I year to those wool growers who are largely dependent on wool and whose incomes have fallen markedly in 1969-70. The assistance will be given by way of a grant within a total amount of $30m. Because individual entitlements will depend upon the number of applications lodged, it is not possible to announce the extent of entitlements. The payment to any individual will, as a maximum, be no more than $ 1 ,500. To assist in the4 speedy processing of claims, it is not proposed to pay those involving an amount of less than $50. The Government is most concerned to ensure that the assistance be directed primarily to those most in need. It is the intention to assist all growers who have been unduly affected by the drought and by low prices. On the other hand, it is reasonable to expect the wool grower to carry some of the loss as a normal hazard associated with the production of wool. With this in mind, the assistance will be based on half the average fall in wool prices in 1969-70, that is, 8%. The amount of assistance will be related to the difference between gross wool income in the year ended 30th June 1970 and 92% of the wool income for the previous year.

In order to ensure that only those wool growers who are largely dependent on wool for their living receive a grant, assistance will be confined to persons receiving a substantial proportion of their total income from wool. Eligibility for full assistance will be limited to growers whose gross income from wool makes up at least 50% of their total gross income from all sources in the year ended 30th June 1969; but there will be a phasing out arrangement, with assistance ceasing where gross income from wool is 33i%. From the foregoing it can be seen that applications should only be made by wool growers who obtained at least one-third of their income from wool in the year ended 30th June 1969 and who suffered a fall in gross income from wool of more than 8% between the years ended 30th June 1969 and 1970. Under these conditions, a large part of the grant will be going to persons in Queensland, New South Wales and Western Australia who have been affected by drought. The Government has been mindful of the views of the Advisory Committee of the Australian Wool Board that immediate relief was necessary, and has taken account of the principles enunciated by the Committee, in formulating the principles on which the assistance is to be given, subject to administrative feasibility and simplicity. As this assistance is to meet an emergency situation it is essential that it be made available as soon as possible. If we are to avoid any undue delay it is inevitable that some anomalies may well be unavoidable. Where these can be shown to have a particularly adverse effect because of the circumstances of an individual wool grower these will be considered as sympathetically as possible. Further details of the grant will be made available to wool growers in the near future. It is not possible to calculate the total entitlement of wool growers until all applications have been lodged. Accordingly it is proposed to make an early interim payment on each claim.

In order to ensure that payments are finalised as soon as possible, wool growers must submit their applications by 30th November 1970. Claims for assistance received after this date will be considered only if the total fund has not been exhausted. Application forms for assistance will be available at post offices within the next few weeks. I must ask eligible wool growers to submit these promptly. This scheme should materially assist hard-hit wool growers to survive the immediate crisis. However the emergency assistance outlined here tonight can only be a first step. As 1 stated earlier, the Government will be seeking appropriate longer term measures to overcome the fundamental problems of the industry.

As my colleague, the Treasurer, has said the need for reconstruction in the wool industry will be examined as a matter of urgency. The problem of debt and debt servicing is a critical one for many people particularly in the drought stricken areas. For some farmers such measures as debt reconstruction would offer a way out of present difficulties. Arrangements now being operated in some States or operated prewar illustrate some of the possibilities to be considered. The selection of appropriate arrangements needs to be carefully considered or the result could well be to put some wool growers into deeper trouble, with an even bigger financial millstone around their necks. Long term debt reconstruction would be of assistance only to those producers whose businesses are basically sound and have good prospects of servicing the capital value of their debt after debt reconstruction has taken place. The problems of many producers finding difficulty in meeting their debts can be solved only by more fundamental reconstruction of their properties. Debt restructuring must therefore be tied in with farm adjustment. The Bureau of Agricultural Economics has been asked to investigate and report to me on the immediate and longer term needs for debt reconstruction and farm adjustment. Whilst the necessary investigation of all aspects of these matters will require some time, I have asked the Bureau to make a preliminary report to me at the earliest possible opportunity for consideration by the Government.

The Government recognises that any total approach to the problems of the wool industry entails close attention to wool marketing, lt has before it a proposal submitted by representatives of the wool industry for the establishment of a statutory wool marketing authority to administer the marketing of the Australian wool clip. The plan was prepared by the Advisory Committee of the Australian Wool Board at the request of the Australian Wool Industry Conference. The Advisory Committee was under a great deal of pressure to complete ils report. I had asked it to provide a quick picture of the total wool scene including reference to the marketing structure proposed by the industry. As the Treasurer mentioned in the Budget Speech, the Government has under examination all aspects of the setting up and operation of such an authority. A close analysis of the proposal is required and (his is being undertaken by the Government as a matter of considerable urgency. On behalf of the Government I will be in consultation with the industry on the marketing plan and when the details have been finalised it can then be put to the Government and the industry for consideration. In the interim I trust that the various sectors of the wool industry will not prejudge the issue but will wait until the details have been worked out.

Close attention has also been given to the potential benefit of technical innovations in the marketing of wool. To assist the industry in its own efforts to reduce the present high costs associated wilh the handling and sale of wool, the Government has agreed to guarantee approved loans obtained by the Australian Wool Board for the construction and equipping of integrated wool selling complexes where these can be shown to provide benefits to the industry. Further, the application of objective measurement to wool prior to ils sale could well lead to the sale of wool by sample, which offers the prospect of considerable cost savings and other advantages. To this end the Government has agreed to provide a sum of about $1.5m over 2 years to finance research and trials into the feasibility of introducing pre-sale objective measurement of wool on a commercial basis.

The measures which 1 have outlined will operate concurrently with the assistance which has been announced earlier, namely, the halving of the levy paid by wool growers for promotion and research and a doubling of the Government’s contribution in this field as well as the financial aid given by the Government for the operation of the current wool marketing price averaging plan. All these measures, together with those which the Government has under immediate consideration, represent a concerted approach designed to deal with the real and pressing problems of wool growers and to restore confidence and prosperity in Australia’s major rural industry.

I present the following paper:

Assistance to Wool Industry - Ministerial Statement, 19 August 1970.

Motion (by Mr Molten) proposed:

That the House take note of the paper.

Debate (on motion by Dr Patterson) adjourned.

page 170

COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATION

Trinidad and Tobago Conference

Debate resumed (vide page 167).

Mr LUCOCK:
Lyne

– It is my pleasure to speak in support of the report of the Fifteenth Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Conference which was held at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad and Tobago last October. I do so with a great deal of pleasure because I realise the importance of Commonwealth parliamentary conferences. It was my privilege to attend one in 1964 and I appreciated its value not only to myself and the other members of the Australian delegation but also to the members of the Commonwealth of Nations who attended it. The conference we are now debating would have been of particular value to the people of Kingston and Jamaica because they would have had the privilege of witnessing a meeting of parliamentarians of the Commonwealth of Nations. Many complex problems are facing the Commonwealth of Nations in this day and age. I believe that Commonwealth parliamentary conferences as they are constituted at present can make a tremendous contribution to the stability of the world because members of the parliaments of the Commonwealth of Nations are able to gather together and discuss matters which are of vital importance not only to our parliamentary system but also to the world. On top of that, the members of parliament who attend these conferences are given an opportunity to see the conditions which prevail in the countries in which they are held. They are also given an opportunity to get together and talk before the sessions of the conferences actually begin. I believe that these conferences are of value not only to the Commonwealth of Nations as such but also to the rest of the world because of the impact they have on world affairs.

Many problems are being experienced in the Commonwealth of Nations. These include such things as problems of trade and understanding. All of these problems, as well as discussions in regard to our parliamentary systems, are brought out into the open and debated in an atmosphere of tolerance and understanding. I believe that this report substantiates what I have been saying in support of its adoption. One has only to look through it and read some of the matters of discussion to realise its value. Such matters include the pattern of unrest - youth and revolt - regional development and economic development. The section on economic development would be of value on its own, even if there had been no previous discussion, because one gains a full appreciation of the economic problems confronting, in the main, many of the small countries. I do not say that there are no economic problems in the larger countries, but in particular the smaller countries, many of which have received their independence in recent years and many of which are trying to find their place in the scheme of world economics, are confronted with economic problems. From the discussions held at these conferences we can learn to understand the problems of these countries and they can understand the problems that we have in endeavouring to assist them.

As I said, it is with a great deal of pleasure that I support the remarks of those honourable members who have spoken in regard to the report of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference. The honourable member for Casey (Mr Howson), who has had very close association with our Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, said that it also gives honourable members an opportunity to come back and report on the floor of this national Parliament on what they did at the conference and the value of it. This highlights the value of these conferences for many people who would not otherwise have an appreciation of their value. Today we have had the privilege of having members of a Japanese delegation here with us during their visit to Canberra. The value in meeting members of other parliaments was mentioned in the speeches of welcome to the delegation. Members of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association attend various conferences throughout the world. The associations that they make at these conferences and the understanding they gain provide a valuable contribution to the success of discussions that are held and which relate to many problems.

As I say, I am glad that this report has been presented to Parliament and for the opportunity to discuss not only the report but also the wider sphere of activity of our Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. I am glad of the opportunity to have these discussions and this debate. J am sure that all honourable members on both sides of the House and in both Houses who have attended these conferences have an appreciation of their value not only to us as individuals, not only to Australia, but to the Commonwealth as a whole.

Mr McIVOR:
Gellibrand

– lt is not my intention to delay the House too long with my remarks on the presentation of the report of the 15th Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference. The title on the cover of the report should indicate to the House the manner in which air travel has removed all boundaries. When one thinks of the places where Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conferences have been held one cannot but wonder how these meetings could have been arranged without the modern travel facilities that we have today. Places like Nigeria, India and Bermuda come to my mind as places which in the old days would have been considered far out of the way places but which are now accessible because of the modern air travel that we are so fortunate to have today. Such places as Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago were in my younger days legendary places that belonged to the days of piracy on the high seas.

While honourable members know that the decisions reached at these conferences are not binding on the governments of any of the delegates attending, i agree with former speakers that these conferences have tremendous value from a public relations point of view and serve to strengthen the bonds of understanding between countries in the Commonwealth of Nations and the parliamentary institutions in which delegates serve. The agenda set out on page 8 of this report indicates the high standard of the subjects discussed at the conference. As my colleague, the honourable member for Grayndler (Mr Daly) said, the discussions get very heated at times. Nobody is tied down to any particular range of policy. As the honourable member for Grayndler said, it is an open go for one and all. The matters under discussion cover a very wide range of subjects. They are matters of great magnitude to many of the developing nations and indeed to Australia. As 1 said before, it would be hard to assess the value of these discussions. 1 have had the privilege of attending CPA conferences. Apart from the benefit of touring the countries in which the conferences have been held I have been impressed by the quality of the debates that took place at these meetings. 1 gained a great deal of knowledge from them. 1 think that those who attended the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference in New Delhi came away convinced that there at that conference was laid down the pattern of apartheid, lt was evident that between the white delegates from South Africa and the black delegates from South Africa there was such a difference of opinion that at times they would not travel together on the same bus. Because of the mutterings we heard at the conference we came away firmly convinced that the near future would see such a policy as the apartheid policy brought down in South Africa.

I think I would be truthful in saying that most of the delegates who went to Nigeria came away firmly convinced that the enmity that existed between tribes such as the Yorubas, the Hausas and the Ibos could not be contained and that it would break into open conflict before very long. The day that we left Lagos there were riots in the streets of that city and much of it emanated from the jealousies and the differences that existed between the tribes in those days. So it came to pass that there was a terrible conflict in Nigeria that practically wrecked the country and practically wiped out the tribe of Ibos in Eastern Nigeria, as we called it in those days. I think that the honourable member for La Trobe (Mr Jess) who travelled to London with me in 1967 as a guest of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association of the mother country was impressed by the nature of discussions that went on and by the manner in which the delegates, particularly from the developing countries, were so keen to learn everything about our parliamentary institutions and to put forth their views on the problems associated with their own countries. So I conclude by saying that this report contains a wealth of information on the attitudes of many countries to the problems besetting the world today and Australia in particular. Therefore, like other honourable members who have spoken, I have much pleasure in supporting the tabling of this report in the House today.

Debate (on motion by Mr Snedden) adjourned.

page 172

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE

Report

Mr SNEDDEN:
Minister for Labour and National Service · Bruces · LP

– Last night Mr Speaker presented to the Parliament a report from the Standing Orders Committee. After the presentation of that report I moved that the report be printed and I then moved the subsequent motion that the consideration of the report be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting; hence it appeared on the notice paper today. Honourable members will have seen that there are a number of items listed before it and will be aware that I have just moved for the deferment of those items so that this matter could come on. It is a matter which concerns every individual member of the Parliament. It affects him more specifically as an individual member than as a member of a party. For that reason, in the course of the discussions in the Standing Orders Committee, it was suggested that there should be a free vote on all matters contained in the report. I have been informed by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr

Barnard) that the matter was considered in the Opposition caucus and that the caucus did agree to a free vote on all matters in the report. I have no doubt that it is also known to all honourable members that the joint Government parties met this morning and also agreed that there should be a free vote of every individual member of the House. So we approach this debate, which will be launched by the motion I am about to move, in the situation where each individual member will express his own views according to the way he sees the best operation of this Parliament for the passage of its business and its national duty. I move -

That the Report of the Standing Orders Committee in its relation to the general matters of (a) sitting days, (b) a reduction in time limits for debates and speeches and (c) a reduction in the quorum of the House, be endorsed in principle and
That Standing Orders 72 and 250 be amended as recommended by the Committee, such amendments to come into operation on Tuesday, 25 th August 1970.

– I will circulate the motion. 1 am now explaining the procedure. 1 am informed by the Clerk that the motion is on the way and as soon as it comes it will be circulated. If honourable gentlemen will contain themselves and allow me to explain it while we are waiting for the motion to be circulated, 1 will do so. There are 3 matters which I think should be dealt with on an issue of principle. These are the sitting days, the reduction in time limits for speeches and the question of the quorum of the House. The reason why I propose it in this way is that the Standing Orders Committee has recommended a 4-day week, 2 weeks following, and then a week of recess. In the course of making that recommendation it also recommended the actual sitting hours. I am sure that honourable members will have the report in front of them. If they look at it they will find the times set out in the report. It proposes that the commencement of a day’s sitting shall be at 10 a.m. on certain days and at 2 p.m. on other days. It may be that some of the honourable gentlemen in the House would feel that 10 a.m. was not the appropriate hour or that 2 p.m. was not the appropriate hour. There may be some very real discussion as to whether or not that is an appropriate commencing time.

But I think the first thing we need to do is to look at the principle of a 4-day week for 2 weeks with a week’s recess. That is the reason why the motion is moved in the terms in which it is, to endorse the principle of what I might term a 3-week cycle instead of a 4-week cycle. At the present time we have a 4-week cycle of 3 sitting weeks and a week’s recess. Each of the sitting weeks is normally of 3 days. What is proposed by the Standing Orders Committee is a substitution of a 3-week cycle for the 4-week cycle, that is, a 2-week sitting of 4 days instead of 3 and then the week’s recess. It is important in my view to look at the matter as an issue of principle so that honourable members can express themselves on this principle. Having expressed themselves on the principle, if there is a majority of the House in favour of it, then it will be necessary to put a specific motion as to the sitting hours so that honourable members can express their attitudes to the particular hours. That is the reason why I am adopting this procedure in relation to sitting times. As to the limitation of times for speeches, generally the Committee has recommended a reduction of time.

Mr Calwell:

– Shame!

Mr SNEDDEN:

Mr Turner:

- Mr Deputy Speaker, I seek your clarification as to how this matter should be dealt with, because I want to know what I am voting on. I presume the Standing Orders have been amended from time to time in the past. What has been the usual procedure? If the Leader of the House comes along with a list of proposed amendments in precise terms and makes some explanation of those amendments in a general way with arguments as to why these should be adopted in principle and so forth, then the House has the opportunity to vote on each specific proposal to amend the Standing Orders. We have a general debate and we are able to vote on the particular matters. It seems to me that the same procedure ought to be followed as on other occasions when the Standing Orders are amended.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-(Mr Lucock) - In reply to the point of order raised by the honourable member for Bradfield. I suggest to the honourable member again that the only matter before the House at the moment is a suggestion by the Leader of the House in these terms:

That the Report of the Standing Orders Committee in its relation to the general matters of (a) sitting days, (b) a reduction in time limits for debates and speeches and (c) a reduction in the quorum of the House, be endorsed in principle. . . .

The Leader of the House has suggested that there should be a separate vote on the 3 parts of that section of his motion. The Chair asked then whether it was the wish of the House to proceed as suggested by the Minister. At this moment, this is the question that has been asked of the House. The House has to decide whether it wishes to proceed with the debate and whether it wishes to proceed along the lines as suggested by the Minister, that is, taking the parts of the motion, which I have read, separately.

Mr SNEDDEN:

– I believe, Mr Deputy Speaker, we may have got over these procedural difficulties at this stage - at least, I hope so. I hope that, during the course of the debate, we will not have points of order taken on matters of procedure which will avoid the resolution of the issues which now have become important for the House to determine. If anybody-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! I point out to the Leader of the House that the time allotted to him to speak on the original motion has expired. [Extension of time granted.]

Mr SNEDDEN:

– I thank my colleague, the Minister for Social Services (Mr Wentworth), for the extension of time granted to me. The report of the Standing Orders Committee was circulated to all honourable members in July. The matter has been considered in the Party rooms of Parties on both sides of the House. So that the debate may proceed in a composite form, 1 shall set out briefly what the Committee has recommended.

The first recommendation of the Committee is that the sittings of the House be based on a cycle of 3 weeks - Tuesday through to Friday in the first week, Monday through to Thursday in the second week, with no sittings in the third week. Commencing times would be, as the report recommends, variously 10 a.m. or 2 p.m. with rising times at 10.30 p.m. or such later time as may on occasions be necessary, except that on the Friday of the first week the anticipated rising time would be about 4 p.m. It is that matter - the actual hours of sitting - which 1 feel ought not to be intruded into the debate at this stage because the variations could be minor, such as a 10.30 a.m. start instead of a 10 a.m. start, or something of that kind. I feel that, if these issues came up, the matter that we are deciding now would be clouded. The matter I refer to is the proposal for a sitting of 2 weeks, of 4 days a week, with a recess of 1 week, as distinct from our present system of a 3 weeks sitting of 3 days a week followed by a recess of 1 week. The motion is in these terms so that the issue will not be clouded.

I should make it clear that new standing orders will be required to achieve this end and that it will be necessary for me actually to move the new standing orders. I will move them in the terms of the report of the Standing Orders Committee. Certain honourable members may oppose different recommendations. For instance, an obvious matter which may come up for discussion is the 10 a.m. commencing time on the Tuesday of the second week. This is a matter with regard to which honourable members will consider the needs of standing committees, joint committees, statutory committees and so on. We do not wish to cloud the issue tonight by debating that point. I should point out also that it will be necessary to put these new standing orders as a specific motion because we will need to make consequential amendments to the Standing Orders to deal, for instance, with Grievance Day and General Business Day. The Standing Orders now provide specific times for those days, but those times are related to a different sitting programme. Those specific times would need alteration. Therefore, a composite motion dealing with that matter will be proposed.

Standing order 72, as at present written, prevents references in the House to any debate or proceedings of the current session in the Senate or to any measure pending in the Senate. This was no doubt a useful provision in the days when the debates of one House were not easily known to the other. But the Standing Orders Committee is of the opinion that the daily publication of debates and the expansion of the news media make the rule unnecessary. In fact, the recent practice in the House has been to allow reasonable reference to debates and proceedings of the Senate.

The Committee therefore proposes that the Standing Orders be amended to allow reference to Senate debates or proceedings, provided it be relevant to the matter under discussion. As a corollary, it is proposed also that the Chair should allow reference to the Senate and senators by name although this would not prevent members from using the former oblique reference such as another place’ and ‘member of another place’ if they so desire. The parliamentary history of this matter is dealt with more fully in the report. Under the terms of my motion, this proposal would be adopted by vote tonight in terms of the recommendation of the Standing Orders Committee and would operate from next Tuesday. I would not think that any member of the House would find any objection to it at all.

The next recommendation of the Committee relates to time limits for debates and speeches. As honourable members will see from the report, these proposed changes are fairly comprehensive. A number of amendments to standing order 91 are recommended. But, in the main, it is proposed that speech times be reduced by 5 minutes in debates such as second readings, censure motions, resolutions relating to tax or duty, and consideration in Committee of the Whole of the main annual Appropriation Bill or a Tariff Bill. The Committee feels that these proposed changes are reasonable in present circumstances and will not prejudice in any way the opportunity for or the ability of a member to deal with matters before the House. The Committee felt - and I agree with it - that the time that a speaker will be permitted in the debates that I have mentioned will enable each member to mobilise the facts and arguments that he wishes to present to the House and so contribute to a coherent debate.

Standing order 250 sets out the procedure which may be followed where a Bill is returned a second time from the Senate and where the Senate insists on its original amendments to which the House has disagreed. When a Bill is returned a first time by the Senate, the Standing Orders permit the House to make a further amendment in the Bill, provided it is relevant to a Senate amendment rejected by the House. That is. the House respects the Senate amendment but. in place thereof, makes another and relevant amendment. The Committee thought that this ability to make a further amendment in the Bill on an occasion when the Senate returns the Bill a second time should be written also into standing order 250. This is consistent with the modern practice in the House of Commons and will expand the area of deliberation between the Houses. A sap has been identified and the Standing Orders Committee rr»<: recommended ‘hat it be filled. Under the terms of my motton - and I would not think that members of the House would object to this - the change would operate as from Tuesday next.

The next change proposed by the Committee is that legislative action be taken to reduce the quorum of the House from one-third to one-fifth of its members. The present quorum of one-third is fixed by section 39 of the Commonwealth Constitution which provides:

Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the presence of at least one-third of the whole number of the Members of the House of Representatives shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the House for the exercise of its powers.

The case for the proposed alteration is well documented in the report. But, if the House will listen to me, I would like to deal with some of those factors.

-The House has agreed to take each vote separately and I am putting the question now that proposal (1) (a) in relation to sitting days be agreed to.

Mr CHARLES JONES:
Newcastle

– I oppose the proposition that we adopt a 4-day sitting week. I consider that there are many reasons why honourable members should not commit themselves to a 4-day week. Firstly, we have no guarantee from the Government that the sittings will continue for any length of time or that honourable members will be given the opportunity of debating at length measures brought before the Parliament. Let me state a hypothetical example. Suppose that in the autumn or spring session of Parliament there is sufficient business for 60 sitting days. If a 4-day week is introduced the Parliament will sit for 15 weeks. If there is a 3-day week the Parliament will sit for 20 weeks and that will mean that the Parliament will be in recess for a much shorter time. For 20 weeks honourable members will have access to Ministers and will have the opportunity to raise matters of national importance in this Parliament during the 3-day week. If business is completed in 15 weeks Parliament will be in recess for a much longer period. Then the only way honourable members will be able to raise matters of importance to their electorates, their parties or the people as a whole will be by writing to the Prime Minister or the Minister in question. We will not be able to subject Ministers to continuous questioning, raise matters of urgency, speak on adjournment motions or do other things that honourable members are entitled to do under the Standing Orders to bring to the attention of the Parliament matters which concern them and their electorates or the nation as a whole. For that reason alone we should dispose of the proposition for a 4-day week which has been put before us on the supposition that honourable members will travel less, that it will involve less travelling between their electorates and this place. On one occasion a senator stated in my company that one would think that the sitting hours of this Parliament were framed to provide business for the airlines. I am not concerned with the airlines; I am concerned with doing a job in my electorate and doing a job in this place. With a 3-day week we will be in a much better position to bring matters continually before the Parliament.

If the Government had proposed to us tonight: ‘Whether it be a 3-day week or a 4- day week we will sit from the first Tuesday in February to the last Thursday in May’ - ‘that is a silting extending over 4 months - I would agree to a 4-day week. If the Government were to say also: ‘In the Budget session we will sit from the first Tuesday in August to the last Thursday in November’ - that would be the minimum sitting period - yes, there would be some sense and logic in a 4-day week. But the way I see it - I emphasise this - is that this is an attempt to close this Parliament as quickly as is possible so that the Executive will be able to continue to rule and dominate the affairs of the Parliament. We would become increasingly a rubber stamp for the Executive, whether a Labor Government or a Liberal-Country Party Government was in office.

There are many other points to be taken into consideration. I see a member’s responsibility as something more than attending in this place. If you consider the number of members who speak in the Parliament you will agree with me that some honourable members rarely participate in debates. In fact a former member of this House had the proud reputation of having made only 1 speech during the whole of his time in the Parliament. It is not a matter of the number of times that a member speaks in this place. If some honourable members want to become a rubber stamp for the Executive, that is a matter for them. As I see it, a member has 2 responsibilities. Firstly, he is required to be here as often as he can while his health permits him to do so, and if his health deteriorates to the extent that he cannot be here then the sooner he resigns the better. Secondly, a member has a responsibility to his electorate and to his constituents. I know that most honourable members attend their offices daily when the House is in recess.

Another matter concerns me greatly. I have established an understanding in my electorate that I am in my office every Monday except in exeptional circumstances - one such occasion arose when my Party held a meeting on Monday of this week - or should a committee of which I am a member meet on that day. I might add that when a Monday sitting is suggested I always try to use my influence with the committee not to sit on that day. The proposal before us is to sit on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of the first week and Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of the second week. That will throw members out of their routine in their offices. At present their constituents know the days on which their member can be interviewed. Whether it be a Monday, as in my case, or a Friday is immaterial but at least let us have some set days on which we can be in our offices so that our constituents will know when they can interview their member. With the present 4-day sittings my secretary and 1 rarely leave my office before 8 p.m. on Mondays and there have been occasions when we have not left until 9.30 p.m. I do not think this is a fair go. Under the proposed arrangement we will not be in our electorate offices for a period of 10 days. Further, according to the programme which has been outlined a member will not be in his office on ordinary working days which I classify as from Monday to Friday.

If honourable members decide to change the Standing Orders to provide for the proposed sitting days we will have to look at the question of the payment of overtime for the staff we engage. At present the payment of overtime is not permitted. Ministers are all right. They can bring their staff on duty whenever they wish to do so and pay them overtime, but as far as other honourable members are concerned the position is different. If the 4-day sitting week is introduced we should be given authority to bring in staff on a Saturday and a Sunday to clear the business which has accumulated in our offices while we have been in Canberra, and to pay the staff overtime. 1 suppose most people try to stick to a S-day week, but in industry if it is necessary to work overtime on a Saturday and a Sunday the staff concerned is paid overtime. I cannot see any reason why, under the circumstances which may be created here tonight, we should not have the opportunity and the right to bring in staff over the weekend to dispose of correspondence and other business which accumulate in our offices while we are away, and to pay the staff overtime. These matters must be taken into consideration.

Another matter which has been raised is that if we sit on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of the first week and Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of the second week honourable members who have to travel long distances will stop over in Canberra on Saturdays and Sundays. I have spoken to a few honourable members who live in Western Australia and other far distant places and they all have indicated to me that if the House rises on Friday afternoon of the first week they will pack up and go home. I know that I will go home. I have no intention of remaining in Canberra on Saturdays and Sundays. If that is what the Standing Orders Committee has in mind, I am one who will not cooperate with it. As far as I am concerned 1 will be going home as soon as I can get out of this place. Travel will not be saved by the introduction of a 4-day week. Possibly things will only be complicated for members. I oppose the proposition. We cannot move an amendment. There will be a straight out vote for or against it. But if the proposition is adopted, when the Minister proposes his next motion at least let us look at the possibility of working on the same 4 days in the 2 weeks that we might sit.

Mr GILES:
Angas

– I do not pretend that in weeks gone by I did not adopt the same policy as that enunciated by the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones). In fact I do not suppose it is breaking a confidence to say that in my Party room some time ago I spoke in the same vein as he did. But I wonder whether the honourable member and perhaps some members of his Party have stopped to consider the ramifications of the recommendations of the Standing Orders Committee. Although they represent some inconvenience to me, as they would to the honourable member for Newcastle, I am now convinced that this is a move in the right direction. I should like to try to explain my reasoning to the House.

First of all, whether we accept it or not, Canberra is regarded by the community in general as something of a white elephant. There is no question in my mind that in time to come members of Parliament, whether they like it or not, will be here for the majority of the year putting in their time on committee work, as has been suggested by honourable members, particularly the younger ones, on both sides of the House. I regret that this will occur but I believe that it will. In looking at the proposed amendments to the Standing Orders we have to take into account the fact that it might well prove to be the position in the future that members of the Commonwealth Parliament will be anchored here for the majority of the dme working full time on committees and on other jobs with staff supplied for that purpose.

Mr Armitage:

– Will you support the setting up of committees?

Mr GILES:

– If the honourable member will restrain his undoubted exuberance for a couple of minutes 1 will continue my remarks. As I have said, whether we like it or not the chances are that we will be working full time in Canberra. When that does come about we will have an even harder job explaining to our constituents that in Canberra we are looking after the national interest.

Mr Armitage:

– But will you support the setting up of committees?

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member for Chifley will cease interjecting.

Mr GILES:

– It is a bit nauseating. I would ask the House to consider these recommendations. It is inconvenient for me when I am unable to get a longer weekend. I agree with what the honourable member for Newcastle said in this respect. I have no intention of being in Canberra on Saturday or Sunday.

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– Why?

Mr GILES:

– It is up to each honourable member to make up his own mind as to the reasons why, and the reasons will be diverse. The point I wish to make is that as a stop gap, pro tempore measure I regard these recommendations by the Committee as being of importance to the Parliament. When we consider these recommendations let us stop for a minute and look not at our own personal convenience entirely but at the function of this House and determine in what way we can get better performance because it is largely on performance that this place will be judged by the people of Australia. I remember very clearly 2 recent debates, one on the Council of Egg Marketing Authorities and another on Meals on Wheels. During those debates honourable members for one reason or another - I do not deny for a minute their interest - took part and put their views to the Parliament, very largely I suppose on behalf of their constituents. But in the national order of priorities those Bills were very low in importance and of very low financial significance and yet this House wasted an extraordinary amount of time on such simple measures. Whilst all honourable members may be in agreement with the principles involved other major issues will crop up even more frequently in time to come which will be of major importance to the nation.

Any move which will give additional debating time to honourable members which this recommendation will achieve in terms of approximately 30 days compared to 27 days in a normal sessional period, must be of advantage to the back benchers because it will permit more time for debate and there will be less wastage of time on individual debates. It will also remove some of the onus from the Leader of the House (Mr Snedden) and the 2 Whips on the Government side in regard to the use of the gag. Obviously any administration of Parliament must be elastic otherwise we would not be able to deal with the emergencies which arise from time to time. I would earnestly deprecate anyone who did not think seriously enough of this Parliament and its performance - whether he be on the Opposition side or the Government side - and who did not take into account the necessity for the Government and the Executive to produce performance.

Whether the Labor Party is in government or whether it is the Liberal Party which is in government, the performance of Parliament will very largely be measured by the community on the ability of Parliament to put through timely legislation - not 2 years too late or 6 months too late, but at a time when it should be passed.

The incongruity of the situation is precisely this. Honourable members on the other side of the House have for many years been on the Opposition benches. I have not had that experience. However, I have a genuine regard for the rights of the Opposition to fight. In this context I would not have a bar of mechanisation to facilitate the counting of a division, because I regard it to be an inherent right of the Opposition to fight back on divisions, and, as it were, to waste time by fighting back. I do think that in the interests of the Parliament and the people of this country we need some reform. I do not personally regard these recommendations as a very great reform. As I said I regard this matter as a stop gap, pro tempore measure which is necessary at this point of time. I remind honourable members and those who sat on the Committee that there are many more important things that need to be considered in the future before we can streamline our methods and obtain performance on behalf of Australia and the people of this nation.

I spent a few days in the House of Commons 3 weeks ago and a few days in other parliaments during my journey to London and it may well be that in order to get a proper priority in debates we need a great deal more consideration from those on the Opposition benches. There are ways and means by which this can be encouraged and there are ways and means which I have in mind by which we could gain more influence as a Parliament to try to achieve these effects, although the whole principle of the House of Commons with 630 members and room for only slightly more than 200 is the opposite of our position in Australia. On the other hand we have honourable members who are virtually in a hostage position in Canberra. I believe that there are great lessons to be learnt from experiences of a Parliament such as the House of Commons, which has functioned effectively for many years and which has altered 98% of its standing orders since the end of World War II. This is something which we have not done. However, the Standing Orders Committee is in the process of considering alterations to our Standing Orders. The Committee has produced for the first time since I have been here a list of recommendations. I hope that these recommendations are looked at in a commonsense fashion by honourable members. I also hope that regardless of the convenience to us as members of Parliament they will remember that other issues are involved. Firstly, there is regard for an Opposition. Secondly, there is regard for the effective functioning of an executive. Thirdly, there is the image we give to the Australian people.

I would deprecate the day when Canberra and the Federal Parliament become matters of no regard in the eyes and minds of the people of Australia. If I may I will finish as 1 started. If we are to spend more time in Canberra and less time in our electorates it will be a bad thing. Surely the commonsense way of looking at this matter is to try to move as rapidly as we can so as to achieve a more effective use of the time that we have in this place and where possible to provide more hours for the sake of the Executive, the Opposition, the back benchers on the Government side and the people of Australia whom we represent so that we can hold up our heads and feel we are doing a job which is worthwhile and to the advantage of the nation as a whole.

Mr CALWELL:
Melbourne

– All Western democracies are under challenge. The parliamentary institutions of the United States of America, Great Britain and Australia are subject to pressures which 20 years ago would not have been thought to exist. We have to move with the times. What would have satisfied the democracies of even 20 years ago would not suffice now. This reform about which we speak is only a minor contribution to reform as such, but it has something which commends itself to me. I believe in a 4-day week. I believe that we were elected to serve the people of Australia in Canberra and we should not run away from Canberra as the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) admits he does whenever and as soon as he can. The honourable member for Angus (Mr Giles) said much the same thing. I think it is our duty to be here 4 days a week.

Mr Charles Jones:

– At least I am always here when the Parliament is sitting. That is more than can be said of some people. I hope the cap fits.

Mr CALWELL:

– That is all right. The honourable member is young enough and able enough and he ought to be here and should not run away from the place.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honourable member for Newcastle will cease interjecting. The honourable member has already spoken in this debate.

Mr CALWELL:

– My heart bleeds for the honourable member for Newcastle because he has to work until 8 o’clock at night. He would not have to work until 8 o’clock at night if he stayed here and did his work. I believe that all honourable members - young and old - should be in Canberra as much as possible. It is all very well for the honourable member for Newcastle, who is in the full bloom of middle age, to say that those honourable members who are too old or too sick ought to resign. I think anybody who comes to Canberra only to draw his salary and who gets out of it as if it were fever-ridden should resign first. To get back to our muttons, I believe that the House should sit 4 days a week. I believe the House ought to sit on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of the first week and Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of the second week and then have a break of 1 week. 1 think the House should sit for 2 weeks and then have a break of 1 week instead of sitting for 3 weeks and having a break of 1 week. That is a fair proposition which should be acceptable to everybody. Generally speaking, the honourable members who want to rush out of Canberra are those who come from Sydney and Melbourne. They do not have any concern for the honourable members who live in the cities of South Australia, Western Australia, Queensland and Tasmania or in the country districts surrounding these places.

I have been accused by honourable members sitting around me of being a stirrer. I have devoted the last 3 or 4 years of my life to stirring the possum and I intend to stir it again on this issue. It is impossible for each member of a parliament of 125 members to debate every piece of legislation which is introduced. We would be talking into eternity if every member of the House were to speak on every Bill. There has to be some reason used in regard to this sort of thing. We should adopt the practice of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom of a set time being fixed by the Government for discussion on each piece of legislation which is introduced, with a vote being taken at a certain time. That is the only way in which the House of Commons can work with its more than 600 members. We should adopt this practice. It seems to be to me somewhat idiotic to set aside a fortnight to debate the Budget. The case to be put on the Budget can be stated very well by, say, 10. 20 or 40 speakers. The public should be able to make up its mind on the merits of the Budget after such a debate. I believe this is the next matter which should be considered.

Although it may be somewhat irrelevant to the proposal we are discussing at this stage, I would like to say that 1 do not like the idea of cutting down the time allowed for each speech. Those honourable members who are called upon to speak should be given more opportunities to say what has to be said instead of their time being cut so that everybody will have an opportunity to say something. Some people can say a lot in a very short space of time. Abraham Lincoln took only 3 minutes to say what he wanted to say at Gettysburg and what he had to say won a deserved immortality. A lot of people can cut down the length of their speeches. We do not want to be depicted in the public eye as a parliament of babbling brooks, and we do not want to be all talking on only 1 or 2 subjects. I have no objection to what the Leader of the House (Mr Snedden) has proposed, that we have a break of 1 week after the House has sat for 2 weeks of 4 days each. I am in favour of the proposal.

I am sorry that I have had to disagree with the honourable member for Newcastle, but I believe that the Commonwealth Parliament is the most important parliament in Australia. T am not going to reflect on the State parliaments, but I once heard a Minister in a State government say that members of the Commonwealth Parliament regard State politicians as glorified shire councillors - in fact, Gus Kelly said that. I was impetuous enough to say ‘Hear, hear’ and I meant it. The eyes of this nation are on the Commonwealth Parliament. We live in dynamic and very challenging times. As we enter the era of the permissive society the challenges will be greater and more fundamental. I would not mind sitting as they did in the days of the French Revolution, when the Legislative Assembly was in constant session.

Mr Cope:

– We would all finish up in the Bastille.

Mr CALWELL:

– I was thinking of that. I was thinking that the honourable member would be one of the first into the tumbril.

Mr Cope:

– I would be the first to lop off the right honourable member’s head.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The honourable member for Sydney will cease interjecting. I suggest to the right honourable member for Melbourne that he come back to the motion before the House.

Mr CALWELL:

– The honourable member for Sydney is like a lot of people from Sydney in that he thinks of only one thing - Sydney or the bush. I know that I have to finish at some time, Mr Speaker, I think I had better finish now.

Mr BRYANT:
Wills

– As a member of the Standing Orders Committee which brought down this recommendation 1 want to make sure that honourable members have their arithmetic correct. I wish to point out that the Standing Orders Committee examined this proposal for some time. I am in sympathy with those honourable members who would like the sitting to be on the basis of a regular 4 days a week so that they can put aside a particular day in order to do whatever it is they wish to do in their electorates for their constituents, but the fact is that there are members of this Parliament who come from places such as Alice Springs, Broken Hill and Bunbury whose activities we are in duty bound to consider. Those honourable members who live, say, 150 or 200 miles away from an airport are also in a particularly difficult position. The Committee has recommended that the 4 days be dovetailed, if that is the correct term, at each

My suggestion - I hope it will be written into the Standing Orders - is that the 2 sessional periods should commence every year during a particular week in, say, February and August. I believe that the House should sit during February, March, April and May and then again during August, September, October and November. In this way the House could easily sit on 96 to 100 days, or even more if necessary, and all honourable members would know where they stood. It seems to me that the great penalty which we inflict upon each other is that the eccentric nature of sittings means one cannot plan to do anything in particular. I believe that this is the important issue which is before us. The other point I wish to make is that my experience in this place is that the present idea of a 2i-day week results in a continual disintegration of one’s life. At present we are not remaining in this chamber for a long enough period to complete some matters. We manage to get a debate launched in some way only to find that on Thursday evening we are banished until the following Tuesday. A 4-day sitting week would give us much greater continuity of work. Therefore I appeal to honourable members to support the proposition which is before the House. I believe it will assist in the working of the Parliament. I hope it will make life a little more comfortable for those honourable members who have to travel long distances, regardless of whether they do so by aeroplane or some other means.

Mr HALLETT:
Canning

– Perhaps the situation was a little different when the original Parliament House was sited at Canberra, but if it were being sited today I would suggest that it would be more appropriately sited at Alice Springs,

The electors of Canning elected me to represent them in this place. When the House is sitting I propose to be here as often as possible. It is much easier for me to be here for 2 weeks straight, as proposed, than it is in the present circumstances especially if we are sitting 4 days a week anyway which is the programme at the moment and which I understand will be the programme for the next 6 weeks of sitting. We shall be sitting on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday and the same days next week. If I return to my home State at the weekend I arrive in Perth on Friday sometime after midnight according to Eastern Standard Time on which I started the day. 1 return to Canberra again on the Monday. This, in my book, is quite crazy although honourable members often have to do it. It is far too many miles even with jet travel.

I support the recommendations of the Committee for a sitting of 2 weeks straight on the terms and conditions contained in the report, with 1 week off, in preference to what we are doing at the moment, sitting 4 days a week 3 weeks running and having a week off.

Mr COHEN:
Robertson

– 1 do not want to take up too much time of the House but 1 thought, being one of the newer members, a few comments might be in order. I think that the honourable member for Canning (Mr Hallett) was being a little unfair on the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones). Those who know him know that he is one of the most dedicated members of this House and one of the hardest working and most consciencious members in his own electorate. Having met his charming wife, I am not surprised that he wants to get home as quickly as he possibly can. I was rather astonished when I came here to find that 1 seemed to be travelling all day and every day. I estimated that at least I day in each week was a complete and utter write-off. I found also that my life was very disjointed. No sooner did I get to the House, start to settle in and learn some of the format and start to think that I was prepared to make a speech or make a statement on some subject, than I found that I was flying home again. This went on, and I could not settle down in the very short stay. But I found in the last few weeks of the last session that the longer sittings enabled me to concentrate better, to prepare work and to make better speeches.

I represent a seat just outside Sydney, but I felt sorry all the time for members like the honourable member for the Northern Territory (Mr Calder), the honourable member for Gwydir (Mr Hunt), the honourable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr Collard) and the honourable member for Kennedy (Mr Katter) who had to travel for such an enormous amount of time. If 1 was spending half a day getting here and getting back then they must have been spending a full day or 2 full days a week in travelling. To me this seemed an onerous task that should not be placed on anyone. That is one of the reasons why I am supporting the proposal. I think it is wrong that parliamentarians, particularly in marginal

20734/70- R.3

seats such as mine, have to dash back to their electorates and go to the Bandiwallop picnic races or some such thing because it is going to win a few votes. I believe, as the honourable member for Angas (Mr Giles) and the right honourable member for Melbourne (Mr Calwell) stated, that we have a responsibility to be here even if it means losing a few votes because we could not go to this fete or that ball. I think that Parliament takes precedence over these functions, much as we know their importance to us in getting elected. I think we ought to spend more time here.

I would like to say a few words about one of my favourite subjects. We ought to inform the people of Australia what sort of role we play while we are here. There is an appalling ignorance throughout this country of what a parliamentarian does. I said this before during the debate on the Parliamentary Allowances Bill. 1 have never seen the gallery of the House as full as it is tonight except at Question Time or during a Budget speech. For a normal Bill one might see 15 or 20 people there. They sit up there and then they go home to their friends and say: ‘I walked in and 1 saw that there were a dozen of them, and one of them was asleep’. We ail know who that would be - the honourable member for Wave Hill. Those people do not understand what is going on here. They do not understand that we are at Committee meetings, out talking to constituents, preparing speeches or in the library doing research. They do not understand that we do not stop from the minute we walk in at 9 o’clock in the morning until 1 o’clock the next morning. They expect us to be here. It is important that the House at a later stage considers educating the people of Australia as to the role of a parliamentarian, not only here but also in his electorate.

I am going to support the proposal for two 4-day weeks mainly on the basis that I think it is only fair for those members of Parliament who have to travel from outlying country areas.

Mr TURNER:
Bradfield

– I find myself in agreement with the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones). I was inclined earlier to think that this poor, miserable, paltry measure of reform of Parliament, as far as it goes, had some merit. But listening to the honourable member for Newcastle and considering what has happened in the past I realise that there is immense merit in what he had to say. I think that the proposal would make Parliament simply into a quicker rubber stamp. Let us have a look at a little bit of history. Let us first of all think about a few statistics. This Parliament sits fewer days and fewer weeks in the year than any other comparable parliament, far fewer than Westminster and far fewer than Ottawa. We sit very few weeks and very few days of the year, much fewer than either of those other parliaments. At the end of last year the House sat for - a day, was it? I was not here. Then the autumn session started rather late this year, later than usual, and it ran through for a long time because the Government lost control of the House. It tried to steamroller measures through. It met with turbulence and opposition and then was too timid to gag when the gag should have been applied. So we dithered through that period. This session in which we are now engaged has started later than any Budget session than I can remember, on 18th August. My recollection is that the Budget session usually started on about the first Tuesday in August. This time it started on the 18th. Let it not therefore be said that there are not enough weeks in the year. Let us look at the proposal and see what it is. Let us get down to detail.

We are debating this proposal:

That the report of the Standing Orders Committee in its relation to the general matters of (a) sitting days … be endorsed.

Let us have a look at the question of sitting days. It is not just a matter of sitting on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday in 1 week and on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday in the next. The recommendation about sitting days also involves sitting hours; let us be clear about that. In the past the major parliamentary committees - I refer in particular to the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Public Accounts Committee - have sat on Tuesday mornings. Under this system it will be impossible for them to do that. When will they sit? Nobody has told us. Not only that, but the hours of sitting involved in this little matter of ‘(a) the sitting days’ involves snatching an hour here. an hour there, cutting back meal times and things of this sort. I am not so much concerned with meals but it so happens that this Parliament has the heathenish practice of having party committees at meal times. If the meal times are cut short, so are the opportunities for party committees. So under this system it will be made very difficult for the parliamentary committees to sit. The time in which party committees can sit will be cut down.

Now I come to the point that there is no guarantee whatsoever that at the end of the fortnight’s sitting under this new proposal - this new cycle, this bicycle that the Minister has referred to - we shall know what is to be the business for the next fortnight. If we could use that week in between to prepare speeches for the fortnight that follows all would be well, but experience teaches me that we shall never know what is happening from day to day.

Mr Scholes:

– You want to know a lot.

Mr TURNER:

– I may want to know too much, f know. Under the present system at least sometimes one has the opportunity of knowing one week what is coming on the next week. If you are not quite as assiduous as, I think, the honourable member for Robertson, then you may even find a day in the weekend to make some preparation of a speech for the following week. With these things in mind - and these are the results of history and bitter experience of what happens - I believe, with the honourable member for Newcastle, that all that would happen as a result of this change is that the Parliament would sit for fewer weeks in the year, there would be less opportunity to question the Executive and we would rush through legislation with even less notice of what was coming than we have had in the past. I believe this would be to the detriment of Parliament. While my heart bleeds for the honourable member for Canning (Mr Hallett) I believe that Parliament is more important than Canning.

Mr HAYDEN:
Oxley

– I want to support some of those views which have been expressed, especially by the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner). It seems to me that there is an element of indecency about the way in which this proposition is being put before the Parliament.

I would expect it would be offensive to the great Australian public. The conditions of employment we are proposing are to work for 2 weeks and then have a week off. This would surely be the envy of any group within Australia. I am happy that we have this opportunity to speak as individuals and not be bound by party discipline. I feel strongly on this. I expressed my opinion quite forcibly within the executive meeting of my party a few mornings ago - I was not the sole one to do so - along the lines on which I am now proceeding.

I believe we are elected to Parliament to represent the people of this country in our electorate and, as national representatives, the people of Australia on the great national issues which are discussed here. Our return to our electorates is not associated with the great national issues which are discussed here. Our return to our electorates - we often forget this - and the work we do in our electorates is connected with political self survival. We want to move about our electorates to look after ourselves, to maintain our vote, to see that we come back at the next election. Frankly, that is a thoroughly commendable purpose. I for one want to return at every election. But on the other hand I increasingly feel as I serve more time here that I want to play a more influential and positive role on behalf of this country. I have grave doubts about just how influential is the role I play in this Parliament. Perhaps this is through personal deficiencies, but certainly not the least of the causes of this are the deficiencies in the way in which Parliament is operated. There is room for deep seated reform within this Parliament, and we are tinkering at the very distant periphery in that area of reform needed when we deal with hours of sitting and the period of sitting.

I frankly believe that once we commence sitting we ought to be sitting continuously without a week’s break every 3, 4 or 6 weeks until we complete the business of the Parliament. This is the important reason why we are here. This is our responsibility to the public. It is because of these breaks that we run into the problem which is apparently the cause for the change in Standing Orders to be recommended to this House, that we are here over too many months in the year, ft would not matter if we were here for 12 months. If there is work to be done then we ought to be here. This I firmly believe. 1 want to mention our role in this Parliament. I believe it is a greatly diminished role, if in fact it was ever a greatly influential role. I do not know. I do not believe that backbenchers in this Parliament on the Opposition side or the Government side have been greatly influential, despite any theories expressed to the contrary by political scientists or political commentators. I am speaking of the time since I have been in this Parliament. It may have been that back benchers were influential at some stage in the history of federation, but I doubt it. The influential role of the back bencher in Parliament goes back-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! 1 do not think that this motion deals with the role of the back bencher. Unless the honourable member is going to show some relevance to the question before the chair I will have to ask him to leave that aspect.

MR HAYDEN:

– 1 will relate it to the motion in about 2 seconds. 1 was saying perhaps if we went back far enough in history of the development of the parliamentary system of government in Great Britain that significance may be discovered. 1 do not know. 1 am not an historian in this area. But in any event I am reluctant to make any concessions to the Government because we operate under a system of Executive autocracy. The Cabinet makes decisions. They are brought into this Parliament and the back benchers on the Government side pretty much have to rubber stamp them. The great decisions are not made in this Chamber under the parliamentary system today; they are being made in the councils of parties outside the Parliament. They are being made in the party committee meeting rooms. They are not being made in this chamber. This incidentally is one of the reasons why I welcome the opportunity to express one’s individual feeling on this issue. Because of this autocracy we find that the influence of private members is a greatly diminished one in this Parliament. It has diminished in the short time that I have been here, so 1 will make no concessions to the Government until there is some sort of equivalent concession made to back benchers, until the role of Parliament and the role that back benchers play in this Parliament becomes an influential one. I am as concerned about this situation of which I am so critical under a Liberal Government as 1 would be in the event of a Labor Government coming into power. I would hope that we would operate better than the Liberal Government has done. We have no guarantee, and so I speak about the rights of back benchers. I want to see something written into the Standing Orders to preserve the rights as they should be. We need a system of standing committees which will allow back benchers to play a positive role on behalf of the people of Australia.

I have been here 9 years and I find increasingly that I am suffering recurrent periods of gloom and depression because 1 am not playing as positive a role as I feel I am capable of playing in this place, because in spite of the work which I do - regardless of the value which honourable members might place on it, I do work hard at the speeches 1 present - I find that after 20 minutes or 30 minutes, whatever the speaking time might be, it is over and finished. No notice is taken except perhaps for a line in one of the newspapers which is looking rather desperately for something to fill up a spare column. But nonetheless this happens. But surely the role we are supposed to play is more a important one than it is. I am being completely candid about this. I am not being hypocritical. I am trying to reach into the core of the real problems of Parliament. If back benchers are prepared to go along with these superficial changes which only tinker at the periphery of the real problem of the Parliament then that is their prerogative. But in the long term they are the ones who will suffer, and so too will the Australian public.

What I am concerned about is to see an uplifting in the standard of our performance in this Parliament and of government of Australia. What impresses me tremendously is that in bipartisan standing committees or select committees most often we have found that the rigid party differences have been broken down. Presented with the facts of the particular issues by experts as evidence and advised by an expert staff, the committees have come down most frequently with unanimous decisions. The recommendations have been of outstanding value. This is what I am talking about and this is the area we ought to commence from - not from the other end. I will make no concessions on Standing Orders until we back benchers are given some countervailing power to try somehow to bold the autocratic power which the Executive is currently able to wield in this Parliament. It is true, I repeat, that our role has diminished; the only power we have at the moment is to stand on our feet and talk. It is limited power. But at least it represents some sort of influence, albeit extremely moderate, for us. I do not want to give this away. The more we give away the less influence we will have. Frankly, all I can see out of these recommendations is further regression. This is one of the critical issues of parliamentary government.

Mr WENTWORTH:
Minister for Social Services · Mackellar · LP

– I was glad to hear the honourable member for Oxley (Mr Hayden) commend the work of bipartisan committees. We have before us the unanimous report of a bipartisan committee.

Mr Turner:

– It is not before us.

Mr WENTWORTH:

– It is a unanimous report, that the hours and days of sitting be changed. There are two duties of honourable members in this Parliament. One is to act in the Parliament in regard to matters of policy and the major matters which come before a national parliament and the other is their duty to their constituents. All of us know that there are things that we can and should from time to time do for our constituents but, more than that, contact with our constituents does enable us I think to be better members because, after all, we are trying to represent them. Honourable members may differ among themselves as to the relative importance of these two functions. They are both important. I for one would think that the former - the policy function - is the more important. But both of these functions are important and we need as much time as we can to perform them. One thing that is certain is that while we are travelling we are performing neither function. We are wasting time while we are travelling. If we can find some way of spending more of our time on these two functions, whichever one we may think the more important, we will be increasing our efficiency as members of Parliament. I take the point I think originally made by the honourable member for Wills (Mr Bryant) and echoed by the honourable member for Robertson (Mr Cohen) that travelling in itself has some disorienting effect and may diminish our own efficiency in this Parliament when we are here.

For those reasons 1 think we should support the proposition that has been brought forward by this bipartisan Committee. There is only one other thing I would like to say, and that is that I feel my friends, the honourable members for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) and Bradfield (Mr Turner), have not sufficiently considered the figures and details of the proposal because if they had done so they would not have spoken as they did in regard to one important matter. They said that the recommendation before the House would diminish the times in which the Parliament was in session. This is not quite true. If they looked at the figures they would see that under existing arrangements of a 3-day week the Parliament sits approximately 24 or 25 hours in a week. Under the suggested new arrangements the Parliament would sit 60 hours in 2 weeks. But including the proposed week off in the calculation, the weekly average would be just on 20 hours - almost exactly the same as under the existing arrangement - under the new proposal. So the length of the session would not be affected materially either way. I can assure the honourable members that if they look at the figures they will see they have made a slight arithmetical error in this regard because they have forgotten that the times we are speaking of are a 4-week cycle of 3 on and 1 off and a 3-week cycle of 2 on and 1 off. I would also say to them that they should look in more detail at the matter of hours, which we are not at the present moment considering but of which we will be speaking in a moment. There will then be ample opportunity to discuss not only the conduct of Committee business as it is at present but indeed ample opportunity to discuss how Committees can be conducted in a more efficient way. Indeed, anything which reduces travelling time and provides for members a greater total of time - which they can divide as they choose between their duties as policy makers in this Parliament and in preparing for their work in this Parliament and their duties in representing their electorates and keeping in contact with their electorates will increase also their efficiency as members, however, they may see their duty.

Mr CONNOR:
Cunningham

– I am vehemently opposed to any alteration in the sitting times of this House. I say this not because I want to act as a brake on progress but rather the reverse because as I see the position it is quite a simple one. The more weeks and the more occasions on which we can visit Canberra the better for our constituents and the better for this nation. The net result of the proposals that have been submitted for our support is this: We will be here less frequently and we will have less opportunity to observe the bureaucracy. I have every respect for the men who dedicate themselves to the Public Service. But by the same token we have 3 generations of civil servants and they have developed an intellectual elitism which needs to be watched. Parliament is being progressively downgraded. If we were to probe into the fundamental philosophy today of civil servants, not only in Canberra but in most countries, it would be: ‘Parliamentarians come and go, but we continue forever till the day of our retirement’.

I happen to be rather old-fashioned in one respect. One thing I do believe in is decorum. On many occasions I would be ashamed to bring my constituents to this House and to see the bear garden that exists here. We are here to do business, to speak, to listen and to be listened to. A good deal of the time that is wasted here is to be offset further by implementing a 4-day week. With what intensity are we using our time when we come to Canberra? We are not using it efficiently. If we were to ask an efficiency expert to pass judgment on us he would not give us a 15% pass for the way in which we used our time. For example, take yesterday. With all due respect to the deceased gentleman - and proper and glowing tributes were paid to him - should we have adjourned for the rest of the afternoon? I doubt it. Possibly an hour’s adjournment would have been an adequate expression of sympathy.

Mr Reynolds:

– What does it all mean anyhow?

Mr CONNOR:

– Precisely. I have heard debates here. I heard the Minister for

Education and Science (Mr N. H. Bowen) groan on this afternoon. The subject of his address was of importance. But how many of us were in the House? What are we doing with our time?

I would like to revert to the question of the Public Service and again I will deal with the question of committees. I come here periodically when Parliament is in recess. I am looked on as one of the rarer forms of animal life. What am I actually doing in Canberra? This is Parliament House; this is where I get the information I want. It is from this point that, fundamentally, I operate. For most of us Parliament is a place of casual resort to get out of as quickly as we can - and that goes for Canberra too. Three days a week is plenty, particularly with the commitments that I might have.

But let us consider the assistance that we are given by the Government. The Government - to put it in brutal terms - is not going to help us to put it out of office, and for that reason it will give us as little assistance as possible to dig ourselves in and to criticise it. We are here for the purpose mainly of rubber stamping what is put before us. The whole ritual and procedure of Parliament today are archaic. They are 3 centuries old and it is time we wiped them out utterly and completely. We live in a completely new age, so let us face up to it. Before anyone has the impetinence to put to this House, or to any individual member of Parliament, a suggestion of this type, let us examine ourselves. The results will not be to our credit because of the way that we are behaving.

Committees should not sit while the Parliament is sitting. It is like a 3 ring circus at times. Members are trying to dart around, scuttle around, between 3 committees while there is something else of importance going on in the House. Do not let us flatter ourselves that everything that is being discussed here is being discussed by us as statesmen. I have heard matters discussed here - and seen time wasted on tinpot parochial issues - that I would not be proud to have discussed in a local or parish pump council. Tonight is a case in point. If this is the national Parliament, let it be the national Parliament. How much time has been wasted? I have seen it here. I have seen debate groaning on day after day on customs proposals, and have realised the time that is wasted on them.

Mr Foster:

– And on procedures.

Mr CONNOR:

– Yes, procedures - the rituals. This place is as ritualised as a brolga dance. Let us consider the time that is wasted on divisions - on successive divisions. Why cannot we have proper electronic devices to deal expeditiously with recording our votes? Why cannot we abandon the archaic procedures that have been thrust on us? Every new member who comes here takes it as part of the deal - part of the routine. I have had 20 years experience in Parliament, both State and Federal, and I have seen a pretty tight ship run in the New South Wales State Parliament, and I want to see it here. I am not here to waste time. When I have finished my duties here I have corresponding duties like my colleague, the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones), and I deprecate the attack that was made on him by the honourable member for Melbourne.

Mr Calwell:

– The right honourable member.

Mr CONNOR:

– All right, the right honourable member. I am not here to deal with facetiousness, pseudo or actual. I know precisely the problems of the honourable member for Newcastle because I have exactly the same problems. The honourable member for the Australian Capital Territory (Mr Enderby), who has just been elected to the Parliament, has realised what has hit him like an avalanche. We have our problems too. In terms of enrolments I represent the third largest electorate in Australia. With men, women and children, and about 40,000 unnaturalised migrants, I have problems. Already in my term in the Parliament I have had 2 secretaries crack under the strain, and I have to nurse the third one along or she will crack too. All right, honourable members can laugh if they want to.

Mr Calwell:

– What sort of a nurse are you?

Mr CONNOR:

– I will only treat the honourable member for Melbourne with contempt. I am here to speak facts and I am speaking in stark seriousness. It is time that we took a pull on ourselves. We come here; we waste time. It is part of the deal. We are wasting time utterly and completely. I have heard repetitious debates that achieve nothing and make no contribution. Three centuries ago the major issue was one between the King and the Royal Prerogative on the one side and Parliament on the other. Today the major issue is between Parliament and the Executive, and Parliament is being progressively downgraded. A proposal of this nature will do more to downgrade it. Let us come here for as many weeks as we need. Let us come here for a 3 day week and, above all, let us have a fair go at the bureaucracy.

Mr DOBIE:
Cook

– In simple words I support the proposal. I do not agreed with the arguments that have been advanced by the honourable members for Oxley (Mr Hayden), Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) and Cunningham (Mr Connor), who, I think, at the moment is still objecting. I have found it difficult, however, to listen to such argument as was put forward by the honourable member for Oxley who regards the week away from Canberra as a week off. There would not be another member in this building - in this House or in the other place, which we still have to refer to it as - who would regard the time away from Canberra as a week off. However it is not my intention to continue with this type of debate.

I rise to discuss a simple matter relating to committees. I agree with the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner) that the proposals as put before us make it very difficult for joint statutory committees to meet. The Public Accounts Committee, of which I have the honour to be Chairman, cannot meet while the House is sitting. One of the problems we have already faced with the 4-day sittings arrangements we have until October is that by conducting the public sessions of the Committee, which we are required by this Parliament to conduct, certain members, who have to come from all States, have to stay in Canberra for at least 2 weeks at a stretch. I believe that we have to give greater consideration to the work of the existing joint parliamentary committees. If the proposals contained in the other paper that was tabled by Mr Speaker come into effect then I suggest that the hours as mentioned in paragraph 7 of the paper being discussed will not fit in with the correct and proper functioning of those committees.

I agree with the honourable member for Cunningham that one of the great jobs of this Parliament is that we, as parliamentarians, should have our eye on the effects of administration by the bureaucracy. It is something that is creeping on us so quickly that we should be concerned about it. In any rearrangement of times, days, and timetables we must consider very emphatically the role of the committees that this Parliament itself appoints. If I have understood the Leader of the House (Mr Snedden), I believe this is the time for me to give notice that the question of the sittings on the second Tuesday morning of the 2-week sittings will be the subject of an amendment from myself. I support the motion.

Mr WEBB:
Stirling

– I should like to reply to one or two of the points that have been raised, mainly by members on this side of the House. The honourable member for Cunningham (Mr Connor) said that if the proposals were accepted we would be sitting for less time. In my view, and on the figures that have been supplied to us, we would be sitting for more time under the proposal that is before the Parliament than under the existing hours. The hours have been set out not in a report that was submitted to the Parliament but in a report that was submitted by our own committee, and they reveal that this is so. Under the proposal we would be sitting longer hours than we would be sitting under the normal hours of sitting in the present circumstances. The honourable member for Cunningham said there are corresponding duties to perform over the weekend - that members had corresponding duties to do. That is only natural. But, for God’s sake, give those who have long distances to travel an opportunity to do those duties.

How can a member carry out correspondence duties when he must travel for more than a day to and from Western Australia. Take as an example the case of the honourable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr Collard). After he lands at Perth he must travel 300 miles to Kalgoorlie and then return over that same distance to Perth. The honourable member for Forrest (Mr Kirwan), after he arrives in Perth has to travel 100 miles or so lo Bunbury on a Friday or Saturday and then travel that distance again on a Monday back to Perth to return to Canberra. What about giving some thought to them? We do not get just a bus ride home to our State. It is not a trip of half an hour or an hour. It is a trip of pretty well a day. When Parliament sits on Friday, a member returning to Western Australia arrives in Perth very late on Friday night and gets home in the early hours of Saturday morning. Then, in the case of those honourable members I have mentioned, additional travel is involved in going to their home districts. For God’s sake, give some thought to those members. My remarks do not apply only to members representing Western Australia. The position of each of those members is bad, but other honourable members who live in country areas are affected as well.

I was surprised to hear the honourable member for Oxley (Mr Hayden) say that, if we adopted this proposal, we would be making a concession to the Government. Where is the concession to the Government? I look at this proposal as a concession to ourselves and to those whom we represent in our electorates. If we can sit for more time here and spend more time at home in our electorates, surely this should be our objective. Is this a concession to the Government? The proposal does not come from the Government. I see revealed before me the names of II persons who are members of the Standing Orders Committee. I see that 5 of those persons are members of my Party, 5 of them are members of the Government Parties and the remaining member of the Committee is Mr Speaker. This decision was a unanimous one. So, where is the concession to the Government? Also, I was surprised to hear the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) say that the majority of members from Western Australia would still go home of a week-end if the new proposed sitting procedure were adopted. He said that they were opposed to this proposal. Well, I have not seen one Western Australian member rise and say that he is opposed to it. All those to whom I have spoken support it. I do not know of one member from Western Australia who has revealed himself to me as being opposed to this new proposal. So, when the honourable member for Newcastle says that there is a majority of them, or some of them opposed to it, he should say who they are, because I do not know of them.

– Go to their homes.

Mr COPE:

– Do not talk rot, Fred. You are asking the impossible. I have advertised already the points at which I will be conducting interviews in my electorate. People do come to see me on Mondays at those points. Naturally, every honourable member is speaking from his own point of view as to the way in which this proposal will affect him. In addition to these interviews, I have 28 Labor branches in my electorate. This, I believe, is the largest number of branches in any electorate in Australia. They need quite a lot of attention. 1 hear a few interjections from members representing electorates in States other than New South Wales, lt is strange to hear those interjections coming from members from States where those members are appointed by their Executives. I would remind those honourable members, now that they have brought this matter up, that it is only in New South Wales that a democratic method of electing members is followed.

Let me say also that 1 am a member of an organisation in my electorate called South Sydney Community Aid. It meets on a Monday night. I attend it as often as I can. This organisation does a very good job for migrants. My friend, the honourable member for Riverina (Mr Grassby), addressed it last Monday. He knows that what I am saying is true.

Mr Grassby:

– It is -n outstanding body.

Mr COPE:

– lt does an excellent job. Also, I am president of the Redfern Lonely Hearts Club which meets once a week on Monday nights. Naturally. I would prefer to have my Mondays off so that, in the day time, I may interview my constituents, particularly pensioners, and so that at night I may attend my Labor branches and the other organisations which I have mentioned.

Mr KELLY:
Wakefield

– 1 am in favour of the change. 1 want to speak as Chairman of the Public Works Committee. I have consulted some members of the Committee and we can see no difficulty in the change. I would ask the House to have some regard to the position of honourable members who come from far away States, particularly the Queenslanders and the Western Australians. I think it is unreasonable to expect them to be shuttling uneasily across the face of Australia continually unless they have to. I do not think they have to and I have much pleasure in recommending the change to the House.

Dr GUN:
Kingston

– I just w.mt to raise a couple of points. We are not discussing the total number of hours that are to be sat in any particular year. The number of hours that are to be sat in any year has nothing to do with the passing or opposing of this resolution. This is in reply to points raised by the honourable member for Oxley (Mr Hayden) who said that if we pass this resolution we will spend less time in Canberra. The parliamentary sitting time is quite irrelevant to that. The amount of time we spend sitting in Parliament is surely solely related to the amount of business that the Government has before us. We are not discussing the total amount of parliamentary sitting time. We are discussing how we will best use our day. We have hud a number of reasons put up by the honourable member for Cunningham (Mr Connor) and the honourable member for Oxley. I do not think they are relevant. The honourable member for Oxley said that if we passed this resolution we would not spend enough time in Canberra. The honourable member for Cunningham said that if we passed it we would not spend enough time in our electorates. I think they have both missed the point. It is dependent on the amount of business the Government has before us. There is no relationship between the amount of sitting time and this motion. They have nothing to do with each other at all.

I wish to raise a couple of other points. The honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner) expressed concern about the sittings of committees. 1 think it is something that can be dealt with when we consider the times of sitting as a separate matter. Even apart from that, is this not one of the points of being here over the weekend? I hope that we are going eventually lo make the committee system more meaningful and that some of the time we spend in Canberra over the weekend, at least on Saturdays, will be devoted to committee work. Otherwise there might not be any point in being here. Surely that is one of the most important matters. Another point has not been mentioned by any honourable member. I hope that consideration will be given by the Library Committee and the Joint House Committee as to what facilities will be available to honourable members when they stay over the weekend. There are a lot of things we can do apart from normal parliamentary duties and committee work. I would appreciate the opportunity to be in Canberra a bit more. Sometimes 1 think it might be better if honourable members lived in Canberra. We would at least have a better idea of what is going on. Usually when I get here as an itinerant I have to ask one of the Press gallery what is going on in the corridors of power. When we are here a bit longer we might be able to find out for ourselves. Apart from that, I hope we can spend some time on research, committee work or library work and that the Library Committee and Joint House Committee will see to it that if we pass this resolution we will be able to spend time over the weekend in the library and making use of the facilities in the House.

Mr TURNBULL:
Mallee

– I have not been influenced by anything I have heard here tonight. I want to refer to one or two things that have been said. While it is in my memory I wish to refer to what the honourable member for Kingston (Dr Gun) has just said about committees sitting on Saturday. Surely this is only a dream. When Mr Chifley was Prime Minister in the time Labor was in office the House had to rise because on occasions there was not a quorum. We were supposed to sit till 4 o’clock on Friday but because there was not a quorum the House had to rise. Things are just about getting to that stage now. After all, everybody wants to get away early on a Friday. No-one is prepared to see it through. There are a handful of people here on Friday so what chance has the honourable member for Kingston got of getting honourable members here on a Saturday. It is just a dream that you cannot take into consideration. I have been here a long time and have seen what happens.

Let me refer to one or two other things that have been said. The right honourable member for Melbourne (Mr Calwell) said that this proposal suits Sydney and Melbourne members; it suits them admirably. He proved it suited Sydney and Melbourne because he supported it. Apparently most honourable members say they will not remain in Canberra. I would like to ses a show of hands to know how many would stay in Canberra but that cannot be done. Other honourable members say we could have committee meetings at the weekend. As far as their electorates are concerned, honourable members do not lose votes by being here. They lose votes by not being here. If I went to some function in the Mallee electorate when Parliament was sitting I would have - without exaggerating - a dozen people come to me and ask why I was not in Canberra. Apparently members say they are very pleased to be in their electorates because they are not important enough to be in Canberra to attend to their job. This is the way things work out. As the honourable member for Cunningham (Mr Connor) said, this is the place. It is also our place to be in the chamber as far as quorums are concerned. How often have I heard honourable members come into the chamber when there is a vote to be taken and say: ‘What are we voting on?’ No-one tells them. They just follow whatever” is happening. This happens all the time.

I listened very carefully to the honourable member for Oxley (Mr Hayden), who decided against the proposal for a reason that has nothing to do with the subject. My colleague, the honourable member for Northern Territory (Mr Calder), said that I do not live near airports. I do. I live near 2 airports located 30 and 68 miles away but the planes always run in opposite directions from the way I want them to. That is how the timetables work out. I heard honourable members say that the Western Australians have to sit in an aeroplane for 3i or 4 hours. That is a luxury. It is said that everyone puts his own case. Let me put mine. I have put it here often; let me put it again. The railway goes to the town where I live but it is impossible for me under the proposed system to go home at the weekend by public transport. Why should I not have the same opportunity as honourable members who live in Sydney and Melbourne? As soon as the House gets up on Friday - they will be asking for leave to get away early - they will go home. There is no doubt about that. Do honourable members think that of those from Sydney and Melbourne more than 2 or 3 will stay here? I think not. They will go home and there is not the slightest doubt about that.

When I think of sittings since I came here, when the Chifley Government was in office and whilst this Government has been in office, the main thing I think about is the late nights. They are the things we should overcome. After all, if we sit till 3 o’clock in the morning for 3 or 4 days and until 4 p.m. on Fridays what good are we in our electorates? I find the young men are the first to go to sleep in this House so do not blame the old men. I am speaking of the average. I would not have a chance of getting home. That would not matter very much. I want to say very definitely that I am against the proposition. I will vote against it because if I looked at what it says I could say: ‘This is fine - Tuesday 2 p.m. to 10 p.m.’ But this can be changed afterwards. It would be fine if it were 2 p.m. to 10.30 p.m., 10 a.m. to 10.30 p.m., 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. If that were right I would vote for it. But 1 turned the page of the report and found that this is subject to what the Government may decide to do. It could decide to sit, not till 10.30 p.m. hut till 5 o’clock in the morning because at 10.30 p.m. or 11 p.m. the question relating to the adjournment of the House would be put and if the Government wanted to carry on it could negative the question and the House would continue to sit just the same as ever. Therefore, that proposal will not overcome late night sittings and that is one thing that I want to overcome. 1 am an individualist in this job and I think I have some supporters. I want to do away with late nights. I am opposed to the proposition for a number of reasons which 1 will not detail tonight. When the proposition comes to the vote I will vote against it and that will prove my sincerity.

Mr ARMITAGE:
Chifley

– I oppose the proposition. I should like to deal with a few of the points that were raised earlier this evening. The honourable member for Angas (Mr Giles) stated that there was a very great need for the reform of the procedures of this House. I do not think that too many honourable members would disagree with that. He referred to committees and said that the day would come when the committee system would be instituted, but when I asked him by interjection whether he would support the committee system and would vote for it - he will get the opportunity pretty soon now - be did not answer. I do not think he is being fair dinkum in his remarks. Either he believes that this is a reform or he is trying to make it out to be a reform.

Let us look at the proposition. The most important thing is for this House to sit for as many months of the year as is possible as a forum and as a watch dog to ensure that the Executive does not have unbridled rein and unbridled opportunity to govern for the greater part of the year. I think we must look at the history of recent events. As the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner) said tonight, the Government tried to be too rigid in its method of handling the House during the last sessional period and it was faced with revolt. Accordingly it lost control and the House sat for 4 days a week instead of the traditional 3 days. The Government has suddenly realised that if it can continue the 4-day week sitting cycle the House, in normal circumstances, will meet for fewer months of the year than it has been meeting in the past, given the same amount of legislation to handle. The proposal is to concertina the sittings of the House so that the period in which we will be able to act as a watch dog on the Executive and determine the government of this country will be reduced. That is the motive behind it. lt is true that we would sit for the same number of days in a 12 weeks cycle if we sat for 4 days a week for 2 weeks on and I week off as we would if we sat for 4 days a week for 3 weeks on and t week off. But the important thing is that 4 sitting days a week would become a permanent arrangement to enable the Government to concertina the business of the House and to sit for fewer months of the year, thus depriving the public, the Press and this Parliament of the opportunity to act as a watch dog on the Executive. That is the base motive behind this proposal before the House. That is why the Ministry is so keen to see it implemented.

Without doubt there are other aspects to be considered. If the House met on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of the first week and Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of the second week difficulties would be created such as those mentioned by the honourable member for Sydney (Mr Cope) and other honourable members who have set days for interviewing constituents and for meeting the normal commitments that a member of Parliament has to meet. If the proposal were adopted it would be far better to sit for the same days on each week and for us to have the same day off, whether it be a Monday or a Friday, so that we would be able to make long term commitments. However, I repeat that the most important thing to look at is the way in which this proposal for a 4-day sitting week arose and the motive behind it. It will mean that overall the House will be in session for a shorter period and will be in recess for a longer period. The Government wants to concertina the sittings by meeting for 4 days a week instead of 3 days a week. The Executive has suddenly realised, as a result of the circumstances which arose during the last sessional period, that it has an opportunity to govern for longer periods by virtue of the fact that the Parliament will be in recess for longer periods. For those reasons I oppose the proposition.

Dr SOLOMON:
Denison

– A number of honourable members have indicated their support for the motion so 1 shall be reasonably brief. I believe that a certain amount of obscurantism is involved in what has been stated by the honourable member for Chifley (Mr Armitage) and I think we should get one or two simple facts of the matter straight. The proposal is that we sit on a certain number of days on what is essentially taken to be a 12-week cycle. It is true, as the honourable member for Kingstom (Dr Gun) has pointed out, that we are not held to that 12 weeks cycle and that, if necessary, we could increase the number of sitting weeks.

Let me draw some simple facts to the attention of those who do not appear to have them straight. The system under which we operated in the past was for a 3-day sitting week repeated 3 times and then we had a week off. The result was that there were 27 sitting days in a 12 weeks cycle which involved 18 trips to and from this place. For reasons which have been put forward, some of them specious and some of them correct, that developed into a 4-day sitting week repeated in the same cycle which, if we had gone the full term on it, would have given us 36 sitting days which still involved 18 trips to and from this place in a 12 weeks cycle. What is now proposed is 4 sitting days in 2 successive weeks with 1 week off making a 4 times effort for 12 weeks instead of 3. That will result in 32 sitting days and a mere 8 trips to and from this place.

I suggest that the most relevant aspect brought forward when the specific matter was under discussion was that brought forward by the Minister for Social Services (Mr Wentworth). He took up the points which had been made variously and at variance by several honourable members that they saw their main function, on the one hand, to be here and, on the other hand, to be back in their electorates. I think it was Duncan Sandys who once said that he was elected by the constituents of Streatham, if that was the electorate, to represent them in Parliament, not to represent the Parliament in Streatham.

I think that is true although I allow the fact that the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) or whoever else feels the same way, may hold the view that working for the electors in the electorate is his prime function. The fact of the matter is that some people hold that view and some people hold the other view. Both views relate to the proper work of people elected to this place, and therefore the point made by the Minister that the system now proposed will make the most efficient use of the time, whether it is here or there, is the best point that has been made in this whole debate. We cannot make a direct analysis of the travelling time involved without taking up a lot of time. Let us assume that the average travelling time is half a day. We would be proposing 32 sitting days with 8 half day trips. That is 36 days out of the electorate in a 12 weeks cycle. Under the system operating at the end of the last session we would be using 45 days.

This proposed arrangement is a compromise. There is no correct amount of sitting time. Presumably the logic of the honourable member for Chifley is that we should sit 2 days a week each week of the year and we would then be able to watch the Executive very closely indeed. I do not have quite the same fears. However, I understand his point of view even though I may not agree with him. I have used a little more arithmetic than most honourable members have tonight. In terms of a compromise We have offered to us now the best compromise. It seems to me that the honourable member for Chifley has not been very informed or else some of us are more stupid than we look. He could have been told that he has several more honourable members - and notably new members - on h!s side of the House who have been independently involved in trying to evolve a system such as this which will increase the efficiency of the operation of this place and thereby, some of us think, the workings of the Parliament and perhaps even the furthering of democracy in at least one of its manifestations. I regard it as absolute nonsense to suggest that the Executive has suddenly decided that it has not enough power and it wants to get more by putting up a system such as this. I think that is utter balderdash.

I take a point with the honourable member for Cunningham (Mr Connor). I cannot see that he can in any way substantiate his assertion that Parliament is being downgraded by the system which has been put before us. J cannot for the life of me see on any statistical or other count how that statement can be substantiated. If it can be I look forward to the point being made later during this debate. As to the matters of being here or in the electorate the question of compromise comes up again. I find myself totally unmoved by the remarks of the honourable member for Sydney (Mr Cope) and one or two other honourable members. I think he put his position most explicitly. He is used to meeting his electors on a Monday morning. He may be used to taking bath on a Saturday night but that is no reason For not having it twice a week or changing the time to Thursdays. That sort of inflexibility is something which the honourable member for Sydney should not be particularly proud of however long he may have practised meeting his constituents on a Monday, lt would be a simple mat’.er to change the meeting day to a Friday or a Saturday or some other day which will he suitable because of the result of the propositions which are now before us.

It is not often that I have found myself in disagreement in the short time that I have been here with my colleague the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner) but I cannot help commenting on his introduction of basically relevant - and I think specifically irrelevant for the moment - factors such as the number of days other people meet in Ottawa of in Westminster, where, in the cast of the Mouse of Commons, there are three or four times as many members as we have here and everybody lives in and around London. 1 cannot see that that is relevant to a negation of or opposition to the current proposition. I cannot help but feel with due respect that he may have a slightly jaundiced view of this matter.

Mr Turner:

– I just do not believe in fairy tales any more.

Dr SOLOMON:

– That may be so. 1 can sympathise with the point of view of the honourable member. I hope that 1 will nol have to hold it in 15 years time. I do not believe that there is anything more of real consequence which I can add except to take up a point which I think is relevant, even though we may debate this again on another section of this question, and that is the question of daily times. Obviously this matter affects people such as the members of standing committees. Honourable members will . see that it is proposed to have 2 days which begin in the afternoon. There are 2 days proposed to commence in the morning. Essentially that is the position which we now have. With a small fluctuation of half an hour or an hour or so at the end of the day as is now proposed the position is essentially the same. Even though the Minister raised the matter of hours as distinct from sitting days, these are of secondary importance compared with sitting days and the mechanics of their compression into 2 weeks. I put that point very strongly and I hope that there will be at least a majority, as there appears to be so far in this chamber, who hold essentially that point of view.

I do not know if it is of consequence to this debate but I might say that 1 do not think I have ever seen more than half as many people voluntarily in the chamber at this lime of the night in the time thai I have been here. Perhaps this means that there is some amount of interest in the procedures of the House as distinct from some other matters which appear to be more substantive.

Mr CLYDE CAMERON (Hindmarsh) 111.5] - Although 1 have not had many opportunities to say this I have always said that the Parliament is at its best when it can debate any subject on a non-party basis, with each man being free to speak as he wishes and to vote as his conscience directs and dictates. This is one of those rare occasions when this has happened during the 20 years I have been a member of this Parliament. This proposal was first put to members of this Parliament, but not to Parliament, 12 years ago by the then honourable member for Mackellar (Mr Wentworth). I supported the proposal then and I support it now. The Caucus of my Party by majority vote supported it then and I am glad to know that the Caucus of my Party has decided by majority vote that it will not bind all of its members to vote for it now when some members in the Caucus now, as was the case 12 years ago. disagree with the proposal. 1 think that this is a proposal that ought lo be decided according to how each honourable member feels. I think that the Parliament should always deal as a Parliament with any proposals affecting its own

Standing Orders and not as a rubber stamp for a government or a rubber stamp for an Opposition or any other party.

On this subject we are surely speaking as parliamentarians and as individual parliamentarians. We are speaking for or against the proposal according to the way in which we see the proposition as it will affect us - 1 hope not as individuals but as parliamentarians - and as we think it will affect us as representatives of our respective electorates. The present proposal is now inescapable because the Government has decided that it will use its numbers to alter the number of sitting days from 3 to 4 until this matter is determined. Therefore the present proposal is not the proposal we have been accustomed to in previous sessions. The present proposal for the purpose of this debate ought to be at once recognised as a proposal which envisages the sittings of 4 days each week, sitting from Tuesday to Friday with each Friday in Canberra for 3 consecutive weeks, followed by 10 days in the electorate each 4 weeks. The proposal is that we sit 4 days a week - the same as will be the case if this is defeated - for 2 consecutive weeks instead of 3, which will require honourable members to be in Canberra for only 1 Friday and 1 Monday, to he followed by 10 consecutive clays in their electorates each 3 weeks instead of each 4 weeks. Now we have 10 consecutive days in our electorates every 4 weeks. Under the proposal before us we will get 10 consecutive days in our electorates every 3 weeks. I would most certainly favour the second of the two proposals because, as one who believes that the electorate is entitled to proper attention, I can see that it will give me an opportunity to give my attention to my electorate on 10 consecutive days in every 3 weeks instead of 10 consecutive days in every 4 weeks. The only questions which remain are: Will I be neglecting my parliamentaryduties by giving my electorate this additional time? Does the proposal mean that I will have fewer sitting hours in the Parliament? If it does. I would hesitate to support it; but it docs not. If one examines the proposal one will see that, although it will allow us to spend more days in our electorates than is now possible over, say, a 12-week period, it will also allow us more sitting time in the Parliament.

Mr Webb:

– We will spend less time in aeroplanes.

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– Yes, we will spend less time in aeroplanes, as my colleague points out. Even though this proposal may require some of us to remain in Canberra for 1 weekend in every 3 weeks - I refer to those honourable members who live in distant States and isolated localities, a fact which would make a return to their homes on Friday night impossible - we still have our own private secretaries to hold the fort while we are away, although they could not do it as efficiently as wc would do it ourselves. This could perhaps produce a situation which the electorate would be entitled to complain bitterly about. However, if a matter of great urgency arose during our absence, regardless of whether it was on a Monday. Tuesday. Wednesday. Thursday or Friday, we would be fortunate in that we would have the facilities available to us to handle it. Our secretaries would be able to contact us and tell us of this matter of great urgency and wc would be able to attend to it either by dictating a letter by telephone or, on the other hand, taking down the particulars of the matter to be dealt with and dealing with it promptly in Canberra.

If the new programme results in some honourable members remaining in Canberra on 1 weekend in each 3-week period instead of travelling back to their electorates - as mo«t of us now have to do - it will force those honourable members to make a choice on that 1 weekend in every 3 weeks between wasting the Saturday or Sunday in idleness or resting - if the hours are to be as late as they have been in the past some honourable members might need the rest - or of using the 2 free days in each 3-week period in catching up with one’« reading or curving out research One of the main troubles with our joh is that we spend loo much time travelling hackwards and forwards between our electorates and the Parliament. Too much of our time is a’so wasted at weekends attending to things which do not improve our capacity to represent our electorates in the Parliament or improve us as parliamentarians

Mr Turner:

– I believe that laic nights impair our efficiency much more.

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– I agree with the honourable gentleman. This is something to which I will refer in a moment. I could not agree more. I agree with many of the things which the honourable gentleman said a moment or two ago. The trouble is that we cannot find enough time to do the reading and research which we ought to be doing. At least under this proposal we will get 1 free weekend in which to do them if we find that we cannot return to our homes because of the difficulties involved. The trouble is that too many of us are forced to throw away material which is posted to us for our reading. I would suggest that very few, if any, of us could honestly say that we have read every piece of material which has been sent to us through the post. Perhaps we should not be expected to read all of it. but T venture to say that in the process of throwing material in the waste paper basket because we do not have ‘he time to read all of it we have on many occasions thrown away material which it would have been to our own advantage and the advantage of the electorate to have read. We have In this place an excellent library and an excellent library research system. T would suggest that not one of us is so knowledgeable on any subject as to be unable to learn more from the material which is available to us in Canberra. When we are in our electorates on Saturdays or Sundays we are rarely free from the constant interruptions of telephone call”!, interviews and social engagements which do not improve our capacity to represent our nation in the national Parliament.

Unfortunately my good friend, the honourable member for Sydney (Mr Cope), is not present in the chamber. No doubt he is listening on the blower up top, which is one of the facilities we have in this place. The honourable member said that each of us in our vote on this proposal will decide the question according to our own individual interests - the innuendo being that we will not care two hoots about our colleagues. Of course, this is not what the honourable member meant to say. Nobody is more unselfish than the honourable member for Sydney. I have never known a more dedicated member of this Parliament than the honourable member for Sydney. It was not his intention to suggest that each of us would be so selfish as to determine our vote by how the proposal would affect us as individuals, and not to care two hoots about the position of our colleagues who live in distant States or isolated localities. This is not what the honourable meant. I did not quite understand exactly what he did mean, but I know that he did not mean that. I know that the honourable member for Sydney is one honourable member who has always had a very sympathetic and kindly understanding of the difficult position in which his colleagues who live in distant States or isolated areas, such as the honourable member for Darling (Mr Fitzpatrick) and the honourable member for Riverina (Mr Grassby), are placed. Looking around the chamber I also notice the honourable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr Collard). All of the honourable gentlemen who come from Western Australia are in this category. Looking further around the chamber I can see some honourable members from Queensland, such as the honourable member for Dawson (Dr Patterson) and the honourable member for Leichhardt (Mr Fulton), who come within this category. All of these honourable members are entitled to expect their colleagues to have some regard for their position. I have every regard far their position. I also know that nobody is more kindly and more considerate of another person’s position than the honourable member for Sydney.

I want to say that I agree with most of what the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner) had to say. He was completely right when he said that we have to stop sitting late hours. It is crazy to go on like we have been doing, sitting in this chamber until after midnight each night. We cannot do our job next day if we are required to sit as late as that. But the honourable member for Bradfield and I part company at that point, because he does not recognise in this proposition, as I do, an opportunity to escape sitting the crazy late hours that we have had forced upon us under the old system. 1 see in this proposition an opportunity to get rid of the necessity to sit such hours. I do not think that we should have such short sessions. The honourable member for Bradfield and I are again in perfect accord on this aspect. I do not like to see the Budget session begin as late as it did this year. I do not like to see the Parliament called together for only 1 day. which is what happened after the last general election. 1 do not like to see the Parliament get up in November while a lot of business has still to be done. I do not like to see important matters forced through in the dying hours of the last day of a session without debate in order to finish a week earlier. I know, as does the honourable member for Bradfield, that the Government loves to get the Parliament out of the way so that Ministers can make policy statements without having to face the Parliament the next week.

The cure does not lie in retaining the kind of hours which we have had in the last 20 years. I hope the kind of hours and the kind of sitting days we have had in the last 20 years will be replaced now by this proposition. During the whole of the past 20 years we have complained about the hours of sitting. This has not forced the Government to have longer sessions, it has not stopped the Government from sitting late- into the night, and it has not stopped the Government from closing down the Parliament, getting away from it all and treating Parliament as a rubber stamp. Perhaps the new proposal will achieve this. If it does not do so it will not have achieved any less than the old proposals and there is a good chance that it will achieve more. 1 remind the Parliament that everyone of us knows that the Government parties and Opposition Party have specialist committees operating. On our side we have 14 specialist committees. However, a great problem is to find enough spare time when the House is not in session to enable the committees to get down to the subject that we ought to be dealing with and to grapple with the programme or problems that we ought to be facing.

Last session while the House was sitting I was never able to give proper attention to the industrial committee’s consideration of the Workers Compensation Bill. The only time when we were really able to grapple with it was on 1 Saturday and 1 Sunday when most members of the industrial committee and expert advisers from interstate travelled to Canberra and we were able to spend the whole weekend working on the problem. The industrial committee got through more work in that 1 weekend than we had done for the whole of the year. I venture to suggest that if all committees recognised the great value of staying here for 1 weekend every month or 6 weeks - please yourself how often - occasionally to grapple with the problems that they should be considering they would find that their committees would do more work than they now do while munching a sandwich during meal breaks and hoping to give intelligent consideration to the matters which they have before them.

Mr Turner:

– They will not sit on Saturdays, Sundays or at all.

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– 1 think they will sit on Saturdays and Sundays, lt will happen only once in 3 weeks, i believe that our parties would be a lot better for this and that all of us would serve our respective parties better if we could set aside a weekend for this sort of work. 1 strongly support this proposition. 1 do so not only because it suits me personally. From the point of view of transport 1 can get to Adelaide and back almost as quickly as one can travel to Sydney and back, and perhaps more quickly than one can travel to Newcastle. 1 am not supporting the proposal for any particular personal reason associated with travelling, but I do have - 1 mean this and 1 know 1 speak for all honourable members on this side of the chamber - some consideration for our less fortunate colleagues who are separated from this place by greater distances. Although the honourable member for Grey (Mr Wallis) lives in South Australia, it will take him longer to get to his home from this place than it would take the honourable member for Perth (Mr Berinson) because of the unusual and awkward travelling schedules in South Australia. For those reasons I have much pleasure in supporting the proposition which has been put forward.

Mr Howson:

– Mr Speaker, is the 11 o’clock rule operating tonight?

Mr SPEAKER:

– No. That rule was brought in only as a sessional order and does not operate tonight.

Mr DONALD CAMERON:
GRIFFITH, QUEENSLAND · LP

– We have sat here tonight and witnessed opposition by the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner). I remind the House - particularly the honourable member for Bradfield - that on one or two occasions he has not even waited for the weekend to come before going home and when various legislative matters with which he has disagreed have been introduced we have seen him walk out of the chamber before a vote has been taken.

Mr Turner:

– And I shall do so again.

Mr DONALD CAMERON:
GRIFFITH, QUEENSLAND · LP

– The honourable member says that he will do so again, yet he is complaining about people going home for the weekend. Another matter which people seem to have forgotten very quickly relates to the honourable member for Oxley (Mr Hayden) who very early tonight was making comments about the Parliament and the way it should work. I think it is very appropriate to remind the House that the honourable member, with all due credit to him, obtained his degree in economics during the hours that Parliament was sitting. In those earlier years when he had a somewhat shaky seat he applied himself diligently to his electorate. But now that the boundaries, through redistribution, have given him a favourable seat he can see everything wrong with honourable members wishing to work in their constituencies. I realise that the time is passing very quickly and in any case I can see no reason why this debate has been prolonged to this hour, but I must say that contact with the people in one’s electorate means a lot. lt enables honourable members to come to this place ably representing the views of the people.

Tonight’s debate has, to a degree, been free from political tones. On occasions there has been political undercurrent. I am able and free, as a member of the Liberal Party, to use much more discretion in the casting of my vote than honourable members opposite can. I am always pleased to come here with full knowledge of how the constituents of my electorate feel on a particular subject. The views put forward by the honourable member for Chifley (Mr Armitage) and the honourable member for Cunningham (Mr Connor) are the views of men who have been here for a long time. They think that what went yesterday is good enough for today. Perhaps this type of policy characterises all their contributions to the Parliament. It is appropriate to remind honourable members that, comparing the session that has just passed with the session of last year, we have sat for over 100 hours more than we did in the corre sponding period 12 months ago. There has been a need to discuss further legislation and more Bills have been introduced. I hope that the Leader of the House (Mr Snedden) at 11.27 p.m. will see fit to call it quits for tonight to avoid many of the things honourable members have been complaining about, such as staying up late, and set a good example on the second night of the parliamentary sitting, because everyone has made up his mind anyway.

MR DALY:
Grayndler

– I want to add a few brief words to what has already been said. Firstly, I think that the real trouble with hold-ups in business started in this Parliament when the break of 1 week was introduced in the first place. I am one who favours sitting 4 days a week from the commencement of the session until it finishes. That does not suit the Government because it cannot work out its business on more than an hourly or a daily basis. In other words, it does not know what is going to happen in the Parliament from day to day. I think that the Government should set certain days on which the Parliament will commence and finish each year. As the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner) said, it should be able to announce the business for the session and, once having set it, Parliament should sit for 4 days a week, or 5, right through until the session is finished. What happens now is that we sit for a week, a fortnight or 3 weeks and then lose all track of the business. This is particularly so if Easter intervenes. A session may extend over months whereas if we had sat on a 4-day week or S-day week basis we could have finished it within a reasonable time.

Members of this Parliament - be they new members or older members - are very fortunate to be here at this stage of their political careers. When I first came to this Parliament and when air travel was introduced a member had the privilege of travelling once each week to Parliament and back. There was no going to Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide or Perth every weekend as one wanted. I remember one Western Australian member whose son changed from short pants to long pants and who did not see it happen because he was here for so long. When I first came to Parliament we sat from February to November! without any breaks. I might say that I held a borderline seat at that stage. By never going down to any functions I actually increased my majority. Let that be a lesson to a lot of honourable members who want to rush back to their electorates. The less they see of you, the bigger the majority you may get. I know because it happened to me. I mention these things because I think they are important.

It must be remembered that every member of the America Congress is allowed only 2 visits to his electorate per year when the Congress is sitting. A member must be at Congress whenever it is sitting. He cannot go back to his electorate over the weekend. Members can place too much importance on being in their electorates over the weekend for the simple reason that the public realises that they have a responsibility here. If the Parliament is sitting no elector desires his member to be absent. Honourable members will find that, if a telegram is sent in reply to an invitation to some function or other saying that they cannot attend because of parliamentary duties, it is twice as good as being at the function so far as votes are concerned. The greatest reputation one might have in a Parliament is that one is always there.

When there are breaks in the sittings from time to time one loses track of the business of the Parliament and cannot keep up with it, particularly if the break is an extended one. J do not know why members would want a break in the session except for the reason that the Government docs not have any business to bring on. Committees could then meet in the recess. As it is now, it is practically impossible for the committees, including party committees, to meet because of the sittings unless they meet during the lunch hour, which is not satisfactory.

All in all, I think it would be better for the Parliament to sit right through for 4 or 5 days a week and to finish the session. If we also had set times when we knew the Parliament would be sitting we would have a much better and happier situation. Because I know an amendment along those lines does not have much chance of being carried I do not intend to sponsor such an amendment. I intend to support the present proposals that are before the Parliament, not that I think they suit my point of view or are the best. I think we are lax in our duty in not sitting right through until we finish the session, as was done until comparatively recently. In that way we would be more satisfied. Our electors would see more of us and we would be better able to attend to our parliamentary duties.

Mr JESS:
La Trobe

– I do not wish to detain the House long but I feel that I should make some reply to the honourable member for Griffith (Mr Donald Cameron). He suggested that the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Turner) had, when he felt strongly on certain issues, taken certain action. 1 think his electors would support the action he has taken. He took the action he considered to be in the best interests of the Parliament as he saw what was occurring. I am also sure that the views that have been put forward tonight by the honourable member for Cunningham (Mr Connor), who is a man of long experience in the Parliament, are genuine ones and are based on experience. Those who have not been here for such a long time, including myself, do nol have that experience. I certainly feci that what he put forward was reasonable and justified.

I support the motion before the House but I must say that after listening to some of the speeches 1 have reservations. Like the honourable member for Bradfield, I wonder whether these committee meetings will take place at the weekend. I have seen and 1 am sure the Opposition has seen the situation where it is decided that a committee will sit on Friday or Saturday. Always the Queenslanders and the Western Australians are only too keen to stay because they do not go home but the Victorian or New South Welshman says that he has a function in his electorate to which he must go. The result is a very half hearted committee.

There are other small matters with which I am not in agreement. I do not particularly approve of private members’ speeches being curtailed by 5 minutes or whatever it may be. lt is up to the members themselves to exercise self-discipline in respect of their speeches. I agree with the criticism of members - they may include myself - who go on repeating the same thing just to see out 30 minutes. But most of the problems complained of in the running of the House appear to have been in the hands of the members themselves for a very long time. One of the things that has been forgotten is that most of the wrongs can be rectified if members of Parliament themselves act as I contend they should act. There are occasions where honourable members complain that the House is being detained beyond a reasonable hour. If they can persuade the majority of the members of the House that this is so, the decision is in the hands of the House itself. It can dictate when the sittings should terminate on a particular night. I heard the honourable members from South Australia say that they have been forced to sit late hours in the night. All I can say is that I and members on this side of the House have been forced to sit late hours in the night primarily because the Opposition wants to go on and on, mainly with the idea of forcing the Government to implement the gag so that the Press will be able to say in the morning newspapers that the Government gagged a certain issue.

I support the motion before the House. Quite frankly 1 do not think it will achieve anything. I do not think it is necessary. I do not think it will do the things that some of the newspapers contend it was intended to do, and that is to make the House more effective. The House in my opinion will become more effective only when the members of the Parliament decide that they have a responsibility and are prepared to accept that responsibility whatever their Party. I think one of the things that has been proved tonight, as the honourable member for Hindmarsh (Mr Clyde Cameron) illustrated, is that, when members of Parliament are allowed to get up and speak on an issue without being bound by Caucus or by some decision from somewhere else, even perhaps by some other men, the Parliament is able to get down to a discussion and is perhaps able to reach a solution that may be to the betterment of the people of this country. I support the Issue but I do not think it will solve the problems. I think those problems will be solved only when members of Parliament, including myself, decide that they have a right and responsibility to act on certain issues, perhaps above and beyond the decisions of Caucus.

Mr BENNETT:
Swan

– I rise to put the record straight as far as the Western

Australians are concerned. They are not unanimously in support of the proposal. There are those, such as myself, who oppose this motion. I represent, as does the honourable member for Stirling (Mr Webb), a Western Australian metropolitan electorate. I oppose this motion because I feel that what is before us is quite futile. It does not offer a solution to the problem. In fact, it represents a reduction in the hours of sitting which we experienced in the last session when we sat for 4 days a week. If it proposed that we sat for 3 weeks of 4 days or that we sat from the beginning of the session to the end of the session, I would support it. I am not naive enough to believe that there will be committee meetings on week ends. For example, in the football season honourable members will return to their electorates, saying that they have to attend to electorate matters, but we will find they will go to the football.

Even with the commitments set out here it will be possible for a Western Australian to return to his electorate for the week end. Of course, the honourable member for Forrest (Mr Kirwan) or the honourable member for Kalgoorlie (Mr Collard), because of their country commitments, will not be able to do so. But it will be possible for honourable members with metropolitan electorates to return to Western Australia for the week end. No doubt if this motion is carried I will be returning because I feel that I should be there to attend to my electorate commitments. A lot has been said about the time spent travelling. In Western Australia the amount of time some school children would spend travelling each day would be equivalent to the amount which some honourable members are protesting about spending weekly. Even some of our school buses I believe take 2 hours to get to and fro each day. No doubt, with this modern transport by which some of our members are travelling to the various States, they would return to their homes in the same time and with the same liability as the school child would experience in Western Australia. It is no great burden to have to travel long distances because of the modern transportation that we have, and I appreciate the facility.

I want to see the record straight because some honourable members were saying that they would support the resolution because they understood ail Western Australians were unanimously in support of it. I want to make it quite clear that they are not. Probably I would be the one exception. In a particular instance this proposal would give you 10 days away if you stayed away from your electorate for the weekend and 12 days if you travelled the day before and the day after. I do not intend to commit myself to this, because I feel I should be in my electorate. Not everybody agrees with me. The hour is late. I just wanted to make that point. I leave it at that.

Mr ANTHONY:
Minister for Primary Industry · Richmond · CP

– I do not want to detain the House for long but I want to make a couple of comments first of all to dispel any idea that it might be the wish of the Executive to bring in this new proposal to sit for 2 weeks and then to rise for a week. I do not support the proposal. I oppose it because I do not believe it is a practical proposition or that it will achieve what it is aimed to achieve. Since I have been in the Parliament I have seen various changes. When I first came here we sat continuously with 3-day weeks. I believe a 3-day week is the best sort of week for the Parliament. I believe we all become a little strained if we sit for 4 days a week. I think the performance of the last session, when we sat for 4 days a week, was undersirable and the best was not obtained from this Parliament. However experience showed that if we sat continuously for weeks, be it for 7, 8, 9, 10 or 11 weeks, everybody became a little irascible and cranky. People from distant areas were not given the opportunity to visit their electorates or to attend to them so it was decided - I think in about 1958 or 1959 - that we should sit for 4 weeks and then have 1 week off. Somewhere in the 60s it was decided that we should sit for 3 weeks and then have a week off.

I have noticed that on this sort of performance, sitting for 3 weeks then having a week off, we could not cope with the amount of work that was coming forward. Last year and this year it has been necessary to sit on Fridays - that is, to go into a 4 day week. This new proposal does have certain virtues. I think some of the other proposals, that is for altering the time of speakings, the sittings of the House and the quorum of the House, have great virtues; but to try to confine the work to 2 weeks and then have a week off, and to do that for the term of the session, would mean that we just could not get through the work. Parliament is the most unpredictable place imaginable. One is never certain when it will start or finish or what work will come forward. 1 believe the most important thing with Parliament is that if topics of national importance or of urgency come up there should be ample time for discussion so that all honorabe members can state their point of view. Although this proposal might give more debating hours, before long we will find ourselves having to sit on the second Friday in the 2 week period. That would mean that we would sit for 5 days in the second week, which I think is completely untenable.

The suggestion that honourable members will stay here over the weekend and participate in committees is quite unrealistic because anybody who can get home at the weekend will get home. When there has been a 4 day week everybody has been scrambling to get away on Fridays as soon as possible. To anybody who was here on Friday afternoons the place was almost like a morgue with barely a quorum to keep it going. If honourable members accept this new proposal it will not be long before there will be an extension and they will bc sitting on the second Friday and they will sit for more weeks. The trouble Ls we cannot always sit for more weeks because of periods when there are Senate elections or House of Representatives elections, or we come up to Christmas time. People think you can sit continuously. Honourable members would not accept that, because there is a need for breaks. There is a need for parliamentary teams to go overseas and to travel around Australia. For those reasons I am afraid that I cannot accept the proposal put forward.

Dr PATTERSON:
Dawson

– I will not detain the House for long. However, I am opposed to the motion. I am a country member. Many other honourable members have benevolently said that the motion is being moved for the country members. Let me say that if the Parliament sits on Friday I do not get home until Saturday afternoon. With all due respect to honourable members who come from Perth they can get home on Friday night, even though it is late at night. I take the same view as does the Minister for Social Services (Mr Wentworth) that a person’s responsibility is to the Parliament and to those people who elect him. An average of 30 to 35 people come into my office daily for 5 days a week. When I get home on Saturday or Friday I have enough work for 1 day and sometimes 2 days to try to catch up with because of the weekI have been down here. It is all right to say: ‘You can do this by telephone’. But I find that after 3 days and 3 nights in this Parliament one needs a break.

I agree with the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr Anthony). It is not often that we agree on something; it is very strange that we seem to be agreeing on this proposal. As the Minister said, if we sit for 4 days, before we know where we are we will finish up sitting for 5 days. One has only to witness what has happened in this Parliament when we have sat on a Friday. It is the greatest scramble to get pairs and to get out of the place as fast as possible. I am not going to fall for the argument that we are all going to stay here as a happy family over the weekend and do committee work. I have never heard anything so nonsensical. I guarantee that there will be few members here at the weekend whether the Parliament sits for 3 days a week or 4 days a week. Those who will be here for the weekend in most cases would be staying here anyhow.

I oppose the motion. I can see no advantage in it except in some cases where there is a problem of travelling, as in the case of the honourable member for Darling (Mr FitzPatrick). The honourable member has a major problem in travelling to and from his electorate. It takes him a far longer time to get here than it takes me and practically every other honourable member who lives in a country area. But I am not going to accept this benevolent attitude that we all stay back on Saturday and Sunday, that the Library will be open on Saturday and Sunday and that we will all have our committee meetings on Saturday and Sunday. Just watch the flights out of here on Friday afternoon. There will be no-one left in Canberra on Saturday or Sunday.

Sir JOHN CRAMER:
Bennelong

– I will not keep honourable members for very long. I think honourable members know that J am a very kindly and co-operative person. I like to fit in with what people desire. I have been torn between the ideas of the honourable members who live a long way away and want to get home and those who do not. 1 think what convinced me was when my friend the honourable member for Swan (Mr Bennett) disclaimed the idea and said that he would go home anyhow. I think this attitude is pretty right. I think honourable members will find that this will happen in any case. I do not think there is any real merit in the scheme now before the House. Perhaps honourable members are attracted to it because it is a new idea and they may gain some benefits here and there. But I believe that what appeals to most honourable members who are going to support the motion is that they will get home for a week every second week instead of every third week. Of course, these honourable members want to get home. But I cannot see that we are going to carry out any further parliamentary duties under the proposed scheme. I think that the proposed scheme will disorganise the arrangements in our electorates that have been carried out for many years.

It is not easy to get people to change attitudes and patterns that have been adopted over many years. They wonder why a change is necessary. I would not mind sitting in the Parliament for 4 days over a period of 3 weeks, in the same way as we have been doing, but even that is not a very effective method. I would not mind sitting for 3 days a week right through the session, as has been suggested. More work might be done in that way. However, I agree with the Minister for Primary Industry (Mr Anthony) that that does involve difficulties for some members and it might not result in efficiency. I have given a great deal of thought to the matter. Frankly 1 do not see any great benefit in the propoasls. I therefore inform the House that even though I am co-operative, I propose to vote against the motion.

Motion (by Mr Fox) proposed:

That the debate be now adjourned.

Mr Snedden:

– I ask for the indulgence of the House for a few minutes, Mr Speaker. I wanted to take the first point, point (a), to a vote tonight. Honourable members have spoken about it and all honourable members have the points in their minds, lt therefore seemed proper to take it to a vote tonight. However, time has gone on and it is now 11.50 p.m. I therefore asked the Government Whip to move the adjournment of the debate. However, as we are not voting on party lines but as individuals, I would be very happy to ask the Whip to withdraw the motion for the adjournment of the debate so that we could take it to a vote tonight.

Mr Fox:

– I withdraw my motion, Mr Speaker.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– I wish to take only 2 or 3 minutes of the time of the House. I do not know how many Ministers nave spoken in this debate. Some very interesting points have been made. Personally, I am opposed to the proposals. I do not believe that they will assist the general working of the House or make the working of the House more satisfactory from the points of view of private members and the Ministry. The proposals involve virtually 8 consecutive days of sitting. This would establish a very crowded schedule and a very busy 2 weeks. Whatever may be the intention of the 10.30 p.m. rule, I am sure that the result would be a large number of late nights without any relief for members. 1 believe it would make it very difficult to provide time for parliamentary committees and for Cabinet to meet. This would be even more difficult to achieve than is the case at present. It has been said that one of the facts of life is that as soon as Friday arrived, under the proposals many members would be pressing for pairs in order to get away. It may be that some would be pressing not to return on the following Monday when the House would again be sitting.

Mr Uren:

– But you live in Canberra.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– In that case you may have thought that I would be more in favour of the proposals.

Another point arises which is of importance to private members. I refer to the number of weeks in a year in which private members have access to Ministers because the House is sitting in those weeks. I believe that the proposals we are considering would reduce the number of weeks in which private members would have that kind of access to the Executive of the Government. I believe that this is a significant reason for opposing the general matter which is before the House at present.

Mr COLLARD:
Kalgoorlie

– No doubt it will surprise you, Mr Speaker, to learn that I intend to support the proposition before the House. I have listened with a great deal of interest to honourable members from both sides of the chamber who have put their views in this debate. The honourable member for Cunningham (Mr Connor), the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) and the honourable member for Sydney (Mr Cope) expressed their views as to the convenience they would wish all honourable members to enjoy. 1 feel quite sure that those members who spoke early in the debate will support this proposition now that they have heard of the difficulties and misfortunes that face some of us who are not fortunate to live closer to Canberra than we do.

J am not naive enough to believe that just because this motion is carried we will not sit the hours and days in this Parliament that the Government decides it wants the Parliament to sit. The Government will make the decision because it has the numbers, and I suggest that when we are the Government after the next election and we have the numbers the House will sit the times we want it to sit. Therefore, in that particular situation, I think that those members who have spoken as though this would not be the case are drawing red herrings across the path.

The Minister for Social Services (Mr Wentworth) and others have said that there are 2 particular points concerning the work of a member. They have said that a member is elected to represent, in this Parliament, the people of his electorate. I agree with them completely. This is so, but I suggest that if a member is to represent all the people of his electorate and not just the electors themselves he has to give the people the opportunity of presenting cases to him and of discussing their problems with him to make him aware of how he is going to represent them in this House. At present with the existing sitting hours many members who represent far flung electorates which extend for many miles do not gel the opportunity of seeing their constituents nor do their constituents get the opportunity of seeing their members and presenting cases to them. This is one of the reasons why I support the motion.

Personally I would be no more inconvenienced by the proposed sitting times than I am by the existing situation. 1 have become accustomed to getting home on Friday nights or Saturday mornings and leaving again on Sunday nights. The people of Kalgoorlie have become accustomed to seeing me on Saturdays or Sundays when the House is sitting. Perhaps if I adopted the attitude adopted by the honourable member for Newcastle, who objected to his schedule enabling him to see people on Monday being upset.. I would object to the motion because I might be wanting the people of my electorate to see me during the week when I was not in Parliament. 1 am a bit diffident about putting this because I may be accused of being somewhat selfish. But if I want to go to the far north of my electorate it takes me 2 days travel to get there and back. In other words it is impossible for me to undertake such a journey over the weekend. If I want to go to other parts of my electorate where there is no air travel available it takes me 2 days by motor car to get there and back. Honourable members will appreciate that I will find it easier to contact the people of my electorate under the proposed sitting times than I do under the existing arrangements.

Mr Jess:

– You may lose your «eat.

Mr COLLARD:

– I do not know. It may be, as the honourable member for Grayndler (Mr Daly) said, that if I am around the place too long I will not be around here very long. Irrespective of whether that is so, I think the House should take some cognisance of the fact that the people of Australia should have an equal right, if they live in the country, to see their members, to discuss with them their problems and to present cases to them, as do people who live in city electorates or in electorates where members can get to them or they can get to the members more frequently. For that reason I support the motion.

Question put:

That sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph (1) of the motion moved by the Leader of the House be endorsed in principle (vide page 172).

The House divided.

AYES: 79

NOES: 33

Majority 46

(Mr Speaker- Hon. Sir William Aston)

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

That sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph (1) be endorsed in principle.

Debate (on motion by Mr Foa) adjourned.

House adjourned at 12.13 a,m. Thursday.

page 211

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE

The following answers to questions upon notice were circulated:

Papua and New Guinea: Long Service Leave (Question No. 1259)

Mr Barnes:
Minister for External Territories · MCPHERSON, QUEENSLAND · CP

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

Long service leave is due to an agreement worker who has 5 years’ continuous service with the same employer.
The provisions for long service leave were introduced into the Native Employment Ordinance in September 1967 to take effect from September 1966. On this basis the first long service leave entitlement will become due after September 1971. There is however provision for the grant of pro rata long service leave on completion of 3 years’ continuous service with the same employer. Statistics on the number of workers to whom pro rata long service leave has been granted are not available.

Papua and New Guinea: Radio Broadcasts for Political Purposes (Question No. 1260)

Mr Barnes:
CP

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

(a) 29th June 1969
1. 7th May 1970.
(a) and (b)-

No one from the Mataungan Association has sought to broadcast from Radio Rabaul.

On 25th March 1970 on the initiative of the Rabaul Station Mr Rumet, a Mataungan Leader, and Mr Tobunbun, a member of the Gazelle Local Government Council, were interviewed for a programme on the referendum issue.

On 19th May 1970 the Warmaram Group sought an interview programme to explain the group’s objectives. This was arranged as requested.

Candidates for Local Government Council elections.

Nuclear Reactors: Operating Costs (Question No. 1272)

Mr Stewart:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice:

What are the comparative (a) capital (b) operating and (c) maintenance costs of500 MW (i) CANDU and (ii) SGHWR type reactors.
Has any estimate been made of the number of (a) CANDU and (b) SGHWR type reactors, which could be constructed in Australia; if so, what was the estimate.

Mr Swartz:
Minister for National Development · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · LP

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

Tenders for the Jervis Bay nuclear power station closed on15 June, 1970. They included tenders for the CANDU and SGHWR types but it will not be possible to give accurate up-to-date relative costs for these two types until the tenders have been fully’ evaluated.
No. It isnot possible to give an estimate of the number of these types of nuclear stations which can be constructed in Australia. When generating authorities decide to install nuclear power plants in their own systems they will almost certainly call tenders on a world wide basis as the Australian Atomic Energy Commission has done in the case of the Jervis Bay project. Decisions regarding the type and number of nuclear stations to be selected will be based on technical and economic grounds.

Former Members of Parliament: Positions Held (Question No. 1276)

Mr Daly:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice:

How many former Senators and Members of the House of Representatives in receipt of a Parliamentary pension at present occupy positions in the diplomatic service, the judiciary or the Government service.
What is (a) the name of each person concerned, (b) the nature of his position, (c) the salary received and (d) the amount of any allowances paid.

Mr Bury:
LP

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

Eleven. (Note - Government service has been taken to mean Commonwealth Government Service.)

(2)

Papua and New Guinea: Workers’ Compensation (Question No. 1279)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for External Territories, upon notice:

How many widows of New Guinea workers have not been paid the full amount of employees’ compensation prescribed for the fully dependent widow of an employee whose death was caused by bis employment.
How many of these widows received (a) part compensation and (b) no compensation.
How many of those who received (a) pan compensation and (b) no compensation agreed to the settlement, and in how many of each such cases was the matter determined by a District Court.

Mr Barnes:
CP

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

In one case the widow of a New Guinea worker elected to accept an offer of a sum less than the amount prescribed for payment to a widow fully dependent on an employee who died from injury by accident arising out of or in the course of his employment.
(a) One; (b) None.
(a) and (b). The widow who received part compensation elected to accept the settlement without taking the case to court. There was no other case requiring settlement or determination by a court.

Wheat: Advance Payments (Question No. 1292)

Mr Collard:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice:

Does the Government intend to reduce the first advance payment on wheat of the coming harvest and subsequent harvests.
If so, what consideration was given to the financial effect which such a reduction would have on the economic viability of farmers in shires which are predominantly dependent on wheal for their income.

Mr Anthony:
CP

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

I announced publicly on 26th February 1970 that the Government had agreed to maintain the rate of first advance payment at $1.10 per bushel, less freight, for the next (1970/71) season on deliveries of wheat to the Australian Wheat Board within the State quotas, totalling 318 million bushels, as recommended by the Australian Wheat Growers’ Federation and endorsed by each of the State Governments.
No consideration has been given to the level of first advance for subsequent seasons. It is a policy matter which will be examined at the appropriate time and consideration will be given to all relevant circumstances.

Professional Engineers (Question No. 1297)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

Is it a fact that there are approximately 1,000 advertised vacancies in Australia for professional engineers.
Is it also a fact that there is a large amount of engineering work not being carried out in Australia as a direct consequence of the acute shortage of professional engineers and that Australia is spending something like $50m per year for overseas designs which could be carried out by engineers in Australia.
If the position is as stated, will he take immediate steps to upgrade the salaries now payable to professional engineers with the object of encouraging professional engineers to remain in Australia and encouraging students to undertake engineering courses.

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

There is no official register of all advertised vacancies for professional engineers in Australia. However, the Professional Employment Offices of the Department of Labour and National Service record those vacancies for professional engineers notified by employers. These vacancies numbered 284 as at the end of May 1970.
No official statistics are available on the amount spent in Australia on overseas designs each year. However, as other factors are involved, such expenditure does not necessarily reflect a shortage of professional engineers in this country.
I have no authority to determine rates of pay for professional engineers. This is a matter for negotiation between the associations and employers concerned and, failing that, for arbitration by the appropriate arbitral authorities.

Commonwealth Public Service: Appointments to Divisions (Question No. 1300)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Prime

Minister, upon notice:

How many (a) First Division and (b) Second Division appointments were made in the Commonwealth Public Service in each year since 1950.
How many of the First Division appointments were made from (a) the Second Division, (b) the Third Division and (c) outside the Commonwealth Public Service.
How many of the Second Division appointments were made from (a) the Third Division, (b) the Fourth Division and (c) outside the Commonwealth Public Service.

Mr Gorton:
LP

– The Public Service Board has supplied the following answer to the honourable member’s questions:

First Division

The table below shows the number of appointments to the First Division from -

Officers of the Second Division;

unattached officers of the Commonwealth Service; (this group includes for example officers who have accepted appointment as a representative of the Australian- Government in another country, officers on leave while in the employment of another government, or officers who have accepted employment in a Commonwealth authority.)

persons outside the Commonwealth Service.

Second Division.

Figures relating to promotions to Second Division positions between 1930 and 1960 cannot be supplied without extensive research. However, available records show that appointments between 1950 and 1960 consisted of 1 in 1953, 3 in 1955, 2 in 1956, 2 in 1957 and 4 in I960.

The table shows the number of promotions and appointments to the Second Division in each year between 1961 and 1969.

Second Division Appointments made from

officers arc adequately covered by internal training courses and by opportunities made available for attendance at courses conducted by the universities, colleges of advanced education, technical colleges and such bodies as the Administrative Staff College. The form and methods of staff training in the Commonwealth Service are constantly under review and new arrangements are, and will be, developed as necessary. In accordance with the provisions of the Public Service Act, the system of promotion to senior positions in the Commonwealth Service is already directed to the selection of the most efficient officer. Efficiency is defined in the Act as:

Special qualifications and aptitude in the discharge of the office to be filled, together with merit, diligence and good conduct.’

Commonwealth Public Service: Proposed Management Training Courses (Question No. 1301)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

Will he consider the establishment of an independent public service college, open to all officers of the Commonwealth Public Service, for the purpose of providing a wide range of management training courses, the object of the training being to ensure that, through careful selection for promotion, the senior positions in the Service are ultimately filled by men who are most highly qualified in an administrative and managerial capacity.

Mr Gorton:
LP

– The Public Service Board has advised that the answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Under section 17 of the Public Service Act 1922-1968 the Public Service Board has the statutory duty to devise means of improving the training of officers of the Commonwealth Service. The Board has kept in close touch with developments in other countries in relation to the establishment of colleges of this nature, which include management training courses in their curricula. The Board has taken the view that, at this stage, arrangements for the training in management of

Australian Army: Application Rejection Rate (Question No. 1311)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for the Army, upon notice:

How many persons made application to join the Regular ‘Army in each of the lust 10 years.
What (a) number and (b) percentage of applicants was not accepted in each year.
What (a) number and (b) percentage of applicants was rejected in each year in each of the categories of reasons for rejection for which his Department has records.
What (a) number and (b) percentage of applicants failed the medical test on the grounds of hearing ability in each of those years.

Mr Peacock:
Minister Assisting the Prime Minister · KOOYONG, VICTORIA · LP

– The answer to the honourable members question is as follows:

and (2) The following table sets out the number of enlistment applications received and the number and percentage of applications rejected in each of the last 10 years:

The following table sets out the number and percentage of applicants rejected, in each category of rejection, in each of the last ten years:

The statistics sought are not readily available and would involve manual checks of thousands of individual records.

Australian Army: Expenditure on Recruitment Activities (Question No. 1312)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for the Army, upon notice:

What (a) amount and (b) percentage of total expenditure has been spent by his Department in each of the last 10 years on recruitment activities.

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

Army expenditure on recruitment activities in each of the last 10 years -
Percentage of total expenditure spent by the Department of the Army on recruitment activities in each of the last 10 years -

In addition, the Director General of Recruiting, Department of Defence has expended the following amounts on advertising through all media on Army recruiting:

Department of the Army: Civilian Staff Content (Question No. 1313)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for the Army, upon notice:

What was the ratio of civilian to military personnel in his Department in 1960, in 1965 and in the last year for which figures are available.

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

The approximate ratios of civilian to military personnel including ARA and CMF on full time duly but excluding PIR in the Department of Army on these dates were:

Civilian figures used in determining these ratios did not include seasonal staff, persons on leave without pay or native labour in Papua and New Guinea Command.

Australian Army: Tests on Applicants (Question No. 1314)

Mr WHITLAM:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for the Army, upon notice:

What medical, educational, psychological and other tests arc applied to persons who apply to join the Army.
What criteria are applied and what minimum levels of attainment are required for each of these tests.

Mr Peacock:
LP

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

and (2) The following tests and examinations are administered to applicants seeking enlistment in the Army:

Medical:

The medical test consists of an applicant filling out a medical history questionnaire, followed by a comprehensive physical examination by a medical board constituted of two doctors.

The aim of the examination is to determine the applicant’s ability to serve in any geographical location and his functional efficiency to cope with the physical demands of Service life.

Psychological cum Educational tests:

This examination is administered by a psychologist attached to the Recruiting Centres. Tests used are:

For Other Ranks- tests of literacy, arithmetical knowledge and reasoning ability. The literacy level required is comparable to that attained by the average student in grade 4 primary school.

For Officers - tests of reasoning ability and speed of comprehension standards. No literacy test is administered as minimum education standards are set. They are:

Officer Training Unit - Intermediate Certificate

Officer Cadet School - Leaving Certificate

Royal Military College - Matriculation

Officer candidates are also interviewed by a Selection Board, and Other Ranks by an Enlistment Officer to assess their general military potential after they have satisfactorily passed the medical and psychological examinations.

Australian Army: Comparison of Minimum Standards with Other Countries (Question No. 1315)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for the

Army, upon notice:

Can he say in what instances the criteria or minimum requirements applied in his Department’s medical, educational, psychological and other tests differ from those applied by the Armed Forces of the United States of America, Britain and Canada.

Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honour able members question is as follows:

No exact data comparing the standards in the four countries is available and in any case accurate comparisons of this nature between countries, particularly as regards education, arc very difficult to make. The medical classification used by the Australian Army is derived from the standards developed in Canada and also adopted by the United Kingdom. Standards in the USA are similar, by and large, to ours. In USA. the educational level is set at ‘high school graduate’. This is the level generally attainedat the age of 17 or 18 years. No formal educational standard is set in the United Kingdom. Applicants are psychologically tested and if a satisfactory Selection Group Rating (approximately SGR3) is attained he may be enlisted. This system is similar to the Australian method. Canadian entry standard is Grade Vlll, or the educational level reached by a child of 13 years. It is the entry qualification for high school. In summary, the minimum medical standards for enlistment are about the same in the four countries, the minimum psychological standard is higher in Canada and the minimum educational education level higher in USA and Canada.

Australian Army: Intelligence Corps (Question No. 1319)

Mr Barnard:

asked the Minister for the

Army, upon notice:

What is the strength of the Australian Army Intelligence Corps.
How many members of the Corps have resigned since 1 January 1969, and what were their ranks.

Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honour able member’s question is as follows:

For reasons of security i am not at liberty to divulge this information publicly, but I have written to the honourable member privately on this part of the question.
14 members of the Australian Army Intelligence Corps have retired early, resigned or transferred to the Citizen Military Forces. They include - 1 Lieutenant Colonel

S Majors 5 Captains 1 Lieutenant 1 Warrant Officer 1 Private.

Plan for Australian Development (Question No. 1325)

Mr Grassby:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice:

Has his Department drawn up an overall plan for Australian development.
If so, will he table the plan in the House and arrange time for it to be debated.

Mr Swartz:
LP

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

A document has been prepared which discusses in depth developments in natural resources, particularly minerals, forests, water and energy.
The matter is under consideration.

Oil Imports (Question No. 1326)

Mr Grassby:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice:

What was the (a) quantity, (b) value and (c) country of origin of oil imported into Australia for refining in each of the last 3 years.
What are the names of the importers.

Mr Swartz:
LP

– The answer lo the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The quantity, value aud country ot origin of crude oil and other refinery feedstock imported into Australia in each of the last 3 years, as reported by the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics is given in the attached tabic.
The names of importers are noi published.

Decentralisation (Question No. 1329)

Mr Kennedy:
BENDIGO, VICTORIA

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

Which State governments have submitted reports to the Commonwealth on costs or other aspects of decentralisation in accordance with projects of the Commonwealth-Stale Officials Committee on Decentralisation.
With what subjects do these reports deal.
When were the reports submitted to the Commonwealth.
Which reports have been made available for non-official study, and which have been restricted for study by officials alone.

Mr Gorton:
LP

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

Whilst all States participate hi the deliberations of the Commonwealth-State Officials Committee on Decentralisation, the only States carrying out studies for the Committee are New South

Wales and Victoria. Reports on some studies have been completed by those two Slates. The procedure is not that reports are submitted by States to the Commonwealth Government, but that they are made available to the Commonwealth-State Officials Committee on Decentralisation, or its Technical Sub-Committee.

Both New South Wales and Victoria have completed reports on what are referred 10 as their “private costs” studies. The.: studies are aimed at discovering why firms made particular location decisions and the nature of the particular costs flowing from such decisions.
The Victorian “private rash’ report was circulated to all members ot the Committee, including Commonwealth representatives, in October 1968. The New South Wales “private costs” report was made amiable to the Technical Sub-Committee in May 1970 (all members of the parent Committee are represented on the Technical Sub-Committee).
The New South Wales private costs report has been published by that State’s Department of Decentralisation arid Development, under the title: “Report on Industry Location Survey”. The Victorian private costs report has not been made public.

Hops (Question No. 1331)

Mr Duthie:
WILMOT, TASMANIA

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice:

Is he able to say whether Australian brewers are able lo make known very soon their requirements of hops for the next season.
Can he say if the brewers intend to import hops and extract as in the past; if so, in what quantities.
ls there a large stock-pile of hops, especially in Tasmania, where 80% of Australia’s hops are grown.
If so, will the Government move to restrict the importation of hops and extract.
In view of the export of hops to the United Kingdom and Europe, especially the Pride of Ringwood variety, at a price lower than the local price, will the Government consider subsidising the difference between the two prices.

Mr Anthony:
CP

– The answers to the hon ourable member’s questions are as follows:

1 understand from representatives of the Tasmanian industry that substantial purchases of hops from both the 1969 and 1970 Australian crops could reduce the quantity taken up from next season’s crop. In addition, the conversion of hops to extract by a major brewery resulting in a considerable lessening of hops used and the move by growers, both in Tasmania and Victoria, from the low alpha resin varieties to Pride of Ringwood and similar high alpha resin types could also have an effect on brewery requirements.
Importations of both dried hops and hop extracts have substantially decreased in recent years as the supply of Australian grown hops has been approaching brewers’ requirements. It has been the practice of brewers to import only hops required for specialised beers and relatively small quantities of extract. The value of imports of hop cones and lupulin has declined from about Sl.lm in 1965-66 to $129,000 in 1968-69 and to $38,000 for the 9 months ended March 1970. Import clearances of hop extract were valued at only $1,642 for the 10 months ended April 1970.
I have been informed by industry representatives that the current surplus of hops in Tasmania is between 2,000 and 3,000 bales (bale average 250 lbs).
The domestic industry presently enjoys tariff protection against imported hop cones, lupulin and hop extracts at the following levels of duty:

All imports this financial year have been on a duty paid basis, that is to say there have been no admissions under Customs By-law.

Imports of hops and hop extract at present levels do not appear to pose a major threat to the local growers nor would prevention of imports do much to alleviate their problems. However, in the event of it being the industry’s view that the current level of tariff protection is inadequate the way is open for an approach to be made by the industry to my colleague, the Minister for Trade and Industry, seeking an investigation by the Special Advisory Authority. I believe that, in 1968, when industry problems were discussed by Victorian and Tasmanian hop grower representatives with officers of the Department of Trade and Industry, the possibility of a combined approach by hop producers and factors to the Departments of Trade and Industry, Customs and Excise and Primary Industry for assistance in combating low priced imports of hops and hop extract was a method of action considered. However, no such approach along these lines has been made.

The Government has not considered the payment of a subsidy on exports of hops. To do so could encourage an expansion of production which would be contrary to efforts by the industry to regulate production to a level compatible with domestic requirements and to rationalise distribution and prices. It is also regarded as important not to encourage growers to produce for export in view of the difficulties that have been encountered in finding suitable overseas markets for the quantities and types of hops presently available.

Pneumatic Shearing Equipment (Question No. 1334)

Mr Kirwan:
FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice:

Is it a tact that pneumatic shearing equipment has been invented and developed in Western Australia and that this equipment has won the New Implement Award of Merit for Australia and New Zealand’ because it represents a significant breakthrough in engineering design.
Could equipment of the new design bring savings and greater efficiency to those involved in woolgrowing.
Is he able to say whether the organisers of the Kiev Trade Fair have requested that this pneumatic equipment be demonstrated in the USSR.
Will the Government recognise the value and merit achieved by the inventors of this equipment by providing a research and development grant or some similar grant to assist production of the equipment for the benefit of farmers and graziers.

Mr Anthony:
CP

– The answers to the honourable members questions are as follows:

Pneumatic shearing equipment has been developed in Western Australia which won the Australian New Implement Award at the 1969 Orange National Field Day and the New Zealand New Implement Award at the Hamilton (NZ) Field Day in March 1970.
I understand that the equipment has certain advantages over traditional shearing machines, particularly in flexibility of handling. I am advised that there does not seem to be any evidence that the new design will bring savings and greater efficiency.
Yes, I understand that the Company involved has accepted an invitation to display the equipment at the Kiev Trade Fair.
The inventors of this equipment were not eligible for a research and development grant under the conditions laid down by the Industrial Research and Development Grants Act 1967.

Building Trade: Long Service Leave (Question No. 1340)

Mr Hansen:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

Have workers in the building industry filed a claim for recognition of their eligibility for long service leave.
Will he consider introducing legislation to grant long service leave to building workers and other federal award casual workers, particularly in the Territories under Commonwealth control in Australia.
Will he confer with his State counterparts with a view to establishing a national fund for reserving credits for long service leave payments for these workers.

Mr Snedden:
LP

– The answer to the honourable members question is as follows:

1 am advised that no such claim has been filed with the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission.
and (3) This is a matter for determination in accordance with the provisions of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. The nature of arrangements that might be made, including consultations between the parties, would depend on the terms of the decision of the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission.

Exposure to Asbestos (Question No. 1280)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

Is it a fact that the Waterside Workers Federation has told the Federal Advisory Committee on Waterfront Accident Prevention that more should be done to allay the fears of workers handling asbestos.
Is it a fact that workers exposed to asbestos in their job face the dual threat of the lung scarring pneumoconiosis, of their calling, asbestosis, and the dangers of lung cancer associated with the inhalations of asbestos fibres.
Has his attention been drawn to a recent study in the United States which reveals that 50% of all workers handling asbestos insulation showed X-ray evidence of asbestosis, and that one in every ten deaths was caused bymesotheliona, a cancer of the lung pleura, so rare that it strikes only one in 10,000 in the general population.
If the position is as stated, will he take appropriate steps to ensure that all employers under Commonwealth jurisdiction provide respirators that will properly filter out the invisible as well as visible asbestos fibres floating in the atmosphere in ail places of work where men are required to handle asbestos.

Mr Snedden:
LP

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

I am advised that the Waterside Workers’ Federation has drawn the attention of the Federal Advisory Committee on Waterfront Accident Prevention to the fact that waterside workers on occasions handle asbestos. In accordance with a long-standing arrangement, the matter was referred for consideration to the Occupational Health Committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council, and the Occupational Health Section of the School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine.
Advice from the School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine is that workers exposed to airborne asbestos fibres can be exposed to the risk of developing pneumoconiosis (asbestosis), and the danger of lung cancer. The degree of health hazard depends upon the severity and duration of exposure to asbestos and the protective methods adopted.
Presumably the study referred to by the honourable member is that conducted in 1965 by

Selikoff, Churg and Hammond into the occurrence of asbestosis among insulation workers in the New York-New Jersey metropolitan area. This study is known to officers of my Department and the medical authorities to which I have referred.

The Occupational Health Committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council is continuing its research on this problem with a view to recommending a hygiene standard and encouraging the development of the most effective methods both for the prevention and control of dangerous exposure to airborne asbestos fibres in the work environment.

Stevedoring Industry: Communist Factions (Question No. 885)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

Is it a fact, as reported in the Australian of 23rd May. 1970, that he attributes industrial unrest in the stevedoring industry to Communist factions in the Federation who, in an endeavour to improve their position, are engaged in a competition in militancy.
Has he information that the Federal Secretary of the Waterside Workers Federation, Mr C. H. Fitzgibbon, is a non-Communist and has his attention been drawn to Mr Fitzgibbon’s description of his statement as utterly incorrect.
Has his attention also been drawn to the comment on his statement by the non-Communist President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Mr R. Hawke, in which it was declared that the Minister was still analysing issues in a reactiona ry looking-under-the-bed-for-Communists fashion.
Will he state in what way alleged Communists improve their position by becoming engaged in militancy.

Mr Snedden:
LP

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

In a press statement on 20th March 1970, concerning the five day national stoppage in the stevedoring industry I set out in considerable detail the main factors which caused the stoppage. I also stated that competition in militancy between communist factions was an additional factor in the dispute.
and (3) Yes.
While I have no doubt that the honourable member is well aware of the way, I believe that further canvassing of issues relating to that stevedoring stoppage can only prejudice industrial peace in the industry in the light of the agreement which has recently been reached.

Aboriginals (Question No. 7)

Mr Webb:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Is it a fact that, although Aborigines represent only 2.5% of Western Australia’s population, approximately 21% of all children who die under the age of 1 year are Aborigines.
Is it also a fact that the proportion of Aboriginal children who die between the ages of 1 month and 12 months is approximately 20 times the death rate among white children.
If the position is as stated, what is the cause of these high mortality figures in respect of Aboriginal children, and what action is proposed to reduce them.

Dr Forbes:
Minister for Health · BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

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

From an examination of available material it could be estimated that Aboriginal or part Aboriginal persons probably account for around 2.5% of the population in Western Australia. The percentage of full blood Aborigines may well be much lower, possibly less than half this figure. There is no really reliable way of determining mortality rates in Western Australia for the Aboriginal section of the community since the basic data are absent. As the results of investigations performed on small groups of people, figures reported from an analysis in Western Australia of deaths in the 2 year period 1967 and 1968 indicate that over 20% of infant deaths are contributed by persons identified as Aboriginal or part Aboriginal.
With the same sort of analysis it appears that it would be true to state that the death rate of Aboriginal infants between 1 and 12 months of age is over 20times that of the remainder of the population in that area.
The causes of the high mortality figures in respect of Aboriginal infants and children arc largely the result of infections such as those producing gastroenteritis, pneumonia or occasionally meningitis. Prematurity and dehydration are additional causes. Other problems exist, but the extant to which they contribute to the mortality rate are difficult to define. Some of these factors are: nutritional deficiencies, insanitary living conditions, overcrowding due to frequent pregnancies and the congregation of many members of a family into 1 residence.

In addition to the efforts being made bythe State Governments including that of Western Australia, the Commonwealth Government is endeavouring to provide assistance by making additional finance available from the Aboriginal Advancement Trust Account which was created for this purpose in 1968.

My Department and the Office of Aboriginal Affairs have made special efforts to assist the States in determining the most effective ways to improve the health of this section of our community and recently in an effort to determine the major factors responsible for the production of subnormal health, particularly in Aboriginal children, and ways to correct them, convened a meeting or Workshop’ at which representatives from the States and Territories and experts in fields of anthropology, nutrition, paediatrics, nursing, welfare, administration, public health and medical research were present in Sydney in December 1969. As a result of the ‘Workshop’ specific recommendations for further research and specific action to correct underlying deficiencies were made. Work has already commenced on some of these proposals and is in addition to the work already being carried out by the State andCommonwealth Governments in the areas for whichthey are directly responsible.

Former Prime Minister: Official and Personal Papers (Question No. 42)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice:

What is the name and position of the officer of his Department into whose custody Sir John Bunting gave all official papers discovered in the effects of the late Mr Holt.
Did these papers include the letter which was written by the honourable member for Ballaarat after discussion with him and which was published at page 184 of Mr Trengove’s biography of him.

Mr Gorton:
LP

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

I am informed that official papers were dealt with in the ordinary course.
I do not know. I have not inquired and do not propose to inquire about any private letters or personal possessions belonging to the late Mr Holt.

Aboriginals (QuestionNo. 236)

Mr Collard:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

What is the estimated mortality rate of full blood Aboriginal children in (a) the Northern Territory, (b) Western Australia and (c) Queensland in each of the age groups (i) birth to 1 year, (ii) 1 year to 1 years,(iii) 2 to 3 years, (iv) 3 to 4 years, (v) 4 to 5 years and (vi) 5 to 8 years.
What are the most common causes of death in each age group in each Territory or State referred to.
How does the mortality rate of full blood Aboriginal children compare with that of other children in Australia.

Mr Forbes:
Minister for Health · BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

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

From an examination of available data it can be estimated that in the Northern Division of the Northern Territory for1968 the Aboriginal infant mortality was 75.0 per 1,000 live births, and the mortality rate in the 1-2 years age groups 32.8 per 1,000 children in this age group. In the other age groups the number of deaths, amounting to 2 or 3 only, are so small as to make calculation unrealistic. There were 3 deaths of children aged 2-3 years, one in the 3-4 years group, none aged 4-5 years and 2 between the age of 5 and 8 years.

In the Southern Division of the Northern Territory the infant mortality rates for recent years have been somewhat higher than in the Northern Division, being probably between 90 and 100 per 1,000 live births.

Whilst it is not possible to give Aboriginal mortality rates for Queensland and Western Australia in the same detail it has been estimated that infant mortality calculated in respect of 10 Settlements in Queensland for the 5 year period 1962-66 was around 112 per 1,000 live births.

From a survey carried out in 1967-68 in Western Australia, it is estimated that some 20% of infant deaths may be attributed to the Aboriginal population.

The causes of death vary according to the particular age group and geographical area hut in general, prematurity, gastro-enlerilis. chest infections, malnutrition and dehydration, infections such as those causing meningitis and deaths by accident all play a significant part. The major role played by infections in causing death in Aboriginal infants between the age of 1 month and1 year in Western Australia was highlighted by figures indicating that around 92% of deaths in this age group were associated with infections of one sort or another.

In Queensland for the years 1962-66 gastroenteritis, pneumonia, and prematurity were responsible for the majority of infant deaths whilst pneumonia and gastro-enteritis and meningitis caused a significant number in the1 to 16 age group.

An analysis in the Northern Division of the Northern Territory for 1968 showed that prematurity and contributing factors were responsible for a large proportion of deaths in early infancy, while gastro-enteritis, pneumonia, malnutrition and dehydration accounted for the majority of deaths during the remainder of the first 2 years of life. Drowning was the cause of 2 of the 4 deaths in the 2-4 age group.

In some areas malnutrition is almost certainly of greater significance than would at first sight appear due to its underlying effect in enhancing the development of terminal infections.

The mortality rales for the population as a whole for the year 1968 showed an infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births of 19.83 for males and 15.61 for females. The mortality rate for the age groups under consideration when related to the estimated mid-year population for persons of the age specific group were 1-2 years - 1.44 for males and 1.41 for females. 2-3 year group - 1.04 for males and 0.87 for females. 3-4 years - 0.72 for males and 0.65 for females, 4-5 years - 0.61 for males and 0.55 for females. 5-8 years - 0.47 for males and 0.38 for females per 1,000 of population at risk.

Comparing these rates for the whole population with the Aboriginal mortality rates shown in the reply to part (1) of this question, it may be seen that the mortality rate amongst infant Aboriginal children is much higher than for other children in Australia.

North Head Quarantine Station (Question No. 250)

Mr Armitage:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Can he say whether discussions arc currently taking place between the Prime Minister and the

Premier of New South Wales on ways of releasing land at the North Head Quarantine Station for a harbour side park.

If so, as Minister in control of the Station, has he been brought into the discussions.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The answers to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The Commonwealth is in close touch with the State on this and a number of other associated land issues.
My Department is working closely with other Commonwealth Departments which have responsibilities in such matters.

Accommodation for Industrial Courts (Question No. 463)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Attorney-

General, upon notice:

Has the Commonwealth Industrial Court and the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission been supplied with suitable Court room accommodation for full bench sittings in Adelaide independent of that supplied by courtesy of the South Australian Industrial Court.
If so, when was the accommodation made available.
When did the Chief Judge of the Commonwealth Industrial Court, or the President of the Commission, first direct the Government’s attention to the inadequacy of accommodation for this purpose in Adelaide.

Mr Hughes:
LP

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

Provision has been made for suitable Court, Chambers and Library accommodation in the newly erected A.M.P. Building at 1 King Street, Adelaide. That accommodation is independent of the facilities of the Supreme Court of South Australia and of the South Australian Industrial Commission.
The accommodation became available for occupation on 15th December 1969.
On 23rd July 1964 the President expressed his dissatisfaction with the premises occupied by the South Australian District Registry at 45 Flinders Street. Adelaide. That accommodation had one small Court room, suitable only for a Commissioner sitting alone. On 17th May 1965 the Registry occupied new premises at 50 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, which include two Court rooms one of which can be, and has been, used for a sitting of the Commonwealth Concililation and Arbitration Commission in Appeals Session.

Commonwealth Arbitration Reports (Question No. 464)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Attorney-

General, upon notice:

Is it a fact that the Commonwealth Arbitration Reports are nearly two years behind in publication.
Is it possible to publish the material in part volume form as it becomes available, instead of waiting until the end of each year before publication.

Mr Hughes:
LP

– The answer to the honour-‘ able member’s question is as follows:

The last published volume of Commonwealth Arbitration Reports includes judgments of the Commonwealth Industrial Court and awards, orders and decisions of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission issued up to 31st December 1966. A further volume, which includes all judgments, etc. issued up to 31st March 1967, is in the hands of the Printer.
For some years, each published volume of the Commonwealth Arbitration Reports has covered a period of 3 to 4 months only, and has been published in two parts, with all judgments, awards, etc. issued during that period begin printed in Part 1. Whilst progressive publication of Part1 would be possible, it is not clear that any appreciable advantage could be gained from this, as much of the delay in editing is attributable to the need to prepare the various indices, etc., that render a volume of reports more useful than a collection of reports in pamphlet form.

Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No. 465)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice:

What is the delay between the making of decisions and orders by the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission and their publication in printed pamphlet form.
How many of these decisions or orders have yet to be printed in pamphlet form, and when were such decisions or orders made.

Mr Hughes:
LP

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

Although some decisions, awards and orders of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission have not been available in printed pamphlet form for periods of up to twelve months, the average delay now rarely exceeds six months. Awards and decisions which are likely to be of greater importance than others, or those for which there is likely to be greater demand than normal, are given priority in printing and are available in pamphlet form about three months after the decision has been issued.
For the twelve months ended 31 March 1970, about 950 Commission decisions, awards or orders will be printed. Of these, about 200 have been printed in pamphlet form and about 100 have been proof-read and returned with corrections to the Printer for final printing. About 350 orders were made during December 1969-January 1970 as a consequence of the National Wage Case of 1969.

Commonwealth Industrial Court (Question No. 466)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Attorney-

General, upon notice:

How many of the orders and decisions of the Commonwealth Industrial Court have yet to be published in printed pamphlet form, and when were these orders or decisions made.

Mr Hughes:
LP

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

At 30th April 1970, 42 of the judgments of the Commonwealth Industrial Court which are normally printed, were not available in printed pamphlet form. Fifteen of those judgments were delivered in 1968, 23 in 1969 and the remainder in 1970.

Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No. 467)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice:

On what date did the President of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission first express his concern over the delay in printing the Commission’s decisions in pamphlet form and in producing Commonwealth Arbitration Reports within a reasonable time.
On what date did his Department first make its recommendation to the Public Service Board for the provision of the additional Registry staff required to correct the difficulties referred to by the President.
Has the Board fully met the staffing requirements needed for overtaking the backlog and of keeping up-to-date the printing of Commonwealth Arbitration Reports and the decisions of the Commission in pamphlet form.
If so. on what date did the Board comply with his Department’s recommendation.

Mr Hughes:
LP

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

In the Tenth Annual Report of the President of the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission dated 15th December 1966, and tabled on 18th May 1967.
19th September, 1967.
and (4) Additional positions recommended were approved in two stages, the first group in October 1967, andthe second group in March 1968. However, since that time, in addition to growth of about 15% in the normal business of the Commission, the. Flight Crew Officers’ Tribunal was established and the printing of its awards is processed by the Printing Section of the Registry. A further review of staffing needs in this area will be undertaken before the end of this year.

Public Service (Question No. 555)

Mr Barnard:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:

How many officers have been appointed to the Policy Planning Branch of his Department.
What are the classifications of these officers.
What are the functions of the Branch.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is:

Three positions have been created and one (that of the Assistant Secretary to bead the Branch) has been filled.
One of Assistant Secretary, $11822. Two of Principal Executive Officer$8709-9055.
Engage in studies and analyses of long range international security affairs and strategic issues and recommend appropriate policies.

National Health Act: Benefits (Question No. 564)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Health, upon notice:

What are the20 professional services specified in the Schedules to the National Health Act for which the largest number of individual services were recorded during the last full year for which figures are available.
For how many individual services were Commonwealth benefits payable in each of these 20 services.
For each of these 20 medical services in each State, what does bis Department’s most recent survey of doctors’ fees reveal with respect of (a) the most common fee charged, (b) the second most common fee charged, (c) the percentage of the total number of services provided at the most common fee, (d) the percentage of the total number of services provided at the second most common fee, (e) the percentage of the total number of services represented by services provided at a fee below the most common fee and (f) the percentage of the total number of services represented by services provided at a fee above the most common fee
Has he received similar information from the recent Australian Medical Association survey; if so when will he publish it.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The answer to the honour able member’s question is as follows:

and (2) Figures for a full year for individual professional services covered by the National Health Act are recorded only for general practitioner consultations (item 1 of the Schedule). Estimates based on the results of the Department’s last survey of fees and incidence of services conducted in 1968 (on the basis of contributor’s claims paid by medical benefit organisations for part of that year) are shown in the following table. The twenty most common professional services in each State have been shown to provide correspondence with part (3) of the Question and the answer given.

»TJ6/70-«- W

3 (b) to 3 (f) Not available. The Department s most recent survey established only the most common fee for each service and the relative frequency of those services.

The Australian Medical Association informed my Department in January 1970 of the most common fee for each individual professional service in each State. The . Australian Medical Association published the most common fees for the more commonly used services in the ‘Aus tralian Medical Journal’ of 7th February 1970 and the ‘Medical Gazette’ of 5th February 1970. The information supplied by the Australian Medical Association does not cover particulars similar to those requested in 3 (a) to 3 (f). The most common fees advised by the Australian Medical Association have been shown in the following table for the twenty most common services in each State (determined on the basis of the Department’s most recent survey of fees and incidence of services).

Quantitative Import Restrictions and GATT (Question No. 591)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice:

On what commodities does Australia apply quantitative import restrictions and what are the details of these restrictions.
Do the restrictions in any way conflict with the Articles of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
Has exemption been given by GATT for the restrictions; if so, what are the conditions under which the exemptions have been granted and for what period will they be effective.

Mr McEwen:
Deputy Prime Minister · MURRAY, VICTORIA · CP

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

Australia imposes quantitative restrictions on the following:
1. Aluminium and aluminum alloy, unwrought or in the form of waste or scrap;
2. Used, second-hand or disposals machinery or equipment of various kinds such as tractors, rock buggies, dumpers, graders, loaders, cranes, fork-lift trucks, four-wheel drive vehicles, etc.;
3. Knitted coats, jumpers, cardigans, sweaters and the like;
4. Men’s and boys’ knitted shirts.

Applications for import licences for (a) and (b) are considered on an individual basis in the light of the current market situation. The goods covered by (c) are restricted to the level of imports in 1966-67. Those in (d) are limited to 60% of imports during the period 1st April 1968, to 31st March 1969.

and (3) Theabovementioned import restrictions are in accordance with the recommendations of the Tariff Board or the Special Advisory Authority. Details of them have been advised to all GATT members through the GATT Secretariat.

The question of the conformity with the provision of the GATT of these restrictions has not been the subject of any formal ruling by the Contracting Parties to that Agreement. No member has sought their withdrawal of adjustment on the grounds that they are in conflict with the GATT.

I should add that certain imports are also prohibited or controlled for quarantine purposes and under various acts such as the Trade Marks Act, the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act, etc I assume, however, that the honourable member’s question was not directed towards these particular measures.

HousingFinance (Question No. 608)

MrHay den asked the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, upon notice:

What were the sources of finance for housing in Australia in each of the past 10 years.
What (a) amount and (b) percentage of the total did each source provide in those years.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The Minister for Housing has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

As statistics of the total of loans made and spent on housing are unavailable, it is impracticable to indicate the proportion of the total made by each category of lender. The most comprehensive statistical information available is in the form of housing loans approved by lenders during a period. Loans approved for both new and existing dwellings during each of the last 10 years by the major lenders are as follows:

Home Nursing Subsidy Act: Registered Nurses (Question No. 725)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Health, upon notice:

How many nurses as defined in the Home Nursing Subsidy Act were registered in each Slate and Territory in each year since that Act was passed.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The answer to the honour able member’s question is as follows:

Under the Home Nursing Subsidy Act the Commonwealth subsidises approved organisations which employ registered nurses. Details of the number of registered nurses employed by organisations in the States participating in the scheme are given below. There are no participating organisations in the Northern Territory or the Australian Capital Territory, as the Home Nursing Services in those Territories are a part of the Commonwealth Department of Health Activities.

Where details of part time nurses employed are known these have been included in terms of their full time equivalents.

Defence Industries Mission to United States of America (Question No. 753)

Mr Barnard:

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, upon notice:

Who were the members of last year’s Defence Industries mission to the United States of America.
How long did the mission spend in the United States.
With which United States Government agencies did the mission have discussions.
Which senior Government officers did the mission interview.
Which United States defence contactors did the mission visit.
Was the mission endorsed by the United States Government.
How many offset arrangements and subcontracts were negotiated by the mission.
Has the mission reported to him.
If so, will he table the report in Parliament so that it can be debated.

Mr McEwen:
CP

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

Sir Ian McLennan, K.B.E. (Leader)

Sir James Kirby, C.B.E.

Sir Samuel Jones

Sir Frederick Scherger, K.B.E.. C.B.,

D.S.O., A.F.C.

Mr J. B. Clarkson

Mr D. L. Elix

They were accompanied by officials of the Departments of Trade and Industry and Supply.

11th to 26th November 1969.
The United States Department of Defense and its appropriate agencies including the Defence Supply Agency and Service procurement authorities.
A large number of Senior Government officers were interviewed during three days in Washington. They included the Deputy Secretary of Defense; Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Installations and Logistics); the Director for International Programmes and the Deputy to Director of Defense Research and Engineering in the Department of Defense.
General Dynamics Corporation

International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation

United Aircraft Corporation

General Electric Corporation

Sperry Rand Corporation

Raytheon Corporation

Grumman International Corporation

Condec Corporation

Ling-Temco-Vought Corporation

Bell Helicopter Company

Collins Radio Company

The Boeing Company

F.M.C. Corporation

Lockheed Aircraft Company

Litton Industries Incorporated

Northrop Corporation

Hughes Aircraft Company

Hughes Tool Company

Teledyne Incorporated

Lear Seigler Incorporated

North American Rockwell

The Garrett Corporation (Airesearch Division)

Norn’s Industries

Yes.
The Mission’s role was not to negotiate offset arrangements and sub-contracts, but to enable representatives of Australian industry to meet directly with American officials and American industry to gain a broad appreciation of the opportunities open to Australian manufacturing firms to supply more of the United States defence needs as an offset to Australian defence purchases in the U.S.A.
The Mission has reported to me. Us report has been considered by the Cabinet and subsequently a joint statement was made by the Ministers for Defense, Supply and myself on 1st April 1970. That statement dealt with the establishment of new machinery in Australia to assist Australian industry to achieve increased sales to the American and other overseas defence industries.
The discussions held by the Mission with American officials and companies concerned present and future American defence projects. It is not intended that the report will be made public.

Dental Treatment of Pensions (Question No. 1048)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Have any requests been received for the inclusion of access to registered dental practitioners on the list of benefits available to holders of pensioner medical cards.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

Yes. A Dumber of requests have been made over past years to extend the scope of the Pensioner Medical Service to include dental treatment.

The Pensioner Medical Service was introduced to provide medical services of a general practitioner nature such as that normally provided by a doctor in his surgery or in the patient’s home including treatment at his home after an operation.

Careful consideration has been given from time to time to extending the scope of the Service to include allied health services such as those rendered by dental practitioners but it has been decided not to extend its scope.

Nursing Profession (Question No. 1049)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Health upon notice:

Has he or his Department conducted any investigations into the current unrest among Australian nurses.
What action does the Commonwealth Government propose to take to ensure that nursing regains the standards desired by the nursing profession.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

1 have recently asked the Nursing Committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council to make any recommendations on nursing in Australia which it feels may be appropriate. As well 1 recently released the report prepared for me by a special A.C.T. Committee on nursing education. This report contained recommendations on the commencement of general nursing and post-graduate courses at the School of Advanced Education in Canberra, the establishment of an A.C.T. Nursing Education Authority and a School of Nursing.
The problem of maintaining nursing staffs and of providing working environments which adequately reward nurses is one which is related to the whole question of hospital and health services. Health services are constitutionally the firm and primary responsibility of the States. However, financial problems affecting the recruitment and maintenance of nursing staff could be matters tor consideration in the context of CommonwealthState discussions presently taking place on those aspects of the Nimmo Committee Report which have a bearing on the provision of hospital services.

Telephone Services (Question No. 1061)

Mr Uren:

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice:

What is the cost to his Department of installing a telephone service in a private dwelling in (a) Sydney, (b) Melbourne, (c) Brisbane, (d) Adelaide, (e) Perth, (f) Hobart and (g) Canberra.

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

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

There is no differential in the rental for a basic telephone service far private or business use and costs are not recorded in this way. On average, the costs of installing a service involving new lines or equipment in the metropolitan area of each capital city during 1968-69 were:

The figures quoted refer to total expenditure on the provision of telephone services inclusive of trunk facilities and buildings. The information is not recorded separately for Canberra.

It will be appreciated that (he average cost of providing a telephone service can vary’ from time to time and from area to area, depending on a number of factors, including the capacity of existing exchange and external plant at particular locations to meet current demand. Basic plant and equipment have to be provided In as economic a manner as possible, having regard to longer term as well as short term aspects; the achievement of this often involves considerable expenditure in an area at a particular point of time.

Queanbeyan Hospital (Question No. 1077)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

On what dates and by whom have requests been made to the Commonwealth for financial assistance for the Queanbeyan Hospital.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

Departmental records show that in the past 10 years, the only requests for financial assistance to Queanbeyan Hospital was made on 29th August 1969, by Mr S. G. Mauger, M.L.A. for Monaro.

Arbitration Reports (Question No. 1092)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the AttorneyGeneral, upon notice:

What is the reason for a lag of more than 12 months in the publication of Commonwealth Arbitration Reports.
If the fault lies with the Government Printer, will he bring to the notice of the Government the need for an extension of the Government Printing Office in order to expedite the printing of Government publications.

Mr HUGHES:
BEROWRA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

and (2) Staffing difficulties have caused delays in editing the reports. Commonwealth Arbitration Reports are now edited by the Publications Officer in the Principal Industrial Registry, who spends the major part of his working time on this task. However, as a result of staff changes, it was necessary to transfer the Publications Officer to another important “position in the Principal Registry early this year. In that position he had only limited time available for editing. Anew Publications Officer was appointed but did not take up duty until August this year.

Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No. 1093)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Attorney-

General, upon notice:

On how many occasions has the President of the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission referred in his Annual Report to the delay that occurs in the printing of pamphlets, awards and other decisions of the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission.

Has the Government taken heed of the President’s complaint; if not, why not.

Mr Hughes:
LP

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

On5 occasions.
Yes, see my answer to question 467.

PharmaceuticalDrugs (Question No. 1095)

Mr HAYDEN:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

How many pharmaceutical manufacturing companies operate in Australia.
What percentage of the commercial market Is held by the largest (a) 5. (b) 10 and (c) 20 companies.
What was the estimated total (a) public and (b) private expenditure on pharmeaceutical drugs in Australia for the last year for which figures are available.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

My Department does not maintain statistics relative to the overall pharmaceutical industry in Australia and I am therefore unable to provide an answer on this basis.

However I am able to supply the information requested in so far as it relates to the provision of pharmaceutical benefits through approved pharmacies, private hospitals and medical practitioners.

On 1st April 1970, 153 companies were listed as manufacturers of pharmaceutical benefits.

The percentage share of the amount received by manufacturers for sales of pharmaceutical benefits (ready prepared items) was:

Percentages shown above do not take into account prescriptions for benefits where no particular brand is specified and the item is supplied by more than one company.

Expenditure by the Commonwealth on all pharmaceutical benefits during the year ended 30th June 1969 amounted to $118,372,358. Patients contributed $20,129,402 to benefits supplied through approved retail pharmacies, private hospitals and medical practitioners. The amount of patient contribution to benefits provided in public hospitals is not, however, available. The Department does not have available any further information on public expenditure nor has it any additional information on expenditure in the private sector.

Law Administration (Question No. 1098)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Attorney-General, upon notice:

Is he able to state the rate of (a) arrests, (b) convictions and (c) sailings per thousand of population for specific age groups in each State and Territory for (i) the latest year for which figures are available and (ii) for the year 10 years earlier.

Mr Hughes:
LP

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

The latest information with respect to the Australian Capital Territory is to be found in Tables 116, 117 and 118 of the Australian Capital Territory Statistical Summary for the year 1969. The latest information with respect to the Northern Territory is to be found in Tables 103 and 104 of the Northern Territory Statistical Summary for the year 1969. Statistics in respect of the Ter- ritories for the year ten years earlier are to be found in Chapter XVI of the Commonwealth Year Book for the year 1959.

The information sought with respect to the position in the States is not a matter that falls within my administration. However, information with respect to the States is published in the Commonwealth Year Books for the relevant years.

Police Officers (Question No. 1099)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Attorney-General, upon notice:

Is he able to say how many (a) male police officers, (b) female police officers and (c) civilian staff employed in administration, are attached to the police force of each State and Territory, including the Commonwealth Police Force.
Can he also state the amount provided for each force for (a) salaries and (b) recurrent expenditure for the latest year for which figures are available.

Mr Hughes:
LP

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

I am able to answer this question only so far as concerns the Commonwealth Police Force, which is the only police force that falls within my administration. As at 31 May 1970, 868 male police officers, 4 female police officers and 85 civilian staff were employed by the Commonwealth Police Force. The amount of $3,750,000 for salaries and $486,330 for administrative expenses was appropriated for the Force for the year 1969-70. Certain of the information sought as to State and Territory police may be found in Chapter 16 of the Commonwealth Year Book.

Dental Health (Question No. 1119)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Health, upon notice:

What would be the estimated current cost of each proposal submitted to him by the Australian Denial Association in August 1968.
Have the Commonwealth and State Governments conferred on school dental service;; which the Nimmo committee regarded as an important matter for their joint consideration.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

In August 1968, the Australian Dental Association submitted identical proposals to the Commonwealth Committee of Enquiry into Health Insurance (Nimmo Committee) and to the Senate Select Committee on Medical and Hospital costs. A copy of these proposals were forwarded to me by the Association.

The submission of the Australian Dental Association embodied a number of proposals as follows:

That (he Commonwealth Government should establish a Division of Public Dental Health within its Department of Health with the following main functions:
1. The investigation of the incidence and precedence of dental diseases and demand for dental services.
2. The co-ordination of present pro grammes of dental health education and promotion of additional ones.
That in view of the crisis envisaged in the supply of trained dentists to provide a denial service to the Australian community the Commonwealth Government should, through the Australian Universities Coinmission, give high priority to forward planning for dental education.
That because of the magnitude of the dental health problem Government School Dental Services should concentrate upon the treatment and maintenance of pre-school and school children on an incremental age basis with particular priority to the ‘dentally indigent’.
That a Voluntary Dental Insurance Scheme Subsidised by the Commonwealth Government be introduced to cover the dental treatment requirements of children and that such a scheme -be introduced in anincremental age basis commencing with children 2 years of age.
That patients of dental practitioners should be entitled to claim for medical benefits in respect of work carried out by registered dentists in accordance with the provision of the following items of the Medical Benefits Schedule.
2053, 2086, 2303, 2900, 2903, 2906, 2909. 2912, 3060, 3066, 3076, 3130, 3133, 3136, 3139, 3176. 3179, 3215, 3243, 3249, 3265, 3268, 3916, 3953, 4199, 4202, 4214, 4217, 6300, 6303, 6545, 6548, 6551, 6554, 6557, 6560, 7153. 8385, 8388. 8391, 8394, 8397, 8410, 8413.

That patients who are referred to medical specialists by dental practitioners should be entitled to the same Comonwealth benefit as applies when a patient is referred by a medical practitioner and that the Medical Benefits Schedule should be amended accordingly.
That the Pharmaceuticals Benefits Scheme be amended to allow patients a benefit when obtaining drugs prescribed by a dentist in accordance with his rights under the appropriate State legislation.

Consideration of proposals (a), (b) and (c) has not progressed to the extent that any costing has been undertaken and therefor no cost estimates are available.

Proposal (d) was costed by the Australian Dental Association in its 1968 Submission based on the following assumptions -

That such a Scheme be introduced progressively over 11 years commencing in 1969 with 2 year old children and in each successive year, introducing 2 year old children into the Scheme.
1. The children introduced into the Scheme each year continue to be treated throughout the 11 years required for its full implementation,
2. The proportion of total population participating in such a voluntary insurance scheme would be identical to that recorded during the first 11 years’ operation of the existing Medical Benefits Scheme from 1953. namely - year 1-16%; year 2 - 39%; year3 - 45%; year 4 - 51%; year 5-60%; year 6 - 63%; year 7 - 67%; years 8-10 68%; year 11-71%.
3. The Commonwealth Benefit to represent 50% of the estimated cost of treatment, based on the scale of fees approved for dental services by the Commonwealth Repatriation Department in force as from 1st August 1967, the remaining 50% to be borne equally by registered Benefit Organisations and the patient.
4. The scale of treatment for alt participating children be uniform in each age group but decreasing between each successively older age group up to the proposed 12 year old group.
5. There will be no change either in economic conditions or in dental fees in Australia during the 11 years required to implement the entire Scheme.
6. Net growth in the population of 2 year old children between 196.1 and 1966 census figures of 0.70% per annum (including net migration) will continue uniformly throughout the 11 years for full implementation of the Scheme.
7. A net reduction in dental caries of 50% will occur in regions where the communal water supply is fluoridated compared with the level of dental caries in nonfluoridated areas.

As from 1st January 1970, the Repatriation Department approved a revised scale of dental fees for treatment of Repatriation beneficiaries. Assuming the same basis of costing as that used by the Australian. Dental. Association in its 1968 Submission my Department has estimated the cost of the proposal to the Commonwealth in the light of higher dental fees approved by the Repatriation Department as follows -

Proposals (e) and (f) have not been costed due to the absence of reliable National Statistics of utilisation of these services by dental patients.

Proposal («) has been embodied in the new Health Benefits Plan as from1st July 1970 insofar as the Schedule items relate to oral surgery and associated procedures rendered in an operatingtheatre of an approved hospital by a legally qualified dentist or dental practitioner.

Proposal (f) has been fully incorporated into the new Health Benefits Plan.

Separate cost estimates for these proposals to the extent of their inclusion in the Health Benefits Plan were not derived but my Department estimated that the cost of the Services involved would have been small in relation to the estimated $33. 5m additional cost of the new Health Benefits Plan.

Proposal (g) to widen the scope of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme to incorporate drugs prescribed by dentists has not been costed either by the Australian Dental Association or my Department due to to the lack of reliable statistics of current and likely utilisation on a national scale.

No. I would, however, remind the honourable member that, as stated in paragraph 15.17 of the Nimmo report, the Australian Dental Association submitted to the Nimmo Committee a proposal for the introduction of a voluntary insurance dental scheme for children up to the age of 13 years. It was in regard to this proposal and not school dental services, that the Nimmo Committee stated -We regard it as another important matter for the joint consideration of the Commonwealth and State Governments.’

Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority (Question No. 1127)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

Has his attention been drawn to the decision of a meeting of members of the Federated Clerks’ Union of Australia held in Sydney on 28th April 1970 requesting continuity of employment of the Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority’s staff at prevailing rates of pay and conditions of employment after 1st July 1970.
Is it a fact that the Authority intends to retrench some of those at present employed by it.
Will he give an assurance that, in the event of any change in the structure of the industry involving any reduction in the powers and functions of the Authority, or its abolition, present employees will be given at least twelve months’ notice of such change in order to enable them to negotiate their position with the Commonwealth.
Was a similar arrangement made in respect of the redundancy of waterside workers during the introduction of permanent employment in their industry.

Mr Snedden:
LP

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

Yes.
and (3) I refer the honourable member to the statement ) made concerning the retrenchment of A.S.I.A. staff during (he course of the debate on the Stevedoring Industry (Temporary Provisions) Bill 1970. (‘Hansard’ June 12th 1970, pages 3499 and 3500).
Arrangements have been made for redundancy situations affecting waterside workers. The details of these arrangements are contained in the Stevedoring Industry (Temporary Provisions) Regulations.

Hop Research (Question No. 1149)

Dr Solomon:

asked the Minister for

Trade and Industry, upon notice:

Has a recent research grant of approximately $31,000 to Carlton and United ‘Breweries of Victoria been used for research into hop extracts.
Is it known whether the results of such research might prejudice the competitive ability of Tasmanian hop-growers.

Mr Sinclair:
CP

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

Carlton and United Breweries Ltd received a grant of $31,440 from the Australian Industrial Research and Development Grants Board. Companies provide detailed information about their industrial research and development activities to the Board with the assurance that the information will be treated as confidential. However, I understand that Carlton and United Breweries has said that the research involved an improved process for extraction of resins from natural hops.
The Department of Trade and Industry has made some enquiries and it appears that in recent years there has been a trend for Australian brewers to require bop varieties with a higher resin content and a growing number of Tasmanian growers are believed to be changing over to new strains of hops to meet these changing market conditions.

I understand that the likely result of the new process developed by the Carlton and United Breweries would be to enable Australian brewers to obtain significantly higher production from a given input of hops.

The effect this will have on the total returns to hop growers in future years will depend on the operation of a variety of factors, including the extent to which resin content may be related to prices received for hops; the enhanced potential for development of an export trade in hop extract; the extent to which the new technology may be adopted by the Australian brewing industry as a whole; and the growth of Australian consumption of beer.

TFX Aircraft (Question No. 1133)

Mr Keating:
BLAXLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for

Defence, upon notice:

Will he make available the papers submitted to the Menzies Government in 1963 by his Department and the other Service Departments outlining the reasons and recommendations for the acceptance of the General Dynamics TFX fighter- bomber concept for the R.A.A.F., including the reasons why the other aircraft types then under consideration were rejected.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

On 26th September 1968, the Prime Minister tabled in the House a number of documents pertaining to the purchase by Australia of 24 F-111 aircraft. These documents included the Memorandum of Understanding dated 19th October 1963, and the associated Technical Arrangement dated June 1964. At the time, the Prime Minister stated that any document or part of any document which had security content applicable to both the U.S. and Australian Governments would not be disclosed. These limitations are still valid.

There is also to be considered the long established practice of not making public the various advices provided to the Government by the public service. The public service in our system of Government cannot engage in public debate on Government issues. On this point I refer you to the discussion in 1958 by Sir Philip McBride, the then Minister for Defence, regarding the tabling of the Morshead Report, (Hansard of 27th March 1958, page 776). The reasons for not tabling that report are still valid and apply a further limitation to the limitation to which I have just referred in regard to your request. For both these reasons, I regret I cannot make available to you the types of paper you have requested. It is my belief that the Government has already made public as much as possible in regard to the F-111 project.

Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority (Question No. 1238)

Mr Daly:

asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice:

Is it a fact that the Stevedoring Industry (Temporary Provisions) Act and regulations, under which the Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority exercises certain powers and functions, will cease to operate on 1st July 1970.
Has his attention been drawn to the grave concern of employees of the Authority regarding the Government’s future plans for the Authority and the continuity of their employment.
If so, will he give an assurance that the continuity of employment of the Authority’s staff on prevailing rates of pay after 1st July 1970 will be protected.
In the event of any reduction in the present functions of the Authority will he give an assurance to those affected that at least -12 months notice of the change will be given to enable them to negotiate with the Government.

Mr Snedden:
LP

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

The Stevedoring Industry (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1970, which was passed during the last sessional period of the Parliament extends the operation of the legislation until 30th June 1972. (2). (3) and (4) 1 refer the honourable member to the statement 1 made concerning the retrenchment of A.S.I.A. staff during the course of the debate on the Stevedoring Industry (Temporary Provisions) Bill. (‘Hansard’ 12th June 1970, pages 3499 and 3500.)

War Service Homes (Question No. 1278)

Mr Keogh:
BOWMAN, QUEENSLAND

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

How many loan applications were received by the War Service Homes Division in Queensland for the purchase of new homes during (a) the financial year 1968-69, (b) the period 1st July to 31st December 1969 and (c) the period 1st January to 3 1st March 1970.
In each of these periods, how many of the applications reached settlement in under 4 weeks.
How many applications took (a) 4, (b) 5, (c) 6, (d) 7, (e) 8, (0 9, (g) 10, (h) 11, (i) 12, and (j) over 12 weeks to settle.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The Minister for Housing bas supplied the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

(a) 392, (b) 185, (c) 91.
and (3) This information is not readily available and could be obtained only by detailed examination of departmental files and registers. However, a special review has been made of applications to purchase new homes lodged during the period 1st July to 30th September 1969 and particulars of settlement times in relation to these applications are set out hereunder:

Television (Question No. 1324)

Mr Grassby:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, up’on notice:

Was an offer made to (be Australian Broadcasting Commission to share satellite facilities with Japan to enable the televising of World Cup soccer matches.
Was this offer refused; if so, why.
Can he say whether She decision not to televise any of the soccer world cup games caused disappointment to many Australians and to large numbers of British and European migrants.

Mr Hulme:
LP

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

No.
As indicated in the answer to Question (!) no such offer was made by any country to the ABC.
The ABC’s inability to obtain rights to permit television coverage of the matches would no doubt have caused disappointment to soccer followers in Australia. The ABC was disappointed also that its negotiations for television rights were unsuccessful. However, the ABC was able to arrange a direct broadcast of a radio description of the last 15 minutes of the first half and of the entire second half of the final match. This description was beard from 64 ABC radio stations in Australia.

Postal Services (Question No. 1339)

Mr Hansen:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice:

Wit) he consider striking a postage stamp commemorating the 25th anniversary of Rural Youth in Australia.

Mr Hulme:
LP

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

I refer to your Question on Notice on 12th June 1970, regarding the issue of a special postage stamp to commemorate the 25th anniversary ot Rural Youth in Australia.

My Department receives very many requests for the issue of special stamps covering a wide range of subjects. However, because our production facilities allow only a few .stamps to be issued each year, al) of these requests must be examined on a very selective basis.

The many requests for stamps, particularly for the recognition of worthwhile causes and organisations, present special problems in distinguishing between the merits of the various proposals put forward by the interested parties. We have had to refuse many of these requests from worthy organisations, both Australian and international, and in recent years we have been able to issue stamps for only a few organisations, such as Rotary, Lions Clubs and the YWCA. In this connection, and because of the number of requests, we have had to stipulate that anniversaries of Australian significance, as a general principle, must be at least of 50 years, or multiples of 50 years.

While I appreciate the position in the community of Rural Youth in Australia I am sorry that I am unable to meet this request for the issue of a special stamp.

Doctors (Question No. 1351)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Is he able to say how many doctors were salaried employees in (a) 1949, (b) 1959 and (c) the last year for which figures are available?
Is he able to say bow many of these doctors were salaried employees in (a) private enterprise and (b) public enterprise associated with (i) the Commonwealth, (ii) the States, (iii) local authori ties, (iv) semi-government authorities and (v) other public enterprise fields, during the same years?
What percentage of the total number of doctors in Australia did each of these figures represent?

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The numbers of medical practitioners who were salaried employees are not available for the years 1949 and 1959. The only relevant figures available are those collected in the censuses conducted in 1947, 1961 and 1966. These figures are shown in table 1.

and (3) The 1947 and 1961 census data did not categorise medical practitioners who were salaried .employees according to their employers. However, in the 1966 census they were categorised by areas of employment and the results are shown in Table 2.

data relate to the year 1967, as later figures are not available for Sweden.

Mortality Tables (Question No. 1352)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Can he provide tables showing the specific mortality rates between the ages of 30 years and 60 years for (a) mates and (b) females in (i) Australia and (ii) Sweden.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The following table shows mortality rates for males and females between the ages of 30 years and 60 years by 5 year age groupings. Rates by single years are not available for Sweden. The

Hospitals (Question No, 13S3)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for

Health, upon notice:

Can he give an estimate of the per bed maintenance costs for public hospitals in each of . the States and Territories for the last year for which figures are available.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

It is estimated that the maintenance costs (including out-patients’ costs) per approved public hospital bed (i.e., approved for payment of Commonwealth hospital benefits) in each of the States and Territories for the year 1967-68, the latest year for which figures are available, were:

Public Hospitals (Question No. 1354)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Can he provide an estimate of the capital cost per bed in a new public hospital which accommodates (a) 200 beds, (b) 400 beds, (c) 600 beds and (d) 800 beds, respectively.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The answer to the honourable members question is as follows:

The question cannot be answered simply as there are many variable factors which influence the cost of a new public hospital. Estimates of cost can only be made after careful examination of respective features and components, and isolation of common and differing elements. Any estimate of costs per bed would therefore have to be made with a defined type of project in mind. For example, costs, excluding land, for a sophisticated ‘acute’ public hospital could rise to $36,000 per bed.

Infant Mortality (Question No. 1370)

Mr HAYDEN:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

asked the Minister for

Health, upon notice:

Can he provide from the latest annual figures available to him, a table which shows the infant mortality rates for various countries in the world commencing with that country with the lowest mortality rate per thousand of live births and proceeding to and including Australia.
If Australia had achieved for the year covered by the table the same mortality rale as that achieved by the country with the lowest mortality rate, how many extra infants would have survived.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

The United Nations Demographic Year Book ‘ 1968 shows the infant mortality rates in 1967. the latest available figures, for countries with rates lower than Australia’s as being -

If Australia’s infant mortality rate for 1967 had been the same as Sweden’s an additional 1229 infants would have survived.

Defence Contracts (Question No.761)

Mr Barnard:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice:

What sub-contracts of defence purchases from the United States have been awarded to Australian companies since 1966.
What offset arrangements to defence purchases from the United States have been negotiated since 1966.

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

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

It is not possible to provide precise information as some Australian companies have contracted direct with United States companies. Some of the major sub-contracts known are as follows, the values given being approximate:

WOWIC Industries Pty Ltd- $1,642,000.

Supply of complete man camps and dormitory type huts to (he U.S. Forces.

Various Australian firms- $1,913,000.

Supply of meat to the U.S. Forces.

Hawker de Havilland Aust. Pty Ltd- $400,000.

Manufacture of helicopter tail rotor hub assemblies for Bell Helicopter U.S.A. (This Company has also received three other contracts for machining).

Favelle Mort Ltd- $285,000.

Manufacture of two deck cranes for the U.S. Navy.

In August.1968, my predecessor. Sir Allen Faiihall and Defense Secretary, Clark Clifford agreed that official representatives of both countries would explore ways and means to increase opportunities for Australia to participate competitively in U.S. Department of Defense procurements. This arrangment was reaffirmed in discussions between the Prime Minister and Defense Secretary Laird in April, 1969. Official conferences have taken place at six monthly intervals commencing October, 1968, and also there is regular communication with the U.S. Department of Defense. This has led to increased opportunities for Australian industry to compete for U.S. defence orders.

There are several important negotiations in progress at the present time covering not only subcontracting and offsets but also co-production. These include negotiations in respect of the Government’s decision to purchase 12 medium lift helicopters, 42 utility helicopters,11 helicopter gunships and 84 light observation helicopters as outlined in my statment to the House on 12th March, 1970.

Housing Ministers’ Conference (Question No. 825)

Mr WHITLAM:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister repre senting the Minister for Housing, upon notice:

What was the

date, and
nature of the Commonwealth’s response to each of the requests made by the State Housing Ministers at their conference in Brisbane in July 1968.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The Minister for Housing has supplied the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

4th March 1969.
The text of resolutions of the State Housing Ministers* Conference which include requests to the Commonwealth, and summaries of- the Commonwealth responses to these requests are as follows:

Resolution (i) - Low Rental Housing for Aged Persons

Having regard to the need for low rental accommodation for Aged Persons this Conference of Ministers of Housing from all States resolves that the Commonwealth be requested to provide grants to State Housing Authorities similar to those under the Aged Persons Homes Act and that if the Commonwealth is not prepared to subsidise Housing Agreement funds in this manner that it do so in cases where the Housing Authority provides finance from other sources; but that the States accept that in any year the Commonwealth might place a ceiling on the amount available from it for subsidy.’

The Commonwealth agrees that the matter is of the utmost concern to all State Ministers and the matter is being kept under review.

Shortly after this reply was sent, the States Grants (Dwellings for Aged Pensioners) Act 1969 was passed by the Commonwealth Parliament. This Act offers the States non-repayable grants amounting to $25m over 5 years for the erection of self-contained accommodation for the more needy single age pensioners and those who qualify for service pensions by reason of age.

Resolution (ii) - Encouragement Towards Saving for Homes

This Conference of Ministers of Housing from all States:

Agrees that young persons should be encouraged to save for home ownership;
Considers that encouragement of saving by those persons who have to look to State Housing Authorities for home ownership should have a priority no less high than encouragement of saving by other citizens;
Requests the Commonwealth to review its policy inrespect of the Home Savings Grant so as to include houses constructed by a State Housing Authority with funds provided under the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement.’

Reply:

As the Commonwealth is making long term advances at concessional rates of interest under the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement for the construction of houses purchased from State housing authorities, it would be inappropriate to give the purchasers what would amount to further financial assistance by way of a Home Savings Grant.

Resolution (iii) - Housing for Serving Defence Personnel

That this Conference is of the opinion that Clause 7 should be deleted from the next CommonwealthState Housing Agreement’

Reply:

The Commonwealth has noted the view of the State Ministers on this matter.

Resolution (iv) - Urban Renewal

That State Housing Ministers are firmly of the view that urban redevelopment is a matter of urgent National significance and one such as to call for the maximum participation of all the appropriate authorities concerned at the Federal, State and Local Government levels and that, in the first instance, the Federal Minister for Housing be asked again to present these views to the Federal Government.
The Commonwealth Government be asked to pay to the States the sum of $1,000,000 to be split up among the States according to a formula to be agreed between the States for the preparation of plans for urban renewal.’

Reply:

The Commonwealth is not unsympathetic towards the housing needs of those living in the more run-down areas of our cities, but it sees the responsibility for the task of improving the lot of these people as remaining with the region. Under the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement the Commonwealth is already assisting the States to provide new and better housing for those who may be living in unsatisfactory dwellings. In view of the many and urgent claims on the Commonwealth budget, the Commonwealth does not feel that it should offer further financial assistance in this field.

Resolution (v)- Research Grants

That the Commonwealth,through the Commonwealth Department of Housing, make grants to finance, wholly or in part, approved development and research housing projects by State and Commonwealth authorities.’

Reply:

This proposal is being investigated by the Commonwealth.

War Service Hemes (Quest fan No. 894)

Mr Uren:

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

What land has been acquired and what estate development has been undertaken by the War Service Homes Division since July 1950.
What was the dale of each acquisition.
How many allotments were in each acquisition.
What was the average cost of each allotment after subdivision in each particular purchase.
What was the average profit made by the Division on each acquisition.
What was the location ofthe land acquired in each case.
Was any special power necessary to acquire the land for estate development; if so, what authority was used.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The Minister for Housing has supplied the following answer to the honourable members question:

Particulars of the land acquired and estate development undertaken under the provisions of the War Service Homes Act since 1st July 1950 and other information requested by the honourable member are set out in the following table showing the position as at 30th June 1970. In considering the information provided the following points should be kept in mind. The table includesa number of estates acquired before 1st July 1950 where development was commenced prior to that date and continued after that date. It also includes a number of estates acquired before 1st July 1950 where development was not commenced until after that date.

In accordance with the provisions of the War Service Homes Act land acquired and developed for the purpose of the Act is sold to eligible persons at the capital cost of the land, including interest at the prescribed rate. Profit is derived only from sales on the open market and sales to State Housing Authorities and other Government authorities of land not required for the purposes of the Act.

All land is acquired in pursuance of power vested in the Director of War Service Homes under Section 16 of the War Service Homes Act. These powers include acquisition of land by compulsory process but except where otherwise indicatedall land referred to in the table was acquired by negotiation and agreement with the registered proprietor of the land.

Commonwealth Assistance to Hospitals (Question No. 901)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

What sums were provided by the Commonwealth Government to public hospitals m each State for each of the past 5 years by way of (a) bed subsidy, (b) medical benefits, (c) direct contributions to (i) recurrent expenditure and (ii) capital expenditure and (d) other contributions specifying the nature of such payments.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

Payments in the nature of bed subsidy are made by the Commonwealth indirectly under the Hospital Benefits Scheme at the rate of $2 a day to insured patients. Direct payments to hospitals are the 80 cents a day paid for uninsured patients and $5 a day for pensioners and their dependants with Pensioner Medical Service entitlements receiving public ward treatment.

Figures showing the total amounts of these benefits paid in respect of public hospital treatment in each State are available for the5 year period 1963-64 to 1967-68, and are shown below. Figures for 1968-69 are not available.

Under the National ‘Health Act medical benefits are not payable for medical services in respect of which payment is made to a public hospital with the exception of radiological, pathological and certain electroencephalogram services. Where Commonwealth medical benefits are payable they are paid through the medical insurance funds to their members and not directly to public hospitals. The amounts paid in respect of these public hospital services are not separated from the total Common wealth medical benefits reimbursed to the funds, and therefore are not known.
(i) and (ii) Contributions by the Commonwealth to the recurrent and capital expenditures of public hospitals are made under the Tuberculosis Act and, through the Universities Commission, to teaching hospitals. Commonwealth expenditure over the past 5 years for these purposes was:
Recurrent Expenditure
Under the Tuberculosis Act

Capital Expenditure

Under the Tuberculosis Act.

The Commonwealth paid the following amounts of pharmaceutical benefits to public hospitals:

Housing Loans (Question No. 923)

Mr Uren:

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

Is he able to say (a) what percentage of borrowers who obtained a housing loan from savings banks had to seek a second mortgage and (b) what average rate of interest was paid by the borrowers on the second mortgages during each of the last 2 financial years.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The Minister for Housing has supplied the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

Comprehensive statistics required for the preparation of a reply to these questions are not available.

Home Nursing Subsidies (Question No. 934)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for

Health, upon notice:

What was the amount of the subsidies paid in the last financial year in each State under the Home Nursing Subsidy Act to eligible organisations which received State assistance.
What was the amount of the State assistance received in that year in each State by organisations which received subsidies under the Home Nursing Subsidy Act.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

Subsidies paid in 1968-69 financial year under the Home Nursing Subsidy Act to eligible organisations which received State assistance:

State assistance received in 1968-69 financial year by organisations which received subsidies under the Home Nursing Subsidy Act:

Parliamentary Broadcasts (Question No. 963)

Mr Cohen:

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice:

How many hours per week are taken up by Parliamentary broadcasts from Australian Broadcasting Commission stations when Parliament is in session.
Is there a need for three separate ABC radio programmes when Parliament is in session.

Mr Hulme:
LP

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

Currently about 26 hours per week on each of the ABCs First Network’s stations.
Parliamentary broadcasts are not carried on ABC regional stations so that there is no interruption to programmes in country areas when Parliament is sitting. An alternative programme to Parliamentary broadcasts is available in each of the State Capitals and in Newcastle and Canberra.

The provision of an additional channel carrying Parliamentary broadcasts has been examined on several occasions but no frequencies are presently available to allow development along these lines.

Commonwealth Industrial Court (Question No. 1009)

Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Attorney-

General, upon notice:

Is it the practice of the Commonwealth Industrial Registrar and/or his deputies to
1. interview informants and complainants who wish to bring proceedings into the Commonwealth Industrial Court with a view to discovering the merits of their cases and the evidence they have available to support such cases,
2. consult with a judge of the Commonwealth Industrial Court on the material thus provided to him before determining whether to act on the information or complaint,
3. require all informants proceeding under Regulation 76(2) to conduct a form of pretrial of the worth of the proceeding, and
4. insist that in addition to a formal information, the informant must swear an affidavit relating to the information.
Has the Registrar and/or his deputies on any occasion rejected an affidavit as being inadequate, andin such cases declined to issue a summons on an otherwise sound information.
If so. which section of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act or which Regulation gives the Registrar or his deputies the right to engage in any of the foregoing practices.
Do the foregoing practices contravene ordinary procedures in summary jurisdiction.
If these practices do exist, do they impede the access of litigants to the Commonwealth Industrial Court.
If so, does the practice force upon informants the need to enlist expensive legal assistance for the trying, settling, engrossing and defending of affidavits in support of information, thus imposing an unfair and . unnecessary burden of costs upon convicted defendants.

Mr Hughes:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1)(a) Informants and complainants are interviewed not for the purpose of discovering the merits of their cases, but to ensure that their causes are within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Industrial Court and. for that purpose, some indication of the facts may be necessary.

No.
No.
Yes. Informants invariably supply affidavits without being so requested. The view that the summons has to be supported by an affidavit at the time of its issue, and certainty at the time of its service, was expressed by Mr Justice Kerr in 1969 in proceedings in the

Commonwealth Industrial Court involving the Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority and Bums Philp & Co. Ltd.

Yes. On one recent occasion, the Deputy Industrial Registrar, Sydney, declined to issue a Summons on two grounds: firstly, that neither the information nor the summons stated the section of the Act against which the offence was alleged; and, secondly, that the affidavit filed in support merely stated that the facts in the information were true. The information contained only the allegation that a specified disadvantage had been suggested to the informants in contravention of the Act.
Regulations S3, 37 and 76.
, (5) and (6) The duties of an officer of the Court in receiving a complaint and issuing a summons were referred to in a recent judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in a judgment given on 4th July 1969 (ex parte Qantas Airways Limited: re Horsington and Another). The conclusions expressed by Sugerman, J. A. in relation to the duties of Justices of the Peace also express the general basis upon which Registrars of the Commonwealth Industrial Court act in similar matters.

In no instance, of which I am aware, has this impeded the access of litigants to the Commonwealth Industrial Court. Since informants are invariably assisted by a solicitor from the beginning of the action, the additional cost of preparing an affidavit which, in any case, is required at the hearing before the Court, cannot result in any unfair or unnecessary burden of costs.

In the instance referred to in answer (2) the replacement affidavit, which was provided within 24 hours, was a simple statement of facts involving the addition of six short paragraphs to the original affidavit.

Canberra - Health Survey (Question No. 1021)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Did the National Capital Development Commission retain the services of an overseas firm of architects, hospital and health planners to undertake a study of the health needs of Canberra in the future.
If so, what was the name of the firm.
What were the terms of reference upon which the firm worked in its survey.
Has the survey been completed; if so, can a copy of the report be provided for interested members.
If the report is not yet completed, will he arrange for a copy of the report to be provided for interested Members when it finally becomes available.

Dr Forbes:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1)~ Yes. The study is being carried out on behalf of the National Capital Development Commission and the Department of Health jointly.

Llewelyn-Davies, Weeks, Forrestier-Walker and Bor.
The consultants’ proposal for the study, which was accepted by the Commission and the Department, provided for the submission of a report, consisting of five parts each representing a particular aspect of the provision of health facilities in the A.C.T., namely
1. the machinery for delivering health care to the population of the A.C.T.; (b) the special services which are required to back up these health facilities, and to maintain them;
2. a detailed description of the locational and land use requirements of each of these types of facilities;
3. the staging and phasing of health facility provision to meet the needs of the extremely rapid growth which is occurring throughout the A.C.T.;
4. the need for a comprehensive health and welfare service for the ACT.
No.
Yes.

Ileostomy: Special Appliances (Question No. 1025)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice:

Is it a fact that a person who has had an ileostomy operation requires special applicances to be fitted to the body and that these appliances require frequent replacement
Is there a considerable recurrent cost of maintaining and replacing these appliances.
If so, will the Government consider providing this equipment free on a doctor’s prescription or, at the very least, subsidising its cost.

Dr Forbes:
LP

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

Yes.
There is a recurrent cost However, through the Colostomy and Ileostomy Associations in the various States, arrangements are made for patients to obtain discounts for the purchase of appliances.
Any move to extend the scope of the National Health Act to include colostomy and ileostomy appliances must be considered in relation to the fact that there are other aids, such as trusses, spectacles, artificial eyes and limbs, for which no Commonwealth Assistance is available. The question of providing items of this nature has been considered on a number of occasions. As yet, however, it has not been found possible to provide such aids under the National Health Act.

I would point out, however, that the Commonwealth has made special arrangements with tha various Ileostomy and Colostomy Associations for the supply of certain drugs and medicinal preparations as pharmaceutical benefits to colostomy and ileostomy patients.

Telephone Service (Question No. 1047)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice:

What is the average delay in the provision of private telephone services in each population centre with a population in excess of 20,000 persons.

Mr Hulme:
LP

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

The answer to this question needs to be divided into two parts namely:

cases where major extensions to line plant and/or exchange equipment are necessary, and

cases where line plant and exchange equipment are available or only minor extensions are necessary.

In the first case, the time taken to connect telephone services can vary between very wide limits, depending upon the nature and extent of the projects necessary to provide additional tine plant or exchange equipment. It is not meaningful, therefore, to endeavour to quote an average delay In these circumstances.

In the second case, detailed statistics are not maintained on a continuous basis of the time taken by the Post Office to provide telephone services at Individual centres. A sample study has been made at a number of places throughout Australia with populations in excess of 20,000 of the current average delay in providing residence telephone services from the date of issue of the necessary orders for the work to be carried out. The results are:

Colleges of Advanced Education: Fees (Question No. 85)

Mr Whitlam:

asked the Minister for Education and Science, uponnotice:

By what amount and percentage (a) did the fees payable in 1969 and (b)will fees payable in 1970 in colleges of advanced education exceed the fees payable in 1966 when Commonwealth advanced education scholarships were first awarded.

Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

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

There is a wide range of fees levied for the various courses offered by more than forty colleges of advanced education, and it is not practicable to provide complete details. Furthermore, In some cases the fee structure has changed since . 1966 making direct comparison impossible. However, some indication of changes, if any, is given in the following information:

The only comparisons that can be made are in the minimum and maximum fees payable in 1966 and 1970: {: .page-start } page 247 {:#debate-38} ### VICTORIA Because of the change in fee structure, it is not possible to compare fees payable in 1966 and 1969 and 1970, nor to calculate actual and percentage increases. {: .page-start } page 247 {:#debate-39} ### QUEENSLAND There has been no increase in fees at the Queensland Institute of Technology between 1966 and 1970. Fees for all full-time tertiary students, irrespective of the course being undertaken, are $100 per annum. {:#subdebate-39-0} #### Aboriginals: Discrimination (Question No. 628) {: #subdebate-39-0-s0 .speaker-K9M} ##### Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP asked the Minister in Charge of Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice: >What (a) Commonwealth and (b) State laws discriminate against Aborigines. {: #subdebate-39-0-s1 .speaker-DB6} ##### Mr Wentworth:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="a" start="a"} 0. Commonwealth Laws: The only remaining Laws that could be regarded as discriminating against Aborigines are Section 64 of the Migration Act 1958-1968 and Section 423a of the Navigation Act 1912-1968. It is proposed to seek the repeal of these provisions. 1. State Laws: The following State laws contain provisions that could be, prima facie, regarded as discriminating against Aborigines: Queensland - The Aborigines' and Torres Strait Islanders' Affairs Act, 1965-1967 and the Regulations thereunder; Vagrants. Gaming and Other Offences Acts, 1931-1967 (paragraph, (ii) of Section 4. (1)). Western Australia - Licensing Act 1911-1968 (sections 150-151) Native Welfare Act 1963 (section 17) Native (Citizenship Rights) Act 1944-1964. These and other related matters are currently under discussion with the State Government concerned. {:#subdebate-39-1} #### Building Societies: Interest Rates (Question No. 1140) {: #subdebate-39-1-s0 .speaker-EE4} ##### Mr Uren: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is the Minister able to say if there has been an increase in the interest rate of the terminating building societies in New South Wales. 1. If so, what is the increase. 2. Does the increased interest rate involve those persons who negotiated a loan prior to April 1970. 3. If so, bow many persons are involved. 4. Is the increase to be repaid by increased monthly repayments; if so, can he say what will be the average increase per month in the repayments. 5. If the effect of the increased interest rate is to lengthen the period of repayment, can he say what this extended period will be and what will be the average increase in the total amount of repayments which will have to be met by borrowers in these societies. {: #subdebate-39-1-s1 .speaker-KFH} ##### Dr Forbes:
LP -- The Minister for Housing has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question provided from information made available by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies in New South Wales: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Some financial institutions have increased their lending rates on loans advanced to terminating building societies. The majority of societies faced with the increased interest rates will pass the increase on to their members. It is not possible to specify the number of societies which will be involved in the increased interest changes. 1. It is not possible to provide details of increase in interest rates paid by individual societies or by members of societies, but the following statistics indicate the rise in interest rates charged to societies by some lending institutions. {: type="a" start="a"} 0. Commonwealth Trading Bank - *5¼%* to 6¼% per annum. 1. Commonwealth Savings Bank - 5½% to 6¼% per annum. 2. Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement Allocations - 5¾% per annum. 3. Private savings banks and insurance company - 6¾% per annum. 2. Yes - but an existing society financed with Housing Agreement Funds which has drawn some but not all of its total allocation will pay a rate between 5% and 5¾% per annum on an averaged basis. This increased rate will also be passed to members. The rate will remain at 5% per annum for societies which fully drew their allocation prior to 1st April 1970. 3. It is not possible to accurately assess this figure. 4. In nearly all cases the Interest increases will be recovered by increasing borrowing members' monthly loan repayments. It is not possible to indicate the average increase. 5. At the option of the directors of terminating building societies in New South Wales the period of repayment can be extended not beyond 3 1 years. It is not possible to state any average increase in total loan repayments. {:#subdebate-39-2} #### Housing: Maximum Loans (Question No. 893) {: #subdebate-39-2-s0 .speaker-EE4} ##### Mr Uren: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What is the maximum loan available to a person seeking to (a) construct a new dwelling, (b) purchase a new home already constructed and (c) purchase a dwelling more than five years old from (i) Commonwealth and private trading banks, (ii) Commonwealth and private savings banks, (iii) State banks, (iv) permanent building societies and (v) insurance companies. 1. What is the prevailing interest rate in each case. 2. What was the prevailing interest rate in each case in July1950. {: #subdebate-39-2-s1 .speaker-KFH} ##### Dr Forbes:
LP -- The Minister for Housing has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: >Parts (1) and (2): The details cannot be concisely summarised to show an unambiguous answer but the information is available in 'Housing Finance: Lending Terms and Conditions' which is published each 6 months by the Department of Housing. Copies of this publication are available from the Department of Housing and are in the Parliamentary Library. > >interest Rates on Housing Loans in July 1950 > >From information available it would appear that institutions which were lending at that time for new and existing dwellings did not differentiate in the rate of interest charged. The Commonwealth Savings Bank did not introduce housing loans for existing dwellings until 1956. {:#subdebate-39-3} #### Immigrant Families: Arrivals (Question No. 991.) {: #subdebate-39-3-s0 .speaker-EE4} ##### Mr Uren: asked the Minister for Immigra tion, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many immigrant families, consisting of man and wife or man, wife and family, arrived in Australia during each oft he past five years; 1. How many family units are expected to arrive each year for the next 5 years. {: #subdebate-39-3-s1 .speaker-KIM} ##### Mr Lynch:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: >Figures for immigrant families arriving in Australia (a family being defined as a man and wife, or man, wife and children) do not take account of those cases in which the husband and wife migrate separately. Because of this, such figures underestimate the total number of families received. However, a reasonable estimate of the latter can be obtained by taking the total arrivals of married male settlers. In the past 5 years, the fieures for these were as follows: Probably some of the married male settlers who arrived in this period were still awaiting their wives and families at the end of December 1969, but this would be offset by arrivals of wives and families of married male migrants who arrived before 1965. Estimates are not available for the number of family units expected to arrive in Australia in each, of the next 3 years (1970-74). Although the Australian immigration programme is planned broadly some years ahead, the actual composition and size of each individual year's programme is affected by current conditions in overseas source countries and by Australia's ability to attract and integrate new settlers. {:#subdebate-39-4} #### Building Societies: Interest Rates (Question No. 1151) {: #subdebate-39-4-s0 .speaker-EE4} ##### Mr Uren: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Housing, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is the Minister able to say if there has been an increase in the interest rate of the permanent building societies in New South Wales. 1. If so, what is the increase. 2. Does the increased interest rate involve those persons who negotiated a loan prior to April 1970. 3. If so, how many persons are involved. 4. Is the increase to be repaid by increased monthly repayments; if so, can he say what will be the average increase per month in the repayments. 5. If the effect of the increased interest rate is to lengthen the period of repayment, can he say what this extended period will be and what will be the average increase in the total amount of repayments which will have to be met by borrowers in these societies. 6. If a borrower obtains a loan of $12,000 to be repaid over a period of 25 years, what will be the increased interest to a borrower in repayments per month. {: #subdebate-39-4-s1 .speaker-KFH} ##### Dr Forbes:
LP -- The Minister for Housing has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question from information made available by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies in New South Wales: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Some permanent building Societies in New South Wales have recently announced increases in interest rates charged to borrowers. 1. It is not possible to provide details of increases in interest rates charged by individual societies; but it is believed that generally the rise in interest rates is of the order of 0.5 per cent per annum. 2. This is a matter for individual societies. However, where societies lend on a long term basis, and from funds subject to varying rates of return to investors, it is necessary for changes in interest rates to apply to both new and existing borrowers. 3. It is not possible to accurately assess this figure. 4. This is a matter for the boards of individual societies to decide. No assessment can be made of the average increase in monthly housing loan repayments. 5. It is not possible to supply this information. 6. If the rate of interest on a loan of $12,000 over 25 years is increased by 0.5 per cent per annum, the additional amount payable per month will vary according to the interest rate charged before the increase and the basis on which interest is charged, i.e. yearly rests, quarterly rests, etc. No exact figure can therefore be given, but on the most common rates charged before the application of any increase, the additional repayment would be in the vicinity of $4 per month, provided of course the former interest rest period was not altered in any way. {:#subdebate-39-5} #### Mental Health Institutions (Question No. 1283) {: #subdebate-39-5-s0 .speaker-6U4} ##### Mr Whitlam: asked the Minister for Health, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Did he tell me on 4th June (Hansard, page 2938) that at the Health Minister's Conference in March he had conveyed the Government's decision to reject the application by the States for hospital benefits to be paid for patients in mental health institutions when the States Grants (Mental Health Institutions) Act expires on 30th June. 1. Had he declined on 7th April (Hansard, page 797) to answer my question relating to the conference's consideration of Commonwealth assistance after the Act expired. 2. Is he now prepared to answer the other parts the question relating to the conference's consideration of (a) the uniform recognition of the qualifications of doctors, dentists, pharmacists and nurses, (b) the establishment of a hospital planning bureau and (c) Commonwealth assistance for State hospitals which provide free out-patients and in-patient treatment for pensioners, on which subjects he had previously answered my question (i) 22nd May 1969 (Hansard, page 2221), (ii) 20th August 1969 (page 509) and (ii) 10th September 1968 (page 874), respectively. {: #subdebate-39-5-s1 .speaker-KFH} ##### Dr Forbes:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. In my answer to you on 4th June I stated that: {: type="a" start="a"} 0. the Government had rejected the States' proposal and its decision had been conveyed to the State Health Ministers at their Conference in March 1970; and 1. the Government rejected the application by the States on the long standing policy ground of the Government that responsibility for mental health was a State responsibility. 1. The question of what is to be done after the expiry of the Act is a separate issue from the Commonwealth's rejection of the States' proposals, and is, as I indicated in my answer of 4th June 1970, a matter for decision by the Commonwealth Government 2. I am unable to provide any information beyond that supplied in answer to your question of the 7th April 1970. {:#subdebate-39-6} #### Federal Elections: Statistics (Question No. 1332) {: #subdebate-39-6-s0 .speaker-KDA} ##### Mr Duthie: asked the Minister for the Interior, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What revenue has the Commonwealth Treasury gained from (a) forfeited deposits of candidates and (b) fines imposed upon electors who did not vole at Federal elections held since 1951. 1. What has it costthe Commonwealth to conduct the last eight Federal elections. 2. How many polling booths operated on (a) 28th April 1951 and (b) 25th October 1969. {: #subdebate-39-6-s1 .speaker-009OD} ##### Mr Nixon:
Minister for the Interior · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · CP -- The answer to the honourable members question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. (a) $84,370. {: type="a" start="b"} 0. $140,111 (Not finalised in respect of 1969 House of Representatives Elections). (2) {: type="1" start="3"} 0. (a) 9,711. {: type="a" start="b"} 0. 9,503. {:#subdebate-39-7} #### Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No.518) {: #subdebate-39-7-s0 .speaker-2V4} ##### Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it a fact that for 4 months of the year ending 13th August 1969 and for some months of the previous year the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission had to struggle on with only 3 Deputy Presidents on active duty instead of 5. 1. Didthe continued hearing of the Professional Engineers cases before 2 full benches of the Commission and the fall in the number of active Deputy Presidents cause delays in some full bench hearings. 2. If so, what was the reason for the Government's delay in making the new appointments needed to cope with the backlog of hearings that had built up at that time. {: #subdebate-39-7-s1 .speaker-DQF} ##### Mr Snedden:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. and (2) In bis report for the year ended 13th August 1969 the President of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission said the following: {: type="i" start="1"} 0. . . for 4 months of the current year and some months of the period covered by last year's Report the Commission had to struggle on with 3 Deputy Presidents on active duty instead of 5. Thecontinued hearing of the Professional Engineers cases before 2 full benches of the Commission . . . and the fall in the number of active Deputy Presidents continued to cause delays in some full bench hearings. Since the new appointments, however, the full bench list has gradually been restored to normal." 1. I am advised by the Attorney-General that the answer tothis part of the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government regards the office of Deputy President of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission as an important and responsible position. Appointments are made as soon as practicable.' {:#subdebate-39-8} #### Commonwealth Industrial Court (Question No. 846) {: #subdebate-39-8-s0 .speaker-2V4} ##### Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is there no general power in the Commonwealth Industrial Court to (a) restrain conduct that conflicts with the clear policy of the law as expressed in the case of Short v. Wellings against the partisan use of union funds and resources as a means of enabling office-holders to hold office against challenge from the rank and file or (b) restrain conduct that conflicts with section . 171 (I.) of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act as revealed in the case of Dunford v. Dougherty. 1. If so, is this lack of injunctive power a defect in the Act. 2. If a defect is apparent is there any merit in amending the Act to provide authority to the Court to restrain the wrongful use of union funds and resources of registered organisations and to restrain the kind of conduct prohibited by section 171 (3.) of the Act. {: #subdebate-39-8-s1 .speaker-DQF} ##### Mr Snedden:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) As to part (1) (a),I am advised that the judgment in the case. Short versus Wellings and Others, indicates that in proceedings for the performance and observance of the rules of an organisation the Commonwealth Industrial Court can restrain conduct which conflicts with the policy of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, in particular, conduct to which the honourable member referred even though a specific rule of the organisation does not prohibit such conduct. As to part (1)(b), conduct which conflicts with section 171 (3.) of the Act can be enjoined by the' Court under section 109 (1) (b) of the Act {:#subdebate-39-9} #### Post Offices: Western Australia (Question No. 1116) {: #subdebate-39-9-s0 .speaker-JZX} ##### Mr Collard: asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Which post offices in the north and northwest of Western Australia are now fully airconditioned. 1. Is it intended to air-condition other post offices; if so, which and when. {: #subdebate-39-9-s1 .speaker-KIF} ##### Mr Hulme:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows. {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Post Offices are fully air-conditioned at Marble Bar, Port Hedland, Wyndham, Exmouth, Kununurra, Dampier, Mt Newman and Tom Price. 1. Yes. Carnarvon (tenders close June, 1970) and post offices at Broome, Derby, Roebourne, Onslow, Hall's Creek, Wittenoom and Fitzroy Crossing will be programmed for air-conditioning over the next 3 years subject to continued need and practicability. {:#subdebate-39-10} #### Repatriation: Vocational Counselling Services (Question No. 1147) {: #subdebate-39-10-s0 .speaker-JO8} ##### Mr Barnard: asked the Minister for Repatriation, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What vocational counselling services are provided for veterans of the Vietnam war. 1. What are the qualifications of the Army counsellors who interview these men. 2. Are any trained psychologists used by his Department to advise ex-servicemen about suitable civilian employment. 3. What extra vocational counselling and training is provided by his Department for exservicemen injured in the Vietnam war. {: #subdebate-39-10-s1 .speaker-KHS} ##### Mr Holten:
Minister for Repatriation · INDI, VICTORIA · CP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Except as indicated in the answer to the third and fourth parts of the honourable member's question, advice and assistance about employment ls provided to Vietnam veterans and to other members of the Armed Forces on the same basis. Information I have received in response to direct inquiries of the relevant Service Departments reveals that Navy, Army and Air Force establishments provide for units to have on strengths Resettlement Officers whose particular responsibility it is to be fully conversant with the procedures for re-settling regular servicemen, and re-establishing National Servicemen, in civil life. During their service regular servicemen are encouraged to undertake vocational training under the Services Vocational and Educational Training Scheme to enable them to adapt to civil occupations, and are counselled by their unit Resettlement Officers about employment prospects. In addition, the Department of Labour and National Service has a Permanent Forces Resettlement Officer In each capital city to advise regular servicemen about employment, and help them obtain suitable employment through the Commonwealth Employment Service when necessary. National Servicemen are interviewed by officers of the Army and of the Department of Labour and National Service before discharge. They are notified of the full range of re-establishment benefits available to them as National Servicemen and have available the facilities of the Commonwealth Employment Service to help them obtain suitable employment on discharge if they are not returning to the employment in which they were engaged before call-up. {: type="1" start="2"} 0. Although there is no standard academic or other qualification for appointment as unit Resettlement Officer, it is common for Education or Instructor Officers, many of graduate status, to occupy such positions. 1. and (4) Vocational counselling is not normally a function of the Repatriation Department, but of the Department of Labour and National Service. If necessary, ex-servicemen may be referred to the Vocational Guidance Section of the Department of Labour and National Service, staffed by qualified psychologists with special training in vocational guidance. However, for exservicemen receiving treatment for incapacities due to war service (including Vietnam service), or who are eligible under the Repatriation Department's Scheme for ex-servicemen unable to follow a former occupation because of a war disability, vocational training is provided by that Department as part of the rehabilitation programme and, where appropriate, Repatriation Department psychologists are available to advise on vocations and training. {:#subdebate-39-11} #### Nuclear Power Station: Investigation of Sites (Question No. 1191) {: #subdebate-39-11-s0 .speaker-KUX} ##### Mr Stewart: asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice: >Will he make available the reports on the (a) (i) geological, (ii) hydrological, (iii) hydrographical, (iv) meteorological, (v) ecological and (vi) environmental investigations carried out at each of the sites considered for the building of a nuclear power station, and (b) ability of each site to dispose of the radioactive and thermal waste from the proposed reactor. {: #subdebate-39-11-s1 .speaker-KVR} ##### Mr Swartz:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: >The reports to which the honourable member has referred are confidential studies by the Australian Atomic Energy Commission and the Electricity Commission of New South Wales prepared for management. As I have said, I will make a statement to the House after the Government has considered a contract, and this will deal with the matters in which the honourable member is interested. Meanwhile I can assure him that tha standards which have been set in these matters are at least the equal - and in many cases are mora exacting- that those which are observed overseas. Nuclear Power Station Site (Question No. 1192) {: #subdebate-39-11-s2 .speaker-KUX} ##### Mr Stewart: asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is the site chosen *at Jervis* Bay for the nuclear power station situated in one of the few remaining virgin areas in the region. 1. Were any other sites in the region considered, if so, where. {: #subdebate-39-11-s3 .speaker-KVR} ##### Mr SWARTZ:
DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · LP -- The answer to the honourable members question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The area at Murray's Beach, Jervis Bay, proposed for the site of the nuclear power station is a part of one of the undeveloped areas in the Jervis Bay region. The Australian Atomic Energy Commission and the Department of the Interior are maintaining close liaison to ensure that any disturbance of the area occasioned by the construction of the power station will be as small as possible., thus minimising any effect on the aesthetics and general character of the area. 1. Yes. Bristol Point and Scottish Inlet were considered in addition to Murray's Beach, but were found to be unsuitable on several grounds. {:#subdebate-39-12} #### Nuclear Power Station: Discharge of Water (Question No. 1194) {: #subdebate-39-12-s0 .speaker-KUX} ##### Mr Stewart: asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Will the discharge of heated waste from the proposed nuclear reactor at Jervis Bay be made into the open waters of the ocean. 1. Is there any danger in the release of this waste. {: #subdebate-39-12-s1 .speaker-KVR} ##### Mr Swartz:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The final decision on the point of discharge of wanned water from the turbine condensers will not be made until all investigations of the area are completed. 1. No. The Government is aware of the nature of thermal pollution, and detailed examination of environmental and ecological factors is being made so that any disturbance of the environment at Jervis Bay will not be significant. {:#subdebate-39-13} #### Air Pollution: Liquid Propane Gas (Question No. 1203) {: #subdebate-39-13-s0 .speaker-EE4} ##### Mr Uren: askedthe Minister for National Development, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Did certain evidence given to the Senate Select Committee on Air Pollution claim that the use of liquid propane gas would significantly reduce air pollution caused by internal combustion engines, one of the main sources of air pollution. 1. Did (he Senate Committee recommend that the use of liquid propane gas should he examined. 2. If so, has his Department tested the use of this gas. 3. If tests have been carried out, what was the result. {: #subdebate-39-13-s1 .speaker-KVR} ##### Mr Swartz:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Yes. 1. The Committee stated in the body of its report that it considered that the use of liquid propane gas as fuel for internal combustion engines should be examined in detail by the appropriate authorities. No reference however was made to this in the Committee's formal recommendations. 2. No. 3. Liquid propane gas has been used as fuel for internal combustion engines in some countries for many years, and numerous papers relating to such use have been published in scientific journals. {:#subdebate-39-14} #### Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (Question No. 1215) {: #subdebate-39-14-s0 .speaker-2V4} ##### Mr CLYDE CAMERON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP asked the Minister for Labour and National Service, upon notice: >Has he any indications as (a whether the President of the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission is satisfied with the number of conciliators now operating under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. {: #subdebate-39-14-s1 .speaker-DQF} ##### Mr Snedden:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: >In his Thirteenth Annual Report for the year ended 13th August 1969 the President of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission said: 'In my view we need at least four conciliators and it is urgently necessary to bring the present number to that figure by another appointment'. The current number of conciliators is four. {:#subdebate-39-15} #### Education: School Libraries and Science Blocks (Question No. 1245) {: #subdebate-39-15-s0 .speaker-KEC} ##### Mr Kennedy: asked the Minister [or Education and Science, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many (a) libraries and (b) science blocks have been built with the aid of Commonwealth subsidies in (i) government and (ii) independent schools in the Federal electorate division of Bendigo in each year since the inception of the scheme. 1. What are the names of the schools in each case. {: #subdebate-39-15-s1 .speaker-JRN} ##### Mr N H Bowen:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. (a) (i) Libraries. Government schools. No libraries in Slate secondary schools have been built in the Bendigo electorate with funds made available to the State of Victoria under the Commonwealth Secondary Schools Libraries Pro- gramme. I understand that plans for library building projects under the Programme are being developed in Victoria, but no details of individual projects are yet available for the remaining period of the triennium. Four State secondary schools in the Bendigo electorate were assisted by the State to purchase bookstock in 1969, the first year of the Commonwealth Libraries Programme. {: type="1" start="1"} 0. (b) (i) Science blocks.Government schools. Seven science laboratories have been constructed in State secondary schools in the Bendigo electorate with funds made available to the State of Victoria under the Commonwealth Science Facilities Programme. Construction took place in the following years: 1964- 65-3 laboratories 1966-67-3 laboratories 1968-69-1 laboratory 1. (a) (ii) Libraries. Independent schools. No libraries have yet been constructed with funds made available to individual independent schools in the Bendigo electorate under the Commonwealth Libraries Programme. Grants for building libraries have been offered to three such schools in the electorate. Grants will be authorised and payment made as soon as I have been notified in each case that construction has commenced. 2. (b) (ii) Science blocks. Independent schools. Seven science laboratories have been constructed in independent schools in the Bendigo electorate so far and a building grant is available during 1970-71 for 1 school. Quite extensive reconstruction of existing science buildings has occurred in 2 schools. These building activities took place in the following years: 1965- 66 - 2 laboratories reconstructed 3 laboratories built 1966- 67-3 laboratories built 1968-69-1 laboratory built 3. The names of the schools concerned are set out below. For the independent schools, details of the amounts offered and the years in which grants are available, are set out. Science blocks. Government schools. The names of the schools are: Seymour High School Bendigo Girls' High School ' Bendigo High School Kangaroo Flat Technical School. Science blocks. Independent schools. The names of the schools are: Marist Brothers College (Bendigo) St Mary's (Bendigo) Girton C. of E. Girls' Grammar School (Bendigo) St Kilan's (Bendigo) Note - Under both the Commonwealth Libraries Programme and the Commonwealth Science Facilities Scheme, the administration of programmes for government secondary schools is the responsibility of the various State Education Departments, within general programmes which are submitted to me for approval by the State Ministers concerned. {:#subdebate-39-16} #### Nuclear Power (Question No. 1270) {: #subdebate-39-16-s0 .speaker-KUX} ##### Mr Stewart: asked the Minister for National Development the following question, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Are fast breeder nuclear reactors a commercial proposition. 1. If not, when is it predicted that this will be the case. {: #subdebate-39-16-s1 .speaker-KVR} ##### Mr Swartz:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No. Fast breederreactors are not yet a commercial proposition but a large effort is being directed towards their development in most of the countries with advanced nuclear programmes. 1. The first large commercial fast breeder stations are expected to be introduced into Great Britain and certain European countries (for example France and Germany) by about 1980. It may be some years later before they are introduced into the U.S.A. Nuclear Power Stations (Question No. 1271) {: #subdebate-39-16-s2 .speaker-KUX} ##### Mr Stewart: asked the Minister for National Development the following question, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Has he any information as to whether privately-owned and operated industry in remote areas of Australia is interested in the purchase, construction and operation of nuclear power stations. 1. If so, does the Government intend to grant permission to private industry to enter this field of power generation. {: #subdebate-39-16-s3 .speaker-KVR} ##### Mr Swartz:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The Government is not aware of any plans of private industry to construct and operate nuclear power stations in remote areas in Australia. 1. Nuclear generating plant is owned by private enterprise in other countries and there would appear to be no reason in principle why this should not be permitted in Australia. Such a plant however would be subject to whatever controls the Commonwealth or State Governments may consider it necessary to impose, e.g. in respect of safety, insurance against nuclear damage and, in the Commonwealth's case, of satisfying our international obligations, especially as to 'Safeguards' on the use of fissionable material. However, this question has not yet arisen. {:#subdebate-39-17} #### Nuclear Power Stations: Supply of Plutonium (Question No. 1273) {: #subdebate-39-17-s0 .speaker-KUX} ##### Mr Stewart: asked the Minister for National Development the following question, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Will an adequate supply of plutonium be necessary to operate nuclear reactors for power generation when fast breeder reactors become commercially feasible. 1. Has he any information as to whether the Japanese Government is stockpiling plutonium to facilitate the introduction of fast breeder reactors. 2. If so. would it be to the benefit of Australia to follow suit when in a position to do so. {: #subdebate-39-17-s1 .speaker-KVR} ##### Mr Swartz:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Past breeder reactors operate most efficiently and economically when fuelled with plutonium which is the preferred fuelling material. They will however operate with the fissile materialuranium 235 but there is a significant cost penalty involved. The widespread adoption of fast breeder reactors is not expected to commence until about 1990. It is not possible at this time to say for certain that adequate supplies of plutonium would then be available but those countries which have built thermal nuclear power reactors will have had the opportunity to accumulate plutonium for these purposes. 1. Japan, like a number of other countries such as the United Kingdom and France, has a large thermal nuclear power reactor programme and is actively engaged in fast breeder reactor development. Plutonium produced in the thermal reactors will almost certainly be used to supply fuel for future fast breeder stations. Japan is also producing an Advanced Thermal Reactor similar in some respects to the British SGHWR but designed to operate on plutonium. 2. Yes. The earlier Australia embarks on a thermal power reactor programme the greater will be the amount of plutonium available for use in fast breeders when they become commercially available. {:#subdebate-39-18} #### Nuclear Power: Gas Cooled Reactors (Question No. 1275) {: #subdebate-39-18-s0 .speaker-KUX} ##### Mr Stewart: asked the Minister for National Development the following question, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Has a decision been made that gas-cooled reactors are unsuited to the present nuclear power needs of Australia; if so, why. 1. If the suitability of these reactors for Australian needs hat not been considered, why is this so. {: #subdebate-39-18-s1 .speaker-KVR} ##### Mr Swartz:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. and (2) No. However when ail potential tenderers for nuclear power stations were invited in December 1969 to register as tenderers it was ascertained that none of them were interested in submitting a tender based on a gas cooled reactor; therefore there has been no occasion to consider the suitability of these reactors for Australian needs. Mental Health Institutions: Benefits for Patients (Question No. 1282) {: #subdebate-39-18-s2 .speaker-6U4} ##### Mr Whitlam: asked the Minister for Health, upon notice: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many patients in each State would have benefited from the request by the State Health Ministers for hospital benefits to be paid for patients in mental health institutions when the States Grants (Mental Health Institutions) Act expires on 30th June (Hansard, 1 1th September 1969, page 1259). 1. At which Health Ministers' Conferences have the State Ministers made this request. 2. What would be the cost of paying such benefits. 3. Will be provide an answer to this question before announcing or introducing legislation to take the place of the Act. {: #subdebate-39-18-s3 .speaker-KFH} ##### Dr Forbes:
LP -- The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The only State for which my *Department* has figures is New South Wales, where the latest year for which estimates are available is 1967-68. In that year, if the Commonwealth had paid hospital benefits to the New South Wales Government in respect of short-stay patients (under 3 months), the number of patients for whom payments would have been made was 13,340. 1. 1967, 1968, 1969. 2. In New South Wales, for 1967-68 the cost would have been $955,283. Figures for other States are not available. 3. As the honourable member is aware, the extension of the States Grams (Mental Health Institutions) Act for a further 3 years was announced by the Treasurer in the Budget Speech on 18th August 1970.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 19 August 1970, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1970/19700819_reps_27_hor69/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives19 August 1970

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

Mr SPEAKER:

PETITIONS

Social Services

Social Services

Export of Merino Rams

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Kangaroos

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Social Services

Education

Education

Social Services

Town of Katherine

Social Services

War Service Homes

Interest Rates

Interest Rates

Interest Rates

Kangaroos

Kangaroos

Social Services

Kangaroos

MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS

Mr GORTON:Prime Minister · Higgins · LP

QUESTION

SOCIAL SERVICES

Mr WHITLAM:WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr WENTWORTH:Minister for Social Services · MACKELLAR, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

QUESTION

ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE

Mr STREET:CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

Mr Malcolm Fraser:WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

Mr Uren:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr Uren:

Mr Malcolm Fraser:WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

QUESTION

SHIPPING

Mr BARNARD:BASS, TASMANIA

Mr SINCLAIR:Minister Assisting the Minister for Trade and Industry · NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH LAWS

Mr DRURY:RYAN, QUEENSLAND

Mr HUGHES:Attorney-General · BEROWRA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

QUESTION

SHIPPING

Mr DAVIES:BRADDON, TASMANIA

Mr SINCLAIR:CP

QUESTION

IMMIGRATION

Mr O’KEEFE:PATERSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYNCH:Minister Assisting the Treasurer · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · LP

QUESTION

ABORIGINALS

Mr Les Johnson:HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr WENTWORTH:LP

QUESTION

SOUTH AFRICA

Mr JESS:LA TROBE, VICTORIA

Mr GORTON:LP

QUESTION

House of Representatives
19 August 1970

Mr GORTON:
Prime Minister · Higgins · LP

Mr WHITLAM:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr WENTWORTH:
Minister for Social Services · MACKELLAR, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

Mr STREET:
CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

Mr Malcolm Fraser:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP

Mr BARNARD:
BASS, TASMANIA

Mr SINCLAIR:
Minister Assisting the Minister for Trade and Industry · NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr DRURY:
RYAN, QUEENSLAND

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · BEROWRA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

Mr DAVIES:
BRADDON, TASMANIA

Mr SINCLAIR:
CP

Mr O’KEEFE:
PATERSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYNCH:
Minister Assisting the Treasurer · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · LP

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr WENTWORTH:
LP

Mr JESS:
LA TROBE, VICTORIA

Mr GORTON:
LP

Mr GORTON:
LP

Sir JOHN CRAMER:
BENNELONG, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr McMAHON:
Minister for External Affairs · LOWE, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

Mr SHERRY:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

Mr SINCLAIR:
CP

Mr CALDER:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

Mr SINCLAIR:
CP

Mr CREAN:
MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA

Mr GORTON:
LP

Mr WHITTORN:
BALACLAVA, VICTORIA

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr HUGHES:
LP

Mr COPE:
SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr LYNCH:
LP

Mr FAIRBAIRN:
FARRER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr CHIPP:
Minister for Customs and Excise · HOTHAM, VICTORIA · LP

Mr BERINSON:
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr GORTON:
LP

Mr ROBINSON:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr ANTHONY:
Minister for Primary Industry · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

Mr GORTON:
LP

Mr McMAHON:
LP

Mr SCHOLES:
Corio