Senate
27 September 1945

17th Parliament · 3rd Session



The President (Senator the Hon. Gordon Brown) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 5987

BROADCASTING COMMITTEE

Senator AMOUR:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– As Chairman, I present the report of the Broadcasting Committee relating to the broadcasting of parliamentary debates.

Ordered to. be printed.

page 5987

QUESTION

PETROL

Senator ARNOLD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– In view of the conflicting statements appearing in the press concerning petrol supplies, is the Minister foi Supply and Shipping able to give any definite information in regard to the possibility of the abandonment of petrol rationing, and the reintroduction of 80 octane motor spirit ?.

Senator ASHLEY:
Minister for Supply and Shipping · NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– The petrol position is being watched closely by the Government. An additional allowance of 25 per cent, is to be made available to Australian motorists during October. The complete removal of rationing, however, is contingent upon the availability of tankers, and upon the solution of certain other problems, one of which is distribution. That, of course, is a matter for the major oil companies, and I am confident that they will be able to provide the necessary facilities, as soon as petrol and man-power are available. In regard to improving the quality of petrol, I said a few days ago that I had been in conference with the major oil companies and had requested them to investigate this matter. I have not yet received a definite reply, but I have been informed, however, that the companies are endeavouring to improve the quality of petrol.

page 5987

QUESTION

WATERFRONT DISPUTES

Senator FOLL:
QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

– Can the Minister for Supply and Shipping give any information to the Senate with regard to difficulties that are being experienced on the waterfront in certain parts of Australia ?

Senator ASHLEY:
ALP

– The honorable senator has made a very general statement, and I should like him to define “ difficulties “. I explained yesterday that steps were being taken to overcome problemswhich had arisen with regard to the Netherlands vessels. With the Prime Minister I consulted with the Netherlands authorities yesterday, and certain arrangements were made. I understand that the decisions reached are satisfactory to the Netherlands authorities and the Government.

page 5988

QUESTION

CANBERRA

Food at Hostels.

Senator TANGNEY:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Is the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior aware of the type of food that is being served to women and other residents of government hostels in Canberra? I have here a lunch that was given to a masseuse at the Canberra hospital, and which I am sure no self-respecting mouse would eat. It consists of two pieces of dry bread, a piece of cheese rind and a small orange. Will the Minister take steps to ensure that the food served to these women, many of whom are suffering from malnutrition, shall be of a much higher quality?

Senator COLLINGS:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · QUEENSLAND · ALP

– If Senator Tangney will provide me with the sample lunch to which she has referred I shall have it conveyed to the Minister, and shall also place before him the honorable senator’s strong representations on the matter.

page 5988

QUESTION

SYDNEY DAILY TELEGRAPH

Senator AMOUR:

– Have you, Mr. President, seen a copy of to-day’s Sydney Daily Telegraph, in which a leading article published in yesterday’s issue referring to Parliament with contempt is reprinted as a footnote to Senator Lamp’s question concerning that newspaper? Do you, sir, not regard this re-publication as a deliberate challenge to the authority and status of the Senate? Will you take steps to withdraw from the Daily Telegraph the facilities it enjoys in this chamber until such time as the representatives of that newspaper become capable of reporting Parliament fairly and rationally, and cease treating it as an institution to be ridiculed and white-anted, apparently with the idea of destroying its character as an instrument of democracy?

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon Gordon Brown:
QUEENSLAND

– Yesterday, Senator Lamp asked if I had read a certain article published in the Sydney Daily Telegraph on the 26th September. In reply I said that I had not read the article, but would do so and make a statement on the subject. The honorable senator also asked whether I would give consideration tothe expulsion of the representatives of the Daily Telegraph from the Senate chamber. To-day Senator Amour has made a similar suggestion. I have my own personal opinions on these matters. I am a lover of freedom, and I should not like to take any action to deprive any newspaper of the right to say what it likes about Parliament. That is my personal opinion. Of course, there is no such thing as absolute freedom. Freedom must always be limited to some degree. We must realize that in this country there is no absolute freedom of the press, because Australian newspapers are owned by certain coteries of financiers who dictate the policy of the press.

Senator Foll:

– Who owns the Sydney Daily Telegraph?

The PRESIDENT:

– I do not know. I do not hold any shares in it, or in any other newspaper company. Unfortunately, we have reached a stage to-day where the press may misquote, twist, and give a false impression of, the proceedings of the Parliament. The organization to which I belong; - I am still a member of the Australian Labour party, althoughI occupy the office of President of the Senate - does not own any daily newspapers. It controls only a few small weekly publications. For that reason, the Labour party, and this Government, and other governments have suffered because of the attitude of the press towards parliamentary institutions. I contend - and I hold this view very strongly - that governments should have the authority and the facilities to place their point of view before the people of this country, and to offset the vile insults and slanders that are indulged in by certain Fascist-minded interests. There are in this country a number of individuals who would destroy the democratic way of life for which wars have been fought, and who still hanker after the fleshpots of fascism. Their attitude, of course, is governed by their mental outlook. They lose no opportunity to demean and decry the Parliament. That has been our experience over the years. In my opinion, the article of which the honorable senator has complained does demean and decry the Parliament and its members. Still, in this free country, newspapers have the right to do that. I believe it was Voltaire who said, “ I do not agree with what you say; but r will fight to the death to maintain your right to say it “. I agree with some of the statements in the article. For instance, it states -

Broadcast of parliamentary debates is a good idea. [ agree with that; but then the writer adds -

The standard of debate in Federal Parliament is exceedingly low, in content and in style. 1 do not agree with that; but I do not deny the right of the Daily Telegraph to express its opinion. If a newspaper wishes to say that the standard of debate in the Federal Parliament is exceedingly low in content and in style, t do not see why I, as President of the Senate, should take action to prevent the publication of such statements. The article continues -

Members who complain they are misreported are often quite incapable of stringing half a dozen words together grammatically.

And further -

If occasionally one of their precious ideas la misrepresented it is because they have expressed themselves so clumsily that no brain except their own could possibly grasp what they were driving at.

That is grossly untrue and is contemptuous of Parliament and members of it. [ have been Chairman of Committees for a number of years, and I have been President of the Senate for the past two years. During that period [ cannot recall having been unable to follow clearly and completely the speeches of honorable senators, except, perhaps, when I was almost in a state of coma due to the unsatisfactory condition of the air in the chamber and had a tendency to pass into the realm of sleep. I remember only one honorable senator whom I did not understand. I listened to him carefully. He was rather involved and became mentally obfuscated. He was Senator Gordon Brown, when he was making his maiden speech! However, honorable senators generally express themselves clearly and well. So far as the Daily Telegraph’s argument about ungrammatical speech in this chamber is concerned, all I can say is that during my many years of experience in the political sphere in not only this country but also in Canada and England, I found that some of the greatest political leaders were ungrammatical in their speech. It does not follow that because a member of Parliament says “done” instead of “did” or “have” instead of “has” that his work in Parliament is thereby vitiated. Personally, I hate grammar. I hated it as a schoolboy when I would rather do anything else, even arithmetic. I suppose that I speak ungrammatically at times. For instance, when the Chairman of Committees reports a bill from the committee, he says, “ The committee have considered the bill . . .”; and I. as President, in my announcement > the Senate say, “ The committee has considered the bill . . .” Which form is correct, I do not know. Perhaps, the editor of the *Daily Telegraph will tell us to what degree the work of Parliament is vitiated because the Chairman of Committees on such occasions says “have” and I as President say “ has “. I have known Prime Ministers and honorable senators who habitually said “ done “ instead of “ did “. I have heard various members of Parliament drop their “ h’s “. As a matter of fact, some Australians pronounce “ h “ a* “ haitch “. whereas its proper pronunciation is “ aitch “. “ They drop their “ h’s “ in Sydney ‘arbor and pick them up in Hamerica “.

The late ex-Senator Verran, who was once Premier of South Australia, was known to be ungrammatical in his speech. He often used phrases which were very interesting and illuminating, but which would hardly bear examination by the keen analytical brain of the editor of the Sydney Daily Telegraph. On one occasion he was speaking at a patriotic rally. A huge flag was hung behind the platform, and turning round in his enthusiasm and pointing to the flag, he said, “ Ladies and gentlemen, I have been reared on the milk of the Union Jack”. I do not know whether that expression could be said to be to his discredit. According to the Daily Telegraph, such an expression coming from a member of Parliament is bad. When a certain lady, Mrs. Longman, was elected to the Queensland Parliament she was congratulated by Mr. Thomas Arther Dunlop, popularly known as T.A.D.

True and Dinkum “. He was somewhat careless in his speech and said, w T . want to add my congratulations to Mrs. Longman, and I am glad to say she is not a maiden, but a married woman like myself Whether we like it or not, tl, ese things happen; and even newspapers make mistakes. Let us have a look at that august journal, the Sydney Daily Telegraph itself, which takes members of this Parliament to task for being ungrammatical in their speech. That paper in its issue to-day, dealing with the return of the honorable member for the Northern Territory (Mr. Blain) to his seat in the House of Representatives* after having been a prisoner of war in the hands of the Japanese for three and a half years, said -

Sgt. Blain was re-elected unopposed in 1943 while in a Japanese prison.

On that occasion the honorable member for the Northern Territory was opposed by six candidates - Messrs. Barker, Fuller, Grant, Murray, Nelson and Russell. In the same report, the Daily. Telegraph said of the honorable member for the Northern Territory -

His uniform, on which he wore a double row of service ribbons, was old and rumpled.

T have been informed by the honorable member for the Northern Territory that he was wearing a new uniform. Thus, newspapers themselves make mistakes, and, therefore, should not be so ready to take members of Parliament to task on the ground that they make mistakes in their speeches. Newspapers also make typographical errors resulting in jokes which go the rounds of club smoke rooms and many of which would not bear repetition in Parliament. I recall that on one occasion I attended a gathering of journalists, and my impression was that of the six speakers at that function four were ungrammatical and two were incoherent. I admit that the function was in the nature of a celebration and the lemonade was very potent.

There is a very serious side to this matter. I strongly hold the view that after winning a victory for democracy against fascism, and for the survival of our democratic parliamentary institutions, those who value Australian democracy should do all in their power to uplift and not demean the Parliament. When reporting proceedings of Parliament, the press should be fair. Fair play is bonny play. But the Sydney Daily Telegraph and other newspapers have been grossly unfair. They have deliberately taken up the attack against our democratic parliamentary institutions, and have done their best to lower them in the eyes of our people. Sometimes, when I read the editorial disquisitions in the Sydney Daily Telegraph, I form the impression that the idea of that journal is that if the Government wants to win the peace it should ask the editor of that newspaper if he would mind being coopted in this work by the Labour Government on the ground that with his aid and marvellous knowledge the Government would be able to solve all its problems.

I recall the story of an American newspaper correspondent who visited this country. He was arrested; I shall not say for what reason. He was brought before a magistrate, and when he was asked what occupation he followed, he replied that he was a poet and journalist, and added, “ and I am an inventor “. When the magistrate asked him what he had invented he said, “A speedy way to win the war”. When asked what he had invented he continued, “ The other night I was in Pitt-street and 500 diggers were playing two-up. When they saw three or four policemen coming they immediately scattered and ran out of sight”. When asked what that had to do with winning the war, he said, “ When I was a boy in the old baronial castle - he was the son of a baron! - I was told by my father that one Briton was worth ten Germans. And when I came to Australia, I found that one Australian was worth ten Britishers. When the war started I was told that one “ digger “ was worth ten civilians, and when I saw three or four policemen chase 500 “diggers” up Pitt-street, I came to the conclusion that the best way to win the war was to send half of the police force to Germany. We would then win it quite easily on the law of averages “. The editors of some newspapers would appear to know of easy ways to govern this country; but they never offer constructive criticism. I have read a certain anti-Labour and pro-Fascist newspaper for many years, but I have not yet read one constructive idea in it. With regard to the character of members of Parliament I have said on previous occasions, and I now repeat, that the members of this Parliament compare favorably with any cross-section of the public. It is not to be expected that all members of Parliament will have had a university education, or journalistic or legal training. They are drawn from all avocations, and some of the best public men Australia has produced have been drawn from the ordinary avocations. Among members of Parliament there are good and bad as is the case anywhere else; there are grammatical and ungrammatical speakers, as is the case anywhere else; and there are rich and poor, although under the Chifley regime there are very few rich among us. We have all kinds of people among members of Parliament. From my knowledge of the Parliament, and my reading of its history, I am convinced that presentday members compare more than favorably with public men of the past. Parliament has gone through certain developments. It is no longer a club, as it was in years gone by. It is a business institution which must deal with thousands of problems. I hold a very high opinion of members of Parliament generally, and of debates in this Parliament. [ admit that the standard of our debates can be improved, and that some of us could be more grammatical in our speech ; but in that respect we are as capable as those who traduce the Parliament.

I do not propose to take action against the Sydney Daily Telegraph. I sincerely hope that that journal will do its best to uphold our democratic parliamentary institution in the knowledge that this Parliament does its best in the interests of the nation. I hope that in its reports in the future it will deal with proceedings in this Parliament in a proper and fitting manner.

page 5991

QUESTION

VIRULENT DISEASES

Senator COLLETT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Acting Minister for Health and Social Services, upon notice -

  1. Arising out of the ravages of war in Europe and Eastern countries adjacent to Australia, and the heavy employment of shipping for the purpose of repatriating armies and disturbed populations, is the Government aware of the danger of the introduction to Australia of epidemics of virulent diseases ?
  2. If so, what measures have been taken, or are in force, to meet such a danger?
  3. Is the Government satisfied with the effectiveness of such measures?
Senator KEANE:
Minister for Trade and Customs · VICTORIA · ALP

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

  1. The danger of the introduction into Australia of epidemic diseases has been very fully realized, both ,by maritime and air routes. I refer to an article entitled “ The War and Epidemic Disease” which appeared in the August, 1940, issue of Health, the journal of the Commonwealth Department of Health, and which is still applicable at the present time.
  2. The quarantine service of the Commonwealth Department of Health is prepared for any emergency, and there is close relationship between the department and the medical services of the armed forces. The international health organization of Unrra is engaged in restoring the system of reports of epidemic disease between countries. Dr. H. E. O’Brien, Medical Director for the aTea of Unrra Health Organization, has recently gone to the Par East, and Dr. Ji. T. Brennan, formerly Director of Public Health in New Guinea’, is temporarily in charge of the medical section of the Sydney office of Unrra. Information ib now regularly coming to hand about epidemic conditions in all countries, and in this case to be forewarned is to be forearmed.
  3. The Australian quarantine service has an international reputation, and the medical services of the forces have demonstrated in New Guinea their efficiency in dealing with epidemic and tropical diseases. The Government is satisfied that effective measures are being taken to safeguard Australia.

page 5992

QUESTION

CHILD ENDOWMENT

Senator FINLAY:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Acting Minister for Health and Social Services, upon notice -

In view of child endowment payments being increased from5s. to 7s. 6d. per week, will the Government give favorable consideration to increasing the payment for the first child under the Unemployment and Sickness Benefits Act from 5s. to 7s. 6d. per week?

Senator KEANE:
ALP

-The answer to the honorable senator’s question is as follows : -

When the recent budget was being prepared careful consideration was given to the rates of all Commonwealth social services, and it was decided to increase invalid and old-age pensions and certain widows pensions as well as child endowment. The Unemployment and Sickness Benefits scheme only commenced to operate on the 1st July last and it was not found possible to increase these benefits, which are designed to tide persons over periods of temporary incapacity only.

page 5992

QUESTION

FISH IMPORTATIONS

Senator ALLAN MacDONALD:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the Ministry of Food in the United Kingdom is permitting the export to the various parts of the British Empire of token shipments of smoked and salted fish ; if so, will the Government relax the import restrictions so as to permit the entry of this long-awaited food?
  2. As this is the only form of fish food suitable for transport without refrigeration to the outback areas of the States of Western Australia and Queensland, will the Minister expedite this matter?
Senator KEANE:
ALP

-The answer to the honorable senator’s question is as follows : -

No official advicehas been received that the United Kingdom authorities are prepared to release smoked or salted fish for export to Australia, but I have arranged for a cable to be despatched to London to ascertain the current position. If Australian importers are able to secure an export release from the controlling authorities in the United Kingdom no obstacle will be placed on the importation into Australia of any small quantities which may be available.

page 5992

QUESTION

BRITISH NATIONALS FROM WAR AREAS

Senator ARNOLD:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Acting Minister for Health and Social Services, upon notice -

  1. What arrangements have been made for the reception into Australia of British nationals from the recovered war areas?
  2. What are the numbers of each nationality who are seeking admission?
  3. Will the Acting Minister make a statement to the Senate on the matter?
Senator KEANE:
ALP

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

  1. The Department of Social Services arranges, in conjunction with Australian Bed Cross, for the reception, accommodation, aftercare and transport in Australia of civilian persons. Where hospital treatment is required the necessary arrangements are made in conjunction with civilian hospital authorities for these persons. Service personnel are dealt with by the defence authorities.
  2. Up to the present time it has not been possible to obtain accurate information as to the number of persons to arrive.
  3. The whole question is still the subject of negotiations and as soon as possible I will make a statement upon it in the Senate.

page 5992

QUESTION

ARMED FORCES

Releases - Leave

Senator SAMPSON:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Postwar Reconstruction, upon notice -

  1. Was the Minister correctly reported in the press of Saturday, 8th September, as having said that special releases from the forces for students whose courses at the university or technical colleges had been interrupted were to be arranged?
  2. If so, what are the full implications of that statement and how do these students secure speedy release from the services?
Senator KEANE:
ALP

– The Minister for Postwar Reconstruction has supplied the following answers : -

  1. Provision is being made for the accelerated releases under the demobilization plan of students who have interrupted certain courses at institutions which will be specified.
  2. Full details will be announced when the necessary arrangements have been completed throughout the services. Students should await these particulars regarding service procedure.
Senator MATTNER:
through Senator James McLachlan

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

  1. Is it a fact that veteran members of the

Royal Australian Air Force who have served in the Philippines, Borneo and other tropical areas, and are due for long service leave, have now had this leave cancelled, because the war has ended?

  1. If so, will the Minister have the matter reviewed to enable the men concerned to be granted their long leave as early aspossible, and also facilitate their early discharge if they so desire?
Senator CAMERON:
Postmaster-General · VICTORIA · ALP

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

  1. Advices received from Royal Australian Air Force formations outside Australia are as follow: - (a) First Tactical Air Force. - Long service leave has not been cancelled, hut, since V-P Day, instead of granting leave, most personnel due for leave have been posted to personnel depots on the mainland for disposal (including discharge), when they would receive their leave entitlement. (b) Northern Command. - No personnel have been refused tropical leave and, with the exception of two radar officers, posting action has been taken in respect of all officers and airmen who have completed fifteen months’ tropical service. (c) No. 11 Group. - Cessation of hostilities has not affected leave being granted to timeexpired personnel, except in a few cases of such musterings as cooks, stewards and fitters, D.M.T., which cases are now under review.
  2. Appropriate action has been taken to ensure that thepolicy of withdrawing Air Force personnel to the mainland after fifteen months service in the tropics and then granting leave is implemented and that, in all cases where circumstances permit, such personnel will he posted to personnel depots for discharge when they will receive their leave entitlements.

page 5993

QUESTION

ESTIMATES AND BUDGET PAPERS 1945-46

Debate resumed from the 26th September (vide page5895), on motion by Senator Keane -

That the following papers be printed: -

Estimates of Receipts and Expenditure, and Estimates of Expenditure for Additions, New Works, Buildings, &c, for the year ending the 30th June, 1940.

The Budget 1945-40 - Papers presented by the Bight Honorable J. B. Chifley, M.P., on the occasion of the budget of 1945-46.

Senator LAMP:
Tasmania

– The United Nations having won the war, the budget has been designed with the object of winning the peace. Senator Collett said yesterday that it would take ten or twelve years for Australia to recover its economic poise, and I agree with him. The Acting Leader of the Opposition (Senator Leckie) said that provision should have been made for a big reduction of taxation immediately to usher in the era of peace. I believe that the Government has done very well indeed in providing for the small measure of tax relief proposed in the budget. Had I been in the place of the Treasurer, I would have said straight out that nothing would be done to reduce taxes during the first year of peace. The general rehabilitation of the nation could be commenced next year. In opposing the Government’s proposals, the Acting Leader of the Opposition specially attacked the subsidies paid by the Government for the purpose of stabilizing prices. He said that he was definitely not in favour of subsidies, and several other honorable senators on that side of the chamber supported him. However, those honorable gentlemen did not raise their voices against the price ring, by means of which a special form of subsidy is made available to uneconomical manufacturers. While I was a member of the War Expenditure Committee, I encountered numerous cases of prices being fixed at high levels to enable uneconomical industries to prosper to the detriment of the war effort. There is only one highly specialized manufacturing firm in the rubber industry in Australia. The other manufacturers, especially the largest combine, use equipment and methods which are years out of date. They have not taken the trouble to modernize their factories. In order to enable them to produce their goods at a profit, prices were fixed at high levels, which means that they are subsidized at the expense of the community and encouraged to continue with uneconomical processes of manufacture. If honorable senators opposite do not believe in subsidies, stabilized prices for primary products, or pegged wage levels, they cannot honestly support this prices ring.

I shall not deal in detail with the budget. In general, the Government has done a. good job in reducing taxes, although it would have done better to defer such concessions until next year, when it would have a better chance to plan its reconstruction programme.I shall ask the Government to rectify a number of anomalies which have been exercising my mind for some years.First of all, I pay a tribute to the Australian Broadcasting Commission, which is doing valuable work in the community. It has arranged a. number of first-class concerts by overseas artists which have helped to raise our cultural level, and it has broadcast talks and lectures for both adults and school children which have been of great benefit to the listening public. The commission is paying exorbitant fees to an organization whose ramifications’ require close examination. I cannot help wondering why the Government has not done something to curb the profiteering activities of the Australasian Performing Bight Association. I understand that the association claims to hold the copyright of over 1,000,000 songs and hymns.. If I were called upon to pay copyright fees as the Australian Broadcasting Commission is compelled to do, I should want to prove the association’s right to collect them. I should also want to know how the money is being used. The method of collecting fees from the manufacture and sale of gramophone records is reactionary in the extreme. If one buys a recording of the splendid opera, “ The Gondoliers one finds that the best song, “ Take a pair of sparking eyes “, is not included because some special copyright applies to it. That is direct exploitation of the public. The last annual report of the Australian Broadcasting Commission states that, despite repeated representations by the commission, no action has been taken to curb the activities of the Performing Right Association. The commission’s report states -

Meanwhile the commission continues, perforce, to pay the A.P.R.A. an annual tribute which, according to the evidence in its possession, is at least double the sum that could be justified. This means an excess payment at the present time of at least £17,000 per annum. The seriousness of the situation is aggravated by the fact that overpayment has been going on for many years.

The commission would not make that statement if it were not absolutely justified. It is time for the Government to investigate the activities of the association. It should introduce a copyright bill to put the matter on a proper basis. I am very pleased with the progress that is being made by the A.B.C. Weekly. Publication of this journal has been a losing proposition, but the money lost represents capital only and will be regained many times over when newsprint is available in sufficient quantities to permit the printing of the number of copies of the journal that are required. The present circulation totals 60,224 copies weekly, and sales are increasing steadily. Advertising revenue amounts to about £10,000 a year. The present loss sustained on the journal is only about 1 per cent, of the revenue, and I understand that, when sufficient newsprint is available, that loss will be wiped off and substantial profits will be made. This publication could be made into one of the greatest newspapers in Australia. I look forward to the day when it will be printed at Canberra. I see no reason why the printing contract should be let to private firms. The printing industry does nol create smoke, dirt or annoyance to the public, and therefore it is suitable for this capital city. I hope that, in the near future, machinery necessary for printing the A.B.C. Weekly will be installed in Canberra and also that all government printing will be done in this city. I see no reason why the journal should not be issued free to all who hold a. listener’s licence. There are 1,451,41S listeners, and, if all were supplied with a free copy through the post, that publication would provide one of the best advertising mediums in the world. Il would be possible to make a large profit as well as issue the journal free, if the Government owned the printing machinery necessary for the work. I commend the commission upon the. recently initiated “Forum of the Air”, which is proving a valuable educational session, and I hope that it will be continned as long as possible. Referring to the temporary restoration of ls. of the fee charged for a listener’s licence, the commission stated in its annual report; -

The special grant will of course be employed to the best advantage in the circumstances, but the greatest potential value will’ not be had from it because of difficulty insecuring artists and other personnel foi; employment which is only of a temporary nature. Such personnel has so keen a market for its talent that it may pick and choose its employer. The commission is in fierce competition for artistic and executive talent with various commercial organizations - broadcasting stations, newspapers, theatres and others.

I see no reason why the commission should not encourage those members of the public who possess artistic talent. Australia has a vast untouched reservoir of natural musical and dramatic talent which should be used. I brought this matter to the notice of the Senate during the last two budget debates. A great deal of public interest would be awakened if the commission were to conduct musical competitions in the various States. It has the necessary organization for this purpose, not only in the capital cities, but also in some of the large country centres. The commission could with advantage conduct competitions to decide amateur Australian championships in singing and in the playing of musical instruments. If the prizes were only certificates displaying the Australian coat of arms, sufficient incentive would be given to attract to the competition the best amateur artists in the Commonwealth. On Sunday last I heard a programme of choral music by combined choirs of the churches in Canberra, and this furnished a striking example of the good amateur talent available. The soloists performed excellently, and would have been well qualified to take part in any amateur com/petition in this country. The commission could well make use for broadcasting purposes of the musical talent available in Canberra alone, [t would be well advised to inquire regarding the advisability of organizing championships to decide the amateur Australian championships for all voices and all musical instruments now available. In addition to the programmes being broadcast, the champions should be employed by the commission to give recitals for the benefit of the people generally.

Yesterday Senator Arnold referred to the high prices charged for goods in stores in Canberra. Surely something could be done to correct this serious anomaly. I suggest that the Government should erect a substantial building for a cooperative society, which could trade in all the household commodities required by Canberra residents. This would be to the advantage of both the Government and the citizens. When the Mount Lyell Mining Company became concerned about the steady increase of the basic wage in the districts where it carried on its operations, it established stores and built houses for its employees, who were able to secure them at reasonable rentals. The company was able to sell commodities at lower rates than those charged by other storekeepers, the result being a reduction of the basic wage which the company was called upon to pay. The cost of living in Canberra is far too high and exploitation is most pronounced. It seems to me that the only way to solve the problem is for the residents themselves to .conduct a cooperative store sponsored by the Government. Recently I asked a shopkeeper at Kingston, Canberra, to fit a pair of rubber heels to my shoes, but he declined to do so. He said that he was too busy, but he spent about twenty minutes in decrying members of Parliament. I told him that he could have earned 2s. while he was blackguarding honorable members. There is no desire on the part of the shopkeepers generally to serve the people, and there is not sufficient competition. I hope the Government will take action to remedy this serious position.

Employees of the Postmaster-General’s Department have brought to my notice a serious anomaly with regard to the wages paid to ex-servicemen under the age of 21 years. A young man who is discharged wounded before he reaches the age of 21 years and obtains a position in the Public Service is paid the rate applicable to his age, but I maintain thai he should receive the adult male rate. We should do all we can to help exservicemen. The anomaly could easily be corrected.

I renew my representations to the Government regarding the serious effects of the cabbage moth in Tasmania. Most of the garden pests in that State have been introduced from Victoria. I refer particularly to the cabbage moth, the Rutherglen bug and the codlin moth. The Government of Victoria has done little to control the garden pests in its own State. So serious is the damage in Tasmania from the cabbage moth that that State would be justified in claiming an indemnity against Victoria for causing the spread of the pest. I hope that the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research will continue its investigations into the depredations of this moth. The damage in Tasmania has increased to alarming proportions, and it is almost impossible to grow cabbages, cauliflowers and similar crops without the crops being most seriously affected by those pests.

The time has arrived when a new basic wage should be fixed for Australia. I am astonished that the workers can exist on the present wage. -I cannot find much wrong with the prices submitted to the Commonwealth Statistician from time to time for the purpose of determining the basic wage, but of course the regimen is insufficiently wide. The cost of clothing and other commodities should be taken into consideration. One of the principal reasons why the standard fixed is too low is that allowance is not made for the great increase of house rents. I have drawn attention to this anomaly on many occasions, but no action has been taken to remove it. The Statistician claims that house rents are not intended to be a measure of value. He claims that they are required merely for determining price variations from quarter to quarter, but I am not satisfied with the method adopted in determining the wage. Great dissatisfaction has arisen because of the house rents supplied to the Statistician’s representative in Tasmania. It is not correct to say that a four or five roomed house can be obtained at Hobart for £1 ls. lid., Launceston for 19s. 4d., Burnie for 17 s. 10d., Devonport for 16s. 2d. and Queenstown for 16s. lid. a week.

Senator HERBERT HAYS:
TASMANIA · NAT; UAP from 1931; LP from 1944

– It could not be done.-

Senator LAMP:

– I am glad to have support from the honorable senator. I have merely cited the figures published in the Quarterly Summary issued by the statistician. If the figures relating to house rents are not intended to be a measure of value, I suggest that figures which are so intended should be substituted for those now used.

Much of the present industrial unrest is due to the method employed in dealing with disputes. I have nothing to say against members of the legal profession, but I fail to understand why lawyers are chosen to adjudicate in industrial disputes. This work should be delegated to persons engaged in industry. The manager of a large factory who is known to be fair minded, a leading architect or an engineer would be suitable for appointment as president of an Arbitration Court, because he could inspect the work under review and judge its value for himself. Much time is wasted in hearing evidence and arguments before the court regarding the value of the work done. A man who is competent to understand what is being done would give more satisfaction as a judge than is possible in a court where voluminous evidence is presented and assessed by a man with legal training but no industrial experience.

I agree with Senator Armstrong that there is need to advertise Australia more in overseas countries. Branches of the Department of Information in Britain and the United States of America could be used to advertise extensively Australia’s tourist attractions. In my opinion, that portion of Queensland north of Tully has attractions equalling the best in the world. I have travelled a good deal, but nowhere have 1 seen country which offers better prospects for tourist traffic and good living conditions than does thai area. Already the Great Barrier Reef if a tourist attraction. We should make it better known to the people of the United States of America and Great Britain. Tasmania also has great tourist attractions. In the south there are the old convict settlements, and in other parts of the State there is magnificent mountain country. Cradle Mountain with its two lakes compares more than favorably with anything in other countries. These attractions should be placed before the people of other lands. I hope that the Government will bring this matter forward at a conference of Premiers and that the Department of Information will be used, to advertise the attractions which Australia has to offer.

I understand that the expenditure of a vast sum of money on the improvement of aerodromes throughout Australia ie contemplated. A large sum is to be expended in improving the Essendon aerodrome near Melbourne. A trip by air from Launceston or Hobart to Melbourne is a pleasant experience. The only discomfort experienced arises when the aeroplane is flying over the city of Melbourne ; the hot air above the city causes the machine to wobble and dip. From an aeroplane passengers can see south of Melbourne an area which would be ideal for converting into an aerodrome.

As Essendon is 10 miles north of Melbourne, a saving of 20 miles on each trip would be made if a new aerodrome were constructed 10 miles south of Melbourne, and as four trips a day are now made between Melbourne and Tasmania!! airports, that would represent a saving of 80 miles a day. In other words, the saving in four days would equal the distance between Launceston and Melbourne. It would be worthwhile to build a special aerodrome south of Melbourne for the Tasmanian traffic.

The proposed vote of £72,000 for national fitness is the same as was voted last year. A study of what has been done in Russia, Germany «nd the United States of America would convince us of the inadequacy of that amount. In Russia, great advances have been made in the cultural life of the people through national fitness. Only last week some of us saw films depicting what is being done in the Soviet Republics, and we know how the Nazis built up the youth movements of Germany in order to strengthen their military machine. In the United States of America also, much money is being expended on improving the health of the nation. In my opinion, the proposed vote should be doubled. Excellent work in promoting national fitness is being done in Tasmania. Recently a director and a general secretary of the movement were appointed. I hope that the Government will soon be in a position to supply instructors in country towns as well as in metropolitan districts. The Army educational service could be used to train instructors.

Some time ago, I suggested that a trial shipment of apples should be sent to India, or China, or other countries where they could be sold and perhaps a permanent trade established. In India there are numbers of wealthy people who desire to obtain hard fruits. By not exploiting the Indian market for fruit we are losing a great opportunity. I have discussed this matter with numbers of fruit-growers in Tasmania, and I know that if the Commonwealth Government would agree to send a trial shipment of fruit they would be prepared to supply the fruit free of cost. I am confident that a market for fruit could be found in the East.

Senator Keane:

– The Government has already decided to send shipments of goods from Australian factories to Eastern countries, and something similar could be done in connexion with primary products.

Senator LAMP:

– There is no reason why primary products should not be included.

I live in a portion of Tasmania where the poultry industry is carried on fairly extensively. Even before the war, poultry farmers could not obtain sufficient food for their poultry flocks; there was always a shortage of bran and pollard. I am informed that the present shortage is due to large quantities of flour being made in New South Wales and Victoria for shipment to Tasmania. The position is serious; bran and pollard are rationed because of the difficulty in obtaining supplies. That state of affairs exists in Tasmania at a time when dog pellets made of bran, pollard and meatmeal are manufactured in Victoria for racing dogs. It is not right that bran and pollard and meat-meal should ‘be available for feeding racing dogs while poultry-farmers have difficulty in feeding their flocks. The seriousness of the situation is aggravated by the need to send eggs to the people of Great Britain and other countries which have suffered great privations because of the war. The Government should ensure that essential foodstuffs are used for the right purposes instead, of being made available for the feeding of greyhounds. I hope that it will do something to prevent the manufacture of dog pellets from bran, pollard and meat-meal.

Last evening honorable senators saw a series of pictures, exhibited by a member of the House of Representatives, depicting the advances that have been made in connexion with agricultural machinery. Machinery pools have been established in some States. That is a worthy objective, .and I believe that if primary industries are to make substantial progress more such pools will be necessary, especially in small centres with an agricultural population. It, is almost impossible for the average farmer to provide all the implements that he needs if he would keep up with the advances made in connexion with agricultural machinery. On almost every farm, machinery worth perhaps £1,000 lies idle for a considerable period each year. The encouragement of machinery pools would be in the national interest.

Senator Finlay urged that homes should be provided for invalid and oldage (pensioners. That is a worthy objective. I see no reason why the Commonwealth and State governments should not come to an agreement in this matter. In Launceston a committee has been set up to provide homes for old-age pensioners. I understand that the movement is growing, and that before long representations will be made to the Tasmanian and Commonwealth governments for assistance to this worthy cause. I hope that when that request comes before the Commonwealth Government it will be given sympathetic consideration.

The Government should build small flats in Canberra to be let to single men and single women. These people should not be forced to live in boarding-houses if they do not wish to do so. This afternoon we had evidence of the treatment meted out to public servants residents of private boarding-houses and governmentconducted institutions.

A few days ago I advocated the transmission to western Victoria and South Australia of some of the unused electrical resources of Tasmania. According to . the Pocket Year-Book of Tasmania for 1944, there is in Tasmania 1,750,000 horse-power available for use. As only about 1-43,000 horse-power is employed, it will be seen that there is a great field for expansion. The (principal schemes which have been surveyed but are as yet undeveloped are -

The Pieman, Arthur, Mersey and King rivers could be used to generate electrical power for transmission to mainland States I see no reason why large consignments of coal should be taken by sea and rail from New South “Wales to generate elec- trie power in western Victoria and South Australia when that power could be supplied from rivers in Tasmania. It may be said that it is not possible to transmit electric power long distances by cable, but I understand that those who raise that objection refer to the transmission of power along bare wires. If, however, rubber-covered aluminium cables were used, I believe that it would be possible to transmit electricity from Tasmania to western Victoria and South Australia.

Senator Sampson:

– Would it not be better to establish additional industries in Tasmania?

Senator LAMP:

– No. In Tasmania there is a vast reserve of potential power which could be made available to industries in other States. I am not asking the Tasmanian Government to undertake the job: My suggestion is that the Commonwealth should confer with South Australian and Victorian authorities on the question of joint action to develop northern Tasmanian rivers for this purpose. Such a scheme would not detract from the advantage which Tasmania enjoys at present in the provision of cheap electrical power, because even with power lines established to the mainland, electricity could not be sold in Victoria or South Australia nearly so cheaply as it can be provided in Tasmania.

I wish to draw attention to an anomaly which exists in regard to British invalid and old-age pensioners residing in this country. In Tasmania, and I assume in other States, there is quite a number of these pensioners living in retirement. Their pension is 10s. a week in English currency, or 12s. 6d. Australian. After I had brought this matter before the Senate on a previous occasion, I received from a woman in Sydney an interesting letter, a portion of which I shall read, because not only does it express the writer’s opinion, but it puts forward the case for these pensioners much better than I could. It reads as follows: -

Could not prompt action foe taken to do something for these aged people, or at least their plight be made known to the British authorities without further delay? One oldage pensioner who had appealed both to the Pensions Department and members of the British Cabinet received cold comfort indeed . . no increase could be granted from the former, no replies from the latter.

The fact that in Great Britain it is compulsory to contribute to an old-age pension scheme from youth to CO and 65 years, woman and man respectively, makes one wonder just what the mother country does for the aged in recognition of their many years of service, tt would appear they are but reaping the harvest of what they are justly entitled to, and it should therefore not bc any very great drain on Britain’s resources to increase the present pension of 10s. even in some small measure. Millions can be found for war; what possible excuse could be found if Australia voices a plea on behalf of her old-age pensioners ?

Winston Churchill said that “ never did so many owe so much to so few “. Cannot we in Australia recognize this in some tangible way and not let the dire distress of English old-age pensioners be a blot on our democracy? [f we value those three great principles for which we are fighting - Freedom of speech, Freedom from want and Freedom from fear -then something must be done to alleviate poverty, or this war will have been fought in vain. There is no time like the present.

Travelling concessions, too, which are granted our old-age pensioners are denied British oldage pensioners. Why? Is there any just reason for such discrimination? If any plausible excuse could be offered before the war certainly no justifiable one can be offered now when Great Britain has done, and is doing, so much for Australia. It is not difficult to imagine the conditions under which many of these pensioners must live on 12s. Od. a week, but at least let us give there the privilege of leaving their mansions of abode to spend a day with relatives or friends, or on our sunny beaches at the cost of two penny bus, tram or train Tides.

Something should he done to bring this matter forcibly before the British authorities, especially now that there is a Labour government in office. The sum of 12s. 6d. a week is totally inadequate, and I am sure that if this Government were to bring the matter before the British Government some financial arrangement could be reached whereby these deserving residents of this country could be paid a little more than they are receiving at present.

One often hears the slogan, “Follow Britain “. I believe that is quite a good slogan. In February of this year, the former Prime Minister, Mr. Churchill, secured the passage through Parliament of a measure known as the Representation of the People Act, as a reward for the services of the common people during the war. That act provides for adult franchise in all elections. In all elections in Great Britain full adult franchise now operates. It is a blot upon democracy that here in Australia we have State Legislative Councils elected upon a privilege franchise. In fact, in some States, particularly Tasmania and Victoria, these councils have developed into dictatorships by a few landowners. This state of affairs should not be tolerated any longer. “We have fought this war for democracy; let us put democracy into actual practice, and dp something to give to the people of Australia full adult franchise at all elections.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– Once again, peace has come to the world. We have just passed through six years of war in which the people of this country have played a considerable part. Not only have we gained a most decisive victory, but also the British Empire has not lost prestige. In fact, the Empire to-day stands higher in world opinion than ever before. - We have much to be thankful for, and looking back we cannot help but feel that we have had the guidance and assistance of Divine Providence. One only has to recall the calm sea at the time of the Dunkirk evacuation to be convinced of that. One thing for which We should all be especially thankful is the war-time leadership of Mr. Churchill. In all our history, I do not think we have had a leader who so inspired his people as Mr. Churchill did in the dark days of 1940-41. _ Whilst we deplore the fact that this great statesman no longer holds the reins of leadership in the Mother of Parliaments, we realize that we are a democratic people, and that in democratic countries the will of the people is supreme. We can only hope that Mr. Churchill’s successors will realize that they are charged with the responsibility of framing a policy not only for the United Kingdom, but also one to guide an Empire on which the sun never sets.

I deplore greatly the criticism that has been levelled at General Mac Arthur and other war leaders during the past few weeks. Many civilians assert that affairs in Japan are not being handled as they should be; but I am prepared to leave this matter in the hands of General MacArthur and his associates. They did a wonderful job in time of war, and I am quite prepared to remain quiet until their job has been finished. “War has meant to us restrictions and precautions of all kinds. One precaution has been the exercise by the ‘Government of its prerogative to withhold information in regard to certain aspects of this country’s finances. During the war the slogan, “Don’t you know there is a war on ? “ was used for many purposes, one of which was to cover up laziness, incompetence, and inefficiency. In the last six years, the Government of this country has taken from the people in loans and taxation more money than ever before in history, yet never have details of expenditure been so meagre. Inquiries in regard to certain financial matters have been countered with the standard reply, “ It is for defence “. No doubt, in many instances this reticence has been justified, but to-day there is no need for secrecy, and the public has the right to know in. what manner its money is being expended. Public and private companies, and all public institutions, have to supply annual balancesheets, duly audited, showing how money has been expended, and company shareholders have the right to query any item.. I draw the attention of honorable senators to certain opinions expressed by the Auditor-<General.

Senator Ashley:

– Does the honorable senator suggest that certain things have not been disclosed in the budget?

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– Quite a lot of things have not been disclosed in budgets during the last few years, and when honorable senators have sought information in regard to them, the explanation invariably has been that the money was expended on defence and that details could not be divulged. The Auditor-General apparently is rather sceptical about certain matters, particularly accounting methods adopted by various departments. Typical comments include -

A llied Works Council. - Expenditure on jobs continued to exceed the estimates and financial authorities.

Tea Control Board. - The board has not maintained satisfactory accounting records.

Department of Information. - Certain funds expended on the referendum were not clearly related to the purpose for which they were used and not legally available, and applicable tn meet the expenditure referred to.

War Workers’ Hostels. - Unsatisfactory position in regard to the accounting procedure and internal check of transactions at various hostels.

Department of the Army. - Departmental officers were investigating unsatisfactory features relating to stores transferred from the Middle East to Australia. Efforts to remedy the position have been unsuccessful.

Unit Stores. - The standard of accounting at many units leaves much to be desired . . . at some of these units discrepancies have been particularly heavy.

Meat Supply to the Armed Forces in the Northern Territory. - Field butcheries records disclosed considerable underweight deliveries and condemnations due to emaciation but rebates were not claimed from the contractor.

Department of Air. - Stocktaking position still far from satisfactory.

Salvage Board. - The books of account do not reflect the correct position of canteen accounts.

Department of Aircraft Production. - Incompleteness of departmental records of assets held at annexes and absence of stocktaking ot such assets. These unsatisfactory features still continue. Satisfactory records have not been maintained in the department to control the receipt, usage and return of materials by the contractor. Attention was drawn last year to an unsatisfactory position relating to stocktaking of stores for the manufacture of aircraft. It was then reported that competent authority had not been given to adjustment of deficiencies which had been written off in the departmental records. This position still exists.

It is understood that the directorate took delivery of many lend-lease items without furnishing the necessary documentary evidence of delivery. Audit has not been able to ascertain the location of the relative accountancy records since the directorate ceased operations about November, 1943. Representations have been made to the department on the foregoing matters but at the date of preparation of this report, queries had not been satisfied. The position of outstanding amounts due to the department in respect of machine tools sold and loaned on a rental basis is not satisfactory . . . Until control accounts are introduced a satisfactory audit of these accounts cannot be completed.

In view of those comments by the AuditorGeneral, can one wonder that the people are sceptical of the Administration? Our -people have responded magnificently to war loans. They have borne, without complaint, a scale of taxes unequalled in any other country. On that point, I disagree with Senator Nash. The present burden of direct and indirect taxes upon the Australian people is higher than the tax burden being borne by the people of any other country. Our people have also been subject to all kinds of restrictions and regimentation. Private and public companies have used all of their resources in assisting the Government. Although many were critical of some of the Government’s war-time activities, all remained loyal to British traditions in the face of the great threat to our existence as a nation. We remained loyal to those traditions, because we believe in freedom and liberty. That is why our people stood behind the Government regardless of party ‘political considerations. However, during the last few years, the Government has taken advantage of war-time conditions to enact party legislation. Perhaps, this is natural; but some of that legislation is most unfair. For instance, I refer to the establishment of the Mortgage Bank Department of the Commonwealth Bank. Since the inception of that department, 1,600 applications have been made for advances, bin half of the applications have been rejected. The total sum made available in advances by that department is £3,000,000, whereas the total amount handled by private banks in the same period under the same heading is, approximately, £225,000,000. That is proof positive that no necessity existed for that establishment of the Mortgage Bank Department of the Commonwealth Bank. Recently, I asked why, if the Government had power to nationalize interstate airlines, it did not possess power to nationalize other activities. The Minister said that it was not customary to announce Government policy in answer to questions. For years, our people have longed for the cessation of hostilities. Happily, that date has come and gone. However, hostilities ceased sooner than most people expected, and very much sooner than the Government anticipated. Consequently, the Government has been caught unprepared to meet the immediate problems of peace. All the promises in respect of the immediate rehabilitation of ex-service personnel are now revealed as so much talk. The Government promised that immediately hostilities ceased sufficient houses a.nd land would be available for the rehabilitation of ex-service personnel. We were also told that vocational training centres would be ready to play their part in this rehabilitation plan. But the Government has been found unpre pared in respect of all these matters. Senator Gibson, in reply to a question which he asked the other day, was informed that not 1 acre had been purchased in connexion with soldier land settlement. It is clear that in respect of all these matters the Government has done nothing but prepare the blue-prints. The Government is approaching the problem of housing by attempting to nationalize the building industry. Private enterprise, in competition with the Government in this industry, now finds the dice loaded against it, because the Government has complete control of man-power and materials. In New South Wales the wealthiest of the States, where a Labour Government has been in office for many years, the housing situation is deplorable. From the 1st July. 1944, to the 21st April, 1945, the total number of houses constructed in that State totalled only 197. Assuming that another 50 houses were built before the end of June, it would mean that only 250 houses were built in that .State during the financial year ended the 30th June, 1945. That is a very poor showing indeed, particularly when we remember that the quota of houses allotted to New South Wales for that year was 3,250. According to a report published in the Sydney Sun, of the 6th August last, Mr. Thompson, the secretary of the Building Trades Federation of New South Wales, stated that employees in the building trade were adopting a. go-slow policy in order to force the Government to improve working conditions in the industry. South Australia is leading the other States in its housing programme. That State has adopted a thousand-house scheme, and has erected a number of tenement houses, which will be let at a nominal rental, as well as many workers homes near the city of Adelaide. Under the South Australian scheme, applicants who obtain a block, can approach the State bank to finance the construction of .a home. I believe that is the best scheme yet evolved in respect of housing. Generally, the classes of homes erected under the Government schemes are the best yet made available in any of the States. At present, the Government has let a contract for the construction of 1,000 homes which will be sold at £850 each. My only fear is that speculators will take advantage of these schemes to exploit ex-service person,nel for whom the houses are primarily being constructed. Speculators, for inr stance, will approach an ex-serviceman, who does not require a home, and persuade him to apply for a house in respect of which the speculator himself will provide the finance. Some days ago the secretary of the Co-operative Building Society of Sydney stated that the cost of construction of a room 10 feet by 10 feet was £180 under the Government scheme whereas the cost of constructing that unit by private enterprise was only £120.

The record of governments in home construction schemes is not very good. For instance, the constructing authority in Victoria, as the agent of the Vietorian Government, has shown a considerable loss on its operations, although in a given period it has not constructed as many houses as private enterprise. Mr. Lewis C. Burne, president of the Master Builders Association in Victoria, said that the State Housing Commission, which was supposed to have housed the people because private enterprise had failed to do it, had done little beyond accumulating a deficit of £134,368 by 1944 which was expected to reach £150,000 this year. Twenty-one per cent, of the tenants occupying commission property fell short of requirements in housing cleanliness and home manager ment; 266 were in arrears with rent; 35 had been evicted in 1943, and 24 in 1944, and 164 had left since the first house was tenanted. This social experiment had been costly for the Victorian taxpayers. The method used in South Australia was much better. Under that scheme, & man selected his own block of land, then applied to the State bank for an advance, and built the sort of home that he wanted.

Senator Collings:

– Was this done during the war?

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– No doubt. What is the difference?

Senator Collings:

– Labour and materials made a difference.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– I hope that we shall have sufficient labour and materials later. It is unfair of the Government to take over the job of house building, because government methods will be more costly than those of private contractors. The Government will havea monopoly of all building materials, and there will be no competition.

The land settlement scheme for e>;servicemen was competently discussed yesterday by Senator Gibson. The only point that I need to stress is the importance of proceeding with the scheme quickly. The Government has already lost almost a year, and, if it loiters any longer, ex-servicemen wishing to settle on the land will be delayed for two years.

Senator O’FLAHERTY:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– D - Does the honorable senator agree with Senator Gibson that big estates should be cut up into blocks suitable for 1,000 sheep?

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– 1 would favour that proposal in some cases. The production of wool and meat will be of great importance to this country, and we should develop that class of production as much as possible. If an exserviceman were given a holding that would carry 1,000 sheep he would have a chance of earning a decent living. Probably the honorable senator will say that this method of land settlement would be very expensive, but any scheme must be expensive. It would be more expensive in the long run to settle men on land that is not fully developed, and the settlers would have to suffer hardship? in the process of developing it. Senator Gibson dealt’ with the subject adequately yesterday, and I shall not enlarge upon it.

We have heard a great deal from the Government about full employment, and we are approaching the day when it will have to fulfil its promises to the people in that respect. A peculiar feature of the budget is that the Government anticipates that the pay-roll tax this year will be about £80,0.00 lower than previously. In my view the pay-roll tax is a barometer of employment. If the Government expects a shortage of £80,0.00 in the pay-roll tax, how can it conclude that the people will be given full employment? If it gave the people full employment, receipts from the tax would increase. Therefore, the budget is contradictory. The Government also propose? to continue with the Man Power Directorate, which will cost the country about £700,000 a year. We all agree that high employment is essential to our prosperity, but I consider that full employment is impossible of achievement. High employment must go hand in hand with high production, which must be obtained at costs which will enable us to compete in the world’s markets. Only by successful international trade can we build a prosperous nation. Full employment is a leading plank in the Government’s platform. A White Paper on full employment issued recently by the Government does not clarify the position, but makes confusion worse confounded. The plan laid down in the White Paper has only one meaning, and that undoubtedly is the continued conscription of labour, which is not supposed to be a plank of the Government’s platform. Conscription of labour was regarded by the trade unions exclusively as a war effort. It has been referred to as an example of what Labour has done during the war, and I agree that, in the main, the people have done a good job. When addressing the Australian Labour party conference in Sydney in August, the Minister for Post-war Reconstruction (Mr. Dedman) said that every man would have a choice of occupation but his choice must be beneficial to the nation. A few days later, in the House of Representatives, he said that the Government would insist on full employment but there would be no direction of labour. There is a very great difference between those two statements. If the promises of full employment are to be fulfilled, there must be many cases in which workers will have to engage in avocations not to their liking either in nature or situation.

Senator O’flaherty:

– T - That has been the case all our lives.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– 1 do not agree. Our workers have been free to change their employment whenever they wished to do so. Perhaps the honorable senator is referring to the regimentation of workers by the trade unions. To aim at full employment is to strive for the unattainable, and in the struggle we are likely to miss what is attainable. No industry can stand alone, and although the Government may find congenial employment for 90 per cent, of the people, the other 10 per cent, not being amenable to discipline, can hold up practically the whole of industry. Unfortunately, we have had some glaring instances of this during the war, and we are. still suffering severely from such delays to-day. The coal-miners and the waterside workers are outstanding illustrations of what a small body of men can do to paralyse industry. Every State in the Commonwealth is starved of coal to-day, although we have probably the richest coal mines in the world. When a survey was made some time ago, it was estimated that Australia’s coal resources equalled the whole of the coal requirements of the world for the next 50 years. The figures are cited by Stratton in his book, Discovering Australia. Part 4 of the White Paper betrays its weaknesses. Pathetically it relies upon the hope that “ a spirit of enterprise is alive amongst all concerned with productive effort, whether business men, primary producers, or workers “. Recent experience proves that the trade unions have done much to kill the spirit of enterprise, which is based on incentive. As soon as we destroy the incentive for the business man, the primary producer, or the worker, to better his position, progress is considerably retarded. To-day. almost 20,000 men in various avocations are out of work. We have seen the sorry picture of our waterside workers refusing to load ships because of some trouble in the Netherlands East Indies. Some time ago, waterside workers went on strike because we were exporting pig-iron to Japan. They said that the iron might be used against us in weapons of war.

Senator Sheehan:

– They were right.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– Today they are supporting the people who supported Japan. They will not load Netherlands ships, which will be carrying not munitions but foodstuffs for our own people in the islands.

Senator Ashley:

– That is entirely wrong. It is a misstatement.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– It is not a misstatement.

Senator Ashley:

– I accept the word of the Netherlands Consul-General that arms and munitions were to be loaded on those ships.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– The waterside workers are supporting the Indonesian Quisling who spent some months in Japan and who co-operated with the Japanese in Java.

Senator FOLL:

– He was Japan’s puppet premier.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN.Yes. They are supporting that man to-day, although a few years ago they refused to load pig-iron for Japan. A great deal of money has been spent under the emergency war-time powers of the Government for which we have received no return. One instance of such waste was the expenditure of £150,464 on mining for copper and wolfram in Central Australia. The return from that venture was £27,243. Another project was mining for mica,. The Government laid out £73,409 on this work for a return of only £1,420. A third instance was the erection of power alcohol distilleries at a cost of £1,2417,416. Only one of these distilleries operated and it ceased production after six months, its operation resulting in a deficit of £68,126. The Government also has a construction programme for 300-ton wooden ships involving a total cost of £2,000,000. According to the report of the Auditor-General the cost per ton of each vessel will be much greater than that of standard steel ships. He described the price of £62,500 each as being exceptionally heavy. The Minister for Commerce and Agriculture (Mr. Scully) recently admitted that the Government vegetable farms in northern Queensland were established at a cost of £102,547. and that receipts from the vegetables produced amounted to only £19,281. The Government established flax mills during the war. I admit that while the nation was at war the Government had to expend money on such costly projects, but it would be a mistake to continue with them any longer than is necessary.

Senator Ashley:

– Would the honorable senator stop flax production?

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– I would do so unless we can produce flax more cheaply than at present, but I am hopeful that we shall be able to produce that commodity at a reasonable cost. Before the war, we were able to buy flax from overseas at about £90 a ton, whereas the present cost of Australian flax ia about £200 or £250 a ton.

Senator Ashley:

– Those figures relate to flax grown on marginal lands on which many crops have failed. They are not the present prices.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– The present methods of harvesting flax are very primitive and costly. The labour costs alone amount to £5 u ton, but with modern machinery they could be reduced by about two-thirds, or to little more than £1 10s. a ton. As a rule, the flax, on being harvested, ia carted to a mill and stacked for drying. Then it is removed to a de-seeding plant and put back into a stack. Then it is removed to a retting field, after which it is taken back for scutching. It will be necessary to adopt a method by which the flax will be taken from the farmer’s paddock to the scutching mill. Unless flax can be produced at a much lower cost than at present, we may as well cease to grow it. There is great risk of fire when the stacks are in close proximity. Apart from the cost of retting and scutching, £40,000 has been expended in the purchase of seed flax. During the five years in which the industry has been carried on in Australia, 75,500 acres of land have been planted with flax, of which only 28,000 acres have been reaped. If the crop is not of sufficient height to make it useful for retting, it is not harvested, hut the farmer is allowed £1 an acre for it. He can burn it or do what he likes with it. It seems to me that a crop of flax 18 inches high should not be burnt off, as it would probably provide flax seed as good as that obtained from crop 21 inches high. Perhaps most of the crops which have been burnt should have been harvested for seed.

Senator Collings:

– Does the honorable senator suggest that they were burnt out of sheer perversity?

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– They were burnt under instructions; but why? If 30,000 acres of flax was burnt, surely much of it would have been suitable for seed, if not for retting into fibre.

I now turn to the tax for social services. A taxpayer in receipt of £300 a year, and without dependants, will pay £22 10s. a year, for which he will get a few bottles of free medicine, if he waits until January, 1946, before besoming ill. If the High Court does not decide that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Bil] is unconstitutional, he will also get an old-age pension, provided he spends ill he receives between now and the time when he reaches the age of 65 rears. Should he be in receipt of £300 a year and have two children, he will contribute in social service tax £15 4s., for which he will get £6 10s. in child endowment, a hospital bed, a full share of coloured medicine, and a remote chance of receiving an old-age pension, if he is not thrifty. All these benefits could be obtained through a friendly society for much less than is to be charged under the Government’s proposals.

Senator Courtice:

– The friendly societies cater only for the healthy, but the Government desires to take care of the sick.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– The policy of the Labour party has been to tax the thrifty in order to meet the needs of the poor and improvident, [t is now proposing to tax a single man or woman in receipt of £200 a year to the amount of 5s. 9d. a week, and at the same time the members of this class are asked to be good citizens and have families. All of these privileges could be obtained from a friendly society for. about ls. 6d. a week per head of the population. Even a tyro in finance must realize that the scheme has been hastily conceived, and is extremely ill-balanced between those who pay and those who benefit.

The immigration policy of the Government is based on the platform of the Labour party, which is strongly opposed to monopolies of all descriptions in trade and finance, but the Government would claim a monopoly of this country, with its vast undeveloped resources, and holding a handful of people totalling about 7,000,000. Under the weak immigration scheme proposed by the Government, many years will elapse before the population can be increased considerably. The Minister for Immigration (Mr. Calwell) is prepared to accept 70,000 immigrants yearly.

Under such a scheme, even allowing for the natural increase, 25 years would elapse before the population of Australia would reach 12,000,000, which is a very small proportion of the world’s population of 2,000,000,000. Our increase of population has been very slow, because, for all practical purposes, we have lacked an immigration policy. In 1815 our population totalled about 15,000. During the following twenty years, it increased to 100,000, and during the subsequent 25 years, it reached 1,000,000. In 1880, the population totalled 5,000,000, and to-day we have slightly passed the 7,000,000 mark. There would be no great danger in adopting a full immigration policy for the next two or three years. Thousands of Europeans will no doubt be glad to better their conditions in a new land. Should Australia, at the end of that time, consider that the influx of migrants was too great, it would be easy for it to legislate to check the flow of newcomers from overseas. The Labour party’s policy of admitting no immigrants while there are unemployed in this country is ludicrous. Not only in this country, but also in every other part of the world, a certain section of the people is unemployable, and no matter how great the inducement offered may be, they will not become regular workers. The greatest incentive that we could offer to the right class of immigrant would be to make this country a desirable place in which to live, and the duty of any government is to legislate in such a way that people overseas will be anxious to come here to try their fortunes. By reducing taxes, and offering greater inducement for the expansion of industry, and by persuading capitalists from Great Britain and the United States of America to’ transfer their capital, their manufacturing interests, and also their workmen to this country, we shall attract migrants who, while expanding their own industries, will at the same time assist Australia. These in my judgment would be the most desirable immigrants, as they would confer benefit both on themselves and on Australia.

Senator Collings:

– The honorable senator decries his own country, and then claims that we need more people to share our misery.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– Australia is a good country. All it needs is good government. I have always subscribed to the policy of a white Australia, but, during the last three years, most of our people have realized at times just how close they have been to, not only an influx of a coloured race, but also the danger of our meagre population being made subservient to that race. We are now confronted with a problem that provides much food for thought. By the adoption of the United Nations’ Charter we have extended the hand of fellowship to many who have been debarred even an entry to our country. We must realize that our ally, China, is one of the “ Big Five “ who must be in agreement before any belligerent nation can be disciplined. A plea from China for equality for its people would require a carefully considered reply.

We have heard a good deal lately about the means test in connexion with .social service benefits and, later, legislation on this subject will come before us. This matter is causing concern to a great number of citizens, and the Government would have been wise if, instead of adopting the half-baked scheme that it has submitted to us, it had given consideration to a comprehensive scheme of national insurance under which all would pay and all would benefit. At present, old-age pensioners are allowed to earn only 12s. 6d. weekly without interfering with their pension. During the war many of them have proved that they are capable of earning more than they are permitted to earn. Indeed many of them have shown that they can earn a full day’s pay. Some pensioners declared themselves off the fund and worked in munitions factories. It is not right that an old-age pensioner should not be allowed to earn as much as he can earn. Why stop at 12s. 6d. a week? Why prevent a man from working if he is able to work?

Senator Collings:

– No one is prevented from working. If a man wants the pension, he is allowed to earn only 12s. 6d. a week. If, however, he can earn more, he may choose to do so, but, in that event, he is not entitled to the pension.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– A man 65 years or older should be allowed to earn whatever he is capable of earning.

Senator Sheehan:

– Does the honorable senator believe in a national superannuation scheme ?

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– ] certainly do. Gradually, the Labour party is tending towards a comprehensive scheme of national insurance; it favours to-day many things which it opposed a few years ago.

Senator Collings:

– Nothing of the kind.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN.Last March I asked for a comparison of the amounts paid as subsidies to primary industries in 1939 and the subsidies then in existence. I was informed that in 1939, when subsidies were paid in respect of wheat, apples, citrus fruits, wines and cotton, the subsidies amounted to ?4,377,480, and that by March, 1945, the cost had risen to ?20,928,000, an increase of over ?16,000,000. Of that amount, about ?6,500,000 was debited to cereal production. The necessity for the payment of a subsidy on cereal production is due mainly to the restrictions placed on the growing of cereals during recent years, coupled with a shortage of man-power” and superphosphates, and exceptionally dry seasons. Farmers would have surmounted those difficulties, as they had overcome other obstacles in the past, had they been allowed to grow as much wheat as they desired. In that event, instead of facing a drought with no reserves on hand, they would have been better prepared.

Senator Collings:

– They would have been better off if there had not been drought, and if the Japanese had not captured Nauru.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– Included in the amounts which I have mentioned is about ?750,000, which is paid to farmers not to grow wheat, notwithstanding that the Government must have known that when hostilities ceased millions of people would be starving. Apart from payments to them for not growing wheat, growers of cereals have received no great benefits compared with the amount received by the Government for their produce that it handled. Without repeating in detail figures which have already been given to this

Parliament - figures which the Government has never refuted - I submit that the Government has robbed the farmers of about £6,000,000 to which they were legally entitled. [Extension of time granted.] A few day ago, when Senator J. B. Hayes advocated an extension of the use of dehydrated vegetables, his remarks were applauded by honorable senators on the Government benches. Apparently, they forgot that their supporters, the waterside workers of Sydney, had allowed 50,000 bags of potatoes and other vegetables to rot in the holds of ships in Sydney Harbour. The primary producers of this country do not ask for charity, but they do expect whatever government is in power to take steps to ensure that their production shall not be wasted. In the course of his speech, Senator J. B. Hayes said that a spokesman for the Government in a broadcast statement had said that if there were no railway breaks of gauge fresh vegetables could be broughtto the big cities of Australia from almost any part of the continent. That might be so, but he did not say what the cost would be. The broadcaster then went on to say that that could not be done because the electors had rejected the Government’s referendum proposals.

Senator SHEEHAN:
Victoria

. -I was disappointed with the speech of Senator James McLachlan. For the most part, it consisted of petty criticisms, and did not contain one constructive suggestion. I always regard the budget debate as one of the most important discussions that takes place in this Parliament, because it gives to us an opportunity to review the activities of the nation for the year that has past and to plan for the future. It also givesan indication of the possibilities open to us, and shows the way that we are going. The budget presented to the Parliament by the Treasurer (Mr. Chifley) a week or two ago merits the sincere consideration of all honorable senators. It is neither a peace-time budget nor a war-time budget, but one which covers the transition period from war to peace. The Acting Leader of the

Opposition (Senator Leckie) said that the war had changed our methods of finance. I agree with him. Together with other nations engaged in the war. Australia has passed through the valley of the shadow of death. The United Nations have emerged from the struggle victorious, but certainly not unscathed. Australia has suffered severely; but today we look to the future with hope, believing that it will be better thanthe past. It has been truly said that we cannot return to the conditions that we knew prior to the war - that the old civilization disappeared with the coming of the atomic bomb.

Whenever I listen to a speaker like Senator James McLachlan I fear that in the new civilization this country may never occupy the position to which it is entitled. It is easy to criticize, but when we remember what this country has gone through, and what burdens the people have been called upon to bear, we realize something of the magnitude of the task that lies before us. When we realize that war expenditure up to last year amounted to £2,111,000,000 of which 34 per cent. was provided by direct taxation, we can appreciate the great sacrifice that has been made by the people of this country. What has that sacrifice entailed? Senator James McLachlan made scathing references to industrial unrest on the wharfs in Sydney and in other parts of the country. Has he forgotten that during the war period, when this nation was fighting for its very existence, the workers of this country worked for unduly long shifts and submitted to conditions unprecedented in peace-time? Taxation was heavy upon their earnings, their wages were pegged ; yet one hears this carping criticism not only in this chamber, but also in the press. Other sections of the community, too, had to do their share in the great contest of war. They too suffered in the years through which we have just massed. The spending power of the community was severely limited. People had to go without the luxuries, and even some of the necessaries of life so that the war could be won. I mention these matters to bring to the notice of honorable senators the fact that this budget is the programme for the future. We are of British stock, and I have yet to learn that it is the practice of Britons to repudiate their commitments. What did we say to the people of this country during the war years? We said, “If you will submit to the inconveniences which the Government has to impose upon you, we shall build «. better and brighter world for you after the war. If you will go without the luxuries of life and make every effort to bring victory within reach, when the war has been won you will enjoy better conditions.” This budget is a clear indication that the Government is prepared to redeem its promises. One critic has suggested that the reduction of taxation provided for in the budget was arrived at by a rule of thumb method; that quite blatantly, the Treasurer (Mr. Chifley) said, “ The war is over. We shall reduce taxation by this much.” Some people believe that now that the war is over all war-time restrictions and controls should be eliminated immediately.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– Who has suggested that?

Senator SHEEHAN:

– That is the attitude of a number of honorable senators opposite who have criticized the budget and *e Government’s legislative programme. Their cry is, “ Let us get back to the old days “. Heavy taxation is still required to meet this country’s commitments to its citizens who fought for the security of the Australian nation. The Government promised those men that certain things would be done for them. Deferred pay alone is a substantial commitment. We have also guaranteed a gratuity payable at a later date. To suggest that taxation should be reduced in a wholesale manner, despite those commitments, is ridiculous. To Senator James McLachlan and other honorable senators opposite who referred in rather scathing terms to the manner in which this Government supported primary producers during the war, I say that had the Government not taken that action, not only would many of our primary industries have reached the point of extinction, but also our kith and kin in the United Kingdom would not have received the assistance from this country that they did, and Australia would not have been able to play its part in maintaining not only its own forces in the South-West Pacific theatre of war but also the forces of allied nations; yet honorable senators opposite who pose as the representatives of primary producing interests condemn what the Government has done.

Mention has been made of the cost of producing flax in this country.

Senator Ashley:

– It was produced at the request of the British Government.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– Yes. Prior to the war, flax was imported into this country, but with the outbreak of hostilities shipments ceased. What did we do? We stepped into the breach and produced flax ourselves, regardless of the cost. It will be recalled that six or seven years ago the Menzies Government introduced Australia’s first war budget providing for an expenditure of more than £100,000,000, and what a colossal sum we thought it was ‘ However, compared with war expenditure in subsequent years that budget has paled almost into insignificance. To achieve victory we had to spend vast sums of money. As the Acting Leader of thu Opposition (Senator Leckie) said, the war taught us to disregard ordinary financial standards. It also taught us that we need never again face the position in which we found ourselves some years before the war when employment could not be found for the people of this country. It is true that some men are out of work on the wharfs to-day, but what was the position before the war? Thirty-two per cent, of our working population was unemployed. Did Senator James McLachlan or any other honorable senator opposite express grave concern because such a huge number of people were out of work? Certainly not.

Senator O’flaherty:

– T - They were not allowed to work.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– That is quite true. Mention has been made also of the fact that the Government spent some thousands of pounds searching foi minerals in this country. Was that expenditure not justified? Is it not true that the Government was seeking deposits of minerals vitally necessary to the proper conduct of the war? Was the Government not searching for a mineral the use of which probably made possible a much earlier end of the war than otherwise might have been the case? It is well known that in this country there are deposits of certain minerals used in the production of high explosives. The search required considerable sums of money.

The Government bas been criticized also for its endeavour to have power alcohol produced from wheat. Was expenditure on that project not wise when, in the early stages of the war, supplies of motor spirit to this country were drastically cut owing to enemy action?

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– The Government needed wheat for the production of power alcohol, but restricted the production of wheat.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– The growing of wheat for the production of power alcohol was not curtailed. Unfortunately, a drought descended on the land and reduced the wheat crop. Whilst Senator James McLachlan complains about certain expenditure in respect of industry, he does not object to the Government “ wasting “ money to provide a bonus to the wheat-grower, or to stabilize prices.

Senator JAMES McLACHLAN:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · UAP

– All of the wheat was sold.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– It was sold after the drought had decreased production. Let me refer to the criticism of the honorable senator in respect of expenditure on distilleries for the production of power alcohol from wheat. During the war we were badly in need of liquid fuel, which was really the life blood of the nation. In such circumstances, had the Government failed to proceed with the erection of distilleries, it would have been unworthy of its responsibility to the nation during the war. We are entering upon a new era in primary production. We must increase our productive capacity to the fullest possible degree because a grave shortage of foodstuffs exists in various countries. Thus, it will be necessary for the Government to assist primary producers, first, in order to continue production; and, secondly, to stabilize prices in order to prevent wholesale inflation and the skyrocketing of prices which would cause substantial increases of the cost of living. In such circumstances, nominal wages would rise, but the purchasing power of the worker’s income would not be increased. On pay day, he would bring home more bank notes, but these would not increase his purchasing power. As the result of the stabilization of prices, the purchasing power of wages has been substantially maintained. For that reason, the Government is justified in subsidizing the production of essential primary products. The Treasurer (Mr. Chifley), in his budget speech, estimates price stabilization subsidies to be paid during 1945-46, at £2,500,000, in respect of potatoes, compared with an actual expenditure last year of £2,433,492, and in respect of tea, which is ah important item of the regimen stabilized in computing the basic wage, £2,200,000, compared with an actual expenditure last year of £2,1S8,292. Last year the price subsidy actually provided in respect of whole milk was £1,785,946, and it is proposed to increase this subsidy to £2,600,000. The subsidy in respect of the basic wage adjustment last year was £801,891, and it is expected that expenditure under this head will be reduced to £500,000. Price subsidies in respect of other items which last year totalled £3,599,803 are to be increased to £4,700,000 making the total of subsidies for the stabilization of prices this year £12,500,000, as against £10,S09,424 last year. This total does not include subsidies in the form of direct assistance to primary producers.

In view of these facts, we can readily realize that the Government has little opportunity at present to make very substantial reductions of taxes. Some weeks ago, we passed the Wool Use Promotion Bill. It is true that under that legislation wool-growers will contribute towards the cost of setting up machinery to benefit the industry, but at the same time, the scheme will involve substantial cost to the taxpayers to stabilize an industry which plays an important part in our internal economy. In view of competition from synthetic fibres, the wool industry is not now in so favorable a position as it enjoyed immediately prior to the war. Therefore, the Government, mindful of the welfare of the country, has taken steps to protect that industry, and help it to meet new conditions. Honorable senators opposite who criticize this expenditure cannot have it both ways. They claim to represent the wool-growers of this country; and, having agreed to the Woo! Use Promotion Bill, they cannot now cavil at expenditure in the interest of other industries. There can be no doubt that the proposed expenditure in respect of the wool industry is justified. The same observation applies to the dairying industry. All of us are aware of the parlous conditions in that industry in the past. Those conditions were not a credit to Australia, particularly when we claim that Australia sets working standards which other countries might well copy. The conditions existing in the dairying industry before it was given assistance by the Government belied that claim. Owing to low prices, dairyfarmers were compelled to exploit their family labour. Children were called upon to labour early and late. Before going to school and after they returned from school they had to do practically a day’s work. I know of no industry that makes greater slaves of those employed in it than the dairying industry which is notorious for drudgery. It is a 365-day-a-year occupation with no holidays on Sundays or public holidays. The dairy-farmer must always be on the job. The Government has endeavoured to improve working conditions in the industry. The wages of employees have been increased, and as the result of subsidies paid to dairy-farmers the industry is now in a favorable position.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– It is in a better position than it was, but it is not in a favorable position.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– But f - But for the help given to it by the Government it would be in a far worse position. Indeed, if the Government were to withdraw the present subsidies the industry would collapse. To-day, our own kith and kin in the United Kingdom are in dire need of butter-fat. Appeals are now being made by right thinking people in Australia who believe that we should help to supplement food supplies in the Motherland, particularly at a time when its internal economy has been dislocated as the result of the sudden cessation of lend-lease. In these circumstances the Government must continue paying the existing subsidies to the industry.

Sitting suspended from 6.58 to 8 p.m.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– F - From the 1st April, 1014, the Commonwealth Government guaranteed the dairying industry a subsidy on commercial butter which enabled producers to obtain a price of ls. 7.3d. per lb. During the last financial year an amount of £5,153,000 was expended to assist the manufacture of processed dairy products and for this year it is estimated that such assistance will amount to £5,250,000.

Senator Gibson:

– Does the honorable senator consider that ls. 7.3d. is a profitable price?

Senator SHEEHAN:

– That is not the point. At least the subsidy has made it possible for the industry to develop and for dairy-farmers to carry on under fairly reasonable conditions.

Senator Gibson:

– Production last year was 13,000 tons less than in the previous year.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– That was due to seasonal conditions. I am surprised that the reduction was’ not greater. The figures which I have cited do not include payments in respect of butter and cheese exported to the United Kingdom, in respect of which certain amounts are recovered in each financial year. However, they include the following special subsidies, which were granted in respect of processed dairy products in order to meet difficulties resulting from drought conditions: From the 1st May to the 31st August, 1945, 2d. per lb. on commercial butter, and from the 1st December, 1944, to the 31st October, 1945, Id. per lb. on butter fat. These are estimated to involve an expenditure of £750,000. These facts show that the Government has made adequate provisionfor assisting our primary industries.

Senator Gibson:

– The amounts mentioned are merely subsidies to the consumers.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– The honorable senator suggests that if there were no subsidies the dairy-farmers would receive higher prices for their products. I have yet to learn of any organization of dairyfarmers which is dissatisfied with what the Government is doing. There may be some malcontents, who would never be satisfied, but the majority of dairyfarmers are not included in that category. These subsidies are responsible to some degree for the huge expenditure provided “for in the budget. I now turn to the wool industry.

Senator Gibson:

– That industry is not subsidized.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– M - Machinery has been set up to deal with the wool industry. Senator Gibson must be aware that, with the large carry-over of wool at the present time, it is necessary for the Commonwealth Government to step into the breach in order to ensure that justice is done to the growers. Surely the honorable senator has not forgotten that, at a cost of £40,000,000 sterling to be spread over four years, the Commonwealth Government will assume half-ownership of the Australian-grown wool at present owned by the United Kingdom Government.

Senator Gibson:

– The Government will only buy it back from Great Britain.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– E - Even though it has been bought by the United Kingdom Government, the fact remains that the transaction will cost the Australian taxpayers a total of £40,000,000 sterling. That amount must be provided by the Government, even though it may be offset later by the re-sale of the wool. Without Government assistance, it would not be possible for this financial arrangement to be made. It ill-becomes honorable senators opposite to accuse the Government of insincerity. They continually indulge in carping criticism, and when they hear of any Government action favorable to their own particular interests, they are still unwilling to give the Government credit for it. They reiterate the old story that nothing good is ever done by a Labour government. At the last elections they told the electors that it would be impossible for a Labour government to deal with the problems of primary producers, and now, in order to save face, they are trying to belittle this Government’s achievements. The Government has an excellent record in its dealings with the dairying and wool industries. E now direct attention to the position of cereal growers. Senator James McLachlan deplored the fact that during the war the acreage under wheat Had decreased. That reduction was caused by drought conditions. The budget papers contain some illuminating figures in relation to the wheat industry, which I shall cite for the edification of honorable senators opposite. The worst drought in our history struck the primary producers, in 1944-45, and because of this the total quantity of wheat delivered to the Australian Wheat Board was 38,000,000 bushels, compared with 84,000,000 in 1943-44, and 142,000,000 in 1942-43. Assistance to wheat and other cereal growers under the States Grants (Drought Belief) Act involved the Commonwealth Government in an expenditure of £1,855,000 for 1944-45, on the basis of equal payments by the States. Because of the effect of drought on the production of other grain crops, assistance to stock-feed producers was concentrated mainly on the production of wheat. Senator Gibson is not prepared to give the Government credit for what it has done in this connexion. The cost of subsidies foi stock-feed production, was £4,624,000. In addition, the Commonwealth Government met considerable charges for transporting hay and chaff to the States in which supplies were short. I have heard no criticism from honorable senators opposite, who profess to speak on behalf of the wool-growers, of the provision that has been made for the continuation of subsidies on cornsacks, woolpacks and bran bags, lt is estimated that the cost of those subsidies this year will amount to £1,000,000. The Government is continuing to help other primary producers. It is subsidizing potatogrowers. Why should it not do so, even though there is a surplus of potatoes and prices may be high in some States? The Government asked growers to plant potatoes to the limit of their capacity in order to meet the requirements of the war situation. Does Senator Gibson suggest that, after inducing them to plant large areas, the Government should neglect them?

Senator Gibson:

– That is what the Government has done.

Senator SHEEHAN:

– That is what honorable senators opposite did to the wheat-growers some years ago. They rejected the Scullin Government’s wheat proposals, by means of which the wheatgrowers were to be given a fair deal. It seems that honorable senators opposite are quite prepared to play confidence tricks on the primary producers, whereas the Labour government is playing fair and square with them. This Government stands by its commitments. The Government’s plans, as outlined in the budget papers, will make a strong appeal to primary producers throughout Australia. The budget represents a stock-taking of last year’s events and gives an indication of the Government’s future intentions. I note with pleasure the increased benefits to be given to the people in the form of social services, but honorable senators opposite have criticized the Government’s proposals in that direction. The fact that the invalid and old-age pension has been increased to 32s. 6d. a week is at least an indication of a sincere desire on the part of the Government to improve the conditions of invalid and elderly people, although the recipients will not get as much financial assistance as we should like them to have. The Government can take full credit for the fact that a widow who has to maintain a child under the age of sixteen years will receive up to 37s. 6d. a week, whilst a widow in necessitous circumstances will receive a pension up to 32s. 6d. a week. Considering that the cost of pensions was only £17,000,000 in 1938-39, as compared with £63,000,000 this vear one can appreciate the magnitude of the expenditure contemplated in the budget. That is not all I hope to see accomplished. The Government has indicated the likelihood of further benefits in future.

A measure providing for hospital benefits will be introduced at an early date, land I am at a loss to understand why in some quarters opposition has been expressed to the introduction of the measure. It has been suggested that the proposals of the Government in that direction are likely to dry up the fountain of charity, and that the hospitals will not be largely benefited. Taking Victoria as an example, I consider that the Government’s proposals will be of immense advantage, not only to the hospital boards, but to the people generally. The stigma of charity will be removed from treatment in hospitals. It will not be necessary for those seeking admission to those institutions to answer a variety of questions, and to pay practically the whole of their wages in order to secure hospital accommodation in time of illness. The measure to be introduced will assist in the building of more hospitals, and will tend to improve the conditions under which medical services will be provided. I hope that no objection will be raised to the proposals to be made later to deal with the scourge of tuberculosis. I was hoping that, by the application of science to this dread complaint, it would disappear from our midst, but it has been found necessary for Commonwealth action to be taken in order to eradicate the disease, or at least greatly to minimize it.

Taken generally, the budget shows what may be anticipated in the way of legislation during the transition stage from war to peace. Despite the huge increased expenditure that will be necessary for the repatriation and rehabilitation of ex-service men and women, and for the provision of the social services to which I have referred, the Government is prepared at this early date to bring about a reduction of the income tax. Like other honorable senators, I should have liked to see it reduced to a much greater extent than is now proposed, particularly in respect of people in the lower wage group ; but, in view of the cost of increased social services, we must wait until war expenditure has decreased and many of the huge commitments that have to be met to-day have disappeared. I have no hesitation in believing that taxes will soon be reduced to such a level that the people will be well satisfied with the position. The criticism indulged in by honorable senators and others professing to speak on behalf of the people is unfounded. The budget is one of which th<? Government may well be proud.

Senator SAMPSON:
Tasmania

– There are not a few unconscious humorists in this chamber, and the honorable senator who has just resumed his seat is one of them. I laughed inwardly when I heard his assumed righteous indignation that Honorable senators on the Opposition side should have had the temerity to criticize the budget proposals of the Government. When, immediately prior to the suspension of the sitting, he endeavoured to castigate Senator James McLachlan, I could not suppress a smile. What is the function of an opposition?

The late Prime Minister, Mr. Curtin, declared on one occasion that it was the bounden duty of an opposition to criticize. That, ostensibly, was one of the reasons why he declined to join a national government. In castigating the Opposition for criticizing government policy, and the budget in particular, Senator Sheehan displayed colossal impudence savouring of hypocrisy and humbug. The duty of an opposition is to criticize, and it ill becomes the honorable senator to complain when the Opposition in this chamber discharges its obvious duty.

This is the first time since 1939 that we have had more or less detailed figures of defence and war expenditure. It is interesting to note that the cost of the war from 1939 to this year has been £299 per head of the population.

Senator Nash:

– But that expenditure saved Australia.

Senator SAMPSON:

– I am not complaining about it, but I deplore the suffering, the destruction, and the loss of valuable lives during the war. That is the true cost of the war, and it cannot be expressed_in monetary terms. Of the sum of £299, an amount of £105 per head of the people has been raised by taxes and the remaining £194’ by loans. Three years ago, the Department of the Navy incurred an expenditure of £38,500,000; in the following year, the expenditure was £38,000,000; and in the present budget the proposed expenditure is down to £31,800,000. The Department of the Army cost Australia £215,000,000 in 1943-44 and £173,000,000 last year, whilst the estimate for the present year is £174,000,000. The Department of Air expended £128,000,000 in 1943-44 and £119,000,000 the following year, and it is estimated that the expenditure in the present year will amount to £86,000,000. The total expenditure of the three services combined was £382,000,000 in 1943-44, and £334,000,000 in 1944-45, whilst the estimate for this year is £293,000,000.

The expenditure on arms and munitions, ‘ armament, mechanization, equipment, and reserves shows practically no decrease as compared with last year. The expenditure in the coming year in those directions will amount to £24,000,000. Of course, we have no details of the total expenditure incurred from 1939 to 1944, but we know that the cost of the war in terms of money amounted up last year to £2,111,000,000. The total tax burden is still £45 5s. per head of the population. In 1944-45 taxes averaged £46 per head, and in the previous year, £41 las. In addition to those large sums which are charged to defence, civil expenditure is estimated at £132,000,000. The Navy, which carries a far greater number of permanent personnel than does either the Army or the Air Force, shows a reduction in respect of pay and allowances. On the other hand, the Army and the Air Force show increased amounts. That is somewhat puzzling at first. The Treasurer says that there will be no reduction this year of the amount provided for service pay. Deferred pay to members of the services is expected to total £54,000,000. The rather astonishing thing in connexion with deferred pay is that it was not charged in the Government accounts in the year in which it was earned. Apparently, this £54,000,000 is accumulated deferred pay, and I would have thought that it would have been shown each year as it was earned. There is a further liability of about £30,000,000 in respect of deferred pay which will have come into later accounts. The total Army vote is a little greater than last year, presumably because of the inclusion of the deferred pay. The votes for the Navy and the Air Force are lower in the latter case, because of the reduced outlay on aircraft About £1,750,000 will be required for administration and general expenses of the Department of Munitions, compared with £2,200,000 pounds last year. The total for that department is ‘still £7,400,000, and includes £3,000,000 for the construction of standard ships. The cost of the wooden ships built in Tasmania is somewhat amazing. The State Government undertook to do the job, and without any experience it rushed in, with the result that it made an unholy mess of things. After about £300,000 had been expended, and before any of the 300-ton ships had been launched, the State persuaded the Commonwealth to take over the project. So far, over £1,000,000 has been expended in that enterprise. That represents a cost of over £200 a ton. Whether those small ships will be of any use in the post-war period I do not know. They were built to special specifications prepared by the Army authorities. It is problematical whether they will be of any use in the island or coastal trade. They may he of some use as fishing vessels.

The Department of Supply and Shipping shows an estimated deficit of over £4,000,000 in the shipping branch, compared with £2,300,000 last year. It is still paying a 50 per cent, war risk bonus to coastal seamen, but for what reason it is paid I do not know.. There may be a few stray mines here and there, but there is no war risk associated with the coastal trade between Tasmania and the mainland of Australia. It is not difficult to understand why the Department of Supply and Shipping is expected to show a deficit. One of the greatest scandals in this country is the time that it takes to load and unload ships. I have vivid recollections of a striking poster prepared under directions by the late Prime Minister, Mr. Curtin. There was a good picture of the late Prime Minister, and under the caption, “ Keep the ships moving,” it was stated that -

Ships must sail. There must he no tie-ups. Delay in the movement of vital materials renders a service only to our enemies and vitally reduce our capacity to resist aggressors. The loss of even half a day in loading and unloading a ship may endanger valuable lives. Keep the ships moving.

John Curtin, Prime Minister.

Canberra, 20th October, 1941.

I first saw that poster more than three years ago at the Ocean Pier, Hobart. In the main, the appeal fell on deaf ears.

Senator Collings:

– Not in the main.

Senator SAMPSON:

– Yes. I am speaking of ports with which I am acquainted. Ships were unduly delayed.

Senator Keane:

– The delays were due to shortages of man-power.

Senator SAMPSON:

– No. I do not want to discuss the details now, although I have certain information in my possession to support what I have said. The statement that the loss of even half a day might endanger valuable lives holds good to-day, although the war is over. “Mercy” ships to assist stricken prisoners of war and others have been held up. The appeal of suffering humanity has fallen on deaf ears.

Senator Keane:

– The waterside workers have done a good job.

Senator SAMPSON:

– Nonsense I

Senator Nash:

– There are many workers on strike in other countries.

Senator SAMPSON:

– That has no bearing whatever on the position in Australia. In his budget speech the Treasurer said -

I would also emphasize that self-discipline is still necessary, for no financial policy or system of controls can achieve an orderly and early changeover to a prosperous peace-time economy without the full co-operation of every citizen.

I agree with every word of that. The Government’s policy of full employment and social security will contribute to a healthy and happy community but there must be co-operation. Has the Prime Minister been given that co-operation? The answer is “ No “. Recently the right honorable gentleman announced the Government’s policy in regard to strikes in general. The policy of the Government is that nothing can be done. The Government has power but no courage. The Minister for External Affairs (Dr. Evatt) has been described as “ the greatest Minister for External Affairs Australia has ever had “. I have heard him described in those terms in’ thu chamber and also by the press. As Attorney-General the right honorable gentleman has “ squibbed “ it. The law may be defied ; law-breakers can act with impunity. It is a sad commentary on a government which claims to have saved Australia from the Japanese that it cannot do anything to save us from strikers. In 1943-44 peace officers cost the Commonwealth £735,000. In the following year the cost was £638,500. For the current year £300,000 is to be voted. The only time when peace officers loomed large in the public eye was when they held up at pistol point persons engaged in distributing Sydney daily newspapers during >a strike. There were some interesting pictures of what then took place. I sincerely hope that the expenditure of money on peace officers is justified. If the peace officers could reduce pillaging on the wharfs the money expended on the force might be justified. The pillaging which takes place on the waterfront is alarming. Insurance officials say that their companies have had to pay out large sums in respect of claims for the loss of cargo.

The Potato Committee cost the country £39,732 last year, and £35,000 is to be voted for it this year. Man-power control cost over £1,000,000 in the last two years, and the expenditure this year will be on practically the same basis. Prices control calls for an expenditure of £520,000 in 1945-46. That is an increase of about £30,000 on last year’s expenditure. Rationing is estimated to cost £394,000.

Last year the Department of Postwar Reconstruction cost the country £1,156,759, of which £417,734 was expended on administration. For the current year the estimated expenditure for this department is £8,500,000 and I do not doubt that every penny of it will be required. It includes £3,000,000 for war service land settlement. That is not a big sum if we are to give our soldier settlers a chance to make good. This will be a difficult job and we must heed the lessons of the last war. Included in that vote also is £1,500,000 for university training and £2,250,000 for rural and technical training. We shall need every penny of that too, and a lot more, because these are jobs that must be done thoroughly. It is the obligation of the country to provide further university training for young men whose courses were interrupted when they answered the call of their country. Rural and technical training are also essential.

Last year the Department of Information cost more than £297,000 and the estimated expenditure for the current financial year is £326,000. I have vivid recollections of being invited to attend a meeting of business men in Melbourne shortly after the war started. The meeting was attended by 400 men, and was addressed by a Minister of the Menzies Government, the late Sir Henry Gullett, who talked about this wonderful new department that was to be set up at a cost, I think, of £20,000. Most of us left that meeting wondering what in the name of fortune it had been about. The Department of Information has been one of the biggest “ frosts “ ever- perpetrated upon this country. It has undertaken many activities which could well have been carried on by existing agencies. Of course, it also provides an excellent medium for the Government to propagate its own policy at public expense. Last year this department had the effrontery to expend £44,153 on the “Yes” campaign at the referendum. What a waste of money! But the cream of the joke is that this expenditure was charged to “ Post-war educational campaign “. That is a matter to which the AuditorGeneral has directed his attention. It seems, however, that the money was well spent, because the people of this country answered the Government with a resounding “ No “. Included in all these figures, but not specified, is an item which runs into many millions of pounds - waste. Waste, of course, is inevitable in wartime, but Australia has had more than its share of political mismanagement and extravagance during the war. It is high time that this waste was eliminated. The crux of the matter is that government expenditure should be carefully guarded and that the Government’s social security schemes should be on a sound economic and psychological basis instead of a foundation of political opportunism. Also, tax scales should be fixed with due consideration to their effect upon initiative and incentive, and should not be the subject of political partisanship or vote-catching tactics. With its present budget commitments Australia requires high taxation revenue, but borrowing, especially bank credit borrowing, is very heavy and has been heavy all through the war. This budget requires revision with emphasis on economies. The same may be said of taxation on industry. Not only is a good deal of budget expenditure and planning wasteful and unsound, but many people believe that the money which they are contributing in confiscatory taxes is being used substantially to provide jobs for Jacks-in-office who will further harass taxpayers with formfilling demands and tie up their enterprise and initiative with more red tape.

I wish now to deal with a subject of which I have made a study in the last 40 years, and about which I have thought a great deal during this war. I refer to our post-bellum army. There must not be a repetition of what happened after the war of 1914-18. Notwithstanding war weariness, and popular distaste for war, if war is to be avoided, we must be prepared for it. In short, we must hope for the best and prepare for the worst. I suggest that the foundation of our post-war military system must be a citizenry trained in and accustomed to arms. Owing to the abandonment of Part XII. of the Defence Act, when war overtook us in 1939 the General Staff had to improvise plans for a great army of citizen soldiers. It had to be extemporized, with consequent muddle and confusion. The voluntary system has proved a. costly failure. Failure to establish and maintain the sound system which bore such good results in the 1914-1S war found us in 1939 in dire straits when called upon to raise and equip quickly an efficient fighting force. We must retrace our steps and base our military policy upon the democratic principles that in a free state every able-bodied citizen should be trained, to defend his country, and that every citizen soldier should be eligible for promotion to any rank for which he is able to qualify according to sound and equitable standards. The Australian Army of the future as I would have it, would consist of a relatively small regular army subject to prompt reinforcement, when necessary, from a great citizen army reserve composed of trained citizen officers and soldiers. In contrast to the parsimonious policy of starving the forces in times of peace the most modern equipment should be made available on a generous scale for training and instruction. Training for war must be done in peace, and to that end it is essential that anything that stands in the way of an efficient war machine must be ruthlessly scrapped.

The officer corps of this national army should include relatively few professional officers, and a relatively great number of citizen officers; but the efficiency of the whole would depend primarily upon the efficiency and the disinterested devotion of the professionals. There can be no efficient citizen army without a nucleus of professionals. It would be their indispensable task to leaven the whole loaf. The highly trained professional officer would thus become one of the most invaluable servants of the modern demo- cratic state. The citizen army that I advocate would meet our military requirements whatever the future world organization may be. Such an army would not be provocative of war, as great standing armies are. It would be organized for the prompt reinforcement of a relatively small regular army in the formation of such expeditionary forces, great or small, as would enable us to do our part in suppressing lawless aggression. We are pledged to do that under the Charter of the United Nations to which we are a signatory. It would be our duty to provide our portion of any expeditionary forces required to suppress lawless aggression. Thus we should assure our friends and warn our potential foes that, hereafter, Australia shall be not only willing but also able and ready to do its part in maintaining a peaceful world order.

If the organization of world peace should, unfortunately, break down, it would put us in a position to mobilize all, or any necessary part, of our total man-power in a minimum of time and with maximum effectiveness for war. It. would also form the basis of a military system of maximum economy. Under a system of universal military training, the money required to maintain one officer, or man, of the permanent establishments of our armed forces would maintain several trained reserve officers, or men. With such a reserve system, our peace establishment would be capable of rapid expansion and, therefore, a relatively and inexpensive permanent establishment would meet our needs. Without such trained reserves, there would be no such power of rapid expansion, and a much larger and more expensive regular establishment would be necessary in order to give a reasonable degree of security. I suggest, it may, therefore, be laid down as a fundamental principle that whenever we maintain one officer, or man, on the permanent establishments of our land, sea or air forces to perform a duty that can be effectively performed by trained citizen reserve officers, or men, we increase the per capita cost of our national defence system unduly and reduce its ultimate capacity to meet the nation’s requirements in war.

I hope that history will not repeat itself in Australia, and that we shall not again fall into ways of sloth, and that once again the man wearing the King’s uniform will receive little regard from the general public. We must base our needs on the fundamental principle of a citizenry trained and accustomed to arms. This will save us much trouble, effort and suffering in the future. Looking back over the last six years of war, all of us will agree that we have had a most wonderful deliverance. Now that peace is here, what does it hold for us? Just what we make of it ourselves. The general assumption, of course, is that we are going to build a better world. I can see no signs to justify that hope in either Australia or the world at large. This better world may prove a delusion. But Australia’s fate is in its own hands. We can have adequate defence and a better order; but we must earn them. We have in this country many advantages if we make the best use of them, and we can be strong and prosperous. Our safety and our living standards can be assured by work, and by work only. There is no easy road. The day of the easy-going, carefree “ Aussie “ has gone forever. If it has not, if we are still going to be the same happy-go-lucky, carefree crowd we have been in the years between the two world waTS, the days of a White Australia are numbered. There cannot be any argument about that. Geographically our situation is serious and grim. If we persist with go-slow tactics in industry, disrespect for law, irresponsibility and indifference generally, we shall head for trouble. A triumphantpeace has come to us as a Providential deliverance rather than as a reward for our own foresight, industry and attention to duty. For how long this peace will remain, and what the outcome of the next breach of the peace, if and when it comes, will be dependant on how we face the problems that lie ahead of us. One thing is certain : if we do not make the most of our natural resources, our talents and traditions, we shall not survive. In order to make the best of this country we must all work together. But we are not doing that to-day. If sectional conflict is persisted in, this continent is not likely to be kept for any section. He is a dull fool who cannot comprehend that fact. I submit that if Australia does not “take a tumble “ to itself, it is heading for a grim time. The future rests entirely with ourselves. If we demand leisure and ease without toil, if we prefer extremes in socialization instead of drives for abundant production, and if we persist in the crazy idea that the short-cut to comfort is to take it from somebody else, we shall deserve what we shall certainly get, and that is, ruin.

Senator ARMSTRONG:
New South Wales

– This debate is now drawing to its close. Honorable senators have made a wide and comprehensive survey of the budget for 1945-46. As Senator Sheehan has said, it is not a war budget and neither is it a peace budget. It is a budget whereby the Government hopes to lay plans for this country to meet the next very difficult six months of the nation’s existence, namely, the transition period which we know will provide many problems for not only the Government but also the people of Australia. One lesson to be learned from, the conflict which has taken so much toll of life in this country, and from the threat which, fortunately for this country, did not fully materialize, is that if we are to provide effectively for our defence we must substantially increase our population.

It is said that Australia’s war effort was magnificent and outstanding. Our war effort has been described in superlatives in not only Australia, but also overseas. But having regard to the war in the Pacific, and comparing our war effort with that of the United States of America, it was not in the aggregate very great. It was great only because of the fact that it was made by only 7,000,000 people. But that is not enough. In the aggregate it would not compare with that of other nations engaged in the war. It was not all that was needed of ourselves to hold this country. But for the fact that we received help from outside, our population of 7,000,000 would, unfortunately, have been swept off the face of the earth. The lesson to be learned from this fact is that we must increase our population as quickly as possible. The time has come when we must do more than merely talk about this problem. We must take action - sensational action, - to deal with it. I disagree with the Minister for Information (Mr. Calwell) when he says that there can be no effective migration to Australia for at least two years. I know that the problem presents great difficulties; but by the same token the solution of the problem is correspondingly more urgent. In England to-day there are a number of Polish nationals. Their numbers, with their wives and families, exceed 100,000. These people will not return to their native land because of differences with the Government of the day. They feel that if they did so, their lives would be in jeopardy. They feel that even if their lives were not jeopardized upon their return to Poland, their future in that country would not be very bright. They are longing desperately for a haven and refuge. They have been in Great Britain since 1940, and, although of another nationality, they speak English very well. That is a great start for any migrants who come to this country. In addition, they have fought and died with Australians in the Middle East. Any Australian who has made the acquaintance of these Poles speaks of them only in the highest terms, (first, of their comradeship, and, secondly, their courage. They flew with the Royal Air Force in every theatre of war in Europe; and in the landing in France they did their part to win Europe back to democracy. They served in the British Navy throughout the world. Generally speaking, they are of the highest type, .and, as such, would be a wonderful acquisition to this country. My principal purpose to-night is to survey the possibilities of attracting these people to Australia, and to see how they can be used to the very best advantage.

During the war, every soldier and every ounce of equipment which the British Government carried on behalf of Australia were paid for in full by the Australian Government. Every division which left these shores on British ships was carried at certain rates arranged between the two Governments, and the Australian Government has met that cost in full. I suggest that Australia should continue to pay for .any service which the British Government may provide for us in the future. We havefunds in London amounting to over £100,000,000 sterling. Many British statesmen fear that this money may be used in such a way as to injure British interests, but that is another matter. The Government could use some of it to negotiate with the British Government for the use of certain British naval ships. I particularly have in mind the use of firstclass aircraft carriers. The British Navy proved, in the evacuation of prisoners from territories formerly held by the Japanese, that large numbers of people can be carried in reasonable comfort on aircraft carriers. We cannot obtain Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, or any of the other great passenger ships, because they are required for other purposes.

I do not believe in bringing people to . this country haphazardly. Unless we have a well-planned system of immigration, our hopes will be dashed. We have undeveloped areas where migrants could be profitably settled. For many years we have talked about the great potentialities of our far-northern and northwestern areas. Now we can do something about settling those areas. Many thousands of Australian soldiers and airmen have lived in those regions during the last few years. They have helped to develop them, and they have found that they can grow most of their own fruit and vegetables. They made mistakes, but we can profit by them. They must he in possession of valuable information of which we can take advantage. I suggest a mass migration of Poles from Great Britain to that area. We should have no difficulty in feeding them during the initial period until they can produce their own crops. The country should have been thoroughly surveyed by now and there should be no reason to make the mistake of settling the migrants on unsuitable land. The area is noted for its production of beef cattle, and so the problem of providing fresh meat for settlers could easily be overcome.

Senator Herbert Hays:

– Does the honorable senator suggest that they be settled in communal centres?

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– They would be scattered over a wide area, but they would be grouped fundamentally in a community.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– Like the Polish settlement in Alberta, western Canada.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– In the initial stages, probably 98 per cent, of the settlers would be of the same nationality. That would have disadvantages, but we must expect to have some drawbacks. If we wait for perfection, as the Government seems to be doing, I am afraid that we shall never see any mass migration to Australia. Now is the time to strike and to strike effectively. I consider that we could establish a community settlement in our northern areas. I do not know how many settlers the land would carry, but the Minister for the Interior (Mr. Johnson), who has travelled about the north of Australia all his life, estimates conservatively that more than 50,000 people could bc settled in the area between the Northern Territory and the Kimberleys. I believe that his estimate would be reliable. He is about to undertake a tour of the Northern Territory, and will see what use is being made of the lands held under lease from the Commonwealth Government. He may bring back some interesting information to apply to this problem.

Senator Allan MacDonald:

– Other Ministers have made similar tours.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– But we have never had such a favorable opportunity as we have now to develop that region. That land was surveyed long before there was a Commonwealth Government. Settlers went to Port Essington, near Darwin, from South Australia nearly 100 years ago, and their history is a story of failure and futility. However, now that we know so much about that country, we should be able to avoid the mistakes of the past. Settlers could not be expected to produce food from the land at once, and I see no reason why, during the transition period, the present method’ !of feeding the armed forces should not be used. We have plenty of stocks of Army food which could he used for the purpose. I should like to know how many tons of “ M. & V.” and “ bully beef “ will be offered for sale by the Commonwealth Disposals Commission unless it is used as I suggest. Those stocks should be ear-marked for the use of migrants until they can produce their own food from the land.

Senator Lamp:

– Tasmania can supply blue peas for them.

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– No doubt offers of help will come from all over Australia. We have everything that is needed. We must do something sensational about our immigration problem. It would be futile to wait while our 7,000,000 population grows slowly to 8,250,000, at which stage, according to the vital statistics, the birth-line and the death-line will meet. After that, our population will decrease unless we augment it from outside sources and take full advantage of our undeveloped areas. The emptiness of the Northern Territory constitutes a serious threat to the security of the nation. We must diffuse our population through that country as soon as possible. At present it is being exploited by a relatively small number of people.

Senator Gibson:

– What is the difference between the Poles, whom the “honorable senator suggests should be brought to Australia, and the Jews who wanted to settle in our northern areas some years ago? Would not 50 or 60 per cent, of the Poles be Jews?

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– I do not know. I am prepared to take that risk so long as they are Polish nationals. These people know the English language, and we will have a common bond with them from the outset. Many of them married English girls and have children.

Senator Cooper:

– Where are they now?

Senator ARMSTRONG:

– They are in England. As I have said, they do not want to go back to their native country because of the changed political conditions there. The Government’s plans will be futile if it delays for two years, as it proposes to do, and these Poles will go elsewhere. South American countries are hungry for immigrants, although most of them have populations much larger than our own. They want new blood, and will do almost anything to secure it.

The Government says that it must do three things before it can encourage mass migration. First, it wants to rehabilitate Australian men and women returning to civil life from the services. Secondly, it wants to build houses to accommodate the migrants. Thirdly, it wants to obtain ships. Were there any houses waiting for our forebears when they arrived in Australia? Was there any reception committee waiting to make the way easy for them ? If we wait for houses to be built we shall never induce migrants to come here. The first great influx of population to Australia occurred in the days of the gold rushes. Many of those people did not even have tents when they arrived, but they became good citizens. They developed atn entirely mew character. The Australians are like no other people in the world. Strangers, after living here for 25 years, develop different characteristics of which they have every reason to be proud. I disagree with the Government on the problem of housing. We could accommodate these Poles in barracks. Provided that we tell them honestly of the conditions which await them here, I am sure that they will be happy to accept the opportunity. It will not be necessary to flaunt great posters in front of them advertising aspects of Australian life that they can never enjoy. Recently, about 400 waterside workers were brought from Brisbane to work in Sydney, and about 3,000 British workers were brought to Sydney to work on the graving dock, and they were housed in wooden barracks in the Domain and elsewhere. They made no complaints. I am sure that the Poles would be happy to live under such conditions until houses can be provided for them.

The problem of re-absorbing our own men and women into civil life should not be difficult. There has never before been such a high demand for man-power as there is in all countries to-day. There is much work to be done in repairing the ravages of the war years. We are suffering from a wasting disease caused by the shortage of man-power. We have watched our cities and public buildings deteriorating owing to a lack of maintenance work; our streets have crumbled, and tram-lines have become virtually unusable. In every city, town and village throughout Australia work needs to be done in order to restore normal conditions, and I anticipate no difficulty in absorbing in employment all ex-servicemen. We should welcome all who can be induced to come to this country at the present time, and we can guarantee them full employment immediately on arrival. Sometimes a few weeks have elapsed, and at other times many months have passed, before employment could be obtained for new arrivals. Immigrants are potential home buyers and home builders within a short period of their arrival in this country. The advantage of settling these Poles m the Northern Territory is that there would be no conflict with any State. From first to last it would be a Commonwealth responsibility. I have already suggested a solution to the shipping problem.

Another field which should be well exploited for immigrants i3 among members of the Royal Navy. Many of them are anxious to remain in Australia, and, if an arrangement could be made for their discharge in this country, we should probably be agreeably surprised at the number who would be happy to settle here. An outstanding effort is being made in Sydney in the entertainment of British seamen. Every day 4,000 meals are served to them in buildings erected in Hyde Park, and every night at least 1,000 are provided with beds. There is a dance floor sufficiently large to provide for 3,000 dancers. British seamen are seen dancing with lovely Australian girls every evening, and these beautiful examples of Australian womanhood should be quite sufficient to make the visitors from Britain anxious to remain in Australia. British sailors become friendly with our Australian girls, but it is only a passing romance, as the visitors must return to Great Britain to be demobilized. To a young man two years seems half a life-time, and on their return to Great Britain they will probably find a job and settle down. There will then be little hope of their return to Australia. Many English lads to whom I have spoken are anxious to make their homes in Australia, but I feel confident that there will be no shortage of work in Great Britain, and once they obtain a reasonably good job there they will be lost to Australia. They have no illusions about Australia, and I believe that they could make a success of life here. They will not be attracted to this country by the propaganda which they have read about Australia for the last twenty years, particularly the slogan, “ Go to Australia and settle on the land”. The average man associated with rural pursuits in Great Britain is the salt of the earth, and would not be attracted to Australia, but there are good prospects of inducing immigrants from Great Britain to take up work in Australian cities. If the necessary land were made available Australians could be found to populate our out-back areas. Farmers with four or five sons have not sufficient land to provide homes for all of them. Frequently the eldest son remains on the land, whilst the others drift to the cities. We shall be expecting too much if we imagine that men reared in the cities of Great Britain will do well on the land in Australia. Immigration is the blood plasma which we must inject into the veins of the nation in order to prevent the , development of a condition of national anaemia; otherwise the future of this country will be determined by other nations.

The National Film Board was established some months ago for the production of films required for various government purposes, including the development of visual education through the schools. The opportunity is being taken to produce documentary films, so that people in other parts of the world may be informed regarding the attractions of Australia. We are critical of the people of the United States of America and Canada because they do not know much about Australia, but it is surprising how little Australians know of their own country. The board will show Australia, as it is, first to the Australians, and it will then show it to other nations. That will encourage our internal tourist traffic - a problem which could be more easily solved than that which arises in respect of the external tourist traffic. A remarkable change of climate would be obtained by a resident of north Queensland visiting the snow-lauds of the Kosciusko district, or by taking a holiday in Tasmania. Perth has attractions which are peculiar to that State, but how few people have travelled from the eastern States to Western Australia for a holiday? A tour was taken through that- State some time ago by Mr. Frank Clunes, the Australian author. He travelled as far north as Derby and Wyndham, and his description of his experiences was most interesting. A couple of months ago, members of this Parliament saw a colour film in Canberra dealing with the wonders of the Great Barrier Beef, and displaying some of the incredible glories of Australia. Our internal propaganda for the expansion of the tourist traffic will be supplemented to an important degree by the production of documentary films through- the National Film Board. Two films are now being produced which should receive much encouragement from the Government. For the first time in Australia’s history, outside money has been provided in the production of a moving picture. I refer to the film entitled “ Overlanders “, for the production of which the greater ‘ part of £100,000 of British capital has been provided. The largest sum that an Australian firm has yet expended on an Australian film is £30,000 ; but I suppose that “ Overlanders “ will cost well over £80,000. It is the story of the driving of cattle from the Kimberleys to southwestern Queensland. If this film proves to be a success, no greater advertisement could be provided for Australia, because it takes the nature of popular entertainment, and. will be presented to the people of all nations. The Prime Minister (Mr. Chifley) remarked regarding it -

I believe that a production like Overlanders” adds to the dignity and importance of the film industry, and I hope that more such films will be produced, which will help to make Australia better known throughout the world.

That shows what can be done through the National Film Board. The board itself will not make pictures; its duty is to encourage the local production of films. We are looking at certain proposals which we hope will encourage local film production. Another film which is being made in Australia is “ Smithy “, the story of the life and death of Sir Charles Kingsford Smith, one of Australia’s outstanding airmen. Already that film is reported to have cost £70,000 and there are still six weeks’ work ahead. Great care has been exercised in the preparation of “ Smithy “ ; there has been much research in order that his life may be accurately portrayed. If the film is a success and is shown to millions of

American picture patrons, it will do much to make Australia known in the United States of America. Its value cannot be assessed on a money basis. If American and British interests can make successful films in Australia, there will be many more films made in this country and in that way the Australian story will be told to the people of other countries. I ask leave to continue my remarks at a later date.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 6022

ADJOURNMENT

Vegetable Production: Cancellation of Contracts - Armed Forces: Binoculars: Service in Occupied Countries; Mails.

Senator ASHLEY:
Minister for Supply and Shipping · New South Wales · ALP

– I move-

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Earlier to-day Senator J. B. Hayes asked the Minister representing the Acting Minister for Commerce and Agriculture the following questions, upon notice : -

  1. Is it a fact that the vegetable contracts made between the Government and farmers have been partially cancelled?
  2. If so, what proportion of the contracts has been cancelled in each State?

The Acting Minister for Commerce and Agriculture has supplied the following answers: -

  1. Yes.
  2. In the light of a review of the services’ requirements of vegetables for next year, the quantities of vegetables for which 1946 contracts may be let have been considerably reduced. Authority has now been given to enter into 1946 vegetable contracts for the following proportions on the original targets, which in the case of Tasmania included an additional quota of carrots added to the target shortly before the cessation of hostilities: -

In Victoria and Tasmania, contracts for quantities in excess of those now authorized for certain vegetables have already been entered into and the excess contracts are being cancelled in respect of crops not yet planted. The contract system does not operate in Queensland. In arranging these reductions regard had necessarily to be given to the actual reduction in requirements for processing and for fresh consumption by the services in the respective States.

To-day Senator Finlay asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Army, the following question, upon notice : -

Will the Minister inform the Senate whether the Government will give members of the Eighth Division, now being released from prison camps, an opportunity of volunteering for service in the armies of occupation?

The Minister for the Army has supplied the following answer: -

The honorable member’s suggestion will be borne in mind but, in view of the hardship undergone by prisoners of war and their need of medical treatment, rest and rehabilitation, it is improbable that they could be available in time to join the initial force.

Senator LARGE:
New South Wales

– Some months ago I drew attention to the state in which secondclass mail reached northern operational areas. I complained that the Department of the Navy apparently was not looking for a remedy, but for a victim. I am not looking for a victim, but I am not satisfied with the answer that I received. Later, I complained that both the Senate and I had been ignored in this matter. After a long time my representations elicited a reply which contained the following paragraph: -

As regards Senator Large’s complaints concerning the attitude adopted by the naval authorities in failing to reply to his previous representations in this matter, any statement which could have been made in reply would have reflected upon the United States authorities who were responsible for delivery of all Allied mails in the areas referred to. I suggest you might advise Senator Large of this for his personal information.

The information which I have received is entirely opposite to that. It is that postal facilities are organized jointly by American and Australian authorities and that Australian personnel have always been satisfied with the handling of mails by the Americans. I am informed that at Hollandia and Milne Bay, which are under American control the position is quite satisfactory. In those places the American authorities have established storage sheds of the igloo type to which mail matter is taken after it has been ferried ashore from ships. The mail is stored under fairly good conditions, whereas mails under the control of the Australian authorities are wrapped in hessian of poor quality and dumped in tsars which ‘ are not waterproof. The men complained to the chaplain?, and their complaints were passed on to the captains of the vessels. Officer personnel knew of those complaints, yet evasive replies have been furnished to my” question. American mail matter is carried in waterproof bags, whereas Austraiian mails are placed in hessian bags. At Morotai conditions are fairly good, because there has been time to erect structures in which mails can be stored temporarily out of the weather. As late as this evening my informant has told me- that the naval officers in charge at Manus in the Admiralty [stands are responsible for the trouble that has arisen. The men consider that casual methods have been adopted in dealing with mails. A few weeks ago, mail matter was deposited at Manns, and although American service personnel got their portion of it within two days Australian troops waited for two weeks for their mail and have not yet received it. In his statement to the Senate on the 21st September on this subject, the Postmaster-General (Senator Cameron) said -

If Senator Large knows of any recent cases of serious delay, I again ask him to let me have specific details so as to simplify the task of locating the cause of the delay.

In response to that request, I now inform the Minister that my son-in-law - who is not the informant to whom I have referred - had cakes and other parcels despatched to him in March and May of this year. Among other parcels sent to him wor s two containing suits of pyjamas for tropical wear. They were sent in separate parcels. One was received after five weeks, but. the second did not reach him until four months after it had been despatched. I should also like the Minister to investigate a depot at Madang where, as recently as last week, gear and men’s effects were tossed onto the bare earth ami left for some time. As there is a depot at Madang, there is no excuse for treating men’s effects in that way. I could say a great deal more on this subject but, as I have said, I am not looking for a victim. I hope, however, that as a’ result of this matter having been brought forward, conditions will improve.

Senator ARMSTRONG:
New South Wales

– When Australia was in grave danger and it was impossible to obtain binoculars, an appeal was made to the community to make binoculars available to the Army authorities through the then Department of Supply. Later, binoculars were impressed. Officers of the department visited race-courses and impressed any suitable binoculars that they saw. Most of the owners of those articles handed them over freely, notwithstanding that in many instances they had great sentimental value. Some of them were presentation binoculars ; others had been used by their owners in the war of 1914-18, still others had been handed down from father to son. Their value to their owners was far in ex-cess of their intrinsic worth. However, they were handed over, and the owners were paid for them at various prices. No serious complaint was made because it was recognized that the handing over of the binoculars was a national duty. Now that the war is over, these articles will be disposed of. I understand that the method of disposal will he that the binoculars will first bc made available to the trade, which did little to supply tho deficiency at the time. Those in the trade will take what binoculars they require, and then the public will have an opportunity to hid at auction for those which will still remain. If it. is at all possible for those individuals who made their binoculars available to the Government to re-purchase them at the figure for which they were sold, that would be the honest way to do business. If the binoculars are disposed of through the trade, 30 per cent, will be added for handling, and dealers will be able to sell readily as many pairs as they can get. Surely, the Department of Supply and Shipping has a list of the persons who made binoculars available. These people should be located and informed that they may inspect their binoculars, and, if they so desire, repurchase them.

Senator ASHLEY:
Minister for Supply and Shipping · New South Wales · ALP

. -in reply - Senator Armstrong has been wrongly informed in regard to the proposed disposal of binoculars. Possibly, the misunderstanding has been caused by the disposal through the trade of certain binoculars which were declared surplus by the Army. Those binoculars were not impressed, but were purchased in the ordinary way. The department has the name of every person whose binoculars were impressed, and also the numbers attached to the binoculars when they were acquired. Steps are being taken to return the binoculars to the people from whom they were obtained. Provided the disposal is carried out through my department the former owners will be given a fortnight to claim the binoculars or communicate with the department indicating whether or not they require them. I am sure that the honorable senator will not have any complaint in that regard.

Senator Large referredto a communication which I sent to him through the Minister for the Navy (Mr. Makin). I regret that the honorable senator has raised this matter again to-night. In my view, the proper approach would have been for him to have seen the Minister for the Navy and supplied hint with the information which he has given to the Senate. The Minister for the Navy is just as anxious as the honorable senator that service personnel should receive their mail swiftly, and in first-class order. I shall convey the honorable senator’s representations to the Minister and ascertain what can be done in the matter. The honorable senator referred also to delay in the delivery of certain parcelsto men serving in operational areas. I point out that very often the parcels are not sent into operational areas, but are held at a base until the men return. For instance, when my nephew was serving in an operational theatre, his mother sent a parcel to him every week. Frequently, the complaint was made that the parcels were not being received, but, when the man returned to base, he received all the parcels. That may have been the case in regard to the parcels which the honorable senator claims were delayed for a full month. Every precaution is taken in the delivery of parcels, and the officials responsible for that work are most interested in the welfare of the fighting men. Every effort is made by Postal Department and the Department of the Army to ensure that all mail matter, including parcels shall be delivered as expeditiously as possible.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 6024

PAPER

The following paper was presented : -

Medical Research Endowment Act - Seventh Annual Report by National Health and Medical Research Council, on work done under the Act during 1944.

Senate adjourned at10.5 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 27 September 1945, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1945/19450927_senate_17_185/>.