Senate
27 August 1937

14th Parliament · 2nd Session



The Deputy President (Senator Sampson) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers.

page 242

QUESTION

BRITISH AMBASSADOR IN CHINA

Senator FOLL:
QUEENSLAND

– Has the Leader of the Senate any information to give to the Senate concerning the statement appearing in this morning’s press to the effect that the British Ambassador in China hasbeen wounded?

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

– While the motor car in which the British Ambassador in China, Sir Hughe Knatch- Bull-Hugessen was travelling from Nanking to Shanghai yesterday, it was fired on by machine guns in two aeroplanes. The Ambassador was seriously, but not critically, wounded in the stomach, and a blood transfusion was performed. The military attache and the financial adviser, who accompanied him, were unhurt. As yet there is no definite evidence of the nationality of the attacking aeroplanes. The Ambassador’s car was flying the Union Jack, hut of the size of the flag I am not informed.

page 242

QUESTION

YAMPI SOUND IRON ORE DEPOSITS

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– On the 25th August Senator E. B. Johnston asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice : -

  1. Has the attention of the Government been drawn to a speech madeby the Honorable G.J. W. Miles. M.L.C., in the Western Australian Parliament (reported in the West Australian of the 12th instant) criticizing the reported attitude of the Federal Government towards the development of the iron deposits at Yampi Sound?
  2. Is it a fust, as suggested, Unit the Federal Government has refused the remission under by-law of duties on any of the machinery required forYampi?
  3. Is the Minister in a position to relieve any anxiety which exists in Western Australia us to the Government’s intentions in this matter ?

The Minister for Trade and Customs has furnished the following information: -

  1. Yes. 2 and 3. About three years ago a joint Japanese-Western Australian deputation waited on the Minister for Trade and Customs and requested the exemption from customs duties under by-law of machinery and equipment of Japanese manufacture which might be imported for use in the development of iron ore deposits at Yampi Sound. The granting of concessions such as that sought is subject to the condition that plant or equipment of the class or kind of that to he imported is not being commercially manufactured, firstly, in Aus tralia, and, secondly, in the United Kingdom. In view of the general nature of the request, and of the probability that much of the plant would be of a class or kind capable of commercial manufacture in Australia and the United Kingdom, the request was refused by the Minister. No specific request for by-law concession has since been received. Any such specific request would, if made, be dealt with in accordance with the general principles governing the granting of by-law concessions.

page 242

QUESTION

MIGRATION

With reference to the subject of migration, will the Minister furnish information as to -

The numbers of those aliens, rightly described as Southern Europeans, who were admitted to the Commonwealth during each of the following years:- 1930, 1031, 1932, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1936 and the first half of 1937.

Under what general conditions they were admitted,

The number of Southern Europeans naturalized during each of the years mentioned above.

The number of Southern Europeans. naturalized and unnaturalized, who left Australia during the same period.

The excess of departures from Australia, over arrivals, of members of the British race during the years 1930, 1931, 1932, 1933, 1934. 1935, 1936 and the first half of 1937.

The main contributing cause of such excess of departures over arrivals?

The Minister for the Interior has furnishedthe following information : -

The following figures show the number of alien Southern Europeans,’ i.e., Greeks, Italians, Yugo-Slavs and Albanians, who were admitted for permanent residence to the Commonwealth during the years 1930 to 1936, inclusive, and the first half of 1937, also those departing permanently during the same period and the net migration (excess arrivals over departures) : -

  1. All aliens are required to obtain authority for admission. Such authority is granted as a rule to the following classes: -

    1. dependent relatives of persons already settled in Australia, subject to satisfactory guarantees for maintenance being furnished, Dependent relatives include wives, minor children, adult single daughters and sisters, parents and fiancees;
    2. persons outside the category of dependent relatives who are nominated by persons in Australia guaranteeing to the satisfaction of the Minister that the nominee will not be allowed to become a charge upon the State; will engage in trades and occupations in which there is opportunity for absorption without detriment to Australian workers; and are in possession of £50 (Australian) landing money;
    3. aliens without guarantors in Australia who will engage in trades and occupations in which there is opportunity for their absorption without detriment to Australian workers, provided also that they are in possession of £200 (Australian) landing money.
  2. The following is a statement of the total mu mbers of Greeks,

Italians, Yugo-Slavs and Albanians naturalized during each of the years mentioned : -

  1. The figures given under (a) above show the numbers of unnaturalized SouthernEuropeans who left Australia during the same’ period, but it is not practicable to give particulars regarding the departure of naturalized persons as they have been recorded as British subjects.
  2. The excess of departures from Australia over arrivals of people of the British race was -
  1. The main contributing causes for the excess of departures over arrivals of people of British race during the years referred to were -

    1. the economic depression; and
    2. the severe curtailment of the granting of assisted passages from the United Kingdom.

page 243

QUESTION

LOAN (FARMERS’ DEBT ADJUSTMENT) ACT

What is the mode of procedure adopted by the States when applying for funds to bo used for the purpose of compounding farmers debts under the Loan (Farmers’ Debt Adjustment) Act?

Is it a fact that the Commonwealth Government has made available a total of £12,000,000 for the purpose mentioned?

What proportion of this amount has been allocated to the State of Queensland?

What amount (if any) has been drawn by the State of Queensland to date from such allocation ?

What amount, if any, has been actually used for the compounding of farmers’ debts in the State of Queensland?

The Treasurer has supplied the following answers : -

In 1936-37, the Loan Council, by unanimous resolution, decided the amount of loan money to be included in the Commonwealth loan programme for all purposes. Of this sum, the maximum amount that was possible, £1,500,000, was allocated to rural debt relief. The States subsequently applied to the Commonwealth, from time to time, for the amounts they required within the limits set by the Loan Council. In the case of some States last year, the full amounts decided by the Loan Council were not drawn, but any savings of this kind were allotted amongst the other States. As regards 1937-38, the position was discussed by the Loan Council at its meeting in July last, and it was ultimately decided that the total amount to be included in the Commonwealth loan programme of 1937-38 for this purpose would be £2,500,000. Agreement could not be secured at the Loan Council as to the allocation of this sum amongst the States. The Commonwealth is at present considering how the amount will be allocated.

The amount of £.12,000,000 is the total sum appropriated by the Loan (Farmers’ Debt Adjustment) Act 1935. Up to the 30th June, 1937, the sum of £1,817,000 had been made available, and £2,500,000 is to be made available in 1037-38.

Of the amount of £12,000,000, the sum of £10,000,000 is apportioned amongst the States under section 0 of the Loan (Farmers’ Debt Adjustment) Act 1935, and £2,000,000 is to be allocated amongst the States at a later date. Of the £10,000,000, the amount apportioned to Queensland is £1,150,000. Queensland was originally allotted £125,000 in respect of the years 1935-36 and 1936-37.

The amount actually drawn by Queensland up to the 30th June, 1937, was £75,000.

£54,436.

page 244

QUESTION

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

Senator ARKINS:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– If the Government should decide to propose to Parliament the re-constitution of the Public Accounts Committee, will it consider the desirability of doing so more on the lines of the British system? Will the Government also see if some of the reforms recommended by the Joint Select Committee on Public Accounts in 1932 can be adopted?

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE.The matters mentioned by the honorable senator will be taken into consideration should the occasion arise.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

asked the Leader of the Senate, upon notice -

Will the Government consider the advisability of the re-establishment of a Public

Accounts Committee such as was in operation up to May, 1932?

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE This matter will receive consideration at a future date.

page 244

QUESTION

WIRE NETTING

Senator MARWICK:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice -

In view of the great losses suffered through the rabbit invasion and the present high cost of netting, will the Government renew its past policy of making advances through the State governments at a low rate of interest for the purchase of netting?

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE.A reply will be furnished as soon . as possible.

page 244

QUESTION

GOLD PROSPECTING IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator ALLAN MACDONALD:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA · UAP; LP from 1944

asked the Minister in charge of Development, upon notice -

  1. Has the Government received a lengthy and interesting communication from the President of the Senate (Senator Lynch) recommending a proposal to assist gold prospecting in Western Australia, by the creation of a fund, subscribed by the Federal and State Governments and the Western Australian mining companies, from which advances would be made to prospecting parties, to be repaid out of resultant gold finds?
  2. If so, would the Minister and the Government give early and favorable consideration to Senator Lynch’s proposal, if it is considered that its effective working would give profitable employment to many experienced miners now excluded from deep mining on account of their health?
Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– The President of the Senate (Senator Lynch) has been informed that the fact that the Commonwealth Government is generally in accord with his views is evidenced by the policy which it has adopted towards the mining industry during recent years. During 1935, the Commonwealth agreed to co-operate with the States in a scheme which was designed to stimulate the development of the metalliferous mining industry on a nation-wide basis. The Commonwealth provided £500,000 for this purpose, spread over a period of three years, which will expire on the 30th June, 1938. One of the purposes for which these moneys were made available was the assistance of prospecting.

The Western Australian quota of the Commonwealth provision of £500,000 was £106,400, £66,800 of which was allocated for prospecting. The scheme has proved an important factor in the achievement of gratifying results. Since it came into operation, direct employment has been provided in the mining industry for an additional 8,000 men, and the value of gold production has increased from £7,544,491 in 1934 to £10,172,420 in 1936, and £5,647,782 in the first six months of 1937. In addition to the metalliferous mining scheme, the Commonwealth Government is co-operating with the Governments of Queensland and Western Australia in an aerial, geological and geophysical survey of Northern Australia. The Commonwealth provision for this survey was £75,000, and the States each provided £37,500. In effect, this financial provision results in the expenditure in this regard by the States being subsidized by the Commonwealth to the extent of 331/3 per cent, so far as their territories are concerned. The pooling of the resources of three governments in connexion with this survey enables the employment of the most up-to-date scientific methods, including those of aerial photography and geophysics, whose cost would probably be beyond the reach of any single government. This survey is materially benefiting the mining industry in the territories concerned.

page 245

QUESTION

PATROL VESSEL LARRAKIA

Senator BROWN:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior, upon notice -

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

Have the owners of the recently-arrested Japanese vessels put in a bill of costs for the towing of the disabled Larrakia into Darwin? The Minister for the Interior has supplied the following answer : -

No. The Larrakia came into Darwin under its own power.

page 245

QUESTION

APPLE AND PEAR BOUNTY

Senator PAYNE:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Commerce, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that estimates recently made by the Apple and Pear Export Council of Australia show that the aggregate additional costs through increases in cost of wrapping paper, cases and additions to wages,&c, will amount to £78,125, on the export quota alone, for the marketing of the crop for the 1938 season ?
  2. In considering the continuance of the apple and pear bounty for 1938, will the Minister, in arriving at the amount of bounty to be provided, give full consideration to the estimated increase of costs that will have to be borne by the fruit-growers for the season under review?
Senator BRENNAN:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for Commerce · VICTORIA · UAP

– The Minister for Commerce has supplied the following answers : -

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.

page 245

QUESTION

GALVANIZED IRON

Senator GRANT:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

  1. Has the Minister had his attention called to the statements made in the Argus of the 25th instant -

    1. That the manufacturers of galvanized iron are from three to four months behind in their commitments.
    2. That in some cases orders for steel sheets will be accepted subject to delivery in about eight months from receipt of order.
    3. That delivery of steel plates cannot be given for a period of eight to twelve months.
    4. That for special large-sized steel plates acceptance of orders is subject to rolling about SeptemberOctober next year?
  2. If the above statements are correct, what attitude does the Government propose to take in order to make supplies available within a more reasonable time?

Senator A J McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– The information is being obtained.

page 245

STATES’ GRANTS BILL 1937

Bill received from the House of Representatives and (on motion by Senator Sir George Pearce) read a first time.

page 245

WAR PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1937

Bill received from House of Representatives and (on motion by Senator Sir George Pearce) read a first time.

page 246

DAIRY PRODUCE EXPORT CONTROL BILL 1937

Second Reading

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:
Minister for External Affairs · West ern Australia · UAP

[11.17].- I move-

That thebill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is to provide that the qualification of electors of the Australian Dairy Produce Board shall be conferred only on those persons who are enrolled on the Commonwealth Electoral Roll in accordance with the provisions of Part VII. of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918-1934. By an amendment of the Dairy Produce Export Control Act in 1935 the Australian Dairy Produce Board was created. The constitution of this Board is - One government nominee ; one elected by the Federal Council ofthe Australian Dairy Factory Managers’ and Secretaries’ Association; two elected by Owners of Proprietary and Privatelyowned Butter and Cheese Factories; two elected to represent Co-operative Butter and Cheese factories in each of the States of New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland; one elected to represent Cooperative Butter and Cheese factories in each of the States of South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania, one elected by producers in each of the States of New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland ; and one elected by producers of the States of South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania. In all these cases, with the obvious exception of the government nominee, election is as prescribed.

Turning now to the regulations to ascertain the manner in which these elections are conducted, we find that for the elected representative of the Federal Council of the Australian Dairy Factory Managers’ and Secretaries’ Association, the secretary of that council must furnish to the Chief Electoral Officer a list of the names and addresses of the members of that council, and that list is deemed to be the roll for that election. For the election of the representatives of the co-operative butter and cheese factories, all producers are entitled to vote who supplied, during the year preceding the election,milk or cream to any co-operative butter or cheese factory in the State in which they were producing. It is also provided that a producer entitled to vote for co-operative representatives, as well as for all other representatives of which I have made mention, shall, before his name is placed on a roll in respect of any of these elections, lodge with the returning officer certain prescribed forms attesting his eligibility to vote as an owner or a producer. It will be seen from this, therefore, that there is no question of basic eligibility of the voter to comply with the first principles of citizenship: ie., that ho should be qualified to have his name enrolled on the Commonwealth electoral rolls. Thus a man not having this qualification as an Australian citizen, is nevertheless entitled to record his vote as to who should or should not be elected a representative on the Australian -Dairy “ Produce Board. It is to remove this anomaly that the present bill is brought down and I commend it to the favorable consideration of honorable senators.

Qestion resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 (Australian Dairy Produce Board).

Senator ABBOTT:
New South Wales

– I understand that the law of some foreign countries takes no cognizance of the fact that their nationals have become naturalized Australian citizens. That is to say, the status of such persons, so far as the laws of those countries are concerned, remains unaltered. For that reason we should not encourage a person to become a voter in Australia for the purpose of exercising a voice in the control of an important industry if he be still subject to the law of the land of his birth. He may be conscripted by the other government for service abroad. Before a person is permitted to exercise a vote in connection with the direction of any Australian industry he should be wholly an Australian citizen; he should become assimilated in the Australian community so that ultimately his descendants will lose their foreign identity and associations. If it be too late now to consider that matter in con- nexion with this bill, I .hope that the Government will give attention to it in the future, and make special enquiries to determine what nations insist that their nationals, even though they become naturalized citizens of another country, shall retain their original nationality.

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:
Minister for External Affairs · Western Australia · UAP

[11.23].- I shall certainly bring the honorable senator’s remarks under the notice of the Minister for the Interior. If the Government proposed to take any fiction in this respect, it could not do so through this bill; it would be obliged to amend the Nationality Act.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– Can the leader of the Senate give us any indication of the number of persons who will be affected by this provision? So far as I am aware, comparatively few persons are involved, and therefore it seems to be rather paltry to single them out, as is done in this measure. Doubtless there is some more important reason for this amendment than appears on the surface of it. At the present time a minor, if he were a dairyman, would be given a vote, and possibly a person who is not a British subject would also be eligible; but the numbers must be very few.

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE (Western Australia - Minister for External Affairs) [11.25]. - I assure the Honorable senator that the Government has not acted without advice on this matter. Although comparatively few persons will be affected by the provisions of this bill, ;i. considerable number will be affected by a similar measure, which will presently lie before the Senate. If it were not for this provision there would be sufficient unnaturalized aliens in some areas of Australia to decide an election for the Dried Fruits Export Control Board.

Senator LECKIE:
Victoria

.- I ask the Leader of the Senate (Senator Pearce) whether those persons engaged in the industry who are to be m.ade ineligible to vote foi’ the election of members of the Board will be released from their obligation to pool their butter? This provision does not seem to me to be quire fair. While the aliens will be subjected to all the restrictions in regard to the export of butter and the price of this commodity, they will not be pcr- mitted to exercise a, vote.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

– They can qualify for it by becoming naturalized Australian citizens.

Senator LECKIE:

– That will take some years. The matter seems too small to warrant a bill of this kind, particularly as it will not affect many people. A citizen of the United States of America might decide to invest a considerable sum of money in a dairy farm in Australia; but he would not be entitled to exercise a vote in the control of the industry. In view of the fact that an overwhelming percentage of the persons engaged in the industry are Australians, their numbers would be sufficient to counteract any detrimental effects that might possibly result from a block alien vote. This prohibition is not a friendly gesture towards foreign nationals. If there were present any great danger to the community, I could see reason, for the incorporation of this provision.

Senator Dein:

– If the persons involved are .sufficiently interested in the control of their industry, they can become naturalized Australian citizens.

Senator LECKIE:

– We have encouraged them to settle in Australia; if they are prepared to comply with our conditions and standard of living we want similar settlers in increasing numbers. For sentimental reasons some of them may not desire to relinquish their alien nationality. In this matter a hard business proposition is involved, and while the alien producers are subjected to the disabilities of control, they should have some voice in the framing of the policy.

Senator McLeay:

– Would the honorable senator say that they are disabilities or benefits?

Senator LECKIE:

– Some use one terra and some another; in the end both amount to the same thing; it is merely a matter of terminology. The introduction of a bill of this description to disfranchise a few decent people is .like using a steam hammer to crack a nut.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:
South Australia

– As one who cannot be suspected of having hostile feeling towards other countries I welcome this provision. It is a fundamental rule that a man who is a member of a board constitutedby the law of the land shall be a national of that country.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– But this does not apply to persons sitting on the board.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES:

– It might easily happen that an alien would be elected to the board. As has been indicated by interjection, these aliens are entitled to become naturalized Australian citizens ; naturalization should be a sine qua non of a person having any control of the industry in which he is engaged. As to the matter that Senator Leckie raised, I take it that unquestionably the aliens, even if disfranchised, will be required to comply with the provisions of the act. I cannot imagine that any country would permit a person who is not a naturalized citizen of it to possess powers which might lead to his becoming actually one of the controllers of an important industry. The principle contained in this clause is sound, and if it is to be applied to other industries, that is a greater reason why honorable senators should support it.

Clause agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

page 248

DRIED FRUITS EXPORT CONTROL BILL 1937

Second Reading

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:
Minister for External Affairs · West ern Australia · UAP

[11.32].- I move-

That the hill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is the same as that of the measure with which the Senate has just dealt, but in the dried fruits industry many more unnaturalized aliens are engaged than in dairying. The Dried Fruits Export Control Board consists of one member appointed by the Governor-General as the representative of the Commonwealth Government; two representatives elected by growers in the State of Victoria, and one representative elected by growers in each of the States of New South Wales, South Australia, and Western Australia and two members with commercial experience appointed by the Governor-General.

As does the bill of which the Senate has just approved, this measure contains a provision setting out the manner in which the roll shall be compiled. All the arguments which I have advanced in support of the other measure apply to this bill, but with greater force, because of the greater number of unnaturalized aliens in this industry, particularly in certain districts, in one at least of which their number are almost sufficient to sway the election. The bill not only affects the right to vote, but also guards against the possibility of unnaturalized aliens being elected to the board.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted.

page 248

ESTIMATES AND BUDGET PAPERS 1937-38

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:
Minister for External Affairs · Western Australia · UAP

[11.36].- I lay on the table-

Estimates of Receipts and Expenditure, and Estimates of Expenditure for Additions, New Works, Buildings, etc., for the year ending 30th June, 1938.

The Budget, 1937-38 - Papers presented by the HonorableR. G. Casey, M.P., onthe occasion of the Budget of 1937-38 - and move -

That the papers be printed.

In introducing the budget for 1937-38 in the House of Representatives to-day the Treasurer, the Honorable R. G. Casey, said that it is not too much to claim that at the present time Australia has reached the highest level of prosperity ever recorded. Based on unemployment percentages reported to the Statistician by trade unions, unemployment has declined from 30 per cent, in the second quarter of 1932 to 9.7 per cent, to-day. On more complete figures which are available for New South Wales and Queensland, it is evident that the position is even better than these percentages indicate. The value of production has increased in the five years by over 40 per cent., and building and construction in the same period have more than quadrupled. The market for Australian primary products has materially improved, the value of our wool clip in 1936-37 being almost double that in 1931-32. “Wheat also has shown nearly as marked an increase. Export prices in 1936-37 show the substantial increase of 20 per cent, over 1935- 36. The extent of the recovery is further illustrated by the fact that in 1936- 37 Australia had a favorable trade balance of nearly £36,000,000. The marked recovery during the period of its office is a source of great satisfaction to the Government, which can reasonably claim to have contributed in no small measure to this achievement by following a sound financial policy.

The improved condition of the country is reflected, also, in the budgetary position of both the Commonwealth and the State Governments. The aggregate deficits of the Commonwealth and the States for the year 1930-31 amounted to £25,390,000, and in 1931-32 to £19,490,000; but in 1936-37 an aggregate surplus of £965,000 was recorded.

Since the assumption of office in December, 1931, by the Lyons Government, the Commonwealth debt has been reduced by £11,019,000 to £386,910,000. During the year a loan of £12,360,000 was converted in London, with a saving in interest and .exchange of £46,000 per annum. . Further loans totalling £11,410,000 will mature on the 1st February, 1938. Two loans of £7,500,000 each were raised in Australia during the year 1936-37, the yield of the first being £3 19s. 4d. per cent., and of the second, £3 19s. Id. per cent, per annum. In the current financial year the Loan Council has decided to limit the borrowing for Sta te and Commonwealth purposes to £16,000,000, of which the Commonwealth’s share wall be £2,500,000. The whole of this latter amount will be used for grants to the States for rural debt adjustment.

The national debt sinking fund has played a most important part in connexion with the debt. Since the establishment of the fund in 1923, over £75,000,000 has been provided for the redemption of Commonwealth debt, and over £37,000,000 has been paid to the fund for the redemption of State debts since the State sinking funds were established in 1928. This year £5,580,000 will be provided for State sinking funds, and £4,630,000 for the Commonwealth sinking fund, a total of more than £10,000,000.

The revenue for 1936-37 amounted to £82,807,977, and the expenditure _ to £81,531,419, showing an excess of receipts over expenditure amounting to £1,276,558. Practically the whole of this excess is due to increased income tax receipts on account of the more rapid payment of outstanding arrears. It is proposed that £1,000,000 of these excess receipts shall be set aside for the public works of the Postmaster-General’s Department, and that £276,558 shall be applied to the reduction of the accumulated deficit of the Commonwealth, which will then be £15,658,000.

For the year 1937-38, the Government again presents a balanced budget. Since it assumed office in December, 1931, the burden of taxation on the Australian, people has been considerably reduced by this Government. Successive reductions have been made of sales tax, land tax, and income tax, while the entertainments tax has been abolished altogether. In order to illustrate the value of these reductions of taxes, I point out that, had the income tax, sales tax and land tax been continued at the 1931-32 rates, they would have yielded £36,500,000 in the current financial year instead of the £18,200,000 which is shown in the budget. Extensive reductions have also occurred in primage duties and in customs - British preferential - and excise duties on certain commodities. In view of the formidable and inescapable increases of its obligations for the immediate future, the Government regrets that it is unable still further to reduce taxes in this financial year.

The estimated budget results for 1937-38 may be summarized as follows : - Estimated revenue, £85,190,000; estimated expenditure, £85,160,000; estimated excess receipts, £30,000.

It is proposed to increase the rate of invalid and old-age pensions from 19s. to £1 a week, representing a cost of £800,000 in a full financial year. Further increases are due to the normal growth of the number of pensioners, and by the fact that, in this year, there will be 27 pension pay-days instead of the usual 26. In all, invalid and old-age pensions will cost practically £2,000,000 more than last year.

Following the discussions on Empire defence at the Imperial Conference, substantial provision has been made for strengthening our defences. The total amount to be expended in this direction will be £11,531,000, as compared with £S,067,000 in the last financial year. These defence proposals are to be financed as follows: - From revenue, £6,000,000; from defence equipment trust account, £2,656,000; from civil aviation defence account, £375,000; from loan fund, £2,500,000.

For some years it has been the practice to pay as much as possible of excess receipts of the Commonwealth to the defence equipment trust account, and to draw upon this account to assist the budget in respect of defence expenditure in subsequent years. At the close of 1936-37 approximately £3,000,000 was held in the defence trust accounts, and practically the whole of this sum is being committed during the current financial year. The Government has decided to meet the balance of £2,500,000 from loan fund. To this end it is proposed to raise £2,000,000 sterling, that is, £2,500,000 in Australian currency, by means of. Commonwealth treasury-bills from the Commonwealth Bank in London and, at a later date, to fund the shortterm securities from the proceeds of a public loan. This course has been decided on, because, first it is desired to restrict the total raisings of all governments in Australia in 1937-38 to £16,000,000 ; and secondly, a conversion operation of £72,700,000 has to be dealt with in 1938. Moreover, by this means, we shall be able to finance our expenditure in Great Britain for defence equipment without encroaching on our existing London funds.

The total additional provision in this financial year for war pensions and repatriation i3 £212,000. It is proposed to increase the rate of war service pensions from 19s. to £1, involving an additional charge of £22,000 on the budget.

An amount of £100,000 is being provided in respect of public health projects, especially in relation to the health of women and children, whilst grants for

Senator Sir George Pearce. aerial medical services, and for investigating problems of nutrition are also being continued. An additional £25,000 is being provided for the eradication of cattle tick.

Reports on unemployment insurance and health and pensions insurance have been received from Mr. Godfrey H. Ince, Chief Insurance Officer of the British Ministry of Labour, and Sir “Walter Kinnear, Controller of Insurance in the Ministry of Health in Great Britain, respectively. The former report was recently discussed, with representatives of the States, when it was arranged that a committee of officers and actuaries, representing the Commonwealth and States, should further examine certain aspects of unemployment insurance. The matter of health and pensions insurance is now under consideration by the Government. Towards the initial expense of national insurance, £75,000 is included in the budget.

It is proposed to grant superannuation rights, together with the right to furlough for long and meritorious service, to as many members as possible of the staffs of the High Commissioner’s office, the War Service Homes and Repatriation Departments, and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, who arc, in fact, though not technically, permanent officers. ‘

The estimates of the PostmasterGeneral’s Department for this financial year provide for an increase of the expenditure chargeable to revenue, by about £900,000, and for a corresponding increase of the receipts of that -department.’ The Government has carried out a policy of continuous improvement of postal, telegraphic, telephonic and broadcasting services. This is illustrated by the progressive increase of expenditure on new works of the Postmaster-General’s Department from £865,000 in 1933-34 to an estimate of £3,250,000 in 1937-38. As I have already said, £1,000,000 of the £3,250,000 will be provided from excess receipts of last year. There has been extensive development in air-mail and passenger services and telephone facilities, particularly in the country, whilst additional broadcasting facilities have also been provided. It is pleasing to note that, in respect of all this work, Australian manu- factures have been used to a far greater extent than in the past.

The sum of £10,000 has been provided i.o meet possible commitments which may arise in 1937-38 in connexion with Pacific shipping services. This matter was discussed at the Imperial Conference, and it is hoped that an agreement will shortly be entered into under which two new ships will replace those at .present operated by the Canadian-Australasian line.

The provision in 1937-38 for scientific and industrial research is £170,000, compared with £138,000 for 1936-37. Excellent work has been done by the council, and, as a result, increasing contributions are being received from industry. Research is being pursued with regard to the blowfly pest, pasture improvement, forestry, fruit preservation, &c, and early in 1938 a fisheries investigation vessel will bo in operation under the guidance of Dr. Thompson, formerly Director of Fisheries in Newfoundland.

The Government has undertaken to provide £334,000, and the New South Wales Government £166,000, as debenture capital for the development of the shale oil industry at Newnes. Towards this amount a first instalment of £100,000 is provided in the present budget. From the £250,000 appropriated under the Petroleum Oil Search Act 1936 assistance has been approved for several companies in the search for flow oil, and the prospects are considered promising.

In accordance with a recommendation of the Royal Commission on Monetary and Banking Systems, the Government proposes to establish a new department of the Commonwealth Bank to provide facilities for fixed and long-term lending, and a bill for the purpose will be introduced this session.

The direct financial assistance rendered to the States will amount this year to £15,565,500, which is £543,000 in excess of the grants made during the previous year. These grants are made up as follows: - Interest and sinking fund under the financial agreement, £9,015,000 ; federal aid roads, £3,750,000; special grants, £2,350,000; other grants, £450,500. The fourth annual report of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommended that payments for 1937-38 should be: South Australia, £1,200,000; Western Australia, £575,000; and Tasmania, £575,000. It is proposed to ask Parliament to approve of these recommendations.

As the result of the federal aid roads and works agreement authorized by the Commonwealth Parliament at the beginning of the present session, payments to States have been increased, and it is anticipated that in this financial year these payments will be £3,750,000, or £721,000 more than last year. The budget also provides for other grants to the States amounting to £200,000, to provide technical training and skilled employment for youths, £100,000 towards interest and sinking funds in respect of loans for public works, £70,000 for assistance to the metalliferous mining industry, and £80,000 for assistance to forestry.

In view of continued low prices, the sum of £65,000 is provided in the budget for general assistance, scientific research, and publicity in respect of the apple and pear industry. The bounty given in previous years in relation to oranges is also being extended to all citrus fruits, and it is expected that the expenditure involved will be £8,000.

Due to the fertilizers subsidy, which has; been paid since 1932, the use of artificial manures by primary producers, other than wheat-growers, has substantially increased. In order that the subsidy may be kept within reasonable, bounds, it has been decided to limit the payment to the first twenty tons of fertilizers purchased by any individual. The estimated cost this year is £250,000. Recognizing the valuable work that is being done by the Australian Travel Association, the Government proposes to increase the Commonwealth grant to this body from £15,000 to £20,000. The sum of £30,000 will also be made available to the Australian Overseas Trade Publicity Committee for advertising and trade promotion in the United Kingdom, whilst £7,500 will be made available for general exhibition purposes in the United Kingdom.

Debate (on motion by Senator Collings) adjourned.

page 252

QUESTION

IMPERIAL CONFERENCE, 1937

Debate resumed from the 26th August (vide page 180), on motion by Senator Sir George Pearce -

That the paper be printed.

Senator ABBOTT:
New South Wales

– I earnestly request - I do not like to use the word - challenge - the Leader of the Opposition to explain fully that part of the Labour party’s policy on defence which he expounded in this chamber yesterday, providing that no Australian military forces shall be allowed to go overseas! In what measure would that rule of the Labour party apply if the very existence of our sister dominion in the Pacific, New Zealand, were threatened by the naval forces of other countries? I believe that the Australian people will demand from the Leader of the Labour party a clear, unequivocal declaration on this point, because it is of the utmost importance to the welfare and happiness of every man, woman and child in Australia that our citizens should know just what responsibility is placed upon them in deciding who shall be given the right to say what part Australia shall play in the preservation of the British Empire. According to press reports of his speech yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition said that, under the rules of the Labour party, every member of that party was committed to the “ adequate “ defence of Australia.

Senator Collings:

– I did not say under the rules, but under the policy, of the Labour party.

Senator ABBOTT:

– The honorable senator is reported in the press as having said that the rules of the Labour party provided that no Australian forces shall te sent overseas without the consent of the Australian people.

Senator Brown:

– What is wrong with that?

Senator ABBOTT:

– There would be a good deal wrong with it in the event of the existence of the sister dominion of New Zealand being threatened; because under these “ rules “ of the Labour party a referendum of the people would have to be taken to decide whether or not Australian naval forces would co-operate with the rest of the Empire in the defence of New Zealand.

Senator Brown:

– The people in NewZealand are not worrying about their position. The Government reduced the defence vote the other day.

Senator ABBOTT:

– In this morning’s newspapers, Mr. Savage, the Premier of New Zealand is reported as having said - “We are building a comparative paradise in the Pacific, and I do not see any reason to worry about the future. “ Mr. Savage drew a beautiful picture of the New Zealand paradise, and I suppose we need not be surprised at that, since it is a natural human impulse to try at some time or other to attain to a state of supreme felicity. But I remind our Labour friends in this chamber and elsewhere that in the world to-day, there, are very many people in other countries who would be only too glad of an opportunity to break into New Zealand’s paradise if they thought that effective measures had not been taken to prevent them. Even the Labour party cannot divorce itself from its responsibility to the citizens of Australia with regard to defence.

Senator Brown:

– We shall tell the people all about our policy.

Senator ABBOTT:

– Over and over again yesterday, when the Leader- of the Opposition was speaking, Senator Guthrie asked him point blank to say what a Labour government would do in the event of a threat being made against the sister dominion of New Zealand, and the honorable gentleman is reported to have said “I shall answer that later.” He has not yet answered the question. I challenge him to do so now or on some other occasion before this Parliament is dissolved. The people are entitled to know what would be the position in the Pacific in the event of the Labour party being returned to power. Honorable senators will no doubt remember the interesting position that developed in the Pacific during the Great War, and the anxiety felt in Australia because of the exploits of a small but efficient fleet of German cruisers which raided shipping and did enormous damage to the cause of the allies. At one time they were believed to be planning a raid on Fiji, and there is little doubt that they would have done so but for the fact that they picked up a wireless message indicating that the Australian battle cruiser

Australia,which was - superior in speed and gunpower to any of the German vessels, was in the vicinity. As a matter of fact, the Australia was not anywhere within striking distance of the enemy cruisers, but a “ bluffing “ wireless message served its purpose, and the raiders did not, as was feared, visit Fiji or New Zealand. Most of us remember the battle between those German cruisers, and an inferior British fleet off Coronel in the South Pacific; the British vessels were destroyed.We remember also that the German warships later descended upon the Falkland Islands, a possession in the South Atlantic, where they were met. and destroyed by a superior fleet of British battle-cruisers -which had been released from other duty in European waters to attend to them. What would have been the position if, at that time, the commanders of the German cruisers had known that Australia was under Labour government, and that a “rule” of Labour’s defence policy precluded Australian naval forces from proceeding beyond territorial waters until after the taking of a referendum?

Senator Brown:

– The honorable senator is talking sheer bunkum.

Senator ABBOTT:

– I am putting before the Senate the rules governing the defence policy of the Labour party.

Senator Brown:

– Bunk!

Senator ABBOTT:

– I am glad that my friend applies such a term to that policy. It is bunk.

Senator Brown:

– I mean that what the honorable senator is saying is “bunk”.

Senator ABBOTT:

– And I repeat that I am merely placing before the Senate the implications of Labour’s defence policy. The rules state definitely that Australian defence forces must not be sent overseas until after the taking of a referendum.

What is meant by British defence in the Pacific, if not co-operation? And without co-operation there or elsewhere, what is the value of the British Empire? Do my friends in Opposition in this chamber wish us to believe that they cannot wholeheartedly admire the magnificent declaration of non-aggression contained in the review by the Leader of the Senate of the Imperial Conference proceedings? Do they affirm that the British nations have not displayed qualities of world leadership, and do’ they not know that other governments, even those hostile to the British Empire, are satisfied as to its bona fides? And are they not proud of Britain’s declaration of non-aggression as the keynote of its re-armament policy?

Senator Brown:

– That is Labour’s policy.

Senator ABBOTT:

– I have always been a firm believer in a policy that will tend to remove misunderstandings among the peoples of the world, but I do not blind myself to the fact that if we do not adopt reasonable precautions for self protection, there are robbers abroad who are only too ready to break into our homes, if they know that we have thrown away our guns, or if they believe that we have become such weaklings as to be unable or unwilling to defend ourselves. On the other hand, we do not want to see a display of that spirit of jingoism which, towards the end of last century, became such an object of derision. As a civilized people we do not stand for that. Neither do the Leader of the Opposition and his supporters here and elsewhere. But we of the ministerial parties do affirm that the leadership for peace displayed by the British Empire is an important factor in world affairs. It is so regarded by the governments of other countries, but it would be foolish to allow our defence measures to be determined by the “ rules “ of a political party, especially at a time like the present, when nations, without even a declaration of war, are fighting among themselves under “ Rafferty “ rules - fighting not minor wars, but cruel, major wars of the worst type.

This, I remind the Senate, is what is going on in the world to-day. How long will our Labour friends - these political dreamers - shut their eyes to facts, and refuse to see the, position as it is? How long will they persist in their foolish policy that we must have a referendum of the people before anything can be done by Australia to assist, say, the sister dominion of New Zealand should it be threatened by an aggressor? What would be the value of British defence measures in the pacific if there were no cooperation among the components of the Empire? We depend for our safety on prompt and effective co-operation. Any other policy would mere-y be cruel selfdeception of British peoples who rely for their security upon a powerful British navy.

Senator Brown:

– Listen to this fighting pacifist!

Senator ABBOTT:

– I do believe in peace; but I am now fighting for the principles underlying a strong British Empire which, by its self-denial in the policy of disarmament for many years, gave an example to the world of absolute sincerity in the cause of peace. Unfortunately, Great Britain’s efforts evoked no response from other major powers. On the contrary, the spirit underlying the peace gesture was mistaken for evidence of weakness. Some, indeed, entered the realms of prophecy; they talked of the disintegration of the British Empire and metaphorically threw their hats in the air.

But having for fourteen or fifteen years given the world a lead in disarmament for the sake of world peace, the sincerity of which cannot be called in question, and having found that that example was not followed, and that. robbers are abroad, Great Britain has changed its policy and, by the adoption of a well-devised rearmament programme, has shown its resolve to be once again the determining factor in world diplomacy based on a policy of non-aggression.

In VieW of what has happened and is happening to-day, we are entitled to ask what hope there would be for the people of this country if Labour came into power as the result of the swing of the pendulum during the coming election, and if, as it would have the right to do, it gave effect to its defence policy to take a referendum before the Australian Defence Forces could be employed to assist even the sister dominion of New Zealand. Et is important to note also that, if that unhappy day should arrive, Federal Labour could not possibly govern, except with the consent of the New South Wales Labour party, and from events of recent years we know what that means. Not long ago we heard the Leader of the Op position in this chamber wholeheartedly and sincerely repudiating the actions of a well known Labour leader in New South Wales. Very well! Now I tell him that as surely as God made little apples, if his party wins the next election anc! comes into power, it will be compelled to g.ve effect to the policy of that New South Wales Labour leader, no matter what Mr. Curtin, the Federal Labour leader or the rest of the Federal Labour party may think or do.

Senator Brown:

– Bunk !

Senator ABBOTT:

– Again I agree with* the honorable gentleman that much of Labour’s policy is “ bunk “, and I remind the .Senate that, with one exception, all the New South Wales Labour members of the House of Representatives belong to what is known as the Lang party. That fact, I suggest, is highly significant. We know, from recent utterances of certain members in the House of Representatives and from newspaper reports of speeches of other political leaders what their attitude would be following success at the polls. From speeches which we have heard in this debate we gather that a fair amount of Communist support will be given to Labour candidates at the coming elections. A real danger to British interests in the Pacific would be constituted, should the government he in the hands of the New South Wales Labour party, as there is good reason to believe it would be.

Senator Collings:

– So this is what we have got down to, is it?

Senator Brown:

– It is tragic that an intelligent senator should talk such rubbish.

Senator ABBOTT:

– It is tragic that such a contingency should be possible, if Labour should be successful in the coming elections. It is tragic that, notwithstanding repeated requests from the Leader of the Senate and government supporters for a declaration of Labour’s defence policy, there should have been such deliberate reticence on the part of the Leader of the Opposition. What is needed is a straightout declaration of what will bo the position in the Pacific if Labour be returned to power. We have had certain “ rules “ of the Labour party read to us. What is our strength in the Pacific? Does it rest solely upon the naval forces which Australia can afford? Even Mr. Curtin, the Leader of the Federal Labour party, says “ No “ to that question. He clearly is of the opinion that, alone, we could not provide a navy of sufficient strength to safeguard all our interests. Therefore, it is true that our strength in the Pacific depends upon cooperation between the Australian naval forces, the smaller naval forces in New Zealand, the British China Squadron and the Singapore Naval Base.

If our friends of the Labour party will take the trouble to examine the map of the world, they will find that, in the Pacific, to the north of Australia, there is a string of islands which afford the best chance to save Australia from actual invasion. We cannot, I suppose, hope for complete immunity from raids or serious damage. But we have been told that the “ rules “ of the Labour party would prevent an Australian naval force from being used to check an enemy there until the people had been consulted by referendum.

Senator Collings:

– Thank Cod for the Canberra Times!

Senator ABBOTT:

– I am glad that my friend has expressed thanks to the Deity for something. I can only hope that, as the result of what has been said in this debate, he will see the light and give us a straight-out declaration of where he and his party stand in relation to co-operation of the Australian naval forces with those of other parts of the Empire in time of emergency.

Senator COLLINGS:

– The honorable senator cannot find in our rules anything about a referendum in the circumstances mentioned.

Senator ABBOTT:

– The rules definitely state that the Labour party objects to despatching defence forces overseas without the consent of the people. That means a referendum.

As to the influence of the British Empire on world peace, I remember, as a boy, well over forty years ago, reading a significant statement made by the Consul in Australia for the United States of

America who, in the course of an address, said that if the English-speaking nations cared to say to the rest of theworld “ There shall not be war,” there would not be war. That is as true to-day as it was then. The Government is striving to secure effective co-operation in the defence of the Pacific.

Senator Collings:

– It should also be striving to keep on good terms with the United States of America, a friendly nation in the Pacific.

Senator ABBOTT:

– A very worthy object, too. Vessels of the British Navy are stationed at Singapore, and, in tho event of war, the naval strength of that squadron would be increased. British vessels are also on the China potion and New Zealand has a small force. Only a lunatic would suggest that, in the event of war, Australia should not co-operate with other British naval forces in the Pacific zone. If the Government declared that the Australian naval vessels were to serve only on the Australian coast, that co-operation would be impossible. In endeavouring to explain what he terms the “ adequate “ defence of Australia, Senator Collings used the same words as the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives. Senator Collings, in referring yesterday to our extensive coast-line, the area of this continent, and the vast amount of British capital invested in this country, said that Australia would be doing its job if it defended its own people and tho interests of British capitalists in Australia. Does the honorable senator think that we can protect the whole of Australia merely by aeroplanes operating within the 3- mile limit”? I imagine that, in the event of war, the objective of naval experts would be to get the enemy vessels into a bottleneck, which would not be on the Australian coast. I rose more particularly to see if I could secure from the representatives of the Labour party in this chamber a straight-out answer as to Labour’s policy in respect of co-operation with British naval forces in the Pacific. But all honorable Senators of the Opposition do is to refer us to some plank or rule in their -platform at a time when the whole world is struggling under Rafferty rules. We have reason to be proud of the outstanding results achieved At what the Leader of the Opposition calls a “ dud “ imperial Conference-. It was ni>t a “ dud “ conference, but one which gave to the world an inspiring declaration of where the British Empire stands-. Yet we have some members of the Labour party quibbling about the expense Australia incurred in sending its delegates to attend that gathering. In view of the results achieved, the cost was insignificant-.

Senator Collings:

– I never took any exception to the expenditure incurred.

Senator ABBOTT:

– In all seriousness, I ask the Leader of the Opposition whether he believes that, in the event of war in Which Australia was involved, the centre of hostilities would be in close proximity to Australia?

Senator Collings:

– Where does the honorable senator imagine the centre would, be ?

Senator ABBOTT:

– It certainly would not be within the 3-mile limit. It might be in eastern or western waters; but, wherever it was, the service of the silent navy would bo required. Surely he does not suggest that the power to determine whether the Australian Navy should participate in any conflict to ensure the safety of the Australian people should be in the hands of one section of a political party! That is the greatest insult that could bo offered to free people in a democratic country. The Leader of the Opposition also gave to the Senate an interesting disquisition upon the value of aeroplanes in modern warfare. There are, I know, many so-called experts in the Labour party, and probably there are some in the party to which I belong, but I remind the honorable senator that Great Britain is more vitally concerned in the defence of the Empire than we are. What is Britain doing?

Senator Collings:

– Sending its experts to train potential enemies.

Senator ABBOTT:

– The idea was prevalent for some time that in the event of war aeroplanes would be more effective than, capital ships, but British naval experts have since declared that the strength of the navy must be increased.

Britain is now building capital ships of the Hood class.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

-Britain is constructing five new capital ships.

Senator ABBOTT:

– Yes, and remodelling some of the older vessels. Would that policy be adopted if capital ships could be readily sunk by bombers as the’ Leader of the Opposition suggests? Are not vessels of the Japanese fleet now anchored in. Chinese waters where they are open to aerial attack? Notwithstanding this, the Labour party wishes us to believe that ah air force is our only means of protecting the country.

Senator Collings:

– We said that an air force could be superior to a naval force.

Senator ABBOTT:

– The British naval authorities, who have more information on this subject than the members of the Australian Labour party, decided after full inquiry and considerable expense, that capital ships are still the most effective means of protecting British interests. How does the honorable senator think that we could cripple an enemy fleet on our coast without the assistance of a strong fleet acting in cooperation with the whole of the British naval strength in the Pacific? Will the Australian Labour party deny that protection to the Australian people? I challenge the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives, the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley) and their master, Mr. Lang, to say what a Labour government would do in the event of New Zealand being attacked. Let them say straight out whether they would hold a referendum before they would consent to assist that sister dominion, which is controlled by a Labour government led by Mr. Savage.

Senator DEIN:
New South Wales

– I rose particularly to endorse the policy of holding Imperial Conferences, and to congratulate the Australian delegates at the recent con’ference held in London upon the capable way in which they represented Australia! If membership of the British Commonwealth of Nations is worth anything at all, it surely should be worth the expense incurred in sending delegates to such conferences. The remarks of honorable senators in opposition suggest that in holding such gatherings a new principle is introduced; but conferences arc held by political, religious and sporting bodies in order to formulate policies, on. the understanding that each section co-operating will give effect to the policy determined by the conference. A few months ago a conference of members of tho representatives of the Labour party from five States was held in New South Wales, and that conference even Went so far as to tell tho New South Wales delegates what they had to do. That action had the support of the Leader of the’ Opposition. The Commonwealth Government is expected to give effect to the decisions reached at the Imperial Conference in the same way as the political delegates are expected to abide by the decisions of the conferences which they attended.

The most important subject considered at the recent Conference was defence. In the last war the military arm played the greatest part, and in the next conflict it is reasonable to assume that the naval and air services working in co-operation will be of major importance. The aerial arm is not only the most recent addition to our defence forces, but promises to become the most destructive. In concentrating upon the development of our naval and air forces,- the Government is acting on the best advice obtainable. When the construction of the Singapore naval base was commenced some years ago, I realized that it would be of special significance in the defence of Australia. The impregnability of the Singapore Naval Base, and the invincibility of the navies of the British Empire alone can save Australia from invasion and consequent disaster. In view of the fact that we cannot accurately predict the location of the next theatre of war, it is rather premature to determine in detail the means that we shall adopt for the part, that We may be called upon to play in it. The Labour party has announced its intention to “ wait and see “. The Federal Government, however, is not prepared to delay ; it is going ahead with a programme which will enable Australia, in collaboration .with other members of the British Empire, to offer the utmost resistance to an aggressor. It is of opinion that the aerial and naval arms will play the greatest part in the next war. Those two branches of the fighting’ machine can and must work in perfect co-operation.

Senator Collings:

– Surely the honorable senator does not object to the Labour party propounding its views on the matter.

Senator DEIN:

– I shall presently refer to the policy of the Labour party as enunciated by Senator Collings. At present we have not the faintest idea of where the destiny of Australia in the next conflict will be determined. In the Great War the destiny of Great Britain and this Commonwealth was determined on the battlefields of Flanders. Where the centre of the next great upheaval will be we do not know. We sincerely hope that the last great war has been fought ; nevertheless wo must be prepared for an emergency. During this debate the Labour party has enunciated its policy for the defence of Australia. A little while ago, honorable senators were obliged to extract what satisfaction they could in regard to that policy from the two mysterious words “ adequate defence “. As the result “of this debate, we have advanced our knowledge slightly.

The Labour party proclaims that it is a practical party, in defence and in other matters; I propose to examine the practicability of the defence policy of the Opposition. The Labour party, if not in favour of the complete scrapping of the navy, proposes sadly to neglect it in future. I am able to understand that. According to the policy of the Labour party, there is no need for a navy. Obviously, as our battleships cannot fight on our own soil, the naval arm of defence is to be practically abandoned. The sole function of the navy will be to report the approach of the enemy to the Prime Minister who, I presume, will thereupon summon Parliament. After an interval of three weeks, the Parliament will have assembled in Canberra. During this period the hostile navy with aeroplane carriers, each carrying, perhaps, 40 or 50 machines will be lying within fifteen miles of our shores ; and Parliament will be assembling to debate what steps shall be taken to meet the emergency.

Senator ARKINS:
NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– The honorable senator is mistaken. Before Parliament could be assembled the Federal Executive of the Labour party would have to be summoned.

Senator DEIN:

– Perhaps that step will be dispensed with in view of the emergency.

Senator Arkins:

– I do not think so.

Senator DEIN:

– When Parliament has met, a prolonged debate on the emergency will take place. All this time, I remind honorable senators, the enemy is within fifteen miles of our shores. If the Goverinment believes that a state of emergency exists, it will introduce a bill to provide for the taking of a referendum to determine whether or not the enemy shall be resisted. The debate would occupy two or three weeks and if Parliament decided that the enemy must be fought where he is, provided he stayed there awaiting the result, a referendum would be taken. This would occupy approximately four weeks, and in order to restrain the enemy from dropping a few shells upon Sydney, a notice would appear in the Labor Daily requesting the aggressor not to fire until the campaign was concluded. In case the enemy should’ not read the’ Labor Daily placards would be posted along our coast bearing the inscription “ Trespassers before the referendum will be prosecuted “.

That is the logical conclusion to be drawn from the defence policy of the Labour party. The referendum must be held if the Government feels that the enemy should be fought outside our borders. I wonder what attitude will be adopted in the crisis by Senator Ceilings? Will he say to the people, “ The enemy is off our shore; the Government believes that we will have to fight him where he is, and accordingly asks your permission, through this referendum, to attack him with our navy”? After these periods of delay extending over some months the aggressor, provided that he has not grown weary of waiting in deference to the wishes of the Labour party, and provided that the referendum is passed, will be subjected to an onslaught by our navy. That the attitude of the Labour party on this matter is impracticable is obvious to school children. It is an impossible policy. Why does that party endeavour to fool the people with something that is impracticable? The reason lies in the fact that members of the Opposition recall a certain vote a few years ago, and they have not the courage to lead the people. The Government would be in possession of information which it could not disclose; yet if Labour were in power they would be prevented, under their policy, from saying to the people: “ An enemy is off our shores and we must engage him at sea where we have the best prospect of beating him “. Instead of having this freedom of choice they prefer to wait until the aggressor lands, and then endeavour to pit Australia’s strength against him. The Labour party is fully aware that, in such circumstances, the people will not be in a position to decide the issue. They will not be in possession of the inside information; that will be known only to the government, which has not the courage to provide for the proper defence of Australia.

Senator Brown stated that when the Labour party was returned to power it would co-operate closely with New Zealand. I hope to hear the honorable senator explain in what respect itwould co-operate. Inregard to defence, no such co-operation would be possible, because the policy and rules of the Labour party forbid it. Consequently it is humbug for the honorable senator to say that when the Labour party is in office it will co-operate with New Zealand. Its defence policy would preclude the despatch of assistance to New Zealand, should it be assailed by an aggressor, until a referendum on the matter had been taken. I was disgusted to listen to the humbug, rubbish and clap-trap spoken in. this chamber by members of the Opposition on this vital subject. Having paid close attention to their statements I now understand why they have never been able to explain to us what they mean by “ adequate defence “. I sympathize with the Labour party.

Debate (on motion by Senator

Brennan) adjourned.

Senate adjourned at 12.43 p.m

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 27 August 1937, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1937/19370827_senate_14_154/>.