Senate
12 September 1969

26th Parliament · 2nd Session



The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Drake-Brockman) took the chair at 10.30 a.m., and read prayers.

page 789

QUESTION

EXPORT OF MERINO RAMS

Senator MURPHY:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Would the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry ask that Minister to make a statement which can be presented to the Senate, informing us frankly whether it is intended to preserve the embargo on the export of merino rams or whether it is intended to lift it? I ask the Minister whether he will so ask in order that he will not have to ask that this question be put on the notice paper and lost.

Senator SCOTT:
Minister for Customs and Excise · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– In view of the honourable senator’s interest in this matter I shall certainly ask the Minister to make a statement to the Senate on the subject of the honourable senator’s question. I might say that the Minister for Primary Industry is well equipped to do this. When the Leader of the Opposition asked me, out of the blue, what was going to happen in relation to this particular subject the only thing that I could do was to ask that the question be put on the notice paper.

page 789

QUESTION

WATER POLLUTION

Senator MULVIHILL:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Shipping and Transport. In view of the continued failure of the New South Wales Maritime Services Board to furnish to the Senate Select Committee on Water Pollution details of prosecutions of major industrial river polluters, although requested to do so many weeks ago, will the Minister personally investigate the recent Gore Hill spillage involving the Shell Oil Co. Ltd to see that the present policy of appeasing such offenders ceases?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– I am not aware of the facts of the matter dealt with in the question. Whilst it would be within State jurisdiction I shall refer the question to the Minister for Shipping and Transport and let the honourable senator know what, if anything, can be done as far as the Commonwealth is concerned.

page 789

QUESTION

ELECTORAL

Senator MULVIHILL:

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior. With the national tally room on 25th October to be situated at Lyneham High School, Canberra, what is to be the position as regards central tally rooms in the various capital cities? In particular, will the Commonwealth Bank building in Martin Place, Sydney, be used on this occasion?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– The establishment of a Commonwealth tally room at the Lyneham High School will not affect the establishment of tally rooms in the States. Indeed, there has always been a national tally room in Canberra. However, as more and more use is being made of it by the news media and less and less of State tally rooms, the requirements of the Press will dictate the provision of tally rooms in the States. Tally room facilities will be available in Sydney. Where they are located will depend entirely on the extent to which news media require the service. However, newspaper, radio and television station managers have been communicated with and several have replied that they are going to come to Canberra.

page 789

QUESTION

INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH GRANTS

Senator DAVIDSON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question is addressed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Does the Minister agree with the reported statement of the Leader of the Opposition made in Sydney last night that, according to his view, there was no guarantee that money being spent under the Industrial Research and Development Grants Act was being spent for the benefit of industry in Australia? If the Minister does not agree with the statement, can he give the Senate some instances of ways in which the grants have benefited industry and, further, can he tell us the value of overseas financial assistance to Australia’s growth?

Senator ANDERSON:
Minister for Supply · NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– In the first place it is clear that the statement referred to by the honourable senator was made not by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate but by the Leader of the Opposition in another place. My attention was drawn to the statement and, having seen it, I sought some information about it. The fact is, as honourable senators will know, that the picture painted by the Leader of the Opposition in the other place does not depict the situation accurately. In the very Budget with which we are dealing at present the Government expects to double the expenditure for 1969-70 in respect of industrial research and development. This year the grants will be of the order of $10.8m as against $5.3m in the previous year. These funds will pass to Australian manufacturing and mining companies to encourage them in their research and development programmes. I am sure that we all recognise that this is a very commendable approach.

Industrial research and development grants provide an incentive to industry and they leave the initiative for projects with industry itself. Other definite aims of research and development grants are for the purpose of developing new products and new processes, encouraging import competitiveness and export activity. In special industries that is a very real factor in the improvement of our defence capability. But it is more relevant to Mr Whitlam’s comments to say that the key aim of the grants is to reduce dependence on overseas technology, the payment of royalties and licensing fees. Grants under the Industrial Research and Development Grants Act 1967 are made only when the Industrial Research and Development Grants Board is satisfied with the details of an application, and the national interest must always be the paramount factor in a consideration of the grants.

page 790

QUESTION

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Senator BYRNE:
QUEENSLAND

– I address a question to the Minister representing the Minister for External Affairs. Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to the statement made by Mr Kosygin, the Premier of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, at Calcutta on his return journey from North Vietnam as reported in the ‘Australian’ today? The report stated: the Asian security plan he proposed was not a military pact but was designed for peace. He said the plan was intended to unite all peace loving forces existing in South East Asia.

The report continued with Mr Kosygin’s exact words:

Those forces which are in a position to fight the war menace.

I ask the Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the Press comment which followed, namely:

Some Western observers believe the Russians are trying to arrange an Asian alliance which would isolate China from its neighbours.

Does the Minister agree that this is part of the overwhelming body of evidence now accumulating that Australia has allowed herself to be seduced into a relationship with the Soviet which will make this country little more than an instrument of Soviet foreign policy which is directed to the Soviet master plan for the containment of Red China?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– I have not had an opportunity to study the statement that was made or the Press comments in relation to it. Therefore, it would be very improper for me to make any judgment upon the statement. I do not accept the conclusions that the honourable senator has arrived at. Statements by the Minister for External Affairs make it abundantly clear that the honourable senator’s conclusions and suppositions are quite incorrect. I draw the honourable senator’s attention to the statement that the Minister for External Affairs made in another place yesterday. That statement clearly outlined Australia’s foreign policy, as have statements by the Prime Minister and by myself as their representative in this chamber. The statement that the Minister originally made in the other place on foreign affairs has been completely misunderstood. In some instances it has been completely misrepresented.

page 790

QUESTION

EDUCATION

Senator BUTTFIELD:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Science. I ask: Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to an article in today’s ‘Australian’ which states that the Australian Universities Commission is starving out the universities in the States by allocating only approximately $1,400 per student whilst the Australian National University is to be allocated approximately $5,000 per student? Will the Minister indicate what the States should do to attract more students to universities in this day and age when it is so essential to have highly trained personnel in the community?

Senator WRIGHT:
Minister for Works · TASMANIA · LP

– I have not seen the statement to which the honourable senator refers. I would suggest that the figures she has quoted would be an entirely false guide. It will be remembered that the Commonwealth’s interest in university education is supplementary to that of the States. After the Commonwealth determined its university education policy it established the Australian Universities Commission, which is an independent body comprised of expert university personnel and other competent people. I am sure that the Commission enjoys the complete confidence of the State universities and the Australian National University. Figures I have in front of me indicate that the Universities Commission recommended an appropriation of $580m for the six States, of which the Commonwealth’s contribution will be $226m. For the ANU, which is largely a research university although it now has a considerable number of undergraduates, an appropriation of $92m was recommended, of which the Commonwealth contribution will be $88m. The Commonwealth is, of course, completely responsible for the ANU.

page 791

QUESTION

EXPORT OF MERINO RAMS

Senator WILKINSON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. It follows upon a question asked by the’ Leader of the Opposition this morning. I, too, seek a considered statement from the Minister for Primary Industry. As the situation regarding the lifting of the ban on the export of merino rams has reached a stalemate, I ask: Will the Government consider holding a referendum of wool growers to clarify the position?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– The honourable sena.stor’s question is similar to the question asked earlier this morning by the Leader of the Opposition. I said that I would convey the wishes of the Leader of the Opposition to the Minister for Primary Industry. But the honourable senator wants to go a stage further. He asks whether the Government will hold a referendum on this subject. When the Minister replies to the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition I think he will also state his views regarding a referendum.

page 791

QUESTION

STATISTICS

Senator WEBSTER:
VICTORIA

– Is the Minister representing the Treasurer aware of some unrest in sectors of the business community about the increasing time required to be allocated to the filling in of statistical forms? Does the Minister appreciate fully the cost of this requirement to the producers of Australia’s wealth? Accepting that certain information is required in the national interest by government departments and authorities, will the Minister consider having an investigation carried out to establish better and more efficient methods of obtaining the necessary information so that private business particularly will be relieved of the burden of supplying the detail that is required now?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– The need for industry and for sections of industry to provide statistical data for governments is constantly under review. As government becomes more complex and as parliament becomes more demanding in its search for information, it is inevitable that an increasing demand will be put upon primary and secondary industries and on individuals to supply information. Very often the supplying of information is a burden for the individual or for the company. Nevertheless, this has to be looked at in the context of what is best for the nation. No government - no officialdom, if I may use that word - seeks information merely for the sake of seeking information. In this Parliament the Government is constantly asked for background information about certain facets of industry or departments. If information is to be given, it has to be gathered. I do not believe that there is any impropriety or any unnecessary calling for information.

Senator Georges:

– The honourable senator has not had to fill in very many forms.

Senator ANDERSON:

– I have had to fill in a few forms in my time and some of the forms that I have filled in have not been the kinds of forms that the honourable senator has filled in. We all have our own cross to bear, we all have our own burden to carry and we all have our own way of living. I take the view - and I hope everybody else takes the view - that if a government department asks for information it is for a very good purpose and in the national interest. I say to Senator Webster that every department that seeks information does so because of a valid and justifiable need to obtain the information.

page 792

QUESTION

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Senator GAIR:
QUEENSLAND

– Has the Minister representing the Minister for External Affairs seen reports of the article published yesterday in the journal of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, written by a Dr Whetten, who claimed that the Soviet Union’s bid for control of the Indian Ocean was the most immediate Kremlin objective now that the USSR has penetrated the Mediterranean? Is the Minister aware that the credentials of the Royal Institute of International Affairs - as regards its absence of bias or any identification with one group or other - are beyond question and that quite regularly it publishes articles by the Prime Ministers of Commonwealth countries? For how long will the Government continue to play down or ignore the obvious dangers associated with increased Soviet activity in the Indian Ocean? When will the Government come to its senses and realise that no Australian government should in any way facilitate or encourage the extension of Soviet influence in this region?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– I have not had the advantage of reading the article to which the honourable senator referred. Therefore I find it difficult to make a great contribution in my answer to his question. He obviously imported into the question an expression of some political views. I repeat what I said in answer to an earlier question: Yesterday, the Minister for External Affairs (Mr Freeth), in another place, made the situation .with relation to his statement of 14th August abundantly clear. In fact, he was asked this question by the honourable member for Perth:

Has the Government had any negotiations with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics about the security of South East Asia? Does the Government contemplate having any such negotiations in the foreseeable future; or has it conveyed to the Soviet Union or received from the Soviet Union any proposals for such negotiations? Was there anything in the Minister’s statement on 14th August to suggest that such negotiations might take place?

The Minister said this in reply:

The simple answer to each and every one of those questions is no.

The Minister continued:

Might I just add in relation to the last question that, like the honourable gentleman, 1 have been amazed at some of the fantastic suggestions that have been attributed to that statement. Neither in it nor anywhere else does there exist any proposal to have with the Soviet Union any security arrangement or military pact, or any other of the irresponsible proposals that have been ascribed to that statement.

page 792

QUESTION

CIVIL AVIATION

Senator GREENWOOD:
VICTORIA

– I address a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Civil Aviation. In view of the Minister’s laudatory comments yesterday about Sir Henry Bolte’s interest in the progress of Victoria and in particular his concern for the development of all night flying facilities at Tullamarine airport, I ask: Has the Government received any request from the Victorian Government for a relaxation of the present restrictions on night flying for Tullamarine Airport when it opens? If he has not, is the Minister able to say what the present Government’s attitude to such a request would be?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– I noticed quite a few statements in this morning’s Press to the effect that ‘I am a great advocate of nightflying between the various airports of Australia. I should like to clear this matter up. As I understood the position, I was not answering a question with relation to airport noise yesterday morning but rather a question relating to a statement by Sir Henry Bolte advocating the use of Tullamarine Airport for 24 hours a day and the lifting of the ban on night flying. The honourable senator now asks me what is the Government’s policy with relation to the lifting of the ban at Tullamarine and whether we have received an application from the Victorian Government for the lifting of the ban. I should like to inform the honourable senator that for some time now the Government has pursued a certain policy with relation to aircraft noise. That policy has been applied to flying between the capital cities in the three eastern States - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane - for several years. It is that, except under special circumstances, there shall be a ban on the arrival of aircraft at those airports between the hours of 1 1 p.m. and 6 a.m. The special circumstances under which aircraft will be allowed to land during those prohibited hours relate to weather conditions or any other dangerous circumstances which makes it necessary for an aircraft to land. Under those circumstances, with the consent of the authorities, an aircraft may land during the prohibited hours.

The Government has not received an application from the Victorian Government for the lifting of the ban. In fact, although there has been quite a lot of newspaper publicity on this matter, having talked to the Minister for Civil Aviation this morning I understand that he has not as yet received an application from any State government asking for the lifting of that ban. When he does, no doubt he will be giving consideration to it. But the present policy of the Government, which has been in force for several years, is that this ban will continue to apply. The Commonwealth Government has not given any consideration to the lifting of that ban and has never even talked about it over the last few years.

page 793

QUESTION

OVERSEAS INVESTMENT IN AUSTRALIA

Senator GEORGES:

– Can the Leader of the Government explain the continual postponement by the Prime Minister of his statement on overseas investment? Can he assure the Senate that this procrastination is not caused by dissension in Government ranks on this most important matter?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– I can assure the honourable senator that there is no dissension in Government ranks. I suggest to him that the wish is father to the thought in his case.

Senator Georges:

– What about the dissension on defence policy?

Senator ANDERSON:

– Is the honourable senator talking about defence policy or about a statement on foreign investment? In reply to the question about the Prime Minister making a statement, I say that he will make the statement when he believes that it is in the interests of the nation to do so. When he is satisfied that he has all the facts that he wants at his disposal he will speak, and it will be the voice of the Government when he does speak. All I can say is: Just be patient.

page 793

QUESTION

RELATIONS WITH SOVIET UNION

Senator WOOD:
QUEENSLAND

– I ask the Prime Minister a question through the Leader of the Government in the Senate. As the Soviet embassy has publicly acclaimed the Government’s recent external affairs statement as a very favourable change of policy towards the Soviet Government, as this Government is expressing the view that there is no change of policy by it towards the Soviet Union and in view of the great concern among many Australians, will the Prime Minister see that the Soviet embassy is officially advised that it has made a mistake in its interpretation and that there is no change of policy by this Government towards the Soviet Union. Will he see that such advice is supported by a clear statement in the various public media?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– As I have already demonstrated at question time this morning, there is no doubt as to what the statement of the Minister for External Affairs on this issue was. I remind Senator Wood and others who are not informed that the Prime Minister has made statements in another place, putting this issue in its right perspective. As to what may have been said by the Russian embassy, I do not keep myself informed of Press reports of statements made by that embassy. As to the rest of the question, I believe that the normal procedures of diplomacy are that communiques are passed between nations through the normal diplomatic channels; I do not believe that these matters are resolved at question time in a parliament.

page 793

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN NAZI PARTY

Senator WHEELDON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Has the attention of the Minister representing the Attorney-General been drawn to the fact that over recent weeks large parts of the city of Perth have been plastered with notices produced by the Australian Nazi Party, bearing large swastikas and containing racist statements? May I say by way of explanation that I am not in favour of the limitation of freedom of speech and assembly by any person or party, however odious I may find their views; but in view of the fact that the Nazi Party has a record of violence and particularly as one of the persons associated with this organisation, one Wenberg, who was expelled from the United

States of America because of his violent behaviour at the trial of a person charged with the murder of the former American Nazi Party leader, are the appropriate authorities doing anything to investigate the actions of the Australian Nazi Party? Will the Attorney-General in due course make a report to the Parliament regarding information that has been gathered concerning the activities of these people?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– In answer to the honourable senator, and without in any way commenting upon the informatoin that he gave us, I wish to inform him that I have not seen any reference to the display of posters over large areas of Perth, but 1 have no doubt that the keenest supervision by the appropriate authorities of the Commonwealth is being exercised with regard to them. But I am obliged to the honourable senator for giving me the opportunity of sending a reminder to the Attorney-General. After the matter has been investigated, if it is of sufficient importance I have no doubt he will take an early opportunity to advise the Senate because I am sure that there is not the slightest difference between the viewpoint expressed by the honourable senator and that on this side of the House concerning the undesirability of the violent and racial aspects of Nazism in any country, especially this one.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Drake-Brockman) - I have noticed this morning that a large number of questions have contained far too much information. I would like honourable senators to note that point and to ask questions instead of giving information.

page 794

QUESTION

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Senator BUTTFIELD:

– My question is directed to the Leader of the Government. It refers to the questions asked by Senator Gair concerning the Australian Government’s recognition of the Soviet presence in South East Asia and its willingness to listen to any proposition from the Russian Government. What advice would the Minister give to Senator Gair if he knew that there was a burglar in the vicinity of his house? Would he advise the honourable senator to go to bed, turn all the lights out and pull the blankets over his head, or would he advise him to turn on the lights, pretend that he had a party going on and there were a lot of people about, and call out to the burglar to come and tell him what he wanted?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT- I suggest that the honourable senator rephrase that question.

page 794

QUESTION

CIVIL AVIATION

Senator MCCLELLAND:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Civil Aviation. Will the Minister agree that yesterday I specifically asked him, in his capacity as Minister representing the Minister for Civil Aviation, about the future of night flights as distinct from aircraft noise and that in his answer the Minister said amongst other things:

I certainly hope that in the future we may see an end to any objection from New South Wales.

Bearing in mind the answer he has given this morning to Senator Greenwood, does the Minister now wish to retract the statement that he made yesterday? If not, is he prepared on behalf of the Minister for Civil Aviation to give an undertaking that, bearing in mind the stated policy of the Government, if an application is received for night flying operations in the future, it will be rejected out of hand?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– I will answer the last part of the honourable senator’s question first. I advise him that if the Government gets an application for night flying operations between the hours of 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. within the next few months, or in the foreseeable future, it will be rejected. The honourable senator will be aware that the Government is conscious of the noise problem at Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport, in the honourable senator’s own State, and that a Select Committee on Aircraft Noise has been set up by the Government. Its Chairman is Mr Bosman. I understand that the report of the Committee will not be available for at least 12 months. I can give the honourable senator an assurance that the Government will not be lifting the ban on the arrival of aircraft at Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport between the hours of 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. before the report of the Committee is received and considered.

The honourable senator also asked whether I would retract my statement about aircraft arriving from other capital cities between those hours. Providing certain things happen, the ban could be removed. This is my own personal opinion, and not that of the Government. One thing I have in mind is that if the noise of jet aircraft could be abated, no doubt it would be satisfactory for them to arrive between the hours of 1 1 p.m. and 6 a.m. Another thing I have in mind is that a number of airports are receiving aircraft between the hours of 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. Further airports may be built along the eastern seaboard to allow aircraft to arrive near the capital cities without creating a noise problem for residents. If in those circumstances the present ban could be lifted, I would be all for it.

page 795

QUESTION

CIVIL AVIATION

Senator YOUNG:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question, which I direct to the Minister representing the Minister for Civil Aviation, follows the question asked by Senator Greenwood. In answer to Senator Greenwood, the Minister said that the ban on flying between the hours of 1 1 p.m. and 6 a.m. applies at the airports at Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne and will continue to apply. Does the ban not also apply to Adelaide Airport? Furthermore, will it continue to apply there?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– To the best of my knowledge Adelaide Airport is not at this stage an international airport and therefore is not affected by the problems we have been discussing. However, so that the position may be stated satisfactorily for the honourable senator I ask him to place his question on the notice paper.

page 795

QUESTION

CABINET DECISIONS

Senator McMANUS:
VICTORIA

– My question, which I direct to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, refers to Cabinet’s claim to have authority to disregard adverse decisions of the Senate and to make its own decisions on questions such as the site of the new and permanent parliament house, the sale of merino rams abroad and the sale of the Canberra abattoir. I ask: Is Cabinet claiming to establish a new constitutional principle that it has the right to do by executive act that which Parliament has shown by vote it would not approve if embodied in legislative form? Is Cabinet gravely infringing the rights of Parliament and seeking to replace our democratic forms by an oligarchical form of government based on Cabinet’s executive power?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– The answer to all the questions is no.

page 795

QUESTION

THE PARLIAMENT

Senator CAMERON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Is the Leader of the Government in the Senate aware of the increasing number of members in the national Parliament with the surname Cameron? Is he aware of the increasing confusion that this is causing both inside and outside the Parliament? I am receiving an increasing amount of mail criticising me for remarks that have been made by a member of the Opposition in another place. Will the Leader of the Government instruct Hansard to refer to me in the Hansard record as Senator Martin Cameron?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– I can understand the point raised by the honourable senator. It is a fact of history and ancestry that some names appear more frequently than do others. I have had the experience of the situation in which, in another place, there was a Colonel Anderson and a Mr Gordon Anderson who, I think, was the Labor member for Kingsford-Smith. There is a degree of transference of mail which becomes a source of embarrassment. It has always been my understanding that when there is more than one member or senator with the same surname the Christian name is inserted in the Hansard record. I am sorry that has not happened in the honourable senator’s case but now that he has directed attention to it I should think that something would be done.

page 795

QUESTION

THE PARLIAMENT

Senator MURPHY:

– >I direct my question to the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Will he inform Senator Cameron that the embarrassment which the honourable senator is suffering will be only temporary; that in another few weeks another Mr Cameron will come here with the enthusiastic support of the electors of South Australia and that he, as Senator Cameron, with his brother, Mr Clyde Cameron, in the House of Representatives, will be quite happy to solve any problems which arise in relation to surnames.

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– I am delighted to know that the Leader of the Opposition expects that someone from South Australia named Cameron will win another seat for the Government. We are getting better every day. Speaking in serious vein, however, I think it is proper that when there is more than one member or senator of the same surname there should be a distinction in the Press and in the documents of the Parliament.

page 796

QUESTION

LIFE PRESERVERS

Senator BISHOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question to the Minister representing the Minister for Shipping and Transport refers to the lack of confidence of seamen in the life preserving equipment at present on ships at sea. The tragic loss of 21 crew members of the Noongah’ is further evidence of the validity of the complaints of seamen who refuse to man some vessels because of existing standards. When is action to be taken to enforce new regulations or standards for life preserving equipment as forecast by the Minister for Shipping and Transport?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– All members of the Senate, whether on the Government side or the Opposition side, are most sorrowful at the tragic loss of life on the ‘Noongah’. The Minister has said publicly that he will be looking at the regulations, and no doubt he is doing so with the intention of tightening them as far as possible. I will take up with the Minister the question of when they will be introduced and will advise the honourable senator as soon as possible.

page 796

QUESTION

ELECTORAL

Senator MARRIOTT:
TASMANIA

– Does the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior know who pays the cost of the installation and operation of the computer which will be set up in the national tally room in Canberra for the forthcoming Commonwealth election? Is he aware that at least one important section of the news media covering the election believes from experience that well known political commentator, Mr Alan Reid, is quicker and more accurate than is the computer, and that this section of the news media will not use computer information but understandably will rely on Mr Reid’s expertise? Therefore, is it not worth while for the Minister for the Interior to seek the views of all interested persons on whether the cost of installing a computer is warranted?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– We all know the speed at which computers work and if Mr Reid is faster than these computers he must be mighty fast. I ask the honourable senator to place on the notice paper that part of the question as to who pays for the installation of the computer in the Australian Capital Territory. I shall then get a considered reply from the Minister.

page 796

QUESTION

NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY

Sentor POYSER - Has the Leader of the Government in the Senate seen the result of the latest gallup poll which shows that a majority of the people interviewed - 54% - want Australia to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty? As it is now obvious that a majority of Australians wish us to join the big three powers and 90 other countries in signing this vitally important document, will the Government get into line with world opinion and sign the treaty?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– The first part of the question relates to a gallup poll. As I said yesterday, the value of gallup polls is a matter of opinion and has to be assessed according to the nature of the questions that are being posed and the people to whom they are being posed. The Government’s views in relation to signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are quite clear and the Government has made them abundantly so. Before the Government would sign the Treaty it would have to be satisfied that the conditions of the Treaty were in the best interests of Australia. Nobody - not even those people who may express a view on a gallup poll - could gainsay that as a proper, responsible approach for any government to take. It is true that a number of nations have signed the Treaty and that others have ratified it. It is equally true that some countries, particularly countries in our part of the world, have not signed or ratified the treaty, no doubt for the same reasons as those for which Australia has reserved its position. Looking at it in a classical sense, if it were perfection there would be no reason why any country would not sign it. At all times a country must reserve its position to satisfy itself that in signing any treaty it is acting in the national interest. Until such time as the Government is satisfied on that it has reserved its position. It is rather significant, I think, that neither Russia nor the United States of America, two of the three prime countries involved in the instigation of this Treaty, has yet ratified it.

Senator Georges:

– They have signed it, though.

Senator ANDERSON:

– Yes, and so have 90 other countries.

Senator Georges:

– We have not even signed it.

Senator ANDERSON:

– I have made the point. Surely the honourable senator understands what I am saying. I repeat that neither the United States nor Russia has ratified the treaty. That is what I said and that is what I mean. I would think that it is axiomatic that no country with a sense of responsibility should sign a treaty unless it were satisfied that its terms and conditions were in the best interests of the security and well being of the country. That is where Australia stands at the present time and I have nothing to add.

page 797

QUESTION

WATER CONSERVATION

Senator YOUNG:

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for National Development. As the hydrological experts have stated that the Dartmouth Dam will give an extra 250,000 acre feet of water to South Australia per year over and above that of the concept of Chowilla Dam, I ask the Minister: What will this mean in real terms to the people of that State?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– Many questions have been asked as to the comparability of the Dartmouth and Chowilla projects for the provision of a water supply to South Australia. The honourable senator now asks what it will mean in real terms to the people of South Australia. After looking at various statements and working out various figures in relation to the two schemes, I wish to comment on my first reaction. The Premier of South Australia has stated categorically that Dartmouth will enable the people of South Australia to have for their use 35% more water than would be available from Chowilla. If we relate that 35% more water available to the people of South Australia for irrigation, domestic purposes or any other purpose, to the 250,000 acre feet and reduce that to a basis of gallonage per capita per day in South Australia, we find that the 1,100,000 people living in South Australia, if they were all entitled to a share of that water, would receive in excess of 150 gallons.

page 797

QUESTION

HOSPITALS

Senator MULVIHILL:

– Has the Leader of the Government in the Senate read the remarks of the New South Wales Minister for Health, Mr Jago, regarding the expansion of Australian Capital Territory hospital facilities? Does he link these remarks with a further assertion of that Minister that the physical breakdown suffered by New South Wales Liberal Premier Askin was due to the hard line attitude of Prime Minister Gorton in regard to the clamour for financial justice for the States? How does he evaluate the political credibility of his Liberal Party colleague in the New South Wales Government?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– I should like to strip the politics from the question and refer to the facts as I know them. There is, beyond any shadow of doubt, a need for hospital accommodation in the Australian Capital Territory. The Minister for Works reminds me that a contract has been let for a hospital for the people of the Territory. Each sovereign State as well as the Commonwealth has a responsibility in relation to the expenditure of funds for the purpose of providing hospital accommodation. To me it would seem to be a very improper argument to suggest that because one State does not use its funds for this purpose for some reason or because of some point of view, therefore money should not be spent in another area for hospital accommodation which is urgently needed. I find that to be a completely unreal argument. As to the reference to the health of the Premier of New South Wales, I would say that he is looking particularly fit at the moment and I know that he will play his part as a member of the team at the election in the near future.

page 798

QUESTION

TREATY ON THE NONPROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Senator PROWSE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Leader of the Government. It is prompted by the large number of questions that have been asked regarding gallup poll results, particularly the one concerning the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. What percentage of the people whose opinions were sought would be even remotely aware of the contents of the Treaty? Did the pollsters ask the people giving an opinion whether they had read the terms of the Treaty?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– The honourable senator has asked a very good question. I touched on this aspect myself when I said that it all depends on the nature and presentation of the questions. I think that the poll referred to is a classic example. How can a simple question be asked in relation to a matter that is so complex as the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons? With all the access it has to documents the Government has not been able to resolve the matter. It has raised a whole host of questions in relation to the Treaty. To expect a gallup poll to reflect an intelligent opinion or to give an answer that has any reality at all is blatantly absurd. I think everybody will agree with me. It might be a different matter if a simple treaty were involved, but this is one of the most complex treaties in the history of the world. It is a subject about which most people could not have even a basic understanding. Gallup polls or such subjects can only be very weak reeds.

page 798

QUESTION

TOURISM

Senator BISHOP:

– My question is directed to the Minister-in-Charge of Tourist Activities. It relates to the tourist facilities at Alice Springs and Ayers Rock. Has any solution been found to the problem of the frequent isolation of motor vehicles and aircraft in that region during flooding? Will the solution depend upon the survey that is now being undertaken by consultants to the Department of Shipping and Transport? Has the Minister any ideas about obviating the problem?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– The report of the consultants who were engaged by the Aus tralian Tourist Commission last December was received by the Government in about June or July of this year. It is under active consideration at present, in conjunction with a report prepared by the same consultants on behalf of the Northern Territory Reserves Board in relation to Ayers Rock. The two reports deal with the question of the isolation of the area insofar as surface and air traffic are concerned. The honourable senator can rest assured that comprehensive proposals for the development of all facilities in the area will be put into effect in order to obviate the danger of isolation and to promote the region as a tourist area.

page 798

QUESTION

CUSTOMS

Senator MARRIOTT:

– My question is directed to the Minister for Customs and Excise. Will he outline to the Senate the plans of his Department for the speeding up of the processing for customs purposes of people arriving in Australia on international aircraft?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– The Department is continually looking at ways and means of clearing as quickly as possible passengers arriving by aircraft from overseas countries. At the moment a conference is being held in Brisbane of the collectors of customs. It is chaired by the Comptroller-General, Mr Carmody. These problems are being discussed at the conference at this moment. Because of the appointment of my colleague Senator Wright as Minister-in-Charge of Tourist Activities and the great interest that he and his officers are showing in this matter and their efforts to encourage tourists to come to Australia, my Department and I consider that, whereas at the time he took office we had to handle and cater for about 600,000 passengers arriving in Australia by air each year, by 1975 approximately 2 million passengers will be arriving by air and will have to be processed very quickly.

The ways and means of doing this are very important. When the ComptrollerGeneral went overseas at my request to look at narcotics problems in America and other countries, he paid particular attention to the ways other countries were processing aircraft passengers through their terminals at a speedy rate. He has obtained this information. Because of the vast number of people who will be arriving in Australia in the next few years in increasing numbers, we are endeavouring to implement ways and means of handling them more speedily, always taking into consideration the need to meet the quarantine and health requirements and also to see that adequate provision is made to prevent the introduction of such goods as narcotic drugs and firearms.

page 799

QUESTION

VIETNAM

Senator POKE:
TASMANIA

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for the Army. Has Australia any troops on, or are we in any way involved with, the prison island of Con Son off the coast of South Vietnam, where the Saigon regime’s political prisoners are gaoled under extremely harsh conditions? As startling reports of torture have been appearing in the American Press, can the Government assure the people of Australia that it strongly deplores such practices and will use its influence in Saigon to have these practices stopped?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– I wish to inform the honourable senator that I have not at hand any information on his question, but I will refer it to the Minister concerned and obtain an early answer.

page 799

QUESTION

MONOPOLIES AND RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES

Senator MURPHY:

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Attorney-General. I refer to the Tasmanian brewery case in the High Court of Australia, which concerns the operation and perhaps the validity of the Trade Practices Act passed by this Parliament. I ask the Minister whether it is true that this major constitutional case has been in the High Court for some time without being heard? Will he tell us what steps have been taken by the Government to seek an early hearing of the matter in accordance with the well known readiness of the High Court to give an early hearing to such major matters if an application for an expedited hearing is made? Can he give an assurance that the Government will not, by its inaction, allow this matter to drag on in the same way as the important airlines case - another case of great political significance - was allowed to drift on and on without action being taken by the Government until it was pressed for in the Senate?

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– I express the view that it is very ill advised to have political interference in the conduct of litigation. The case to which the honourable senator referred is pending before the Trade Practices Tribunal. Out of it a constitutional question has arisen involving litigation in the High Court initiated by Cascade Brewery Co. Ltd of Tasmania, from recollection, in about May. My last advice - coming not from the Department but from one of the litigants who officially communicated it to me - was that it was expected that the issue in the High Court would come on for hearing about the middle of August. I have not been informed as to the reason why the case was postponed to that date but there are various circumstances, well known to all honourable senators, which, singly or together, would provide an explanation. I suggest that the parties directly concerned can be relied upon to see that as soon as the court can give them a date for hearing at a time appropriate to their particular interests, they will proceed with that hearing.

page 799

QUESTION

GALLUP POLLS

Senator CAMERON:

– My question is directed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate and follows the question asked by Senator Prowse. Does the Leader of the Government get the impression, from the obsession of the Opposition with gallup polls, that a Labor government would govern on the basis of gallup poll results and not on the proper ground of the good and welfare of the Australian nation?

Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– I do not know that I have the full import of the question. I merely repeat what I said before. Without deprecating gallup polls, it is always wise to understand that gallup polls have to be evaluated against the correct background and in the way in which the questions are presented. For my own part, there is only one real key to our democratic processes - the ballot box.

page 800

QUESTION

WATER

Senator WILKINSON:

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for National Development. Was Mr Fairbairn correctly reported as saying in Darwin last Monday that it was unlikely that there would be another Snowy Mountains scheme in Australia because north Queensland was the only part of Australia with large amounts of uncontrolled water? If so, can this be taken as an indication of the Government’s lack of policy on the development of Australia’s water resources? What hope can residents of our perennial drought areas have when the Minister for National Development believes that our water problems are almost solved?

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– I read some newspaper report in which the Minister for National Development was quoted as saying in Darwin certain things, to which the honourable senator referred. I think when we look at the problems associated with water conservation in Australia we recognise that since this Government has been in office it has increased the amount of water stored by providing more money than was provided previously to build dams to increase the amount of stored water. At present we are providing finance to assist the States in the development of projects that will cost the Commonwealth Government in excess of$100m. The figure might be $150m on the stocks of water at present. I advise the honourable senator that the Snowy Mountains Hydro-electric Authority was established to perform a particular job of providing water for irrigation in a particular area and to develop from that water electrical capacity for generating power.

When the Authority was initiated it was thought that it would be capable of doubling Australia’s power requirements. In addition to this, it would make available more water which would eventually go down to the River Murray to be used for irrigation purposes and for home consumption in the States of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia. It has to be recognised - and the Minister for National Development and the Government do recognise it - that the conservation of water in the various States of Australia is the responsibility of the respective State governments. Therefore, we would have to receive an application from a State government for the Snowy Mountains

Authority to construct dams for the conservation of water. The fact is that at the present time the various State governments desire to keep their own departments functioning, with financial assistance provided by the Commonwealth, on the construction of their own water conservation programmes.

Honourable senators will know that we have played no mean part in Western Australia as the result of an approach made to the Commonwealth by the Government of that State for assistance in connection with the greater Ord River scheme. The Commonwealth Government has agreed to provide an amount of up to, I think, $49m, half by way of grant and half by way of loan, for the construction of this scheme. Before deciding to help, the Commonwealth Government sent its experts from the Snowy Mountains Authority to look at the scheme to see whether it was satisfactory and whether it was properly co-related with relation to the expense and so on that would be involved. We intend to retain a nucleus of this Snowy Mountains Authority for the purpose of giving advice in future to the Commonwealth Government, the various State governments and indeed governments outside Australia if they desire to use the services of these men. I should like to emphasise that the Western Australian Government said that it would construct the dam. We agreed to that. Applications are received from many other parts of Australia for financial assistance from the Commonwealth but the States concerned are not interested in having the Snowy Mountains Authority construct dams. The honourable senator must know that when the Minister made the Press statement that he is reported to have made in Darwin he had all these facts at the back of his mind.

page 800

QUESTION

TELEVISION

(Question No. 1375)

Senator KEEFFE:
through Senator Poke

asked the Minister representing the

Postmaster-General, upon notice:

On what date will television facilities be made available to residents of Darwin and Alice Springs.

Senator Dame ANNABELLE RANKIN:

– The Postmaster-General has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question.

The national television station at Darwin is expected to be completed by mid-1971. The stations included in the seventh stage for remote areas, including Alice Springs, are the subject of detailed investigation and programming and an announcement relative to them will be made as soon as possible.

page 801

QUESTION

VIETNAM

(Question No. 1402)

Senator KEEFFE:
through Senator Poke

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

  1. What is the total amount spent on the Australian forces in Viet-Nam to date;
  2. How much of the expenditure has been incurred by (a) Navy (b) the Army and (c) the Air Force;
  3. What is the total amount spent by the Australian Government in civilian aid in Viet-Nam since Australian forces were first posted to that country.
Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– The Minister for Defence has provided that following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. and (2) Expenditure incurred by the Australian forces in Viet-Nam is shown hereunder:

The above costs represent the excess over normal costs in Australia of the Services.

  1. Up to 30th June, 1969 an amount of $13. 175m has been spent by the Australian Government in Civilian aid in Viet-Nam since Australian forces were first posted to that country.

page 801

QUESTION

MAXWELL NEWTON PTY LTD

(Question No. 1448)

Senator CAVANAGH:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice:

Was there any evidence in the possession of the Attorney-General whch would indicate that Mr G. Pratt had conveyed unauthorised information to the Newton Press and which was not presented to the committal magistrate; if so, why was such evidence not submitted.

Senator WRIGHT:
LP

– The AttorneyGeneral has supplied the following answer:

All the evidence in the possession of the Attorney-General indicating that Mr G. Pratt had conveyed unauthorised information to the Newton Press was presented to the magistrate in the course of the committal proceedings.

page 801

QUESTION

SOCIAL SERVICES

(Question No. 1461)

Senator POYSER:
VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services, upon notice:

  1. Will the Minister initiate inquiries into the bona fides of a company known as F.D.S. Nominees Pty Ltd which has advertised in the Melbourne Herald and has indicated that it can increase the income of those making inquiries, without obligation, regarding the application of the means test.
  2. If the claims made by this company are genuine, will the Minister make this information available to those at present at a disadvantage as a result of the application of the means test.
Senator Dame ANNABELLE RANKIN:

– The Minister for Social Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. and (2)I have no authority to conduct investigations into the activities of companies. However, I understand that F.D.S. Nominees Pty Ltd offers investment advice to persons seeking the services of the firm.

Under the Social Services Act, income from property or other assets is exempt in the application of the means test - this is explained in departmental leaflets. Thus, a pensioner may receive an increase in income without affecting his means for pension purposes if he is able to obtain a higher rate of return on invested capital.

It is anticipated that departmental leaflets outlining the pension rates and means test liberalisations proposed in the Budget will be available to the public immediately the new conditions become operative. A ‘Ready Reckoner’ enabling a person to assess his own pension entitlement will also be available at the same time.

page 801

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH ELECTIONS

(Question No. 1452)

Senator TURNBULL:
TASMANIA · IND; AP from Aug. 1969; IND from Jan. 1970

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

  1. Is it a fact that the States of Tasmania and South Australia each voted as one electorate in the elections to return the members of the House of Representatives to the first Commonwealth Parliament; if so - (a) did each elector in those two States have as many votes as there were members to be elected; (b) was the method of election in those States first-past-the-post or proportional; and (c) were the instructions to returning officers gazetted; if so, will the Minister give the Senate references to those instructions.
  2. Will the Minister inform the Senate if instructions were prepared for the conduct of the 1922 elections of members of the House of Representatives in Victoria, anticipating that Victoria would vote as one electorate.
Senator SCOTT:
LP

– The Minister for the Interior has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. Yes. (a) At the election in Tasmania, each elector was entitled to vote once only. He was required to insert opposite to the names of the candidates for whom he wished to vote the figures 1’, ‘2’, ‘3’ and so on in the order of his preference, provided he voted for not less than one-half of the number of Members to be elected. In South Australia, electors were required to mark their ballot-papers by placing crosses opposite the names of the candidates of their choice. Electors were entitled to vote for the full number of candidates to be elected. (b) In Tasmania, the method of election was proportional. In South Australia, the method of election was firstpastthepost. (c) The electoral office records do not reveal whether instructions to returning officers were gazetted.
  2. A search has been made of the electoral office records but no evidence has been found of the preparation of instructions in anticipation of Victoria voting as one electorate at the 1922 House of Representatives elections.

page 802

QUESTION

SEATO

(Question No. 1505)

Senator GAIR:

asked the Minister rep resenting the Minister for External Affairs, upon notice:

  1. Has the Minister seen reports of a statement by the SEATO Secretary-General (LieutenantGeneral Vargas) in which he warned SEATO member countries of the dangers of the Soviet proposal for a regional security arrangement in the Asian area?
  2. Would the Minister agree that the SecretaryGeneral’s warnings contrast most vividly with the different attitude adopted by the Minister?
  3. Which Department is responsible for the distribution of SEATO press material in Australia?
  4. Why were copies ofthis important speech not made available by the Australian Government to members of the Canberra Press Gallery?
  5. Did the Government want to play down this speech, knowing that it contradicted its earlier utterances on this subject?
Senator ANDERSON:
LP

– The Minister for External Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. Yes.
  2. No.
  3. The Department of External Affairs receives a small quantity of the publications issued by SEATO. They are distributed to interested Government Departments and are also available within the Department to answer general enquiries from the public. The Department has no responsibility for circulating SEATO publications in Australia. Enquiries received by it for copies of SEATO publications are directed to SEATO Headquarters. Bangkok, if they cannot be satisfactorily dealt with here.
  4. Six copies of the Secretary-General’s Annual Report reached the Department late in the evening of Monday, 8th September. It would not have been practicable to issue copies to members of the Canberra Press Gallery by the following morning (Tuesday, 9th September) nor is it the Department’s practice to do so. Copies are available for perusal by those interested at the Department of External Affairs and in the Parliamentary Library.
  5. No. See answers to questions 2 and 4.

page 802

QUESTION

SHIPPING

Senator SCOTT:
LP

– During questiontime in the Senate on 1st May, Senator Murphy asked a question of me as Minister representing the Minister for Shipping and Transport, regarding the purchase of container ships for Australia’s overseas shipping line. I undertook to obtain the information for the honourable senator and it is as follows:

The Government’s policy in connection with the purchase of the two overseas container vessels, to be operated by the Australian National Line, was explained in my statement to the Senate on 23rd April. This statement has since been debated in the House of Representatives.

The amount of $9m referred to by the Honourable Senator was the estimate of the capital required to enable the Australian Government to participate in the joint venture. This figure represented an estimate of the money to be invested at the outset and was not intended to represent the full value of the assets involved in the venture.It is expected that additional moneys needed to finance the venture will be found from revenues in future years.

The price of the vessel for the Australia/North America trade is to exceed that of the vessel for the Australia to United Kingdom/ Europe trade because of a number of factors, including the lime which has passed since the group of ships for the Australia to United Kingdom/ Europe trade was ordered by Associated Container Transportation Ltd. As with those ships, Associated Container Transportation Ltd. is buying a number of ships for the Australia/North America trade from the one yard and the Government would expect to again obtain a benefit in price from the volume of business involved for that yard.

page 802

REPORTS OF PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

Pathology Block, Repatriation General Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria

Senator BRANSON:
Western Australia

– I present the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works on the following new work:

New Pathology Block and associated works at the Repatriation General Hospital, Heidelberg,

Victoria

I ask for leave to make a short statement.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT- There being no objection, leave is granted.

Senator BRANSON:

– The summary of recommendations and conclusions of the Committee is as follows:

  1. Because of the shortcomings ofthe operating theatre facilities at Heidelberg the hospital is functioning under a severe disability.
  2. There is a need to improve these facilities without delay.
  3. The Committee found the accommodation arrangements for the pathology department to be unsatisfactory and that there is a need for an early improvement of the present facilities.
  4. There is a need for permanent and specially designed accommodation for the central sterile supply facility.
  5. The admissions and medical records sections and the library and general store should be relocated.
  6. The remodelling of the present kitchen area as proposed will be satisfactory.
  7. It would be appropriate to remodelthe pavilion operating theatre suite for the school of nursing.
  8. There is a need to re-arrange the accommodation in the south and west wings of the central block.
  9. There is a need to air condition the new multi-storey building.
  10. There is a need to extend air conditioning to, and to replace individual conditioning units in selected areas.
  11. The Committee recommends the construction of the work in this reference.
  12. The estimated cost of the work when referred to the Committee was $3.4m.

No. 1 Stores Depot, Royal Australian Air Force Base, Tottenham, Victoria

Senator BRANSON:
Western Australia

– I present the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works relating to the following proposed work:

No. 1 Stores Depot, Royal Australian Air Force Base, Tottenham, Victoria.

I ask for leave to make a short statement.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT - There being no objection, leave is granted.

Senator BRANSON:

– The summary of recommendations and conclusions of the Committee is as follows:

  1. There is a need for the buildings in this reference.
  2. The sites selected are suitable.
  3. The Committee recommends the construction ofthe work in this reference.
  4. The estimated cost of the work when referred tothe Committee was $2,235,000.
  5. There is scope for accelerating the programme for replacement of this type of accommodation.
Senator Murphy:

– I ask for leave to move that the Senate take note of the reports and statements.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT- There being no objection, leave is granted.

Senator MURPHY:
New South WalesLeader of the Opposition

– I move:

I ask for leave to continue my remarks at a later stage.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 803

SUBSIDY ON NITROGENOUS FERTILISERS

Ministerial Statement

Senator SCOTT:
Western AustraliaMinister for Customs and Excise · LP

– by leave - On 14th August I made a statement that the Government proposed to continue the existing subsidy on nitrogenous fertilisers for a further 3 years until 31 October 1972. In this statement I said that discussions would be held with Australian producers on the Government’s decision to give the subsidy on imported fertilisers if the price of locally manufactured fertilisers was higher than the price of non-dumped imports. An intensive investigation has been made by the Department of Customs and Excise which discloses that most of the imports of urea into Australia during the last few years have been at prices lower than the normal value as defined in the Customs Tariff (Dumping and Subsidies) Act. This was a matter of little concern to the Government at that stage because the limited production of urea in Australia was still being sold at prices satisfactory to the Australian producer.

The production of urea in Australia is now sufficient to meet Australian requirements and for this reason the Australian producers are entitled to the protection afforded by this Parliament under the Customs Tariff (Dumping and Subsidies) Act. Consequently the Department of Customs and Excise has assessed the appropriate normal value for imported urea in terms of this Act On this basis, it has been determined that provided the price of locally manufactured urea, less Government subsidy, is no higher than $79.00 per ton free on board truck ex stock point, the subsidy will not be extended to imported urea. I am satisfied that this price for locally produced urea is no higher than the price of non-dumped imports from Japan, the major exporting country. The Australian producers have agreed to sell urea on this basis throughout Australia. Indeed, Austral-Pacific Fertilizers Limited is prepared to sell at a lower price, based on a cost and freight basis at principal Australian ports, to those consumers who wish to carry their own handling and stock point costs.

There is a significant amount of imported urea in stock in Western Australia. For this reason farmers in that State will be supplied partly from the stock already imported and partly from locally manufactured material. Taking this into account, the distributors of urea in that State have agreed to average the price over the whole of the coming season at $74.80. They have undertaken not to increase this price during the season. [Quorum formed.]

page 804

LOAN (SWISS FRANCS) BILL 1969

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Anderson) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator ANDERSON:
Minister for Supply · New South Wales · LP

– I move:

This Bill amends the Loan (Swiss Francs) Act 1955 to remove the necessity for redeeming from the Swiss Loan Trust Account a 3.75% Swiss loan of 60 million Swiss francs which matures on 1st March 1970. It seems likely that there will be opportunity to arrange a conversion operation for this loan on the Swiss market early in 1970. The Act, as it now stands, would not permit a conversion loan as such although our Swiss underwriters would find it more satisfactory to arrange a conversion issue than a new cash loan. The amending Bill is designed to overcome this pro blem. The amendment proposed would not affect in any way the original loan agreement and is concerned only with the mechanics of the Swiss Loan Trust Account. The Bill provides for any moneys remaining in the Trust Account after the loan has been repaid to be paid into Consolidated Revenue. I commend the Bill to honourable senators.

Debate (on motion by Senator Wilkinson) adjourned.

page 804

LOAN (CANADIAN DOLLARS) BILL 1969

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Anderson) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator ANDERSON:
Minister for Supply · New South Wales · LP

– I move:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

This Bill amends the Loan (Canadian Dollars) Act 1955 to remove the necessity for redeeming from the Canadian Loan Trust Account a 4% Canadian loan of $Canl5m which matures on 1st November 1970. There could possibly be an opportunity to arrange a conversion operation for this maturity, and the bill is designed to open the way for this in similar fashion to the action proposed under the Loan (Swiss Francs) Bill which I have already introduced. The proposed amendment would not affect the original loan agreement in any way.

The Bill also provides for any credit standing to the balance of the Trust Account after the conversion or redemption of the loan to be paid into the Consolidated Revenue Fund. The amount owing on the loan at maturity will be $Can8.5m. This will be the residual after annual repayments of $Can500,000 each have been made in accordance with the loan agreement. It is intended that the Bill will come into operation on 1st December 1969. This will allow the final annual repayment due on 1st November 1969 to be made in the usual way. I commend the Bill to honourable senators.

Debate (on morion by Senator Wilkinson) adjourned.

page 805

TASMANIA GRANT (CRESSYLONGFORD IRRIGATION WORKS) BILL 1969

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Standing Orders suspended.

Bill (on motion by Senator Scott) read a first time.

Second Reading

Senator SCOTT (Western Australia -

Minister for Customs and Excise) [12.6] - I move:

This Bill is one of four concerned with grants which were announced under the national water resources development programme in April of this year. The Government has offered a grant of up to$750,000 under the programme to the State of Tasmania to enable the construction of the Cressy-Longford irrigation scheme. Honourable senators will recall that during the last session of this Parliament legislation was enacted to provide grants to New South Wales, South Australia and Victoria under the programme. The form of this Bill is similar to that legislation.

The Tasmanian Government submitted four projects of which the Cressy-Longford scheme was the only Tasmanian project included in the short list announced last year for closer examination. The proposed Cressy-Longford irrigation district comprises an area of approximately 20,000 acres of which 7,000 acres will be irrigated, and is situated about 20 miles south of Launceston in Tasmania. The main farming enterprises are wool and prime lamb production, with some cereal and pulse crops, and a small amount of beef cattle and dairy production. Over 70% of the area is under some form of permanent improved pasture. The average annual rainfall is about 25 inches and there is normally a distinct summer moisture deficiency which limits growth at that time of the year.

The proposal involves the diversion of a small proportion of the water in the tailrace from the Poatina power station and reticulation through an open channel system to all farms in the proposed district. A substantial increase in pasture productivity and an increase in cropping is expected to follow the provision of an assured water supply to the farms in the district. The Cressy-Longford Valley is already highly developed under dry land farming with a very small amount of irrigation from farm dams. The Lake and Liffey rivers on the east and west of the area carry sufficient water to allow irrigation on riparian lands, but there are no suitable streams serving the sixty-seven farms in the proposed irrigation district. Further details of this scheme are contained in the explanatory memorandum distributed with the Bill.

The works themselves, in respect of which a Commonwealth grant is payable, are described in the Schedule to the Bill, and provision is made in clause 5 for the Schedule to be varied if this appears desirable in terms of the objectives of the legislation. Provision for non-repayable grants is made in clause 4 of the Bill. Clause 6 sets out requirements in connection with the implementation of the project and covers the provision of information requested by the Minister, ministerial approval of the works and approval by the Minister of contracts in excess of $250,000. Requirements for information in respect of expenditure are set out in clause 7, and the usual provision for the Treasurer to make advance payments and for repayment of over-payments is made in clauses 8 and 9. I have pleasure in commending the Bill to the Senate.

Debate (on motion by Senator Poke) adjourned.

page 805

PROPOSED EXPENDITURE 1969-70

In Committee

Consideration resumed from 11 September (vide page 787), on motion:

That the Committee take note of the proposed expenditure.

Repatriation Department

Proposed expenditure, $306,855,000.

Proposed provision, $110,000.

Upon which Senator Drury had moved by way of amendment:

At the end of motion add: ‘and recommends to the Senate that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into and report upon all aspects of expenditure on and in connection with Repatriation, including the adequacy of the rates and allowances provided for and all other aspects of Repatriation and in particular the operation and adequacy of the Repatriation Act and the War Service Land Settlement Agreements Act, such committee to commence its inquiry not earlier than 1st January 1970.’

Question put:

That the words proposed to be added (Senator Drury’s amendment) be added.

The Committee divided. (The Temporary Chairman - Senator Dame Ivy Wedgwood)

AYES: 23

NOES: 21

Majority . . . . 2

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion (as amended) agreed to.

Department of Customs and Excise

Proposed expenditure, $25,055,000.

Proposed provision.$116,700.

Senator McCLELLAND:
New South Wales

– The appropriation proposed for this financial year is $25,055,000, compared with an expenditure last year of $22,554,425.I refer to Division 210 in order to discuss general matters of an administrative nature concerning this Department. We all recall that earlier this year as a result of happenings within the Department towards the end of 1968 certain matters relating to administration were debated at length in the Senate over a period of weeks. As a result of that debate certain matters were highlighted which I think must have been of concern to members of the Australian Parliament and, indeed, to members of the Australian community. On 20th March in an editorial the Sydney Morning Herald’ stated:

It is hard to escape the suspicion that, had it not been for the Hoffmann case, which brought the affairs of the Customs Department under public scrutiny, we would still be waiting to hear of official investigations into what the ComptrollerGeneral of Customs has described’as major frauds and conspiracies’.

It is against that background that I wish to raise certain matters relating to the administration of the Department. First I refer to the Central Manifest Accounting Section. On 15th April the Minister gave me a reply to the following question:

  1. When was the Central Manifest Accounting Section established by the Department of Customs and Excise in Sydney?
  2. How many officers are employed in the Section?
  3. When was the staffing establishment of this Section last increased?
  4. What was the total number of hours worked by these officers by way of overtime in each ofthe last 6 months?

The Minister replied that the Central Manifest Accounting Section was established in February 1968, which was shortly after he took over the portfolio, that the number of officers employed in the Section was 28, and that the staff had not been increased since the Section had been established. The principal matter of concern to me was at that time, and still is after having read the annual report of the Department of Customs and Excise, the extensive amount of overtime worked at that time at least in the Central Manifest Accounting Section. The Minister provided these figures as to overtime worked in the Section:

In February there was a considerable jump over the figures for any of the preceding months and in the first 3 weeks of March up to 21st March the astounding number of 699 hours overtime was worked in that one Section by twenty-eight officers. The Minister went on to say:

The substantial overtime worked during the months of February and March were necessary to overcome a backlog of work. lt is rather interesting to note that while it was necessary to work considerable overtime during February and March to overcome the backlog of work, in the preceding month of January there had been no overtime whatsoever worked in the Section. Following that answer by the Minister I placed another question on the notice paper. A couple of days afterwards 1 received from the Minister an answer which seemed to differ from the answer given to the earlier question in which he stated that the substantial overtime worked during February and March had been necessary to overcome a backlog of work. I asked him to explain further the reason for this backlog and when it was anticipated that the backlog would be overtaken. The Minister replied:

The Comptroller-General of Customs advised me that the nature of the work in this Section is such that this backlog is not serious and does not call for untoward overtime.

In one week the Minister was saying that substantial overtime was necessary because of a backlog of work. In the next week he was saying that the backlog was not serious and did not call for untoward overtime. If the Minister does not regard 699 hours overtime in a period of 3 weeks as being untoward, I would like to know what he thinks untoward overtime might be. I come then to the annual review of activities of the Department of Customs and Excise which states on page 7:

Customs working hours, for many years 8.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m., were extended to 7.30 a.m. to 11.00 p.m., the same as those of stevedoring operations. This action resulted in substantial savings to shipping companies by reducing overtime claims.

In the next paragraph the report states:

The Department also saw the need for a centralised location for manifest documentation and therefore established a Central Manifest accounting group. . . .

I do not know whether the Department is suggesting in this report that the burden of overtime has been relieved in one section of the Department and transferred to another section or whether 699 hours of overtime in 3 weeks is to be regarded as substantial overtime, as the Minister referred to it in his answer to me on one occasion, or untoward overtime, as he described it on another occasion. I should think that it is a matter which certainly calls for some explanation by the Minister.

Still relating my remarks to Division 210, I refer to another question which I placed on the notice paper and which the Minister answered early this year about the number of officers in the Department who were acting in positions higher than their substantive positions. From the information provided to me by the Minister it seems to me that this is an instance where the stalling arrangements of the Department of Customs and Excise need urgent review in the interests of the officers of the Department and in the interests of the administration of the Department. The information supplied to me by the Minister when answering question No. 1120 was:

The number of officers acting in positions higher than their substantive positions for a period in excess of 1 month is 1,217. 1 venture to suggest that no other Commonwealth Department would have such a large number of officers acting in positions higher than their substantive positions for such a considerable time. The Minister’s answer to my question shows that 968 officers were acting in a higher position for more than 1 month and up to 12 months; 191 were acting in higher positions for more than 1 year and up to 2 years; 36 were occupying a higher position for more than 2 years and up to 3 years; and 22 were acting in a higher position for more than 3 years. It seems to me that in fairness to the officers concerned and to those who might wish to appeal against the occupant of a higher position this situation should be corrected. The Minister would be aware that while a person occupies a higher position in an acting capacity, there can be no appeal against the occupant of the position. Consequently, it is in the interests of the Department and in the interests of the officers concerned, as well as in the interests of the people of Australia, to see that this situation is straightened out.

I refer now to a matter which has been of concern to the Parliament and which has been raised in the Parliament for some time, that is, the evasion of duty on cigarettes and cigars. I assume that this subject also would come within Division 210. I refer the Minister to page 55 of the report of the Auditor-General where he sets out a statement relating to the payment of duty on tobacco products. The report states:

Paragraph 50 of my Report for 1967-68 included reference to short payment of duty on imported tobacco products. Following further departmental investigation, short payment of duly in respect of cigars has increased by $1,170 to $809,414 and in respect of cigarettes by $83,002 to $1,165,427. Duty totalling $573,746 (including $185 received in 1968-69) in respect of cigars and $17,372 …. in respect of cigarettes had been recovered to 30 June 1969.

Writs of Summons have been issued out of the High Court of Australia in relation to duty short paid in respect of cigars but. at the date of preparation of this Report, the departmental legal considerations relative to the short payment of duty on cigarettes had not been finalised. 1 remind the Minister that the discovery of the evasion of duty on cigarettes and cigars occurred a considerable time ago and that as a result, 22 or 24 officers of his Department were charged by the Public Service Board under section 55 of the Public Service Act. lt is just not good enough when it is necessary for the Auditor-General to report that departmental legal considerations relative to the short payment of duty on cigarettes have not been finalised after such an inordinate delay has taken place.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Dame Ivy Wedgwood:
VICTORIA

– Order! The honourable senator’s time has expired.

Senator LAWRIE:
QUEENSLAND · CP; NCP from May 1975

– I do not propose to refer to a particular item of the estimates for this Department but rather to the booklet Estimates of Receipts and Summary of Estimated Expenditure’ which was supplied with the Budget papers. At pages 16 and 17 the book refers to the estimates of customs and exise receipts in detail for the year ending 30th June 1970. I notice on the customs side in particular that the estimated revenue last year was $346m, in round figures, and that for the current year the estimate is $395ra. As there has been no general increase in customs duty, can the Minister tell me whether it is expected that during this year we will greatly increase the volume of our imports or that the cost of the items imported will be increased greatly? Practically every item on page 16 shows a considerable increase in estimated revenue.

I refer to the item ‘Arms and ammunition: parts therefor’. The estimated revenue is $790,000, which is more than double last year’s revenue of $333,000. The estimated customs revenue is $50m more than last year. That would presuppose a very large increase in imports, otherwise there must be some other explanation.

When one turns to excise duty one sees that the estimated receipts amount to $960m, compared with $902m last year. Every excise item in Table 3 of the document entitled ‘Estimates of Receipts and Summary of Estimated Expenditure for the Year Ending 30th June 1970’, with the exception of two, has increased quite substantially on last year’s figures. But for some reason or another two show a decrease. One is potable spirits. Last year’s receipts amounted to $24.5m. lt is expected that this year the total receipts for that item will be down by $0.5m. Mote remarkable however is the anticipated decrease in the excise on tobacco. Last year an amount of $15,711 m was received. This year the figure is expected to come down to $ 15.304m.

Senator Georges:

– 1 gave up smoking; that is the reason.

Senator LAWRIE:
QUEENSLAND · CP; NCP from May 1975

– As I do not smoke, I cannot speak authoritatively on this matter. However, there must be explanation for the anticipated decrease. Out of all of the items listed in Table 3 of the document to which 1 have referred the only excise item l.o show a decrease is, strangely enough, tobacco. 1 wonder whether the propaganda campaign that has been conducted has had any real effect. What is the reason for this decrease? I would appreciate it if the Minister would advise me on the matters that I have raised.

Senator ORMONDE:
New South Wales

– Recently I asked a question in this chamber concerning the drug menace. My question had nothing to do with what I call the glamorous side of the drug trade that is mentioned from time to time in this chamber. On that occasion I said - 1 have evidence to prove it - that about 70% of the drags are made in Australia by chemists and manufacturers. These drugs are readily available. I know that regularly the Minister stands up in the chamber and makes a noise about a television personality or some other glamorous person who has been caught with drugs in his possession.

A certain amount of glamour is attached to the smuggling of marihuana and so on. We hear about the customs officers going out into the harbour in their little boats and seizing drugs. This aspect is given publicity because it is newsworthy. But we see little in the newspapers about the thousands of school children who can pick up drugs at any time at pharmacies throughout any city. We often hear arguments about the rights and responsibilities of the State and Federal governments, but nobody says anything about the States and the Commonwealth getting together on this matter. All the Commonwealth is interested in is the publicity it gets from the glamorous drug stories. That is my view, anyway. Apparently the Commonwealth is not interested in trying to track down people who trade in drugs and who carry them between the chemist shops and the schools. Thousands of children in Australia are on drugs and 70% of those drugs are sold over the counter in pharmacies throughout the cities.

Senator Marriott:

– fs that not the job of the vice squad?

Senator ORMONDE:

– Everybody says it is the job of somebody else. I am worried about the job that the Commonwealth Government is doing. I think it should be doing more. I appreciate that it is a difficult problem to solve, but it will not be solved until the governments get together on it.

Senator Cameron:

– It might increase the overtime worked.

Senator McClelland:

– Then why not put on more staff?

Senator ORMONDE:

– There have been many stories about increasing staffs. I have often heard the Minister for Customs talk about increasing his staff and I have asked questions about it. I have tried to prove that he has not done anything about the matter.

Senator McClelland:

– Why not transfer responsibility to the Commonwealth Police?

Senator ORMONDE:

– The Commonwealth Police may have to do something about it. At the moment the people who take drugs and are becoming addicts can purchase 70% of the drugs they require over the counter, without breaking the law. There are people who are growing plants and manufacturing their own drugs. They are becoming quite expert at it. At one time the Hunter River Valley was a prolific source of these plants, but a wider field is now covered. I ask the Minister: ls it not possible to have an urgent conference of the policing authorities, Commonwealth and State? If Acts of Parliament are in the way or the Commonwealth does not have sufficient power, surely something can be done about the matter. Academic argument about State and Federal rights should not be allowed to stand in the way of the salvation of drug addicts. I do not know whether the number of people on drugs has been ascertained, but I do know that the matter could be controlled if the governments could get together. Children start on the so-called ‘soft’ drugs at school. There are agents selling drugs at nearly every school. Once the children get onto the soft drugs and get used to the stimulus, they are on the way to becoming addicts. After they leave school at about 18 years of agc they are well and truly nurtured in the desire for drugs.

Senator Willesee:

– ls the evidence conclusive that soft drugs lead to hard drugs?

Senator ORMONDE:

– There is a lot of evidence of this happening. 1 live in the Kings Cross area of Sydney. It has a name for being the drug centre of Australia. I have been to the Wayside Chapel where the Reverend Ted Noffs does a wonderful job combating the drug trade. I was there last Sunday and heard some terrible stories about the effects of drugs. One can hear the girls and the boys around the place say where the drugs come from. It is not my job to be a policeman; I am a senator. But I hear a lot about where drugs can be obtained.

Sitting suspended from 12.45 to 2 p.m.

Senator ORMONDE:

– Prior to the suspension of the sitting I spoke about the drug menace, particularly in the cities. I do not underestimate the problems with which the Commonwealth and State Governments are faced in the control of the traffic in drugs, it could be - and I say this very seriously - that the Commonwealth Government’s own modern pharmaceutical and medical system for the treatment of nervous conditions is responsible for the greater part of the traffic in drugs. I am talking about drugs distributed by doctors, chemists and hospitals. 1 have come in contact with quite a few drug addicts. As far as T can ascertain - and this has been my experience - doctors do not know how to prescribe and chemists do not know how to supply fewer than 100 tablets at one time. I know that a large number of private hospitals, including a lot of new private hospitals, have been involved, unknowingly, in this trade. The patient’s prescription usually is for 100 capsules, which the chemist supplies. The patient may or may not take all the capsules. Generally he does not, certainly not 100. What happens to the surplus? I do not think the Department can investigate that too far. Almost invariably there are surpluses. The Government should find out what happens to the surplus drugs. I believe that the cost of the Government’s own pharmaceutical scheme this year will be of the order of $56m. The Government is not interested in whether or not all the tablets are taken. In a great many cases they are not.

The new treatment for nervous disorders is miraculous. Today people are hospitalised for treatment by drugs, whereas previously people with the same complaints used to spend their lives in asylums. What a tragedy it would be to society if the cure to one disease, which cure we all applaud, created other dangers, particularly to young people, by exposing them to the drug menace. In my view there is more urgency about the governments getting together on this problem than there is about them getting together on other problems such as education. The Commonwealth and the States should strive to get together on this problem. The Commonwealth has the fundamental responsibility to stop this traffic in drugs. I have known people to be supplied with certain harmful drugs over the counter. One hundred tablets of poison can be sold over the counter legally because the governments have not made the selling of such tablets illegal. Until they do, the trade will not stop.

One particular case brought to my notice was that of a hospital which was embarrassed by an over-supply of drugs. I assure the Senate that the surplus was not washed down the drain. I do not know what happened to the surplus. It could quite easily have gone to the drug market. People interested in the sale of drugs would not take very long to find out and tap such a source of supply to which they could get access without really breaking any law. 1 have had private hospital matrons ask me what they should do about certain patients who have been admitted to hospital and who have 100 tablets prescribed of which only 80 or as few as 20 are used. When that patient is discharged and another patient occupies his bed, a new pharmaceutical prescription is required. The new patient is not allowed to take the old tablets. The stocks build up. To me, that represents a source of drug supply to anybody interested enough to work out a scheme to get the drugs. The tragedy is that most of these drugs are taken by young people, and this may lead them to the taking of the harder drugs. There is some doubt whether the lighter drugs create a demand for the other harder drugs. That is an academic question, I dare say. I do not know how the authorities line up on that question, but I know that is how a lot of young people became addicted to drugs.

I do not have to tell the Senate the dangers to the community. I know that every honourable senator considers this problem a most serious one. This is a more serious part of the drug trade and a bigger menace than what I call the more glamorous taking of drugs by the way-out section of the community. This problem about which I have spoken is not over-publicised, but it exists. I think the governments should get together. The Minister should not say: We cannot do anything about it because it is a State matter’. That is silly. It is not a State matter; it is an Australian matter and it ought to be treated as such. The drug menace is everywhere. I hope the Minister will give me a satisfactory answer or tell me what the governments are doing. I leave it at that. I hope that the Minister will reply.

Senator SCOTT:
Western AustraliaMinister for Customs and Excise · LP

– I shall answer some of the honourable senators’ questions. [Quorum formed.] I will start by answering Senator Ormonde first. The major portion of his speech dealt with the drug problem in Australia. He asked me what the Commonwealth and State governments were doing about controlling the traffic in drugs, as it exists in Australia at present. The honourable senator stated a couple of times that he thought that the States and the Commonwealth should get together with a view to controlling all avenues of drug addiction and usage in Australia. I might mention that on 14th February 1969 and again on 15th May 1969 meetings of Commonwealth and State Ministers were held. The first meeting agreed to set up a national standards control committee on drug abuse. This committee met on 7th March and again on 11th March this year. It was chaired by the Controller-General of Customs and Excise. The control committee consists of members of the Commonwealth Department of Health, members of the Commonwealth Central Intelligence Organisation and the Controller-General of Customs aud Excise together with representatives of the relevant State authorities such as the Department of Health and the Police Department.

It was very interesting to read the other day that, following a recommendation by this committee that the Commonwealth and State Ministers should get together, the Premier of Victoria announced that the Victorian Government proposed to introduce a system of education in the schools so that at least the school children throughout Victoria will be made aware of all the problems associated with the taking of drugs.

I have noticed that other countries, particularly Japan and, I think, Singapore, have paid particular attention to this aspect of drug addiction. They have found that by educating the children in the schools they have been able to reduce the amount of drugs being taken by young people It was stated in one pamphlet that I read that the school children and young people of Japan now despise any of their people who take drugs. That is just one example of what can be achieved by education.

Senator Little:

– You could do the same thing with the young people in connection with smoking.

Senator SCOTT:

– That is your idea, and it could be looked at. What I am particularly worried about is the fact that there are a lot of people in Australia who believe that drug addiction is not becoming a serious problem in this country. I have heard professors and others expressing opinions to this effect. Our statistics reveal that although it is not a serious problem at the moment, drug addiction is increasing at the rate of about 80% a year. If this is allowed to continue it will not be very long before it does become as serious a problem in Australia as it is in other countries. I can only assure the honourable senator that my Department will look at all the problems that he has raised with a view to seeing what can be done to overcome them.

I should like to mention here that we are working with the full co-operation of the State authorities. Regular meetings are held between officers of the Commonwealth Narcotics Bureau and the drug squads of the various State police forces. Following meetings between Commonwealth and State officers, it has been decided to exchange officers between the various governments. In fact, this has already been done. We are quite aware of the problem, but 1 was very interested in what the honourable senator had to say. We will peruse Hansard and give attention to the points he has raised.

Senator McClelland spoke about problems within the Department. He raised several points relating to the amount of duty short paid on cigarettes and cigars. The amount of short paid duty on cigars was $809,414. The amount of duly paid under protest was $809,229 leaving a balance of $185 paid without protest. Writs have been issued in the High Court through the New South Wales Registry. This was done on 26th and 30th July 1968. They were issued against Godfrey Phillips Internationa] Pty Ltd, Cedrick Malcolm Paynter and Derek Lau don Smith, Gallagher International Australia Ltd and Campbell Beaumont Trading Pty Ltd. The amount of duty short paid on cigarettes is $1,165,427. The amount of short paid duty recovered is $17,372. The question of prosecutions was referred to the Deputy Crown Solicitor, Sydney, on 10th September 1968 and 23rd December 1969. The institution of proceedings is almost finalised and legal action is expected to commence in the near future.

Senator McClelland also referred to the administration of the Department and referred in particular to the Central Manifest Accounting Section in Sydney. He felt that there was an inconsistency in answers given to questions asked in April. One answer stated that the overtime worked in the Central Manifest Accounting Section amounted to 699 hours for March 1969 while another answer indicated that the backlog of work did not call for untoward overtime. The Central Manifest Accounting Section, in association with revised wharf procedures has resulted in significant cost savings to the Department. Furthermore, the system has resulted in the speedier and more efficient release of cargo from customs control.

Not surprisingly, there were some teething problems associated with these new procedures. The amount of overtime worked was not considered excessive having regard to the overall advantages that were derived from the system. Senator McClelland might be interested to hear that, whilst the Department has extended the wharf hours to meet more realistically the needs of commerce, the total departmental expenditure on overtime last year was less than that of the previous year. Despite increased costs per hour - for example, salary increases - estimated expenditure for this year has not increased significantly. Obviously this satisfactory position could be achieved only by procedural improvements which have been reported to the Senate.

These improvements have meant several large scale reorganisations throughout the Department. As a result, officers have been required to act in higher positions pending finalisation of these reorganisations. Notwithstanding the reorganisations, considerable progress has been made towards filling positions on a permanent basis. In fact, in this calendar year 871 provisional promotions have been notified in the Gazette’. 1 can assure the honourable senator that this matter is being kept constantly under review and that promotions are made as quickly as possible. I invite the honourable senator’s attention to the Public Service Board’s report, where it will be seen that the total customs staff increases annually by 53, or approximately 1.25%. That compares more than favourably with the overall percentage increase of 3.4% for the Service. The honourable senator may be interested to know that the expenditure of the Department as a percentage of revenue collected last year was a mere 1.79%. Surely that did not indicate inefficient administration.

Senator Lawrie raised a question in regard to the excise on tobacco products.

I inform him that whilst the consumption of tobacco products has shown an increase over recent years there was a decline in the rate of increase in consumption from 1967-68, 1968-69. However, it is expected that the rate of increase will exceed the rate experienced in 1968-69 because of the trend evident at the end of that financial year.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

Order! The Minister’s time has expired.

Senator BYRNE (Queensland) [2.23W had hoped that I might have addressed myself briefly to the Committee before Senator Scott replied to Senator Ormonde on the matter of narcotics control. As the Minister will know, this is a matter in which the Australian Democratic Labor Party has been particularly interested. Probably 12 to 18 months ago a conference of the Party carried a motion asking the parliamentary representatives to press for the establishment of a select committee of the Senate to investigate this question. In the meantime Senator Scott has announced the establishment of a committee consisting of State Ministers and himself and, stemming from that, the establishment of a control body of public officials from the Commonwealth and State governments. Therefore, up to this point the Democratic Labor Party has not proceeded with its suggestion that a select committee of the Senate be created to investigate this matter.

Some time ago I asked Senator Scott, who knew of our interest in this matter, whether he would be good enough to present to the Senate a report on the ongoing activities of the organisation that had been set up. On 28th May he was good enough to read in this chamber a report on what had been done by the new organisation up to that date. I have before me a copy of that report. It was encouraging in one respect. But one of the matters that still concern us is whether there has been an accumulation of all available knowledge on what is to Australia a rather recent problem. We know that if an assemblage of top public officials takes place they are individually equipped in certain areas of life. But we members of the Democratic Labor Party believe that there may be such a small amount of experience behind us on the question of drug traffic, drug addiction and therapy for those who are addicted to narcotics that the nation may not be aware of the nature or magnitude of the problem.

Until the whole matter is publicly explored, firstly, we will not be in possession of that type of knowledge which may be peculiar to this continent, with its strange island geography, and, secondly, the nation may not be aware of the extent and implications of the traffic here. After all, a tremendous public awareness will have to be created before there will be any possibility of adequate control. Undoubtedly, this is that strange type of violation of public and moral law which requires, in a particular sense, the alertness, the interest and even the revulsion of the whole of the community in order to make the policing of it practical and effective.

We are concerned as to whether there has been, by the establishment of this committee of which Senator Scott has informed us from time to time, the creation of this public awareness which will be the additional arm that all law enforcement bodies must have if this traffic is to be brought under control in this continent. That is why I inform the honourable senator now that we have by no means retreated from our proposal. If, after further investigation or scrutiny of the advance of this traffic or the failure to control it by the use of the present means, we were not satisfied that the present system was reasonably effective, we would still have very serious thoughts about presenting to this chamber a proposal for the creation of a Senate select committee to investigate the whole problem.

In more recent times we have had an accent on the creation of Senate select committees. I know that, quite apart from the information that they have been able to accumulate, the very existence of the committees on which my colleagues and I have served with other senators, their peripatetic nature, their movement around the Commonwealth from State to State and the public interest that has been generated by their appearance in the various States and the presentations on radio and television and in the Press have created, in the fields in which they have operated, a tremendous public awareness of the problems.

Let me refer to two committees, namely, those concerned with the pollution of the environment - the committee on water pollution and the committee on air pollution. Undoubtedly in this continent today, after the short period of 12 to 18 months during which those committees have been operating, there is a new awareness of and a new sensitivity to the existence of these problems and the steps that must be taken in order to control them. There is a new awareness in individual members of the public of their individual responsibility to avoid the destruction and pollution of the environment and to co-operate with those who are trying to prevent both of those things.

We would expect that the existence of a similar committee on the control of drugs and the things that are associated with addiction to narcotic drugs might have the same effect. If we could create this tremendous public revulsion and alertness, I believe that it would be of great assistance to the Commonwealth and State authorities which arc dedicating themselves to the control and elimination of what is becoming very quickly a national vice of some moment. Therefore, I draw the attention of the Minister to certain aspects of the report that he presented to the Senate on 28th May. 1 would like the Minister to indicate in some detail, if he can, how far the activities of the Committee have proceeded beyond the position which its activities had reached as at 28th May. I am concerned because I notice, for example, that one of the matters which is mentioned by the Minister as a success quickly achieved by the Committee - and it is to its credit - was that the Ministers agreed in principle to exchange officers between the Customs Narcotics Bureau aud the police drug squads in each State. The Minister said in part:

Such an exchange is already operating in Victoria. This should materially improve the existing co-ordination between these bodies.

As I read the review of the activities of the Department which is presented in conjunction with the proposed expenditure I noticed that there is a reference to this same matter. The only matter that seems to be referred to there is that the Standing Committee subsequently reported to a second meeting of Ministers on the points of law enforcement and health aspects. One important recommendation on the question of co-operation and liaison was adopted in principle by Ministers and has already resulted in the exchange between the Narcotics Bureau and the Victorian police. 1 do not know on what date this report from which I am now reading was compiled, but presuming that it was . fairly soon before its actual presentation here, it would appear that from 28th May or even before then to the date of the compilation of this report no further advance in the achievement of co-operation and exchange of officers between the Narcotics Bureau and the State police drug squads had been made. If that is so it might in general terms be an example of the rather slow rate of development and extension of the effectiveness of the activities of this Committee. It is that type of thing that concerns our Party on the question of whether the steps already taken are adequate and whether the sheer urgency and importance of the matter does not still require a new and different approach which might well be discovered by the scrutiny of a select committee of this place which could examine the whole problem and make suggestions for the assistance of the Government. There is specific reference in the report of 28th May to the recommendations which had been made by the Committee to the Minister. The Minister said in part: lt was recommended:

  1. that a system be established to collect, collate and disseminate information on all interstate movements of licit drugs of dependence. An examination will be made to see if it is possible to extend this system to embrace all intrastate movements of such drugs. This is designed to obtain early information when such drugs are diverted to the illicit area.
  2. A programme be started to collect detailed information about persons dependent on narcotic drugs, hallucinogens, amphetamines and allied psycho-stimulants and barbiturates. This will provide most important data from which the size of the drug problem can be gauged. Resources necessary for remedial action can then be mobilised.
  3. Facilities for treatment of drug dependants will be organised within State psychiatric health services to provide in-patient, outpatient and intensive follow-up arrangements.
  4. An intensive health education scheme be instituted, directed particularly to young people and to those who have strong influence over young people.

It continues in that vein. Those are the four specific matters which are stated as receiving attention and as being under con sideration. I should be interested to discover from the Minister what advance, if any, has been made in any of those fields because we think that this is a matter of such tremendous urgency and moment that at no stage can we afford to pause in our efforts, and if it is found that this method is cumbersome or that it is limited in its effectiveness by the denial of adequate information, or because it has not been able to mobilise information from those highly specialised sectors of the community whose services must be mobilised to achieve a final solution to this problem, then an alternative method must be found and must be found quickly. If it is to be discovered only by a thorough examination of the extent and nature of the problem then let us move quickly to do it.

We have certain advantages and certain disadvantages in Australia. We are an island continent and therefore are vulnerable to those who would smuggle in goods, including narcotics, along our long coastline, but Australia is an island, and to that extent we have a certain natural protection. I favour at this early stage - and I do not speak now as an expert penologist - the penalties being made harsher and harsher. I do not wish penalties on those who have become the unfortunate victims of narcotics but those who, for commercial purposes, would serve to peddle. They are doing things much worse than murder. They are destroying the minds and the souls, particularly of young people, and I would make it clear to the world that whatever might be the depredations that will be permitted in other nations, in this nation we will not permit our youth to be corrupted, polluted and destroyed merely for money. By means of extraordinarily harsh penalties for the first offence, with no alternative of a fine and with the imposition of terms of imprisonment of considerable length, we should demonstrate to those who would prey upon our nation, whether in this country or from abroad, that we at least will not tolerate it. I think that in this way we might go a long way on the track to elimination of this traffic. I commend these thoughts to the Minister.

Senator LILLICO:
Tasmania

– The Committee to which reference has been made is, 1 understand, comprised of State and Federal officials and has been set up relative to those persons manufacturing drugs about which Senator Ormonde spoke. I understand, from the same authority that he quoted, that those persons were responsible for about 70% of the addiction. My concern is in regard to the drugs that are sold over the counter in some chemists’ shops, at least in my State, without a doctor’s prescription. They are, 1 believe, habit forming. They have, in my own experience, caused death.

Senator Wheeldon:

– Not yet.

Senator LILLICO:

– No, not in my own case. 1 am not addicted in that way. But I do believe that some more effective scrutiny of these drugs that are readily available without a prescription should be implemented. I repeat that they are habit forming and are vicious in their effect on the people who take them. 1 believe that the taking of them, in some places at least, is widespread. Speaking of one drug that I know, Valomin, it can be purchased in amounts of 100 capsules in a container without a doctor’s prescription. One can just walk into a chemist’s shop and buy them. On the container it says: To be taken as prescribed’. The one 1 looked at had no prescription on it. There was no indication as to how one should take the capsules. When drugs of that sort are available to irresponsible people by just going into a chemist’s shop and buying them - drugs that make one see things that are not there or put one to sleep - 1 believe there is ample scope for the tightening of regulations so far as the dispersal of the drugs is concerned. I say that it is within the competence of this Committee to take a long hard look at this problem, especially in relation to drugs in capsule form that are sold over the counter in some chemists shops.

Senator TOOHEY:
South Australia

– ‘I share Senator Byrne’s concern on this question of whether proper and effective action is being taken to protect the people of Australia against the twofold problem which exists in this field - firstly, the illegal entry of dangerous narcotics into Australia and secondly, the manufacture and distribution of harmful drugs by sources inside Australia. I recall that more than 2 years ago I expressed my concern on this matter and asked the then Minister for Customs and Excise whether, in view of the fact that even at that time it was evident that dangerous drugs were finding their way into Australia, it would be wise for the Government to consider a body along the lines of the United States Federal Bureau of Narcotics, a specialist organisation consisting of whatever expert knowledge and techniques were available to be devoted exclusively to the task of preventing the illegal entry of drugs into the United States of America. The answer 1 received from the then Minister for Customs and Excise was that no thought had been given to this question, and indeed, that the Department of Customs and Excise was perfectly satisfied that it had ample resources and protection within its structure to guarantee that this country would be immune from that type of problem.

Obviously time has proved that answer to be utterly wrong. The Government has rather belatedly - nevertheless, it is to be commended - recognised the fact that this is a great national problem and must be tackled on that basis. I share the concern expressed by Senator Byrne about whether the methods being adopted will be effective. It is true that an interim report was brought out on this matter in May, but I feel that there was nothing in the report to inspire confidence that the matter is well in hand, f listened carefully to Senator Byrne. He mentioned that as an island continent we have advantages and disadvantages. I think the disadvantages far outweigh the advantages because our tremendous stretch of coastline is so vulnerable to smuggling. Perhaps more than any other country in the world we have less patrolling protection to make sure that drugs cannot enter this country through illegal means.

Working hand in glove with the United States Federal Bureau of Narcotics is the United States Coastguard, which plays a tremendous part in preventing the entry into the United States of millions of pounds of dangerous narcotics each year. We do not have such a force. The fear I have just expressed about the action being taken by the Government is not stated because I doubt the Government’s sincerity or that it now appreciates the dangerous position. I am sure that it intends to do what it can, but I feel that we will be bogged down in this eternal problem with which we are confronted when we try to act on a national basis. I fear that matters will be left to the States and the States will be unable financially to meet their obligations in this regard. I fear that the whole structure will collapse.

It is quite obvious that if something is to be done it will have to be done on a proper scale. If large expenditures are required the States will be unable to find them. 1 think the Senate ought to be told that the Government will supply the finance necessary to meet the obligations in this field, that it will give a guarantee, if not today at some time in the early future, that it is considering these dangerous sections of the unprotected coastline of Australia and is taking practical steps to protect the Australian community from the type of problem that is rampant in other countries.

With regard to drugs that can be manufactured in Australia, let us not be unmindful of the fact that in certain places in the United States - San Francisco is one of them if the authorities I have read are correct - many chemists are operating illegally making huge quantities of dangerous drugs that produce hallucinations and other mind destroying tendencies. It seems that the penalties in the United States are not severe enough to stamp out this type of activity. The dangers exist in two fields, but I think our basic attitude in this Parliament should be to accept the fact that if we are to do anything effective, the problem must be regarded as a national one and the responsibility must be undertaken as a national responsibility.

Senator SCOTT:
Minister for Customs and Excise · Western Australia · LP

– The remarks of Senator Byrne, Senator Lillico and Senator Toohey on the drug problem within Australia are of great interest to the Government and to the people of Australia. I wish first to comment on Senator Byrne’s remarks in which he mentioned quite accurately that the Australian Democratic Labor Party has taken a very keen interest in the drug problem in Australia.

Senator Gair:

– It is the pacemaker.

Senator SCOTT:

– It comes almost second to the Government in that respect. Senator Byrne asked what has been happening in the period since May. He quoted from a statement I made in the Senate on the subject of drugs at that time. After consultation with the Minister for Health (Dr Forbes) and the Attorney-General (Mr Bowen) I will be making a statement to the Senate before it rises at the end of this sessional period. I think that statement will cover all the questions raised by the honourable senator.

Much of the policing of chemists that Senator Lillico suggested should be done is the responsibility of State health and police officials under State legislation. Since the setting up of the National Standing Committee on Drugs of Dependence we have been working with the complete cooperation of the State authorities. Lines of demarcation have been drawn as to who does what. Co-operation has been established in this field. We already have a specialist narcotics bureau stalled by highly trained and expert investigators, backed up by the full resources of the Prevention and Detection Section of the Department. The resources of the Customs Narcotics Bureau are being expanded both in staff and equipment to meet the situation as it exists. The Department of Customs and Excise controls the manufacture of narcotics in Australia down to wholesale level. The policing of distribution to retailers is the responsibility of the States.

The Commonwealth Department of Health is co-ordinating the control of the legal drug trade within Australia. Honourable senators will understand that the Commonwealth and the States, realising the urgency of the problem of drug addiction and drug usage in Australia, are working in close co-operation to do everything possible to reach a satisfactory conclusion. The Commonwealth Government has taken steps to improve the resources of the Customs Narcotics Bureau. Chemists employed by the Department are currently in the United States for discussions on the analysis of drugs. Our own investigation officers are receiving formal and practical training from the United States Federal Narcotics Bureau. We are also receiving co-operation from overseas authorities in all aspects of the drug problem.

Senator WHEELDON:
Western Australia

– I wish to raise a matter which 1 hope will not be digressing from the subject at present under discussion. If further points are to be raised in relation to narcotics 1 apologise for intervening. The matter to which 1 wish to refer is one that 1 have mentioned on numerous occasions in the past, namely, the censorship of books and films. To explain my own position on this. I am not in favour of any censorship of books or films but in relation to the matters that 1 propose to raise I am not speaking from that point of view.

Senator Lillico:

– You mean no censorship at ail on books and films?

Senator WHEELDON:

– 1 am not in favour of any censorship on books and films but that is not the standpoint from which I am arguing at present. The standpoint from which 1 am looking at censorship in Australia is a comparison of the standards of censorship in Australia with those which exist in other countries which I believe cannot be described as being by any means uncivilised. 1 have raised very many instances with the Minister of the prohibition which has been placed on the reading of a great many highly regarded books, and the seeing of a great many highly regarded films, by the Australian people which have been distributed freely in such countries as the United States of America and New Zealand.

I rise now because I still have not been able to discover from the Minister what really are the criteria which are applied either by the Commonwealth Literature Board of Review or the Commonwealth film censors in the prohibition of the importation of books and films. A very loose description, particularly in relation to films, has been given to the effect that they arc blasphemous, indecent or obscene. When I asked the Minister some time ago how many films had been banned on each or any combination of those grounds - that a film was blasphemous, indecent or obscene - the answer I received was that films were banned on the ground that they were blasphemous or indecent or obscene. Absolutely no information was given on when a film was blasphemous, when it was indecent or when it was obscene. Although questions have been asked repeatedly about books and films which have been banned to us. all we have been told is that in the opinion of the people who do the banning they are in some way undesirable.

At the end of last year I was in New Zealand and, as I have mentioned previously to the Senate, while there I saw a film called ‘Pretty Poison’. It is not one of the greatest films ever made but it was made by a serious American film producer. It contained a very fine and highly commended performance by Anthony Perkins, a leading American actor. The film was distributed freely in New Zealand where there appeared to be no outrage at its showing. Although the Minister may well feel that 1 am in some way morally insensitive, I must confess that even from the most narrow point of view I am still completely bewildered as to why this film was banned. I am utterly at a loss to know what was going through the minds of the Commonwealth film censors when they prohibited distribution of this film, either from the point of view of excessive sex, excessive violence or anything else. I am absolutely astonished. 1 have asked the Minister to tell me the reason but the only answer I can get is that the film was blasphemous or indecent or obscene. I was given no information as to which of those criteria operated.

Another film that I saw in New Zealand in which I will admit there is a considerable amount of violence is called ‘The St Valentine’s Day Massacre’. It is an extremely serious film with a sociological purpose, describing the situation in part of the United States in the late 1920s and early 1930s - a very serious film and one which was very highly commended, despite the fact that it contains a considerable amount of violence. I saw the New Zealand version which I understand was uncut. However, it certainly has no more violence than have a large number of films shown in Australia of considerably less intellectual and artistic merit, films which are shown to children on television and freely available in cinemas. This film was shown freely in New Zealand but I understand that it has been cut so much in Australia as to be absolutely valueless from any serious point of view.

The film ‘Raven’s End’ has been banned. It was prohibited from being shown at the Queensland film festival unless certain cuts were made. I have mentioned this film on other occasions. It has been highly commended everywhere else in the world by serious film critics. 1 have read synopses of the plot and have seen stills from the film, and again I am completely puzzled as to what can be going through the minds of the people who tell us what we can see and what we cannot see. 1 am completely at a loss to know.

Senator Greenwood:

– Do you not get some idea from the parts that are cut?

Senator WHEELDON:

– Unfortunately I do not know what parts were cut. All I know is that part had to be deleted. The distributors said that they were unable to allow this film to be tampered with because they could not have the print cut, and therefore they would not allow it to be distributed. This film was to be shown al a festival. lt was not a film that was to have wide distribution.

We have heard a great deal about books that have been banned in this country. Once again I refer to the book ‘Portnoy’s Complaint’ which, like extracting a tooth, now has been made available to Mr Glaskin, the Western Australian author about whom Senator Scott has been very derogatory. I doubt whether Senator Scott would have read any of Mr Glaskin’s novels. I think Senator Scott referred to him twice as the man who said he would leave Australia but did not leave it. In fact Mr Glaskin had left Australia and was absent for about 2 years. I am sure Senator Scott must remember him unless he was reading from one of his adviser’s notes. In any case, on two occasions the Minister made the remark about him. He is the man who applied to have the book ‘Portnoy’s Complaint’ made available to him. He is one of the most eminent Australian authors whose only recognition by this Government is to be insulted by a Minister who, as far as I can gather now, has never heard of him but was apparently passed a note by one of his distinguished censors sitting beside him who probably will be passing him other notes in a few moments.

Another extraordinary piece of censorship is the banning of certain copies of the magazine ‘Playboy’. I am not one of the magazine’s most avid admirers but I have learned that some copies can come into this country and some cannot. When one compares the issues of the magazine - their standard of humour and their standard of illustration - one issue differs very little from another, lt is very significant that one issue late in 1967 which was banned contained an article by Mr Garrison, the New Orleans District Attorney, concerning the alleged assassination plot against Kennedy. I happen to have a copy at my home if Senator Scott would like to arrange a raid. There is nothing in that issue which I would say is in any way distinguishable from any other issue of ‘Playboy’.

I think that all these criteria by which books and films are banned should be explained by the Minister. I read an article in the ‘Sydney Morning Herald’ of 6th September written by J. A. C. Dunn in which it was claimed that the Minister had refused to discuss with journalists the subject of censorship. I do not know whether that is true but that is what Mr Dunn claimed. It is a scandalous and undemocratic state of affairs when people in Australia are deprived of books and films which are available to people elsewhere in the world; when they fail to get intelligible answers to questions asked in the Senate and when the Minister refuses to discuss with journalists a matter of public interest concerning the basic principles of the Australian people. I have been careful in what 1 have been saying today not to refer to a large number of things about which there may be some argument. I refer to books and films which have been distributed freely in Britain, the United States and New Zealand. I am not referring to Denmark, Sweden or other countries which I am sure Senator Scott would find terribly immoral.

Another matter that I think must be looked at relates to the activities of officers of the Department of Customs and Excise at the various airports and harbours in Australia. I have heard most extraordinary stories of their activities. Just recently a senior counsel of the Western Australian Bar told me how he had been detained for approximately an hour when he returned to this country while one of Senator Scott’s employees perused a novel by Dickens looking for salacious parts in it, his curiosity apparently had been aroused by the title Great Expectations’. Only a short time before that at a conference of university teachers in Perth one visitor from overseas informed the meeting - I take it that he informed it accurately - that when he arrived in Australia, having brought wilh him a large box, one of the people who works out what we should and should not read asked what was in it. The visitor said that there were books in it and the customs officer said: ‘That is all right. We will not worry about it. lt is only literature that we are interested in.”

All of these matters are of serious concern to the Australian people. We have had no guidelines put forward as to why these people should say I should not see this film or I should not read this book. I am not so satisfied, having looked at the composition of the authorities which engage in film censorship and literary censorship, that they possess either the intellectual prowess or the moral pre-eminence which entitles them to say who shall read what and who shall see what. Without clear guidelines being laid down 1 believe that it is scandalous that these people, or anybody else for that matter, should be able to prohibit free discussion and free examination of ideas inside this country. I believe that we cut a very absurd figure when ridiculous proceedings take place at Australian airports and harbours, when people who are trying to get into this country are subjected to ridiculous questions put by customs officers who are trying to keep Australia pure.

Senator McMANUS:
Victoria

– I want to strike a new note by saying that I am one Australian who is very appreciative of the manner in which the employees of our Department of Customs and Excise are carrying out their duties. I believe that particularly in relation to drugs the Department is doing a pretty good job at the present time, bearing in mind the difficulties of a country with a coastline as big as ours and the fact that now that the American authorities have pretty well closed the drug route from the East to the United States people in the East have decided that they should try to re-route their drugs through Australia. I saw a little of the work that is being done by our customs officers when I came back by ship from an overseas trip. They went through the ship that I was on very closely and very effectively. I think that they did a wonderful job. They searched my cabin in my absence. Some of the other passengers who had the same experience thought that there should be a protest. I informed them that I had no intention of protesting. I said that 1 thought the drug traffic was so bad that we should welcome any action taken by our customs officers to see that this kind of thing was kept out. My attitude is that any good Australian should be very pleased to see that our customs officers are going to such extreme limits to ensure that everything possible is done to keep this kind of thing out of our country. The second thing I want to say is that I think customs officials are not being assisted by the manner in which State authorities are attending to what is their obvious duty to provide facilities at seaports which would enable the customs officials to carry out their duties with the utmost effectiveness.

Senator Mulvihill:

– The New South Wales Maritime Services Board would not wake up if an earthqake occurred.

Senator McMANUS:

– I agree with the honourable senator that there is something wrong there. He is quite right. I came back on one occasion when 1,300 people disembarked in Sydney. The terminal, which is reasonably well equipped, was occupied and the passengers were taken round to a big shed which was completely unequipped. It was a tremendously hot day and hundreds of Australians stood in line waiting to be dealt with. I think that the customs officials did an excellent job in view of the totally inadequate facilities that they had, but nobody could have been happy about it. I asked the Minister a question on the subject. He pointed out that the Federal authorities had no jurisdiction but were making representations to try to improve the situation.

It is a terrible thing that Australians can come back and, because of inadequate facilities in the sheds, be fored to empty the contents of their cases on to the bare boards of a not very pleasant, not very well equipped shed. Under these circumstances there is an urgent need for State authorities to do more to facilitate the work which our customs officials have to do. On that occasion I thought that the customs officials did everything that they could do but it was understandable that the passengers were angry. I am sorry that they were angry with the Federal authorities because it seems to me that the responsibility lies with the States.

Senator Gair:

– In some cases the Stales do not control the wharfage. It belongs to the shipping company.

Senator MCMANUS:

– If that is the case, the shipping companies should do more. When one goes to some other countries one finds different conditions. For example, in Hong Kong there is a magnificent terminal at which ships’ passengers can be processed. Even in Chi-lung in Taiwan a splendid new terminal has been built. It seems to me that Australia is being let down by the fact that the facilities which ought to exist to process people who come in by ship - and large numbers do - are not available. I am only sorry for the attacks that are being made on our customs officials whose responsibility it is not, and I hope that the Commonwealth will do what it can to press State authorities to do a better job in this respect.

I want to say a few words now about censorship. The Minister was under a lot of attack and a lot of pressure a few months ago because of censorship. I am glad that he had the courage and the fortitude to stand up to the attacks that were being made upon him, because what he was doing was carrying out his duty to put into effect laws that had been passed by this Parliament. If the present system of censorship is wrong it is the fault of the Parliament, not the fault of the Minister. When we see so many people run away from responsibility when there is an inspired Press campaign against them, I pay full respect to the Minister who said: ‘That is the law and I am going to carry it out without regard for what may be said about myself personally’. I fully support the attitude of the Minister. If the censorship is wrong let us change the law. Let us not attack the authorities who are merely carrying out the law that is passed by the Parliament.

There is all kinds of talk about films, literature and so on. I did a university course in English literature and Latin literature for 4 years, so T suppose I might claim to have some knowledge of literature. I say without any hesitation that a good deal of the row that is kicked up about these importations does not derive from the fact that people think that the material has literary appeal. It derives from the fact that they think it has cash register appeal. They will bring in anything and they will show anything if they think they can make money out of it. I do not class some of those people who are today trying to bring in these semi-pornographic things any higher than the unfortunate individual who at Port Said or at Cairo walks alongside you and says: ‘Filthy pictures for sale’. I would at least say this much for the man who is bringing out the filthy pictures: He does it for bread; he does it because he has no other means of subsistence. But 1 have not much time for some of the people who today are trying to import into Australia all kinds of stuff that makes no literary or artistic contribution but is merely being imported by these people because they think they can make money out of it. I hope that our authorities, like the Minister, will have the courage to stand up and say that this kind of stuff is not wanted. I have heard members of the Australian Labor Parry call for censorship. They have said of publications which contain tabloid pictures from the United States-

Senator Little:

– Girlie books.

Senator McMANUS:

– Not girlie books so much as cartoon books and that kind of thing. They have said that publications of this kind make no contribution and have asked why we should be paying currency overseas for the importation of this kind of thing. I agree with them; I think they are quite right.

Senator Greenwood:

– But their Party now wants to abolish censorship altogether, does it not?

Senator McMANUS:

– I do nol know what their policy is; there are so many different policies in their Party at the present time that it is difficult to be able to pin them down to one policy. All I would ask is why they should want to abolish censorship. Why should wc say to these people: ‘You can bring in any publication that you like.’ If we say that we should say also that they can bring in any drugs that they choose. The argument for individual freedom can be carried to the point where it could be said that everybody is entitled to bring in whatever he wants to bring in. There is not much difference between bringing in stuff that is poisonous intellectually and poisonous physically. Personally I regard with contempt the inspired campaigns by these people who make out that they are actuated by all kinds of highminded motives when all they think about is the money in it. I hope that the Government will continue to take a stand on this issue.

Honourable senators will be aware that negotiations have continued for several years between State and Commonwealth Ministers to have censorship put on a reasonable basis. A couple of years ago when the Ministers had reached some kind of agreement people said that was good, but suddenly it became bad - because certain people, apparently in conformity with what appears to be a trend all over the world towards sex and nudity and that kind of thing, decided that the ordinary laws of the community should not apply to them. They held this view particularly where the law happened to be an obstacle to their desire to make money from anything that could be brought forward. I am very pleased that in regard to censorship the Government is adopting the attitude that it will consult with the State Ministers and will try to reach a reasonable basis of agreement.

Much humbug is talked about censorship today. I remind honourable senators of the time when the Minister for Customs and Excise was under fire by people over the film that was to be brought from Norway, Sweden or somewhere else. If anyone wants my idea of censorship I would refer him to the manner in which anybody who wanted to attack the decision not to allow that film into Australia could appear on television, radio or in the Press as easily as I can snap my fingers. Anybody who wanted to present a case in favour of the decision taken by the Government was not wanted and I had the utmost difficulty in having his view put forward. I commend to anyone who wants to talk about censorship in this country today a consideration of the censorship that can be exercised by the television, radio and newspaper people if they do not want something to be publicised. The worst form of censorship today is in the manner in which a certain group can exercise censorship and give almost exclusive publicity to one view but give no publicity to the other view.

Senator McClelland:

– Is the honourable senator talking about television?

Senator McMANUS:

– I am talking about the Press, radio and television - generally - and as a member of the Australian Labor Party the honourable senator should be the last one to suggest that there is not a serious problem in regard to the censorship of certain opinions as against other opinions.

Senator McClelland:

– We have been saying that for years.

Senator McMANUS:

– Then we are in agreement on that. If honourable senators would like an example of censorship I ask them to consider what can be done by television, radio and newspaper interests when they do not want a particular view to be publicised. At the time that the Minister was being criticised for his decision I was listening to programmes night after night and anybody who wanted to suggest that the Minister was old fashioned, behind the time or too conservative could appear on television or radio and in the Press. But what about the people, and there were plenty of them, who wanted to put the other view? Another point that I want to make is that the right to judge whether something is fit to be read or seen in our community seems to depend on whether one has been to a university or is a so-called intellectual. I went to a university but I do not regard myself as any better authority than many decent people in the community who have principles and who stand by them. What 1 regret is the intellectual snobbery that today seems to be rampant in our universities and in many of our so-called cultural circles. They will sneer at a policeman or they will sneer at an ordinary individual, a mother or father, who says: ‘I do not want my children to see this kind of thing’. They adopt the noble hearted attitude that because they happened to get a university degree they are better qualified to determine what ought to be shown or read than someone without a university degree.

Senator Prowse:

– And very often their education has been paid for by the community.

Senator McMANUS:

– Yes, and many of these people have been educated above their intelligence.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

Order! The honourable senator’s time has expired.

Senator SCOTT (Western AustraliaMinister for Customs and Excise) [3.17J - First I should like to answer some questions asked by Senator Lawrie which remain unanswered. The expected increase in customs revenue is based on the anticipated level of imports during the next financial year. These estimates are based on data provided by the Bureau of Census and Statistics. Senator Lawrie asked particularly about the estimate for firearms and ammunition. Over the past few financial years the customs revenue actually collected on these goods has amounted to 0.2% of total customs collections. However, last year the level of these imports was below 0.2%. It is not thought that this downturn for 1 year represents a continuing trend. Accordingly, this estimate is based on 0.2% of the estimated customs collections for the next financial year and this accounts for the seemingly large increase over last year.

While speaking earlier I was unable to complete my answer in relation to the consumption of tobacco products. I should like to add to what 1 had said when my time expired that the pattern of consumption of tobacco products, not including cigarettes, showed a marked decline in the latter half of the last financial year. It is thought that this trend will continue as there is a consumer preference for cigarettes as opposed to other products. The same principle of change in consumer preference is evident in the potable spirits area.

In the debate on these estimates we have had an interesting discourse from Senator Wheeldon who is from Western Australia. He commenced his criticism of the censorship policies of the Department of Customs and Excise by stating that in his view there should not be any censorship of literature and films. In other words, he advocates that we should not have any censorship at all of those mediums. I do not agree with him and the Government does not agree with him.

Senator Webster:

– Very few Australians do.

Senator SCOTT:

– I agree that very few Australians accept Senator Wheeldon’s view. He referred to an attack on a person by name of Glaskin. Mr Glaskin asked for a prohibited book to be released 2 or 3 years ago. He said that if it were not released he would leave the country. Senator Wheeldon said that because the book was not released Mr Glaskin left the country, but that he has now returned. This indicates to me that Australia must be a good country to live in notwithstanding the fact that certain books are prohibited because, after going overseas - if Senator Wheeldon is correct - Mr Glaskin returned to live here again.

Playboy’ magazine is examined on a monthly basis. If it is thought to be satisfactory for distribution in Australia it is released; but those magazines which are not satisfactory are prohibited. That position will continue.

Senator Little:

– There would not be any pornography if the lot of them were prohibited.

Senator SCOTT:

– I think that only a few of these magazines have been released in the last 6 months. I come now to the guidelines in regard to censorhip in Australia. The Department is very concerned about the community’s standards. It is endeavouring to keep censorship within acceptable limits. Whilst the standards adopted by the community are being relaxed, the support that the Department is receiving for the actions it is taking to prevent obscene literature and films coming into the country is encouraging.

Senator McManus congratulated the customs officers upon the way in which he was treated when returning home from a trip. I think the same can be said for 99.9% of incoming travellers processed by the Department. I receive only a few complaints. About 600,000 people entered Australia last year. I should imagine that the figure will be higher this year. There is always the case of somebody arriving in Australia at 7 o’clock in the morning who complains about the treatment he receives. It is impossible to satisfy everyone. There are sure to be complaints but I am astounded at the small number of complaints that I receive from people arriving in Australia. I remind the honourable senator that usually only the complaints are brought to our notice; people who are satisfied do not bother to write to the Department.

Senator McManus also said that he would like to see an improvement in the facilities provided by the New South Wales

Maritime Services Board. When 1 arrived in Sydney by ship two or three weeks ago I was very impressed by the way the customs officers performed their duties. I arrived on the ‘Marconi’. The customs officers were very efficient in their processing of the passengers.

Senator Gair:

– Did they check the Minister?

Senator SCOTT:

– Yes. As a matter of fact, officials from the Department were there to meet me. I passed through with a clean sheet. 1 only came from Fremantle to Sydney. The Maritime Services Board is co-operating completely with the Department. In fact, it is improving the present passenger facilities in Sydney and shortly will provide new facilities. I am sure that the honourable senator will be pleased to hear that.

Reference was made in the other place to censorship. Mr Clyde Cameron, who represents an electorate in South Australia, listed a number of prohibited books that he thought should be released. He said that we should have censorship because books such as ‘Fanny Hill’ should not be allowed into Australia. However, he said that Portnoy’s Complaint’ by Philip Roth should be allowed into the country. I take these two books as an example because I have read them. I think that ‘Fanny Hill’ is quite a modest piece of literature compared to Portnoy’s Complaint’, which is a disgusting book.

Senator McManus congratulated me for my actions in regard to the film ‘I Love, You Love’. It received a lot of publicity. The film censors and myself were condemned for not permitting the film to be shown without cuts at a film festival in Sydney. The screening time of that film was about li hours. Only about H minutes was required by us to be cut before we would permit it to be shown at the Sydney film festival. The cuts were of a scene depicting sexual intercourse. We said that we would not allow this part of the film to be shown. The organisers of the festival were advised of this in 1968 when they interviewed me in my office. The honourable senator mentioned that anybody who wanted to criticise the Government’s decision on T Love, You Love’ would receive publicity in the Press and could appear on television and on radio. Over the years the honourable senator has shown a keen interest in censorship. 1 received over 500 letters from people from all parts of Australia about the Government’s action. The honourable senator said that anybody who criticised the decision of the Minister and of the Department and therefore of the Government could get all the publicity in the world. The interesting part is that of the more than 500 letters that I received 6 out of 7 were in favour of the Government’s action. That fact has not been publicised before. The honourable senator will agree that this gives an indication that the Government is treating film and book censorship in the right way. I hope I never see the day when films depicting sexual intercourse can be shown to all people in Australia. I would not agree to that being depicted on the screen.

Senator MULVIHILL:
New South Wales

– I sat here enthralled by the Minister’s speech. I take issue with him on a couple of points. The Minister patted himself and the Democratic Labor Party on the back about being the first to realise the importance of drug control. The Minister, in his opening remarks, paid tribute to the DLP and to his own Party. Without beating any big drums, if the Minister is honest he will recall that long before anyone on the Government side or anyone from the DLP mentioned the matter I raised a series of questions about the United States Narcotics Bureau and the use of dogs to detect hidden drugs. I do not mention that because I am egotistical, but let us be frank about who was alert to the drug traffic first and say that each Party was equally vigilant. While I am dealing with the Estimates for the Department, I wish to refer to certain inconsistent actions of the Department. The bone of contention of my colleague, Senator Wheeldon, was the criteria that applied to different people. The Minister is responsible for the Department. He should lay down a set of guide lines. I take him back to 19th August when I raised a question about censorship and apparent inconsistencies in actions of the Department. I quoted from a paper which has an abundance of cheesecake illustrations, the ‘Sunday Mirror’. The point that I made was that the Department banned a film called ‘Sampan’, while at the same time the censor did not make any deletions in a trade film advertising Packard shoes. Was it in the interests of the shoe industry or in the interests of commerce that no deletions were made? I believe in consistency. Why was the film banned? Did anyone from the Australian shoe industry say that the industry could not survive unless it could feature a film showing a couple in their birthday suits in bed. I raised this matter on 19th August. I hope that the Minister can allay my suspicions and say that he is as tough with secondary industries as he is with film producers. I think he is, but 1 always have suspicion that in relation to decisions on trade trends very often a double standard is applied. 1 will take the matter a bit further; the Minister need have no illusions about that. 1 know the difficult conditions under which officials of the Department of Customs and Excise operate. 1, like most other honourable senators, have been overseas and have returned through Customs, nol as a senator but merely as a member of the general public. Another matter about which I am not satisfied is the handling of the Marianne Faithful] case. Because she is a film star she was given preferential treatment. Yesterday the Minister gave me an answer which implied that the State authorities had investigated the matter and that nothing illegal had happened. I think Senator Ormonde would know that if somebody from Paddington or any other similar suburb is caught in possession of drugs he is booked. That is fair enough. I would like to think that there is no difference between Marianne Faith full and a drug addict at Kings Cross or Paddington. That is why 1 am not satisfied. I am far from satisfied. If the Minister can say that there is a report from the State authorities that she took some sleeping pills, I will be satsfied. Of course, that would raise another question. 1 have had letters from the Minister’s colleague, the Minister for Immigration (Mr Snedden), which give the reasons for deeming a person not an unacceptable migrant. This is where the Department of Customs and Excise is involved. Does it have any files? Does it say to a migrant that because he has had one pinch in London we do not want him, or does the Department allow him to come into Australia? The Minister knows in his own heart that every bit of sentimental nonsense that was published about Marianne Faithfull would not have been published if she had been an ordinary person. The same publicity would not have been given to a girl on the production line who lost a hand or a foot. That publicity could have been stopped if the Department had prosecuted her. But nothing happened.

It was to the credit of a member of the parliamentary Labor Party in another place, the honourable member for Hunter (Mr James), that he made some very timely remarks about Mick Jagger. Today’s society should have brought home to it the evils of taking drugs. The Minister knows in his own heart that if big advertising combines think that using any of these situations will sell something, they use them. Until the Minister can prove to me that strong influential pressure from certain film groups to pull the police off was not applied, I will not be satisfied. The same justice should apply to Miss Faithfull as would apply to some hooker up at Kings Cross or Paddington. I am particularly concerned about that.

I wish to put on record the dialogue that ensued between myself and Senator McManus and Senator Gair about Sydney port facilities. I am very pleased that the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Water Pollution, Senator Davidson, is in the chamber at present. In the interjection I implied that Sydney, like al) other major ports, has some first class wharfage facilities, but the gap between the good and the not so good is very large. Obviously the same situation would apply at other ports. My interjection to Senator McManus was linked up with the fact that Senator Scott, representing the Minister for Shipping and Transport (Mr Sinclair), is unable to obtain prompt answers. The reason I mentioned Senator Davidson is that the Committee has been waiting for weeks for certain information. The Department has not been able to obtain this information, which the Committee wants from State departments. The Department has its faults, just as every State authority has certain faults. Of course it has its bad days. This inability of Commonwealth departments to obtain information from State departments is vividly exemplified in the situation about which I have spoken.

I am more or less a centralist in relation to censorship. When 1 heard about this exhibition of anti-semitism in Perth I did not have any qualms about the full force of the law, being applied against the person organising that exhibition. I know that Senator Scott will have another bite at the cherry in that he will be making other replies. I would be happy if he could indicate to me that this trade film extolling the virtues of Packard shoes was not given the inside run as against the film “Sampan’ whose producers had a lot to say about censorship. Have there been any discussions between the Minister and his colleague, the Minister for Immigration, with whom I get on reasonably well. I think 1 could say that 1 am a regular client of his. I would like a clear cut understanding as to how many convictions on drug charges an intending British or European migrant has to have before we close the gate on him. Do we impose any restrictions? Every time someone like Marianne Faithfull receives publicity the implication is that there is a good side to drug addiction.

Senator WEBSTER:
Victoria

– In this interesting debate on the Estimates f direct my questions to the Minister under the Division relating to administrative expenses. In the main my queries relate to financial matters. Let me say at. the outset that when the estimates for the Department of Supply were under consideration I made some comment about the role played by the Public Service Board with relation to management and standards of efficiency required within the various government departments. I should like the Minister to indicate to me, if he could, what methods are currently being adopted within his Department to do those things which must be done in a department which expects to spend approximately $25m in the year 1969-70 with a view to promoting greater efficiency and effecting greater savings.

First I should like him to make clear if possible the manner in which the estimate for total salaries as shown in Division 210 is compiled. I should like also some information relating to the movement of personnel. I speak now of numbers. I should also like information as to how the Department arrives at the decision that it is necessary this year to provide for an increase of approximately 10% in the ex penditure of $17,919,742 on salaries last year. 1. seek that information because this trend is apparent in all departments and private industry is most anxious to know the basis on which it is estimated that we will require somewhere in the vicinity of an extra 10% for the coming year. Does the Department believe that costs will escalate by about that percentage? Again, can we take this Department as a typical example. I ask that because I note provision for an increase of only 16 employees out of a total of 4,300. In particular. 1 should like a fairly full reply concerning how the estimate is arrived at.

In my opening remarks I spoke about efficiency generally. The Minister will know that some little time ago the Joint Committee on Public Accounts encouraged the Department in relation to the matter in which it was deeply involved - commodity control. Perhaps the Minister for Customs and Excise will agree that in no other department is there a better opportunity for the introduction of methods designed to improve efficiency and to effect savings by means of commodity control. Can the Minister tell me what has been done in the Department by way of savings in the general area of commodity control in connection with such things as petroleum products, tobacco and alcoholic products? I would be most anxious to know the position in the Department. What can it tell the general public it has achieved in the field of commodity control? 1 note that the Public Service Board has stated that at the present time its organisation and methods establishment is looking at the Department of Customs and Excise, that it is making an examination of overtime arrangements with a view to achieving better control and that it is making an examination of certain departmental transport activities with a view to effecting rationalisation and improved efficiency. I would be most interested to know what management techniques the Department proposes to introduce for the benefit of the Australian community.

I pay great tribute to the Department of Customs and Excise. I have seen its various branches operating in almost every State of the Commonwealth and I was most impressed with the efficiency and high quality of the officers whom I met. The Department of Customs and Excise is one

Commonwealth department which is most efficient. I also congratulate the Minister on the quality of his leadership which no doubt has inspired this high degree of efficiency. I join, too, with Senator McManus in congratulating the Minister upon the stand he has taken in facing up to the barbs that have been thrust at him with relation to literary censorship and film censorship.

There is one other point upon which I should like some information. I note from the Auditor-General’s report that the raw cotton bounty is administered by the Department of Customs and Excise. In fact, it is responsible for the administration of the urea bounty, the sulphuric acid bounty, the sulphate of ammonia bounty, the raw cotton bounty, the phosphate fertiliser bounty, the agricultural tractor bounty and a number of other bounties and payments which are criticised so much by some members of the community.

I ask about the raw cotton bounty because I should like to know from the Minister either now, if he is able to tell me, or at the earliest possible opportunity, the highest amount paid by way of single cheque in 1968-69 in the form of bounty on the production of raw cotton. I should also like to know what was the smallest cheque paid by way of raw cotton bounty to any producer. I ask this question because I would like to have spelt out just how great a contribution is being made to some particular producers. One of the problems that I see in the general area of payments and benefits is the danger of amalgamation of properties. Sometimes I doubt whether the payment of bounties or benefits is in the best interests of the community, especially when, not so long ago, I noted from the balance sheet of one company that the first payment for its product - wheat - was over $600,000. There are some who believe that the small producer is inefficient. I do not agree with that. The general thought in the community seems to favour the coalition of small holdings. In my opinion, it would seem that by the payment of such benefits as the raw cotton bounty, the superphosphate bounty, and so on, we are encouraging the coalition of small producers which, as I see the position, is not in the best interests of the community in general.

It might lead to great efficiency in production, but I suggest that it could do great harm to the development of rural towns and rural areas. I submit that by providing bounty assistance amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars to one particular manufacturer or any one producer we are not acting in the best interests of the professional people, those who sell equipment, chemists, solicitors and those who send their children to school in the small towns. I feel that we have a problem confronting us in this field and I ask the Minister, if he can, to give me the information which I seek.

Senator MCCLELLAND:
New South Wales

– I rise to add to the remarks that I made in opening the debate on the estimates of the Department of Customs and Excise. I return to one or two matters which I raised and to which the Minister gave me replies. Firstly, let me say that I agree with a great deal of what has been said in regard to the efficiency of the officers of this Department. I believe that the ordinary rank and file Third Division and Fourth Division officers of this Department are doing a wonderful job under very difficult conditions at times. The Comptroller-General of Customs, Mr Carmody, is a very efficient public servant.

Senator McManus raised a question in relation to the difficulties under which customs officers are working in the handling of incoming ships. He suggested that some of the States, and perhaps some of the shipping companies, were not co-operating with the Commonwealth in providing reasonable facilities to enable the expeditious handling of passengers. There is one ambit of operations now handled by the Department of Customs and Excise which is under the control of the Commonwealth and which I suggest can certainly be improved considerably; that is the handling of incoming aircraft passengers.

One of the great difficulties under which customs officers labour at the Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport today is the awkward form of the accommodation and the lack of facilities provided for them at the international terminal. I refer particularly to the difficulties they encounter as a result of aircraft noise. Now that forms have been done away with and it is a verbal interrogation of the incoming passenger by the customs officer, the noise of aircraft landing and taking off at Mascot presents difficulties. 1 understand from customs officers who have spoken to me that one of the great difficulties they encounter is that every minute or two during the interrogation of a person about his entry into Australia the interrogation has to be cut off because of the excessive aircraft noise. I sincerely suggest to the Minister and his Department that, even while the new international terminal is being built, an investigation should be made of these problems with which customs officers at Sydney (KingsfordSmith) Airport are being confronted, with a view to taking remedial steps to see that their difficulties in this regard are eased.

I return now to the question that I raised earlier concerning the evasion of duty on cigars, cigarettes and tobacco. The Minister told me that writs had been issued out of the High Court of Australia against certain companies for evasion of duty on cigars; that about $1,150,000 was still outstanding in respect of duty short paid on cigarettes; and that the institution of proceedings was almost finalised and legal action was expected to be commenced in the near future. Unfortunately, that appears to be a stock answer which is trotted out every time the matter is raised. The evasion of duty took place a way back in 1967-68 - some 18 months to 2 years ago. The amount of duty evaded at that time was of the order of $2m. An amount of $1,150,000 is still outstanding. lt is just not good enough for the Australian public to be told by the Minister at this stage: ‘The institution of proceedings is almost finalised and legal action is expected to be commenced in the near future’. The delay might not be the fault of the Department of Customs and Excise. If it is not. I invite the Minister to say so. It might well be the fault of the AttorneyGeneral’s Department. I know that the Department of Customs and Excise would have to refer the matter to the Crown Solicitor or the Deputy Crown Solicitor. But I suggest that a period of 2 years is far too long when an amount of the magnitude involved in this instance is outstanding. When I raised the matter on 1 8th March this year the Minister said:

  1. . appropriate proceedings will be taken in the near future.

When 1 raised it again on 20th August I was told:

I am informed that administrative and legal investigations regarding short-payments of duty in respect of the cigarettes are almost finalised and the appropriate legal action will be commenced in the near future.

It is now mid-September, and still we are given the stock answer; namely: ‘The institution of proceedings is almost finalised and legal action is expected to be commenced in the near future’. Frankly, 1 am suggesting that the song has been sung for too long and that it is about time the record came to an end and action was taken in the form of the issuing of writs. I invite Senator Scott to say whether it is the fault of the Department of Customs and Excise that the delay involved has been so long, or whether it is the fault of some other department, so that if it is the latter we can raise the matter in the debate on the estimates of that department.

Now let me say something about the question of drugs. It was raised initially by my colleague, Senator Ormonde. In replying to him the Minister mentioned that a committee under the chairmanship of the Comptroller-General of Customs had been directed to consider immediately the steps that can be taken by the Commonwealth and States together to combat aspects of the drug problem, including treatment and education. The Minister went on to say that a programme of education in the schools was being contemplated. But the problem of drug taking is one not only among school children but also among the teenage section of the community - those who have left school.

Therefore, any educational programme within the schools that may be contemplated will not be reaching those in the teenage section of the community who have left school and unfortunately have become addicted or are mixing in circles in which addiction might be likely to occur.

Senator Little:

– An educational programme is hardly suitable for those who are already addicted, is it?

Senator MCCLELLAND:

– That is exactly what I am saying. I suggest to the Minister that if he looks at the estimates of the Department of the Treasury he will see that $1 2m is being set aside by the Commonwealth Government this financial year for advertising. A lot of that money for advertising will be going to the newspapers and the radio and television stations. I suggest that one of the best media of education, although the Commonwealth Government has not done anything to date in regard to educational television, is the preparation of programmes for television with the object of educating all sections of the community about the hazards and problems involved in drug addiction. This is a very serious problem. It is growing and becoming more pressing day by day.

It is all very well for the Minister to say that a motion has been carried for the setting up of a committee to consider immediately the further steps that can be taken by the Commonwealth and the States. But this is a problem that has been with the Australian people for some considerable time. Although a committee has been set up to consider matters immediately, I suggest that this should have been done a long time ago. This is just like shutting the door after the horse has bolted. But I would suggest very strongly to the Minister, to the Department and to the committee that has been established that one of the best ways of informing all sections of the Australian community about this problem is by the preparation of properly produced documentary programmes that can be seen on our television screens. I want now to deal briefly with the question of censorship., because to date there has been a lot of Kick slapping in the Senate on this subject.

Senator Webster:

– How hard has the back slapping been?

Senator MCCLELLAND:

– Pretty constant back slapping has been going on this afternoon, and I noticed that the honourable senator who has interjected was one of those who engaged in it. In case there is any doubt about my Party’s policy on the question of censorship, let me read it for the information of all concerned, lt is as follows:

The censorship laws of Australia should conform with the general principles that adults be entitled to read, hear .and view what they wish in private or public and that persons and those in their care be not exposed to unsolicited material offensive to them. For the purpose of implementing those principles a judicial tribunal be established to bold public hearings and to give public reasons. The Commonwealth laws for censorship of imported books, records and films to be altered accordingly.

Our complaint regarding the censorship laws is that there have been anomalies and ambiguities; that we have to accept the word of the Minister or that of the National Literature Board of Review that there is pornography or obscenity and that the relevant film or book has been banned for that reason and for no other. It could well be - I am not saying it is - that this form of excuse could be used when political censorship was intended by a government, and that is why we of the Labor movement suggest that when a film, book or work of literary merit is banned there be a right of appeal before a judicial tribunal which will be established to hold public hearings and to give public reasons as to why censorship should take place.

Senator Greenwood:

– Are your criteria the same - blasphemy, obscenity or indecency?

Senator MCCLELLAND:

– We will work out the criteria. Just let the public know the real reasons in the first instance why the banning has taken place. There has been a lot of back slapping this afternoon on the banning of the film T Love, You Love’ which the Swedish producer Bjorkman brought out here to be shown at the Melbourne and Sydney film festivals. While the Minister may have received a large number of letters congratulating him on banning the film completely there was also an advertisement in the ‘Australian’ of 11th June, inserted by a great number of Australian citizens in connection with the 16th Sydney film festival. They objected strongly to the censoring of the film. In fairness to the Sydney film festival let me explain the attitude of the organisers. I am not one of those to whom Senator McManus referred as literary long hairs. I believe in Australian literature, especially, receiving a preeminent and predominant place in the Australian community because Australians can best learn more about their own country through Australian works of literary merit. But only recently, on 3rd September, the president of the Sydney film festival wrote to me and drew my attention to the protest that had been advertised in the ‘Australian’ and said that the Sydney film festival had no wish to show pornography, and that to last June, to the best of their knowledge to date, no other country in the world has sought even to make cuts in the film ‘I Love, You Love’.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

Order! The honourable senator s time has expired.

Senator SCOTT:
Minister for Customs and Excise · NEW SOUTH WALES · CP; NCP from May 1975

– First of all, I. would like to refer to some of the comments made by Senator Webster. The total overtime hours have been reduced in spite of the increased volume of work. Transport is continually kept under review. I will further advise the honourable senator on other matters he raised in relation to this subject. As far as the bounty on cotton is concerned, whilst we do not have the figures for payments to the highest or lowest recipients, I may say that the 1969 crop will yield about 154,000 bales with a ceiling of $4m and this will result in a payment of 5.4c per lb to the grower. Preliminary estimates for the 1970 crop indicate that about 189,000 bales will be processed. With a ceiling of $3m applicable, growers can expect to receive about 3c per lb. I will endeavour to obtain the other figures for the honourable senator. Senator Mulvihill raised two points. One, I think, was in relation to the actress Marianne Faithfull and to Mick Jagger. 1 can advise the honourable senator, as I did in answer to a question here either today or yesterday, that as far as the Department is concerned no special treatment at all was given to Marianne Faithfull. I went to to say that I could not speak for other departments, whether they be State or Commonwealth. I can speak only for my own Department.

Senator Mulvihill:

– What about her coming back? What happens then?

Senator SCOTT:

– We will deal with that when it occurs. I have had some information on the subject, but so far as Miss Faithfull is concerned she did not receive any special treatment from the Department of Customs and Excise. She received the same treatment as would any other person. Senator McClelland again raised the question of the amount of duty still to be collected on cigarettes. I would like to inform the honourable senator that the evaluation of the mass of evidence associated with such a large scale evasion has presented both the Department of Customs and Excise and the Attorney-General’s Department with a formidable task which is now nearing completion. We in the Department are just as anxious as he is to get the matter cleared up. The honourable senator should remember that in answer to a question I was asked some time towards the end of 1968 I said that the matter was handed over to the Attorney-General’s Department for consideration, and it has gone on from there. However, I will conclude my answer to that part of his question by saying that we are anxious to reach finality. I am informed that we should reach that stage within the next few days.

Senator McClelland also mentioned an education programme in respect of drugs. As well as education programmes, other programmes for treatment and rehabilitation of drug users have been formulated by the State authorities. The education programmes are not designed solely for school children. Information will be circulated through a variety of youth organisations. I think that covers the point thai was raised.

There has been a divergent expression of opinion by honourable senators opposite about their censorship policy. I believe that Senator McClelland accurately described the censorship platform of the ALP. Senator Wheeldon said that if he had his way he would abolish film and literary censorship completely in Australia. But he was expressing only his opinion and not the opinion of the Labor Party. I would like to inform Senator McClelland, who told us the ALP policy on censorship which was agreed at its Federal conference, that that policy is Utopian and unreal in its concept, like so many ALP policies. The policy is naive and quite impractical. In theory at least, every intelligent person in Australia would agree that while adults might be allowed to see, to read and to hear what they wish, at the same time people should not be exposed to unsolicited material offensive to them; nor should they be exposed unwillingly to a casual display of such material. These same intelligent people would agree that children and young persons should be protected. I think Senator McClelland would agree with that. But any censorship policy must be workable. How can the ALP policy be translated into viable legislation? How cun children and young people be protected if pornography and other material is freely available?

The Commonwealth Government has frequently expressed its willingness to implement an X certificate classification for films, but for this scheme to work it is necessary to have the co-operation of the States. The States must legislate to police the cinemas, to keep out children and others under the prescribed age. The States have steadfastly refused to accept this responsibility. How can the States be convinced to police the availability of pornographic and similar material in such a way that only adults have access to it and the young are protected?

The recent examples of action taken by the Queensland Government against material released by the Commonwealth is but one example of the difficulties faced. The Australian Labor Party proposes a judicial tribunal of censorship. This is hardly a new idea. Already ministerial and departmental decisions are open to challenge in the courts and have been so challenged. The prohibition of the magazine ‘Chance’ was challenged in the New South Wales courts recently, and my decision was strongly upheld. Fundamentally censorship iti Australia becomes a question of what people in general accept. It is the sensible recognition of community standards. There has recently been massive evidence of support for the current standards of censorship. There was a most intense reaction to my decision on the film ‘I Love, You Love’, a reaction which was 6 to 1 in favour of the decision and of the standards adopted by the censorship authorities. I suggest that the ALP would hesitate before flying in the face of such solid support of the present system of standards. In the unlikely event of accession to power by the ALP, its policy on censorship would prove to be so many empty words. I suggest that the Labor Party would be forced to observe the criteria which guide me and my Department and which are clearly the minimum acceptable to the Australian community today.

Senator MULVIHILL:
New South Wales

– I do not wish to introduce new business, but I thought that the crux of my argument was that we wanted clarification on consistency in the case I drew to the attention of the Minister. What standard was applied to the film ‘Sampan’? Was discretion allowed in respect of the trade film of the Packard shoe company which included similar nude scenes? The Minister did not answer that question.

Senator SCOTT:
Western AustraliaMinister for Customs and Excise · LP

– I am sorry that I forgot to answer that question. I understand that the film Sampan’ was released, after cuts had been made, for commercial showing in Australia. I understand that we have no knowledge of the trade film of the Packard shoe company which has been used for advertising purposes. It has not come to the attention of my Department. I will look into the matter and advise the honourable senator.

Senator Mulvihill:

– Does not Mr Prowse have to clear it before it goes on circuit?

Senator SCOTT:

– I do not think so. I will get the information for the honourable senator.

Senator CAMERON:
South Australia

– I wish to direct the Minister’s attention to a matter about which I have asked two questions in my short time in the Senate. The questions are related. In my second question, addressed to the Minister for Customs and Excise, I asked: ls the Government aware of the excess cost imposed on wheat farmers, small seed producers and other crop producers by the present duties on imported specialist reaping machines?

Senator Scott replied:

The whole question of farm machinery has been placed before the Tariff Board by my colleague the Minister for Trade and Industry. … I understand that the report of the Tariff Board is at present in the Minister’s hands but, as yet, no decision has been made. However, I should like to advise the honourable senator that in 196S, following representations made to me by various primary producing organisations throughout Australia, 1 extended the by-law admission of harvesters in excess of 20 feet for a period of a further few months. I limited the number that could be admitted.

Later that day the Minister in a personal explanation advised that the report had not been received. He corrected his original statement. I now ask the Minister whether the report has been received. If so, will the Minister give further consideration to the request contained in my question? These duties are being used to protect the manufacturers of harvesting machinery in Australia. In reality, farmers using the machinery are providing the incentive to the manufacturers. I do not question the need for subsidies to the manufacturers in order to encourage production.

Senator Sim:

– As long as they are efficient and have sufficient throughput.

Senator CAMERON:

– I agree with that, but I feel that a method much fairer to the farmers would be one similar to that used for the application of the present bounty on agricultural tractors. 1 ask the Minister to consider changing the system. If that were done some assistance would be afforded the farmers. It is unfair to primary producers generally to be forced to sell on an export market a majority of their products and to buy on an internal inflated market which, to a large extent, is caused by constant rises in wages and salaries from which farmers, as a body, have no protection.

I have two further questions. What would be the cost to the Government of payment of a bounty to local harvester manufacturers if this particular decision were taken? I turn to the document entitled ‘Estimates of Receipts and Summary of Estimated Expenditure’ and refer to the line in table 3 which relates to machinery and mechanical appliances, electrical, equipment and parts therefor for which estimated receipts this year are $73,450,000 compared with receipts last year of $65,472,209. What portion of that amount is collected on imported harvesting machinery? I should like that information. It can be incorporated in Hansard.

Senator MCCLELLAND:
New South Wales

– 1 shall continue my remarks on censorship. When my time expired previously I was about to put the point of view of the organisers of the Sydney film festival on the censorship of the film i Love, You Love’. As 1 have said, the president of the Sydney film festival wrote to me on 3rd September and pointed out that the organisers had no wish to show pornography. He added that until last June and, to the best of their knowledge, to date no other country in the world where the film had been shown had sought even to make cuts in ‘I Love, You Love’.

Senator Webster:

– What countries were they?

Senator MCCLELLAND:

– Apparently there were twenty-four countries. I do not know them all but I will explain the position to you. Despite the fact that no country where this film had been shown saw fit to make any cuts in it, Australia decided to ban it. Perhaps the Minister, or the officers of his Department, might be able to ascertain, if they have not done so already, in which countries ‘I Love, You Love’ was screened and whether any cuts were made in it.

Senator Greenwood:

– What would be the relevance of that?

Senator MCCLELLAND:

– I am saving that other people in other parts of the world can see things which, according to the Australian Minister for Customs and Excise, cannot be shown in Australia, even to a selected audience. The Sydney and Melbourne film festivals are two of only twentyfour international film festivals in the world which are recognised by the International Federation of Film Producers Associations. Only festivals awarded this recognition - the award is reviewed annually - are given full support by film producers and film makers from the non-Communist countries and thus are able to show some of the finest films currently being made in all parts of the world.

The president of the film festival went on to say in his letter to me that but for this arrangement of film festivals throughout the world many of the distinguished films that are produced could not be screened in Australia. He emphasised that Sydney and Melbourne film festivals are annual events which make important contributions to Australian cultural life and, besides affording Australia considerable cultural prestige abroad, they have the important function of keeping Australian film makers abreast of the contemporary cinema world. That is one of the important matters surrounding the holding of these film festivals. Here is Australia crying out for films and crying out for knowledge of techniques in production, direction and acting. These film festivals afford a great deal of assistance to local talent and ability yet the Australian Government says thai even at a film festival a particular film is not to be shown.

Mr McPherson pointed out in his letter that the banning of overseas entries in these festivals undoubtedly will prejudice the continued recognition by the International Federation of Film Producers Associations of the Sydney and Melbourne film festivals, and that withdrawal of such recognition will harm considerably Australia’s cultural image overseas. He went on to stress that membership of the Sydney and Melbourne film festivals is restricted to persons over the age of 18 years. That is a condition which is enforced rigidly by both festivals. In addition, films are shown once only and, in the case of overseas exhibits, the films are re-exported immediately in accordance with the rules of the festival. In other words, they may be shown once only at each of the festivals to a selected audience, all of whom are over the age of 18 years. Yet despite a circumstance of that nature and despite the fact that no other country in the world has banned the film, the Australian film censorship authorities have said: ‘It cannot be shown here’.

Speaking of the Sydney film festival Mr Mcpherson went on to say that he considered that the difficulties with censorship stemmed in a large part from the fact that the censorship board was not directed to take these specific factors into account when considering festival entries. That is one of the main complaints of the Labor movement about the censorship laws in Australia at present. First of all, we say that in the case of film festivals, which are designed to bring to Australia that which the Federation believes to be the best films in the world, the films should be brought to Australia not only for their literary merit but also to assist Australians, who are anxious to acquire new skills or added skills in techniques, by allowing them to see the films. Secondly, we say, in relation to general overall censorship, that adults should be entitled to read, to hear and to view what they wish in private or in public, and that persons in their care need not necessarily be exposed, or should not be exposed, to unsolicited material which is offensive to them.

In those circumstances when we suggest that for the purpose of implementing these principles a judicial tribunal should be established to hold public hearings and to give public reasons, it is beyond my comprehension how the Minister can say that it is naive - I think that was his expression - and Utopian. We believe that Commonwealth laws in relation to censorship of imported books, records and films should be altered. If it is naive and Utopian for that to be done in Australia, then I suggest that the Minister look elsewhere to see whether it is done in any other country. I can well remember that in England a book called ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover’, which was written by D. H. Lawrence, was banned by the British censorship authorities. There was a public judicial hearing into whether ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover’ should be banned.

Senator Greenwood:

– It was a trial.

Senator MCCLELLAND:

– All right, a trial.

Consideration interrupted.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Dame Ivy Wedgwood:

– Order! In conformity with the order of the Senate relating to the adjournment of sittings on Friday, I shall now leave the Chair and report to the Senate. (The Temporary Chairman having reported accordingly) -

page 832

ADJOURNMENT

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Drake-Brockman) - Order! In conformity with the order of the Senate relating to the adjournment of sittings on Friday, I formally put the question:

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 4.31 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 12 September 1969, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1969/19690912_senate_26_s42/>.