House of Representatives
30 May 1940

15th Parliament · 2nd Session

  1. House of Representatives
  2. 15th Parliament
  3. 1940

Mr. Speaker (Hon. G.J Bell) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 1558

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Mr. LANE presented a petition from, certain old-age pensioners and other citizens of the Commonwealth, praying that immediate consideration be given to the question of increasing the present rate of pension from One pound per week to One pound ten shillings per week.

Petition received and read.

page 1558

QUESTION

NEW GUINEA

Censorship

Mr GREEN:
KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– As there is a general desire on the part of the people of New Guinea that where censorship is deemed desirable in respect of letters from Australia, censorship should be exercised in Australia before the letters are despatched from the Commonwealth, will the Minister see if their request can he complied with?

Mr STREET:
Minister for Defence · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · UAP

– I shall give consideration to the honorable member’s request.

page 1558

QUESTION

WAR-TIME COMPANY TAX

Mr SCHOLFIELD:
WANNON, VICTORIA

– Is it the intention of the Government to proceed with the War-time (Company) Tax Assessment Bill during these sittings?

Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · WARRINGAH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– As I indicated yesterday, numbers of suggestions, some of them of great value, have been received, and, in order that they may be fully considered, the Government intends to postpone further consideration of the bill until the next sittings of the Parliament.

page 1558

QUESTION

ELECTRIC CABLE

Sir EARLE PAGE:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Minis ter for Supply and Development arrange that electricity undertakings, such as the Clarence County Council, may obtain sufficient cable and other materials to enable them to carry out their undertakings, and maintain services? Some of them are experiencing difficulty in obtaining supplies owing to the fact that the Defence Department has commandeered all stocks.

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:
Minister for Social Services · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– I have no personal knowledge of any representations havingbeen made to my department on the subject mentioned, but I shall have inquiries made with a view to seeing if the proposal of the right honorable gentleman can he met.

page 1559

QUESTION

WOOL APPRAISEMENT CENTRES

Mr PROWSE:
FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Can the Minister for

Commerce say whether he hasbeen correctly reported in the minutes of a deputation which he received in Melbourne on the 3rd April from a committee of the Australian Wool-growers Federation, in which it is stated that, in reply to a question asking whether appraisement centres would be established at Townsville, Gerald ton and Albany, the Minister gave a definite promise that the request would be granted? I ask the Minister if he did make that, promise?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
Minister for Commerce · BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · CP

– No such promise was made by me, butI did say that consideration would he given to the matter.

Mr McHUGH:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Some time ago, the Minister for Commerce promised to review the wool appraisement scheme, and as not many weeks will elapse before shearing commences, is he in a position to make an announcement on behalf of the Government?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:

– Not at the moment. While Parliament is sitting I cannot give to this matter the attention that it requires.

Mr MARTENS:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

– A day or two ago I. handed to the Minister for Commerce a newspaper cutting relating to a promise by the Minister that a. wool appraisement centre would be established at Townsville. Is it a fact that the Minister gave such a promise?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:

– No promise was given to establish a wool appraisement centre at Townsville, Albany, or any other place.

page 1559

QUESTION

SUPPLY OF AIRCRAFT

Mr BEASLEY:
WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Minister for Air say whether the circumstances have changed in any way in relation to the order given by the Australian

Government for 49 Lockheed Hudson aircraft from the United States of America for use in the training of Australian airmen in connexion with the Empire air training scheme? If changed circumstances will result in the nondelivery of these aircraft in Australia, what steps does the Government propose to take to meet the deficiency?

Mr FAIRBAIRN:
Minister for Air · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · UAP

– The 49 Lockheed Hudson aircraft, which were ordered from the United States of America for delivery later this year, were not training aircraft, but operational aircraft. In considering ways by which the greatest assistance could be given to the United Kingdom to combat the German air power, the War Cabinet agreed to make these 49 aircraft available to the United Kingdom Government. Ways by which they can be replaced as rapidly as possible are being considered.

page 1559

QUESTION

OFFER OF AMBULANCES

Mr HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the attention of the Minister for the Army been drawn to an article in the Sydney Sun of the 26th May, in which it was reported that twelve women in New South Wales had offered to supply ambulances, at a cost of £400a unit, To the forces, provided that they were permitted to drive them? As some of these women have had experience in driving, having driven ambulances daring the last war, and are’ prepared to act in an honorary capacity, will the Minister give consideration to their request, with the object of utilizing their services?

Mr STREET:
UAP

– I have not seen the statement to which the honorable member has referred, but I shall read it in order that I may be able to supply a definite answer to his question. I warn him, however, that it would be unwise to he too optimistic as to the reply that may be given,

page 1559

QUESTION

TECHNICAL TRAINING

Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1936

– Does the Government intend to make any contribution to the State Governments for the erection, extension or improvement of their technical training schools? If so, what States are to receive such benefits, and how much money is to be allocated to each State?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– On Saturday last, Ministers of Education from the various States, with their technical officers, met me in conference. It was decided to obtain precise information as to the number of trained men required for the total war effort of Australia as at present envisaged, and that there should be an immediate reviewby the technical officers of the States, working in conjunction with a Commonwealth co-ordinating officer, of the facilities providedby the various technical schools. These officers are also to make recommendations as to where additional buildings are considered essential, and what additional equipment is necessary to carry out the plan. Until those recommendations come to hand, I cannot give, a definite answer to the honorable member’s question.

page 1560

QUESTION

NETHERLANDS EAST INDIES

Mr JENNINGS:
WATSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the attention of the Minister for External Affairs been drawn to a cabled statementby the Japanese Foreign Office’s spokesman, Mr. Suma, that his Government felt that it was strange that no information hadbeen received of Australia’s attitude towards the Netherlands East Indies? Does the Commonwealth Government intend to communicate direct with the Japanese Government on this matter, or through the Japanese Consul-Geueral in Australia, Mr. Akiyama? Can the Minister furnish any further information about the statusquo of the Netherlands East Indies ?

Mr McEWEN:
Minister for External Affairs · INDI, VICTORIA · CP; LCL from 1940; CP from 1943

– Some days ago, I made a statement in this House, setting out the attitude of the Commonwealth Government towards the Netherlands East Indies. At a personal interview with the Japanese Consul-General, I handed to him a copy of the words which I had used in this House in setting out the Government’s policy and attitude, andwe exchanged assurances on behalf of our respective governments. It is not the practice, nor is it the present intention of the Commonwealth Government, to ignore the Japanese Consul-General and communicate direct with his Government. I have no doubt that the ConsulGeneral for Japan will, in due course, communicate to his Government the policy of Australia in this connexion, as well as the exchanges that took place.

page 1560

QUESTION

TASMANIAN MAGNESIUM

Mr MAHONEY:
DENISON, TASMANIA

– Has the Minister for Commerce yet received any advice from the Australian High Commissioner in London concerning the procuring of supplies of magnesium from Tasmaniaby Great Britain? If such supplies are required, will the honorable gentleman favorably consider the granting of assistance to this Tasmanian industry?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– The Tasmanian magnesium industry has received a great deal of considerationby the Department of Commerce. There is, at present, no obstacle in the way of the industry being established in Tasmania. I have certain information on the subject in my office to which the honorable member may have access if he so desires.

page 1560

AIRCRAFT PRODUCTION

Ministerial Statement

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:
Minister for Supply and Development · Parramatta · UAP

– by leave - In accordance with the undertaking I gave honorable members last week, I propose to review the progress made in regard to aircraft production. As honorable members will recall, when I made my last statement in November, our commitments were principally in respect of the Royal Australian Air Force, then mobilized and in process of expansion under pre-existing war plans. We were also involved in the proposed construction of Bristol Beaufort aircraft for the Governments of the United Kingdom and Australiaunder the scheme recommended by the United Kingdom air mission to Australia in March, 1939.

Even under peace conditions, this scheme was regarded as presenting many difficulties and calling for the development within Australia of an entirely new engineering technique. Under war conditions, of course, the problem had become very much greater, as we were dependent on the importation of vast quantities of jigs, tools, equipment and materials from abroad. I shall, however, deal with this matter in more detail presently.

The Empire air training scheme was, at that time, the’ subject of negotiations by the various governments concerned.

The subsequent decision of the Commonwealth Government to recruit and train 30,000 flying personnel and 27,000 ground staff for the Empire air training scheme has involved an extensive revision, on an upward scale, of our production plans.

Before entering into the details of the amended programme, I must refer to an administrative measure directed towards the unification or control of all sections of aircraft production. This was the establishment of the Aircraft Production Commission, which is responsible to the Minister for Supply and Development. Before this body was formed, some aircraft were in production under orders placed by the Air Board, others were under contracts placed by my own department, and still others under the direct control of the general manager of Aircraft Construction, whilst accessories were being obtained from various sources by the Contract Board.

Control and supervision of all present and future production has now been vested in the commission, the personnel of which is -

Full-time members -

Mr. H. W. Clapp, general managerof Aircraft Construction (chairman).

Mr. F. J. Shea, chief engineer (member).

Mr. John Storey, formerly director of manufacturing, General Motors-Holdens Limited (member).

Part-time associate members -

Mr. R. Lawson, member of the Air Board.

Mr.E. R. Mitchell, chartered accountant, of Sydney.

Mr. A. V. Smith, chairman of the Contract Board.

Honorable members who are acquainted with the gentlemen I have named, and with their experience in their respective spheres, will agree that a well-balanced, competent and highly qualified body, of reasonable proportions, has been appointed to carry through the task allotted to it. The operations are, in fact, being carried out in a highly efficient manner by able and experienced business men.

The Government does not underestimate the difficulties that will have to be surmounted in completing its very ambitious aircraft production programme, which, with other defence activities, constitutes an effort unparalleled in the history of this country.

There are two elements in our air defence scheme which are worthy of note. They are: First, the amendment of the American Neutrality Act, which, by permitting our importation of a large number of Lockheed-Hudson bombers, has placed the Royal Australian Air Force in a better position in regard to first-line aircraft than we ever had reason to anticipate would be possible; and, secondly, the initiation of the Empire air training scheme, which will not merely very considerably increase the number of service aircraft in Australia, well fitted for purposes of local defence, but will also call for the early production of a large number of elementary and intermediate training types.

The Empire air training scheme requires the manufacture of not less than 425 air-frames for Tiger Moth elementary trainers. This contract has been placed with the De Havilland Aircraft ProprietaryLim i ted, of Mascot, New South Wales. Good progress is being made by this company with the construction of these aircraft. Deliveries of completed machines will commence this month, and will reach 25 during July. Thereafter 35 machines will be delivered each month.

Tiger Moth aircraft are equipped with Gipsy Major engines, and it was decided that these engines should also be produced in Australia. Consequently an order was placed with General MotorsHoldens Limited for the construction of 500 of them. The work is well advanced and deliveries will commence in July, and will reach 40 engines a month in August, and thereafter.

In order to provide the necessary engines for the first batch of Tiger Moth aircraft, and to guard against any possibility of delay in local manufacture, arrangements were made for the importation of 200 engines from Great Britain. Nearly one-half of that order is nonavailable in Australia. One hundred complete Tiger Moths are also being obtained from England, of which number approximately one-half has been delivered.

Another phase of the Empire air training scheme is the proposed use of Wirraway aircraft for intermediate training. Orders for these machines have been increased to a total of 575. Honorable members will recall that three years ago a contract was made with the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation for 132 Wirraways for use in our home defence squadrons. The first machine under the contract was delivered less than twelve months ago, and 75 others have since been delivered.

At the outbreak of the war arrangements were made for speeding up Wirraway production. The success of this effort is revealed by the fact that before the end of this year an additional 190 aircraft will have been delivered. Two full twelve-hour shifts are being worked in the engine shop, and extra afternoon shifts in the airframe shop. Under this arrangement it will be possible to secure an evenly balanced output of airframes and engines. As in all of our munitions establishments, the factors limiting the speeding up of production are the shortage of machine tools and the shortage of skilled workers. I have explained elsewhere the steps which the Government is taking to overcome these shortages.

In addition to the large building programmes I have indicated, servicing requirements call for a comprehensive programme to manufacture spare parts for airframes and engines and engine renewals and replacements. Large quantities of materials have, of course, to be obtained from abroad, but the policy of developing the local manufacture of parts has been progressively undertaken, and these machines now include a substantial and increasing content of locally-produced materials.

Attention has also been given to the manufacture in Australia of the latest types of airscrews. A factory has been established in Sydney by the De. Havilland Aircraft Proprietary Limited to carry out, on behalf of the Government, the construction of constant speed airscrews, including the manufacture of airscrews for Wirraway aircraft.

  1. very important feature of our aircraft production activities is the establishment at Lidcombe, New South Wales, of a factory for the manufacture of twinrow Wasp engines. The construction of this factory has been entrusted to the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation and the work is being carried out under the <9i> Frederick Stewart. supervision of the Aircraft Production Commission. This, in itself, is a very big undertaking, involving the production of high-powered aero engines and the establishment of a new Australian industry to provide for future aircraft engine requirements. Urgent steps are being taken to erect the factory, and the building will be completed before the end of the year. Equipment will be installed during January and output of engines will commence in April or May of next year. Criticism of what is alleged to be delay in the building of this factory entirely disregards the necessity to await the return of the technicians sent ito America to study appropriate lay-out and arrangement.

A brief resume of current progress of the Beaufort scheme will be of interest. A modern aircraft store has been erected at Spotswood, Victoria, and delivery into this store has been almost completed of ton sets of fabricated components and ten sets of unfabricated components, from which will be assembled the initial airframes. The preparation of the aircraft area workshops at Chullora, New South Wales ; Newport, Victoria; and Islington, South Australia, has been completed. These workshops will undertake the subassembly of the front fuselage, rear fuselage and mainplanes, respectively. Plant and equipment, including jigs, are being supplied to these three shops, and delivery and installation should be completed at an early date.

The main assembly workshop at Mascot, New South Wales, will be completed in June. The workshop at Fisherman’s Bend has been completed.

While these works have been proceeding, S4 specially selected engineers and technicians were despatched overseas for training at the works of the Bristol Aeroplane Company. The whole of these men have now returned, and are engaged upon activities associated with the particular portion of the work which they were sent abroad to investigate. This, I think, deals with the specific allegation made the other day by the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasely) that these men “ were walking about doing nothing “.

Mr Beasley:

– They are walking about !

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:

– If the honorable member so wishes, I shall be pleased to ask the commission to permit him to make a personal inspection to verify my assertion that these men are, in fact, very actively engaged on their particular portion of the work.

Mr Beasley:

– I should like to do so. 1 know some of the men personally and they are simply walking about.

Sir FREDERICK STEWART.Then I take it that the honorable member accepts my invitation. He also complained that no use had been made of the stores organization of the New South Wales railways. The store organization of the Beaufort scheme has been prepared, and is operated by, the Controller of Stores of the Victorian Railways, a highly experienced and competent officer, who is carrying out his duties with proper regard for the necessity of decentralization.

Mr Beasley:

– That is not correct.

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:

– Again, as to ball races and other machinery lying about, on the floor subject to deterioration through rust, &c, 1 suggest to the honorable member that what his informant saw was a quantity of machine tools and other production equipment, delivered in the shop and unpacked, awaiting assembly, which, as 1 have indicated, will be completed next month.

Mr Beasley:

– My information comes right from the source.

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:

– The organization and planning of the physical facilities necessary for the manufacture of Beaufort aircraft in Australia have been, and are continuously being, advanced to a stage where the production of large bombing aircraft here will be positively established. Honorable members will, of course, realize that I have explained the position as it stands at present. Developments overseas may bring about substantial modifications in this particular scheme,- and the matter is now the subject of discussions between the Governments of the Commonwealth and the United Kingdom. However that may be, I can assure honorable members that the scheme is operating up to schedule, and. subject to any interference resulting from the trend of events in

France, will result in the establishment of an industry on a basis of performance which, so far from meriting criticism, will reflect the greatest credit on the Australian workers and their controllers.

page 1563

QUESTION

TRADE UNION PANEL

Mr SHEEHAN:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Prime Minister a statement to make regarding the conference which he held with representatives of industrial unions for the purpose of forming a national industrial panel to operate during the war?

Mr MENZIES:
Minister for Defence Co-ordination · KOOYONG, VICTORIA · UAP

– I had some discussion on the subject yesterday, and I shall have more to-day. So soon as I can make a statement, I shall do so.

page 1563

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– So that honorable members may be able to make their arrangements for the future, I desire to inform them regarding the Government’s proposals for the business before the House. If. they look at the notice-paper to-day, they will see a list of measures, No. 1 to No. 17, some of which will not require much debate. Items 1 to 10, inclusive, have financial implications, or are more or less urgent, and the Government particularly desires that they should be dealt with.

Mr Forde:

– Is it proposed to deal with the War-time. (Company) Tax Assessment Bill?

Mr MENZIES:

– It will not be taken at this stage. Various suggestions have been made in regard to it which merit careful consideration, and that consideration is being given to them. I do not expect that anything on the notice-paper will need to occupy the attention of the House, if it concentrates on its work, beyond to-morrow evening.

Mr Anthony:

– Is the Prime Minister referring to the first ten items only?

Mr MENZIES:

– To them, and to one or two others, also. For instance, the Minister for Commerce (Mr. Archie Cameron) will introduce two bills relating to rabbit skins. I ask the House to try to get through this business by to-morrow night. That will involve sitting very late to-night. As to the future, it is proposed to call Parliament together again in the first week of July - subject to any circumstance which might demand its being called together earlier.

Mr Gander:

– Does the Prime Minister mean July, 1940, or July, 1941?

Mr MENZIES:

– I mean July of this year. The honorable member will probably have not the slightest interest in what this Parliament does in July, 1941.

page 1564

QUESTION

WAR IN EUROPE

British ForcesinFlanders.

Mr THOMPSON:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Minister for External Affairs received any recent information regarding the position of the British Army in Flanders?

Mr McEWEN:
Minister for External Affairs · INDI, VICTORIA · CP

– The information in possession of the Government does not permit me to give an exact account of the fighting in northern France and Flanders, other than to say that there is a continuation of bitter and desperate fighting inthatareaandthattheBritishand French armies are continuing to fight a magnificent rearguard action under the most intense artillery and air bombardment. The Government has received advice that the morale and fighting spirit of those armies is entirely unimpaired, and that they are withdrawing in an orderly manner towards the coast. I am able to inform honorable members that a considerable proportion of the British Expeditionary Force has already embarked successfully. Advice received by the Governmentis to the effect that, with thepowerful aid of the Royal Navy and the magnificent assistance of the Royal Air Force, it is hoped and expected that as great a degree of success as may be anticipated, having regard to all ofthe circumstances, will attach to this operation ; that the solidarity of the British and the French is absolute; that the magnificent resistance of both armies in this pocket of northern France and Flanders and the unrivalled courage and implacable determination of the men are helping to hold in that areasuch vast German armies as to make possible the complete consolidation of the French lines in the south. In this respect, the resistance of these men is contributing tremendously to the further conduct of the war and the capacity of the French to establish an effective defensive line in the south. It should never be thought that the losing of one battle is to be regarded as the losing of the war. I take this opportunity to point out that the Royal Navy is still entirely intact; and that, man for man, the courage and fighting qualities of the British, French and Belgian soldiers are incomparably superior to those of their opposite members in the enemy ranks. The results of the combats and engagements that have taken place between the Royal Air Force and the enemy air force have shown that there is an unquestionable superiority of the British pilots over the German pilots, and unquestionable superiority of the British machines over the German machines. Our inferiority is only in respect of numbers. I think that I may tell honorable members that the cables, which arrive with great frequency, giving to the Government details of these operations, informed us yesterday afternoon, accounting for the latest operations in the air, that 47 German aeroplanes had been brought down by the Royal Air Force - this was unquestionably confirmed - and that a further 27 aeroplanes were believed to have been brought down, but, this was not confirmed. Against that, the British losses were fourteen aeroplanes. That, I think, speaks for itself as indicating the incomparable superiority, man for man and machine for machine, of the Royal Air Force over the German Air Force. The results of all of these operations might well lead us to the conclusion that, by maintaining our courage and our faith, and by utilizing our resources to the full, we can look forward with confidence to ultimate victory in this conflict.

page 1564

QUESTION

RECREATION IN MILITARY CAMPS

Mr JOHN LAWSON:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– In order that properly organized recreation may be provided for the men in all military camps throughout, Australia, will the Minister for the Army consider the appointment in those camps of welfare officers who are thoroughly qualified to undertake the organization ofsuch recreation?

Mr STREET:
UAP

– Yes. In many camps this is already being done. The matter of its extension to a larger number of camps is at present under consideration, and as soon as a decision is reached, I shall advise the honorable member.

page 1565

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN IMPERIAL FORCE

simplifiedpowerofattorneyfor Recruits.

Mr ANTHONY:

– Very many members of the community are anxious to enlist in the Australian Imperial Force, but are precluded from doing so by reason of their responsibilities as owners of properties or executors of estates because of the difficulty of making arrangements under a simplified power of attorney to have their interests watched during their absence. Will the Attorney-General consider the preparation of a simple form of power of attorney similar to the form of soldier’s will that is now being executed by those who enlist, so that such persons may not be prevented from enlisting on account of the difficulty I have mentioned ?

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP

– I shall be very glad to do that without delay.

page 1565

QUESTION

No. 2 WHEAT POOL

Mr SCULLY:
GWYDIR, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Minister for Commerce indicate when a further advance is likely to be made to wheat farmers under the No. 2 wheat pool?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– At this stage I am not able to indicate when this advance is likely to be made.

page 1565

PRINTING COMMITTEE

First report brought up by Mr. Stacey, read by the Clerk, and - by leave - agreed to.

page 1565

QUESTION

AIRCRAFT MANUFACTURE

Mr BLAIN:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

– Will the Minister for Supply and Development state whether the Wasp engine alone is to be produced at the factory at Lidcombe, or whether the component parts of the plane also will be made and assembled there?

Sir FREDERICK STEWART:
UAP

– I thought that I had made it clear in my statement that the factory at Lidcombe will be used exclusively for the production of engines for the Beaufort machines. The air frames will be assembled in Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide, where they will be fitted with the engines to be produced at the Lidcombe factory.

page 1565

QUESTION

NAVAL CONSTRUCTION

Mr HARRISON:

– In view of the urgency of building defence vessels, now under construction at Cockatoo Island Dockyard, has the Minister for the Navy made arrangements for week-end shifts to be worked?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– Every measure possible to speed up production is taken.

page 1565

QUESTION

JUBILEE COLLIERY

Mr SPURR:
WILMOT, TASMANIA

– I ask the Prime Minister whether, in view of the assurances given by the Coal Miners Federation that it will abide by arbitration awards during the war, and in view of the fact that there is a grave possibility of serious industrial trouble occurring at the Jubilee Colliery, Tasmania, because the owners are not abiding by the award, will the Government issue regulations to compel those owners to abide by the award ?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I understand that that question was put to ray colleague, the Attorney-General.

Mr Spurr:

– But he could not answer it.

Mr MENZIES:

– I will refer the matter to my colleague, who is Minister for Industry.

page 1565

QUESTION

IRON ORE RESOURCES

Mr NAIRN:
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Is the report of the. Government Geologist on the iron resources of Australia, which is referred to in the report of the Printing Committee. his complete report? If not, can the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior tell the House when that complete report is likely to be available for release?

Mr NOCK:
Minister without portfolio assisting the Minister for the Interior · RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– I shall have inquiries made.

page 1565

QUESTION

SECRET SESSION OF PARLIAMENT

Mr ROSEVEAR:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the wide divergence between the implications contained in questions asked of Ministers about supply and defence preparedness in Australia, and the replies which Ministers consider it prudent to give, will the Prime Minister consider the possibility of holding a secret session of this Parliament in order that there might be a frank discussion between the Opposition and the Government as to whether supply and defence preparations are all that they ought to be?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– If I had not considerable experience of public affairs, I might think that a secret session would be secret, but, as it is, I take leave to he rather sceptical. Subject to that, I shall give consideration to the suggestion.

page 1566

QUESTION

SHIPBUILDING

Mr FRANCIS:
MORETON, QUEENSLAND

– In view of the need to maintain supplies of food to Great Britain, and the desire of the Australian primary producers to sell their products to Great Britain, I ask the Prime Minister whether Cabinet has yet completed consideration of the Townsend report on shipbuilding?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– The question of shipbuilding has engaged the attention of the Cabinet, which has had a close and detailed discussion of certain matters. As the result of that discussion, it was decided that, the subject needed further investigation. That matter is set down for early consideration and decision nest week, when Cabinet is meeting.

Later:

Mr WARD:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– When does the Prime Minister expect that the Government will reach a. decision in connexion with the Townsend report on shipbuilding, and when may honorable members expect to have copies of the report made available to them?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– The Government will arrive at its decision as soon as possible, and that will be as soon as it can devote the necessary concentrated attention to the subject to make a decision.

page 1566

QUESTION

SALAMAUA-WAU ROAD

Mr GREEN:

– As I understand that the Attorney-General is the Minister who is dealing with the matter, I ask the right honorable gentleman when the contract for the building of the SalamauaWan road is likely to be let? I. have been asking questions about this matter for two years. I have had a letter from the office of the Administrator of New Guinea saying that the contract was to be let a month ago.

Mr HUGHES:
UAP

– My information is that the contract has not yet been let, but, as I explained to the honorable gentleman, there is a very difficult section and that section has not yet been completely covered ; of course calling for tenders is subject to circumstances that may effect even our own attendance in this place.

page 1566

QUESTION

SHEEPSKINS

Mr SCHOLFIELD:

– I ask the Minister for Commerce what are the intentions of the Government regarding the export of sheepskins?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– The question of the export of sheepskins has been cleared up to the satisfaction of the Government. I had hoped to be able to make a statement. If it can be got ready in time for me to make it tomorrow, I shall make it. but, if not, it will be circulated to honorable members.

page 1566

NATIONAL SECURITY BILL 1940

Motion (by Mr. Menzies) - by leave - agreed to -

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to repeal and re-enact section 17 of, and to insert a new section 13a in, the National Security Act 1939.

page 1566

QUESTION

NEXT SEASON’S WHEAT

Mr THOMPSON:

– Will the Minister for Commerce say whether plans are being made in conjunction with the Ministers for Agriculture in the States of the handling, storage and financing of next season’s wheat harvest? If so, can the Minister indicate the character of those plans, and whether it is probable that a report, on the position covering that harvest will be made to Parliament when Parliament resumes in July?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– That subject will be a matter for discussion between the Commonwealth Government and the State Governments. Whether I shall be able to give full details to the House in July, I do not. know. But they will not be held back a day longer than is necessary.

page 1567

NEW AND OPPOSED BUSINESS AFTER 11 P.M

Motion (by Mr. Menzies) - by leave - proposed -

That Standing Order No. 70 - eleven o’clock rule - be suspended for this sitting.

Mr BEASLEY:
Leader of the Australian Labour party - non.Communist · “West Sydney

– A few moments ago the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) indicated to the House that it was his intention to ask Parliament to consider the first ten items on the notice-paper. Yet, immediately afterwards, he obtained leave to introduce another bill to amend the National Security Act.

Mr Menzies:

– If the National Security Bill is in the slightest way contentious, I shall not take up any time with it.

Mr BEASLEY:

– The House does not know whether it is contentious or not.

Mr Menzies:

– But it will know.

Mr BEASLEY:

– We should return next week and do the business properly. I.t is wrong to rush measures through at the tail end of the session, because Parliament is not gi ven the time to give proper consideration to them. Early morning is not the time to consider such important measures as a bill to amend the National Security Act. The House will probably agree to the suspension of the eleven o’clock rule, but it should object to more bills being added to the already overcrowded list.

Motion agreed to.

page 1567

QUESTION

HERMANNSBURG MISSION

Mr BLAIN:

– I ask the AttorneyGeneral whether any arrangements have been made for German missionaries in Central Australia to take the oath of allegiance, and, if not, whether he proposes to intern those people?

Mr HUGHES:
UAP

– The Government is making a close investigation of this matter. I know the man to whom the honorable gentleman particularly refers. The honorable member may rest assured that all steps are being taken to safeguard the interests of the Commonwealth and to deal with the gentleman referred to.

page 1567

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Homes fob Workers.

Mr WARD:

– Some time ago I brought under the notice of the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior the deplorable housing conditions of workers in the Northern Territory, and was, advised that the matter was receiving consideration with a view to improvements being effected. I desire to know how far the inquiries have proceeded, and when we are likely to know the intentions of the Government?

Mr NOCK:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– I cannot give the information asked for offhand, but I shall refer the honorable gentleman’s question to the Minister for the Interior who will furnish him with an answer.

page 1567

QUESTION

COUNTRY PARTY MINISTERS

Mr McHUGH:

– Will the Minister for ‘Commerce say whether he and his colleagues of the Country party intend to withdraw from the Government in the event of the Government proceeding’ with the bill for the manufacture of motor engines and chassis in Australia?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– When I require the advice of the honorable gentleman, I shall ask for it.

page 1567

QUESTION

REFUGEE CHILDREN FROM WAR AREAS

Mr ANTHONY:

– In view of the great public interest being displayed in the proposal to bring refugee children to Australia as a means of assisting to meet, the problems which the British Government is facing, will the Government consider the advisability of asking the Government of the United States of America to allow such refugee orphaned children to be brought from Europe to Australia in American vessels?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– The Government communicated with the British Government in relation to this matter yesterday, but so far no reply has been received.

page 1567

QUESTION

PURCHASE OF SHIPPING

Mr FORDE:

– In view of the difficulties associated with the shipping of Australia’s primary products overseas, can the Prime Minister say whether the Government has taken into consideration the advisability of purchasing ships, with a view to establishing a Commonwealth Government line of steamers, as was done during the last war?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– The question of purchasing ships has been under consideration by the Government.

page 1568

QUESTION

JEWISH: REFUGEE SETTLEMENT

Mr GREEN:

– - About three weeks ago I asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior a question relating to the owners of the land in the Kimberleys with whom the Jewish Settlement Committee was negotiating, particulars of the land referred to, and the prices asked for it, and the Minister promised that he would get the information. Is the information yet available?

Mr NOCK:
CP

– The matter has not yet been considered, by Cabinet. No negotiations have yet taken place.

page 1568

QUESTION

IMPORTS OF TOBACCO

Mr THOMPSON:

– Last week I asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs if an assurance could be given that no import licences would be issued for the importation of American tobacco until a statement in relation to tobacco, particularly the stocks in the Commonwealth, was made to this House. I have not yet received a reply. I desire to know whether I. can expect a reply before the House rises to-morrow? If not, will the Minister give an assurance that no such licences will be issued until a statement is made in this House on the subject?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– If no reply has yet been forwarded to the honorable member, I regret the oversight. I shall discuss the matter with my colleague and see that the honorable member is given a reply to-day.

page 1568

QUESTION

WOLFRAM

Mr BLAIN:

– Will the Minister for Commerce make inquiries from the District Officer at Alice Springs as to the reasons why the Wauchope wolfram field is not working, and will he make arrangements whereby that field may come into full production at the earliest possible moment?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– I have no power to re-open any wolfram fields. The Department of Commerce deals with the export of commodities and prices therefor.

page 1568

QUESTION

POSTAL DEPARTMENT

Pay of Men on Guard Duty.

Mr WARD:

– Is it a fact that men employed upon guard duty at the General Post Office, Sydney, are paid £7 10s. 3d. a fortnight, plus family endowment if married, and £7 5s. a fortnight, if single, for a week of 48 hours, and, if so, will the Postmaster-General give consideration to the granting of an increase of pay which will take into account the monotony and importance of the work?

Mr THORBY:
Minister for Health · CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP

– All post offices are carefully guarded. As to the remainder of the honorable member’s question, I ask that he will place it on the noticepaper.

page 1568

QUESTION

TENNANT CREEK GOLD-FIELD!

Mr BLAIN:

– Will the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior obtain, from the department information as to when the people of Tennant Creek may expect the new gold-mining battery to he ready for treatment of the valuable ore in the vicinity?

Mr NOCK:
CP

– I shall have the matter investigated, and supply an answer to the honorable member.

page 1568

QUESTION

MILITIA

Compensation to Parents of Deceased Militiaman

Mr MULCAHY:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Last week, I brought under the notice of the Minister for the Army the case of a militiaman who was killed at the Liverpool camp, and asked whether compensation would be paid to his parents. The Minister promised to. make inquiries. Has a decision yet been arrived at?

Mr STREET:
UAP

– I am not sure whether the inquiries into the case mentioned are complete, but if the honorable member will see me later, I shall supply him with an answer.

page 1569

INDUSTRIAL INSPECTORS

Mr.MAKIN. - Can the AttorneyGeneral tell the House when he expects to make further appointments of inspectors under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act?

Mr HUGHES:
UAP

– Some progress has been made, but it has been slow. The assistance which was promised with so much enthusiasm by the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Holloway) has not been forthcoming. I hope to arrive at a. decision soon, but not before the close of these sittings.

page 1569

COAL STRIKE

Victimization

Mr JAMES:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– When the coal strike was settled, it was agreed that there was to be no victimization of the men who had participated in it, but Mr. M. W. Miller, a coal-owner in the Rothbury estate, has refused to take back men who made common cause with the Miners Federation.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The honorable member must ask his question without making allegations.

Mr JAMES:

– Will the Prime Minister, under the powers conferred by the National Security Act, compel Mr. Miller to meet with representatives of the Miners Federation for the purpose of trying to rectify the existing trouble, which is a breach of the arrangement entered into when the coal strike was settled? Mr. Miller has refused to negotiate with the leaders of the Miners Federation.

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I have no knowledge of the facts referred to by the honorable gentleman, but I think that my colleague, the Minister for Industry, has. I shall discuss the matter with him.

page 1569

QUESTION

SEMI-GOVERNMENTAL BORROWING

Mr POLLARD:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

– Can the Treasurer say on what grounds the Government granted authority to the Perth City Council to float a loan of £75,000, and on what grounds it refused authority to the Ballarat City Council to raise a loan of £50,000? Will he lay on the table of the House the files containing the applications, and the reasons for the decisions arrived at?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– Each case was dealt with on its merits. I am not prepared to lay the files on the table.

page 1569

QUESTION

REPATRIATION

Merchant Service Marine - Education Allowance

Mr HOLLOWAY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

– Can the Minister for Commerce say whether the amending Repatriation Bill, covering members of the merchant service marine, will be brought before Parliament during these sittings ?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– The bill will not be introduced during these present sittings, but I can inform the honorable member that, so far, no cases which would come under it have arisen. Should any occur during the recess, they will be dealt with by regulation.

Mr WARD:

– Is it a fact that the Repatriation Department is stopping payment of the education allowance in the case of youths who enter camp for military training, and, if so, how many such cases are there? Will the Minister also say what amount would be involved in the continuance of the allowance in such cases, and whether the Government approves of the policy which is now being carried out by the department?

Mr STREET:
UAP

– Obviously I cannot be expected to know the number of cases, or the amount of money involved. I pointed out in replying to a similar question this week, that an allowance for education purposes made to certain young men was payable while they continued to receive their education. That education cannot be said to continue when the men are in a militia training camp. Consequently, the allowance is not payable for such periods.

page 1569

QUESTION

GRAVING DOCK

Mr FORDE:

– Is the Minister for the Navy in a position to say when the Government intends to begin work on the graving dock near Potts Point, Sydney ?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– I am not.

page 1569

QUESTION

LOAN SUBSCRIPTIONS FROM TRADING BANKS

Mr DEDMAN:
CORIO, VICTORIA

– Has the attention of the Treasurer been drawn to a statement in this morning’s press that the

Bank of New South “Wales has contributed £4,500,000 to Commonwealth loans since the outbreak of the war? If this is so, can the Treasurer give any reason why the House should not be informed of the total amounts subscribed to Commonwealth loans by other private banks since the war began?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– I have not seen the report referred to. In reply to the second part of the question, I have nothing to add to what I have already said on the subject?

page 1570

QUESTION

LORD HOWE ISLAND SHIPPINGSERVICE

Mr WARD:

– What stage has the Government reached in its promised inquiries concerning the improvement of the Lord Howe Island shipping service? When is a decision likely to be made on the subject?

Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP

– I have not received any complaints concerning that shipping service. If the honorable member desires to make representations to me on the subject I shall consider them.

Mr Ward:

– I have communicated with the department.

Later:

Mr WARD:

– I ask the Prime Minister whether it is a fact that for a considerable period complaints have been received from Lord Howe Island concerning the island shipping service and asking for an improvement of it? Is it not a fact that I have received replies to my communications to the Government on the subject, stating that the matter was receiving attention? When may I expect that a decision will be made in regard to this matter?

Mr MENZIES:
UAP

– I regret that I have no personal knowledge of this matter. If letters have been directed to me I do not happen to have seen them, as I do not deal with the matter personally. I shall have inquiries made and hope to be in a position to give the honorable member an answer to his question tomorrow.

page 1570

QUESTION

ASSISTANT PUBLIC SERVICE ARBITRATOR

Mr BEASLEY:

– Is the AttorneyGeneral able to say whether an assistant to the Public Service Arbitrator has yet been appointed?

Mr HUGHES:
UAP

– The necessary arrangements have been made, and a suitable man has been selected. I hope to be able to announce the appointment in a few days.

page 1570

QUESTION

COTTON BOUNTY

Mr FORDE:

– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs whether the Government has yet determined the details of the legislation it intends to introduce to provide a bounty for cotton-growers? Will the legislation be introduced during this period of the session?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– Consideration has been given to that subject, but the bill will not be brought down during these sittings.

page 1570

QUESTION

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Mr GANDER:

– In view of the fact that the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Beasley), the honorable member for Hunter (Mr. James)., and the honorable member for Barton (Mr. Lane) have presented petitions to this House recently, asking that the rate of invalid and old-age pensions should be increased to 30s. a week, I ask the Treasurer whether the Government intends to introduce legislation to comply with the requests made?

Mr SPENDER:
UAP

– It is not usual to deal with matters of government policy when answering questions.

page 1570

MOTOR VEHICLES AGREEMENT BILL (No. 2) 1940

Motion (by Mr. Menzies) proposed -

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to authorize the execution of an agreement between the Commonwealth and Australian Consolidated Industries Limited with respect to the manufacture of motor vehicles, and for other purposes.

No question or amendment shall be proposed which is the same in substance as any question which during the same session has been resolved in the affirmative or negative.

On the 3rd May the following motion by the Prime Minister was agreed to: -

That he. have leave to bring in a bill for an act to approve the execution of an agreement between the Commonwealth and Australian Consolidated Industries Limited with respect to the manufacture of motor vehicles, and for other purposes.

The motion which the right honorable gentleman has just moved differs from that of the 3rd May in only one word. It substitutes the word “ authorize “ for the word “ approve “. I now direct attention to Sir T. Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice, 10th edition, chapter 11, page 288, in which it is stated -

A mere alteration of the words of a question without any substantial change in its object will not be sufficient to evade this rule.

The rule referred to is that the same question or bill may not be twice offered in a session. I submit that the motion which the Prime Minister has just moved must be out of order until the motion agreed to on the 3rd May is rescinded.

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. G J. Bell).Action similar to this has been taken on a number of occasions. In this case, the point of order is based on the fact that the motion moved by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies) is almost identical with the terms of the title of the Motor Vehicles Agreement Bill already on the notice-paper. Although the difference lies only in one word, the significance of the actual change proposed is in my opinion important. In the circumstances, therefore, I rule that the motion is in order.

Motion agreed to.

page 1571

GOLD TAX COLLECTION BILL 1940

Motion (by Mr. Spender) agreed to -

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Gold Tax Collection Act 1939.

page 1571

INCOME TAX COLLECTION BILL 1940

Motion (by Mr. Spender) agreed to -

That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Income Tax Collection Act 1923-1938.

page 1571

TRADING WITH THE ENEMY BILL 1940

Second Reading

Mr HUGHES:
North SydneyAttorneyGeneral · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This is a short measure to amend the Trading with the Enemy Act 1939, in relation to the definition of “ enemy subject “. The present definition defines an “ enemy subject “ as any person or firm, trading with whom would be deemed to be trading with the enemy within the meaning of sub-section 2 of section 3 of the act. Power is also given to the Attorney-General to declare certain corporations to be “ enemy subjects “ for the purposes of the act. It is in respect of this power that it has been found that the definition needs amending. Before a corporation may be “ declared “, the Attorney-General must be of the opinion that it is, among other things, managed or controlled by or under the influence of persons resident or carrying on business in an enemy country. The expression “ enemy country “ is defined to mean any country with which His Majesty is for the time being at war. This means, in present circumstances, Germany. Germany is, however, in occupation of other countries. These occupied countries do not necessarily form part of the German Reich. The consequence is that there is at present no power to declare companies in German occupied territory to be enemy subjects for the purposes of the act, and the object of the amendment is to remedy this defect.

I may mention that the Patents, Trade Marks, Designs and Copyright (War Powers) Act adopts the definition of “ enemy subject “ contained in the Trading with the Enemy Act. Several applications have been received tinder the War Patents Act, and as these depend on the meaning of the expression “ enemy subject “ in certain sections of that act, it becomes of importance to make the proposed amendment if the benefits of the act are to be obtained.

This measure is essential to enable the Commonwealth to deal effectively with trading with the enemy. Reference to the bill will show that the definition of trading with the enemy is to be struck out of that principal act. Other references in that act to trading with the enemy are dealt with in such a way as to include not only trading with the enemy countrybut also trading with subjects of territories occupied by the enemy. Under the present act, the AttorneyGeneral can deal only with listed corporations. It is desirable and necessary to deal with corporations whether listed or not, and, in order to validate any action that has already been taken, it is proposed that this bill shallcome into force as from the date on which the principal act came into force. I commend the measure to the House, and, in the committee stage, I shall furnish any further information that is necessary.

Mr BLACKBURN:
Bourke

.- The Attorney-General (Mr. Hughes) did me the honour to show me the bill before it was introduced. It is, in my opinion, unobjectionable. However, it is desirable that other honorable members should have an opportunity to consider it. I ask leave to continue my remarks on a future occasion.

Leave granted : debate adjourned.

page 1572

PATENTS, TRADE MARKS, DESIGNS AND COPYRIGHT (WAR POWERS) BILL 1940

Second Reading

Mr HUGHES:
North SydneyAttorneyGeneral · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This short bill is of a formal character, and is necessitated by the proposed amendment of the definition of “enemy subject” in, and the proposed omission of the definition of “enemy country” from, the Trading with the Enemy Act, under the Trading with the Enemy Bill at present before the House. Section 3 of the Patents, Trade Marks, Designs and Copyright (War Powers) Act 1939, defines certain expressions by reference to the Trading with the Enemy Act 1939, and it is desirable that, if the bill to amend that act is passed, the reference should be to the act as amended. Clause 3 of this bill contains the necessary provision for this purpose. Section 11 of the Patents, Trade Marks, Designs and Copyright (War Powers) Act 1939 contains the expression “ enemy country within the meaning of the Trading with the Enemy Act 1939 “. If the definition of “ enemy country “ is omitted from the latter act, the cross references thereto in the former act will be ineffective. As it happens, a definition of “ enemy country “ is given in the Patents, Trade Marks, Designs and Copyright (War Powers) Act, so that the position will be met by omitting the cross reference to the Trading with the Enemy Act, and by relying on the definition of “enemy country” in the Patents, Trade Marks, Designs and Copyright (War Powers) Act.

Debate (on motion by Mr. Black - burn) adjourned.

page 1572

LOAN BILL 1940

Message recommending appropriation reported.

In committee (Consideration of the Governor-General’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Spender) agreed to -

That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue and moneys be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to authorize the raising and expending of a certain sum of money.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended and resolution adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Spender and Mr. Fadden do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Spender, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP

– I move -

Thatthe bill be read a second time.

Parliament has already authorized expenditure on defence and war services up to the 30th June, 1940. That provision was included in the amount of the annual appropriation of December, 1939, for £13,780,000, the Loan Bill of September last for £18,630,000 and that of December for £25,235,000. I remind honorable members that the loan appropriation taken in September was an interim measure, which was introduced to carry on services until more adequate plans had been prepared for financing Australia’s increased defence effort brought about by the war. The December appropriation was designed to com*plete the authorizations of liabilities which had to be incurred up to the 30th June, 3940.

The present bill is for £68,740,000, and will cover authorizations of expenditure to be placed up to the 31st December next. As I have explained on a previous occasion, loan appropriations are based on the amount of the liability to be incurred by a certain date, and not on the amount of expenditure which it is expected will be made before that date. This course is necessary to enable Parliament, not only to authorize expenditure, but also to authorize the incurring of the liability and the placing of orders for that expenditure.

The bill covers the period up to the 31st December only for two reasons - first, the Government considers that the -financial aspect of the war effort, and the huge liability incurred thereby, should be submitted to Parliament at intervals of not more than six months, thus ensuring control by Parliament; and, secondly, it enables the Government to provide for revisions and additions which may become necessary in the intervening period.

The amount included in the bill would have been greater but for the fact, which I announced in my .financial statement of the 2nd May, that the revenue for the current year has substantially exceeded the estimate. The excess receipts will, it is expected, be in the vicinity of £9,000,000- instead of £8,000,000 as previously forecast - and at a later hour I will introduce a bill for an additional appropriation of revenue for that amount. If the excess revenue had not been available, the amount of this bill would have been £77,740,000 instead of £68,740,000.

In my financial statement of the 2nd May, I referred to the fact that, less than two years ago, a total defence programme of £43,000,000, extending over three years, had been laid down. At the present time, it is not possible to say to what figure the programme may eventually expand. The outlook on the struggle in which we are engaged is changing rapidly, and it is obvious that no limit to our war effort can now be regarded as fixed or final. Already the Commonwealth Government has authorized the raising of a third division for active service, and is definitely committed to the maximum effort in the output of munitions. Mr. Essington Lewis has been appointed with authority to speed up production, and already plans have been made for organizing a still greater output. To further (ihe munitions effort, plans are under way for intensive training of toolmakers and tradesmen.

The services included in the bill cover the whole range of Australia’s war effort, and such part of the original pre-war defence programme as has not yet been completed. The pre-war programme has been combined in one schedule with war expenditure. The schedule to the bill does not separate items of expenditure specifically, but gives the range of expenditure which is to be covered, and the comprehensive wording is so arranged as to allow for greater elasticity. With the passage of this bill, the total authorizations made by Parliament in 1938-39 and 1939-40 for war and special defence expenditure will amount to £153,000,000. This figure excludes defence departmental expenditure which, in 1939-40, is approximately £10,000,000.

A large proportion of the loan expenditure will be devoted to the vital air arm. This is, of course, mainly due to the Empire air training scheme, which will provide the Commonwealth with a large force of trained pilots and mechanics, and with planes. The programme includes provision for the construction of ul)-to date service aircraft, and for the manufacture of twin row Wasp engines. In addition, the manufacture of Wirraways is being accelerated, and provision foi other fighting and training planes, to be built both overseas and in Australia, is being made. The Aircraft Production Commission has been given very wide powers and is using these to the full to speed up production and purchase of aircraft.

In my financial statement, I set out the Government proposals for meeting war expenditure in 1940-41. The Government expects that taxation on the basis of 1939-40 would provide for defence and war charges of £16,000,000 from revenue account. The Government’s taxation proposals already submitted provide for raising an additional £20,000,000 for defence purposes, making a total provision of £36,000,000.

The amount o£ liabilities incurred is, of course, an index of our war effort, but the amount of the expenditure also furnishes an interesting measure of what has been accomplished. The following table, which sets out expenditure in recent years, demonstrates clearly the progress made in our defence preparations : -

(The exact figure will largely depend on reimbursements of expenditure to the United Kingdom Government.)

A feature of this bill is the provision, in the clause authorizing the raising of money, for part of the necessary funds to be borrowed from the Government of the United Kingdom. In my statement of the 2nd May, I announced that arrangements had been made with Great Britain to finance our commitments up to a maximum of £12,000,000 sterling in London up to the 31st December, 1940, after which fresh arrangements would have to be made. The necessary moneys will be lent to the Commonwealth on the same terms as those on which the original loan was raised. The bill provides for such borrowing. As my financial statement was largely prompted by, and covered, the defence requirements, I do not propose to prolong my remarks on this occasion.

Earlier in my remarks I stated that this bill covered commitments up to the 31st December next. I cannot, however, give any guarantee that further appropriations will not be necessary before that date. The outlook is dark, and it seems inevitable that further and greater efforts will have to be made to meet the menace of war conditions, and, consequently, that Parliament may have’ to be asked before tie end of December to sanction still further appropriations of moneys for war purposes.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

.- Will the Treasurer (Mr. Spender) state at what rate of interest the loan is to be issued, and whether it will be free from federal income tax? The probability is that for the next three years, the proposed dock will be of no use to Australia.

Could not this work be delayed ?

Mr JOLLY:
Lilley

.- Clause 5 of the bill describes the conditions to be observed in respect of borrowing from the Government of the United Kingdom. Are any moneys obtained from this source to be in addition to the amounts mentioned in the schedule?

Mr Curtin:

– The schedule merely makes provision with respect to the expenditure.

Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP

– in reply - Any moneys borrowed from the Government of the United Kingdom will be included in the total amount for which the bill makes provision.

The Government is at present on the market in respect of a loan of £20,000,000, the interest rate of which has been indicated. The rates to be paid in respect of a longterm issue will be 3£ per cent., compared with the rate of £3 12s. 6d. for a similar loan a few months ago. The short-term rate has been reduced from £3 7s. 6d. to £2 15s. I assure the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) that it is the intention of the Government that loans raised during this war will carry low rates of interest. I am hopeful that the rate will be stabilized at not more than 3 per cent. As to whether they will be subject to Commonwealth income tax. the policy of the Government, announced when the first war loan was issued, to which the Government intends to adhere, is that all moneys raised during the war for Commonwealth purposes shall be subject to the full incidence of Commonwealth tax.

I can hold out no hope that the wish of the honorable member in respect of the construction of the proposed dock will be met; on the contrary, I believe that every attempt will be made to speed up (his work.

Mr MULCAHY:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · LANG LAB; ALP from 1936; ALP (N-C) from 1940; ALP from 1941

– What brokers are to handle this loan?

Mr SPENDER:

– The present loans are being raised on the open market. Brokers who submit any applications receive a brokerage fee of 5s. There is no underwriting.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1575

ESTIMATES (No. 2) 1939-40

Message from the Governor-General reported, transmitting Additional Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year ending the 30th June, 1940, and recommending appropriation accordingly

In committee (Consideration of Governor-General’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Spender) agreed to -

That the following additional sum be granted to His Majesty to defray the charges for the year 1939-40 for the services hereunder specified, viz. : -

Part I. Departments and Services - other than Business Undertakings and Territories of the commonwealth.

The Department of Defence - Including war (1939) services, £9,000,000.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Resolution of Ways and Means, founded on resolution of Supply, reported and adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Spender and Mr. Fadden do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

page 1575

APPROPRIATION BILL (No. 2) 1939-40

Bill brought up by Mr. Spender, and read a first time.

Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

In the course of my financial statement of the 2nd May, I reviewed the prospects of the budget for the current financial year. Honorable members will remember that I then stated that, owing to the unexpectedly high customs revenue compared with the estimate, the total revenue would be considerably in excess of expenditure. The amount of the excess was then estimated at £8,000,000, and I intimated that this amount would be made available for war purposes by means of an appropriation to be brought down at a later date. This bill will give effect to that plan.

Since the date of the financial statement, customs receipts have maintained a high level, and I also anticipate that other taxation revenue for the year will be greater than the recent estimate. In addition, the new duties recently imposed have contributed to the increased revenue. In view of the present prospects, therefore, I consider that the excess of receipts over expenditure for the financial year may be of the order of £9,000,000 rather than of £8,000,000.

The effect of this bill will be to enable the ConsolidatedRevenueFund to take up expenditure of £9,000,000 which would otherwise remain a charge to Loan Fund. It will be seen, therefore, that it will merely effect a transfer of charge, and will not provide for additional expenditure in 1939-40. It will, however, relieve the Loan Fund, and reduce the amount which would otherwise have to be raised by loan in 1940-41. This relief was taken into account in estimating, in my financial statement, the amount which will have to be borrowed between the present time and the 30th June, 1941. except that the relief will be £9,000,000 instead of £8,000,000.

The schedule to the bill provides for services which have already been voted by the Parliament in a previous loan appropriation. The items were included in similar wording in items of the Estimates submitted to Parliament in November last.

From the foregoing, it will be seen that this is a machinery bill to give effect to the course of action announced by me on the 2nd May. As I covered the subject exhaustively early in the present month, I do not propose to weary honorable members with a repetition of my former statement.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

The bill.

Mr JOLLY:
Lilley

.- This bill anticipates that for the current financial year there will be a surplus in the ConsolidatedRevenue Fund of £9,000,000. What will be the position if the surplus is £7,000,000 instead of £9,000,000?

Mr Spender:

– The transfer from loan will not exceed the actual surplus; the balance will remain in the Loan Fund.

Bill agreed to, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

page 1576

SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1940-41

Message recommending appropriation reported.

Motion (by Mr. Spender) proposed -

That the foregoing message be referred to the Committee of Supply forthwith.

Mr CURTIN:
Leader of the Opposition · Fremantle

– If it had not been for the announcement made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Menzies)earlier to-day, I would have taken a course of action upon this motion, but, in viewof his statement that Parliament will be called together in the first week of July. I am quite ready to allow the Committee of Supply forthwith to consider His Excellency’s message. I am fortified in the belief that the assurance given by the Prime Minister can be accepted, not only by the reliability of the Prime Minister’s undertaking, but also by the fact that that undertaking has been given as the result of representations from all sides of the chamber. I take it, therefore, that a motion will be submitted, before this period terminates, definitely fixing the latest day at which Parliament will meet - that will be the first week in July. There will have to be provision, as the right honorable gentleman said, for an earlier meeting if that, in the opinion of the Government, is desirable.

Motion agreed to. .

In committee (Consideration of Governor-General’s message) :

Motion (by Mr. Fadden) agreed to -

That there be granted to His Majesty for or towards defraying the services of the year 1940-41 a sum not exceeding £13,709,200.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted.

Resolution of Ways and Means founded on Resolution of Supply, reported and adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Spender and Mr. Fadden do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill brought up by Mr. Spender, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP

– I move -

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill is submitted to the House to secure the necessary - appropriation of moneys to carry on the services of the Government until the annual appropriation acts for 1940-41 are approved by Parliament. The bill makes provision for expenditure of an amount of £13,709,200 for ordinary services for the period of the first three months of the financial year 1940-41. The provision may be summarized under the following heads : -

Provision is madein thisbill only for the amount which is estimated to he sufficient to carry on the essential services on the basis of the appropriations passed by the Parliament for the present year, 1939-40. The items making up this total represent approximately one-quarter of those appropriations, except in a fewcases where expenditure is heavier in the early months of the financial year than in the later. An exception is, however, made in the case of Defence and War Services, where the amount included represents the estimated actual charge to revenue appropriations during the first three months of the year. In addition to this Defence vote there will, of course, be other defence expenditure which is covered by the loan appropriation just dealt with.

The usual provisions are made in the bill for “Refunds of Revenue” and “Advance to the Treasurer “, the amounts being £450,000 and £4,000,000, respectively. This latter amount is mainly required to carry on uncompleted works which will be in progress at the 30th June and also to cover unforeseen and miscellaneous expenditure. It will also temporarily finance the special grants to South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania on the same basis as that approved by Parliament for the present. financial year until a hill can be submitted after receipt of the report of the Commonwealth Grants Commission. lt is possible also that unforeseen war charges not covered by an appropriation may arise and these would be met from Treasurer’s Advance. Except in the case of Defence and “War Services no provision is made in the bill for any new expenditure or any departure from existing policy.

Mr MULCAHY:
Lang

.- The first matter which I have to bring before the House affects our repatriation legislation. A bill to amend the Repatriation Act is at present before Parliament, but it does not go far enough. The scope of the act should be so widened as to enable pensions to be given to many returned soldiers who,, though they have- a moral claim for pensions, are denied” them on technical grounds. This Parliament should insist that those men, who are justly entitled to pensions, should have pensions given to them, and that the onus of proof should not be on the returned soldier or his dependants. Those who served in other wars, notably the South African war, should also be brought within the scope of the Repatriation Act. In Australia to-day there are about 250 veterans of the South African war in indigent circumstances who should be repatriation pensioners.

I recently brought under the notice of the Minister for the Army (Mr. Street) the case of a young man- who, as a member of the Militia, was killed while breaking in horses for the Army at the Liverpool camp. The parents of that boy are in indigent circumstances.He was their main support. I have been informed by the Minister that there is no provision for the compensation of dependants of militiamen who are killed while engaged in military duties. The law should be amended to provide for compensation to be given in such a case as I have mentioned.

In my electorate there are probably more returned soldiers than there are in any other federal constituency. The reason is the large number of war service homes that have been erected there. In the depression many purchasers of thos? homes lost their employment and fell behind with their payments. My main complaint to-day is that those war service homes are not connected with sanitary services, although they are situated in densely-populated districts. I have frequently asked the War Service Homes Commission to make money available to enable those homes to be connected with the sewerage system, but, although the occupants are ready to increase their weekly payments to pay for the service, the reply has always been that there is no money available. Apart from tha fact that the connexion of the war service homes to the sewerage system would improve the property and enhance values, to leave them unconnected menaces the health, not only of the occupants themselves but also of neighbours. Lack of sewerage may cause the outbreak of some pestilence, and the department should take immediate steps to remove the cause of complaint.

In dealing with this bill, many things can be said, for instance, that the Government has fallen down on its job in its conduct of the Postal Department. Two years ago, the department promised to build a post office at Earlwood, in my electorate, but the war broke out before the work started. Now the department says that the work cannot be gone on with because of the lack of funds. The expenditure of about £800, which is all that would be needed to build a post office, would not affect the war activities of the Government, and the department should immediately proceed, with the erection of the post office, because it is necessary as a distributing centre for mails in the district. In many centres, local bodies like municipal councils and progress associations are clamouring for the provision of improved telephone facilities. Representations have been made to honorable members generally that the department is not providing the ‘telephone facilities that should be expected from such a prosperous concern as the Post Office. I hope that the Government, without relaxing its war efforts in any way, will ensure that ordinary works will not be hampered bv the lack of only a few hundred pounds here or there.

Like every other honorable member, I represent among my electors a large number of invalid and old-age pensioners. The cost of living for these people has increased considerably in recent months.

Housing rents, food prices and other costs have risen to high levels and, as the result, honorable members on this side of the House have appealed to the Government to increase invalid and oldage pensions. In providing for an enormous war expenditure the Government should not forget the old people who helped to make living conditions in this country what they are to-day. Invalid and old-age pensions should be increased to at least 30s. a week. The New Zealand Government has increased pensions without interfering in any way with its expenditure on war requirements. I hope that the Government will give favorable consideration to my representations and help to make the evening of the pensioners’ lives much more peaceful and happy than at present.

Mr JOLLY:
Lilley

.- I do not propose to discuss these items in detail, because honorable members will have an opportunity to consider them when the Estimates are before the House at a later date.

Mr Martens:

– “Will that be before or after the general elections?

Mr JOLLY:

– In a quick inspection of the items, I have not seen any provision for the expenses of an election. That is rather gratifying.

Supply bills are introduced every year, and honorable members are always called upon to consider them at very short notice. I ask the Treasurer (Mr. Spender) if in future it would be possible, without causing the Treasury any great inconvenience or expense, to include a comparative statement showing the amounts provided in the preceding year.

Mr Gregory:

– The honorable member will bc given a comparative statement when the budget papers are presented.

Mr JOLLY:

– Yes. But surely hon< arable members, when dealing with Supply, should be given some comparison between the amounts they are asked to pass and those passed in the previous year. Honorable members do not have time to examine the figures carefully before being called upon to pass them. I assure the Treasurer that honorable members would be appreciative if a comparative statement were circulated.

Mr Spender:

– If the honorable member obtains a copy of the act of the previous year he will be able to find the particulars he wishes to obtain.

Mr JOLLY:

– I am aware of that, but this statement is put before us only a few minutes before we are called upon to discuss it, and we have not sufficient opportunity to obtain and examine a copy of the act of last year.

Mr SPENDER:

– I shall investigate the honorable member’s suggestion and see if the Treasury can comply with bis request.

Mr JOLLY:

– I assume that a separate works appropriation will be put before the House to-day.

Mr Spender:

– Supplementary Estimates will be introduced later, before the House adjourns.

Mr WARD:
East Sydney

.- Among the matters I desire to bring to the notice of the House is the Government’s misuse of its powers of censorship. Members of the Labour party, who are the only true democrats in this Parliament, are particularly concerned about the way in which these powers are being exercised. It has been said repeatedly by members of every party that no objection would be taken to censorship exercised in a reasonable manner and solely for the purpose of preventing valuable information from falling into the hands of the enemy. But an examination of the activities of the censorship branch since the outbreak of war furnishes adequate evidence to prove that the branch is not operating in that way. By the wrongful use of the powers conferred upon it, the Government is endeavouring to prevent any criticism of itself or of its supporters. It has adopted a policy of completely suppressing some journals, and is using another method of destruction for certain others. I refer particularly to the Daily News, of Sydney, the official organ of the Australian Labour party. In my opinion the Government has taken action, with the help of its supporters in New South Wales, in order to carry out a campaign of sabotage against the Daily News, and wreck it financially, and by that means close it down and finally silence its criticism of Government policy. In the case of newspapers in a stronger financial position, the Government apparently has a third policy. When it considers that an anti-Labour journal is over-critical of its activities, as in the case of the Daily Telegraph, of Sydney, the Government evidently desires to buy the journal off by using a form of political bribery. This bribery takes the form of offering to an influential member of the executive of the newspaper a highly paid and important government position. But in the case of the Daily Telegraph, that plan failed, not because of any weakening on the part of the Government, but because it was unable to control the majority of the members of its party, who rebelled against its decision.

We have only to examine a little of the history of censorship in recent months to confirm any contention that the Government is using its censorship powers to prevent just criticism of its operations. First, the resignation of a member of the censorship staff in Sydney followed very closely upon disclosures in this Parliament that this censorship official, who occupied a high position, had admitted that his instructions came, not from Canberra, but from the Imperial authorities. After that declaration, the Government apparently felt embarrassed and sought the gentleman’s resignation. It was quickly submitted.

I know of many things which the Government has prevented the people from learning by means of the misuse of its censorship authority. It has prevented newspapers from publishing details of the profits of big monopolistic companies. Nobody could rightly suggest that such information would be of any value to the enemy. The Government has also censored reports of statements made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Curtin) and by other honorable members. Unfortunately, probably because of apathy in many quarters where activity would naturally be expected, the Government has been able to continue unchecked in its campaign to suppress criticism of its activities. It even prevented the publication of a poem by Henry Lawson, the great Australian bard. It also banned the broadcasting of a radio play, under the title, “No Conscription “, which had no other purpose than to depict historical events of this country during the last war. It seems that the Government believed that it would be unwise to refresh the people’s memories of some of the attacks made on their liberties in the past. The sponsors of the radio play determined to present it in the form of a stage play, but before that could be done, the censorship branch again intervened, and stipulated that there should be no public performance of the play. It refused to give any reasons for that action, and the honorable gentleman in this Parliament, known as the Acting Minister for Information - a title which I consider to be a distinct misnomer - also deliberately refused to give an explanation. I cannot see how a play depicting historical events could be of any use to the enemy. Nor can I see how the Government’s reasons for suppressing its performance could be of value to the enemy. I ask honorable members of the Opposition to view this matter very seriously.

By means of certain alterations of the National Security Regulations, the Government has recently taken to itself the power to control literature that may be distributed during an election campaign. The Government now has authority to suppress leaflets which might be prepared by the Labour party in order to present its case against the Government. For instance if the Labour party prepared a leaflet disclosing the enormous profits made by the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited out of the Government’s defence expenditure, that circular could be completely suppressed. If the party further persisted in its circulation of the pamphlets, the members responsible for that action would be subjected to very heavy penalties. The Government can make it very difficult for the Labour party to express any criticism. It also has power, under the National Security Regulations, to ban any meeting that the Labour party may propose to conduct. The only authority necessary is a statement by the Minister that he is of opinion that something likely to cause disaffection amongst the subjects of the Crown is likely to be said at the meeting. Therefore, it would be very easy for the Government, by the use of its extensive powers, to make it almost impossible for the Labour party to present its case to the people without exposing itself to very severe penalties. I believe that there are many things in Australia for which the Government should be criticized, and unless we can have the right of free and open criticism, how can the public be assured that the Government is doing everything possible in the interests of, say, the defence of the country?

I have protested in this House against the supplying of inferior goods to the Government in this time of war. My complaints have been directed particularly against the quality of military boots and against contractors in the Northern Territory who used inferior concrete in the construction of military buildings. But no word of explanation has been given by the Government in connexion with either of these matters. Not one word has been said to inform honorable members whether it intends to eliminate these abuses or not. It is well known to honorable members of the Opposition that any reference to these abuses in the newspapers, or any criticism of the Government for its failure to prevent them, immediately brings down the wrath of the censor. In that way, the Government is stifling legitimate criticism of its members and supporters. At an early stage of the war the Prime Minister stated that he did not want a muzzled Opposition. I took it that he meant that the Opposition was to be given every opportunity to state its case or to criticize the. Government; but instead of that being the case, the Government is doing everything possible to muzzle the Opposition, both in Parliament and outside.

I desire to know what is being done to correct abuses in connexion with the supply of materials to the Government. In order to show the seriousness of the position, I mention that a high government official victimized one of his subordinates because the latter insisted on manufacturers supplying goods according to specification. Instead of the Government penalizing the high official, it penalized the employee who had Hone his duty That is a serious state of affairs. A good deal is said about protecting civil liberties and maintaining democratic institutions in this country, but the fact is that the Parliament is gradually passing over its authority to certain interests in the community, which, if they believed that their position in this country was likely to be challenged seriously by the Labour party, would be prepared to use armed force and to set up a dictatorship for the duration of the war in order to maintain their position in the community. In the early stages of the war, business executives were appointed as advisers to the Government, but now they are being placed in control of departments, in which positions they are able to direct the nation’s policy. When Parliament is approaching a recess there is a tendency on the part of members to pay little attention to what the Government is doing or proposes to do. That is one reason why the Government is allowing to continue injustices which should have been cleared up long ago.

Some time ago I asked what the Government was doing with regard to the internment of aliens. I sought permission to peruse the list of those who had been interned at the outbreak of the war, those who subsequently were released and the. names of the persons who made representations on their behalf, also the names of the aliens who still remained in confinement. The Minister for the Army gave the reply which is always given by the Government when faced with an awkward question - that the information could not be made available because it was not considered to be in the public interest to do so. I should like the Minister to explain in what way the public’ safety would have been endangered by granting my request. I did not ask that the information be made public, but that it should be supplied to me as a member of this Parliament. The reason for not making the facts available is that, assuming that full information is on the files, it would be found that many wealthy and influential Germans who are Nazi sympathizers are walking the streets because of representations made on their behalf by members and. supporters of the Government. In England, the persons arrested for “ fifth column “ activities were not supporters of the Labour party or members of trade, unions, but were well-to-do members of the community. A similar state of affairs would probably be found in this country if the truth were known. If this country is to make its maximum war effort, and if it? people are to be properly safeguarded, there must be in power a government which is free from outside entanglements. The Labour party is not tied to big busi-ness; it is not associated with wealthy, influential people who have Nazi sympathies. Irrespective of their position in the business community, °v the social circles in which they move, persons with Nazi sympathies, who are, in fact, Nazi agents, should be interned. However, the Government remains inactive, and does nothing. But the moment there is any suggestion that a Labour newspaper is criticizing the Government, or publishing the profits of wealthy monopolies in this country, the Government springs to action. It is prepared to use all of its powers under the National Security Act to prevent legitimate criticism of the Government.

Another serious problem is that associated with the refugee population of this country. During recent years there has been a considerable influx of refugees from other countries. The Labour party has never questioned the right of these people to come here, so long a9 employment can bc found for them and adequate safeguards are provided against any breaking down of industrial condi- tions in this country. The La’bour party believes that the first consideration should be to provide employment under decent conditions and rates of pay for the people already here. The position is, however, that many refugees have been brought here in order that cheap labour may be available for the friends of the Government. Although the Government gave assurances that ample precautions would be taken to safeguard Australian standards, it has refused to accept any responsibility for the refugees after their arrival. Recently, in Sydney, a number of refugees proceeded against the Genera] Paint Company, of Caledonia-street, Paddington, for breaches of industrial awards. Their employer contested the case, but after it had proceeded for a number of days he came to an arrangement with the plaintiffs, and settled with them out of court. Had he been observing the award he would not have settled the case in that way. Mr. Prior, the Industrial Magistrate in Sydney, took so serious a view of the case that one inferred from him that the employer had committed perjury, and that he would send the papers to the proper authorities foi; further attention. Nothing more has been heard of the matter. E shall relate the. facts. These refugees were working in a paint factory on work for which, I understand, the award rate is £4 16s. a week, but they were paid only £2 10s. a week. In order to avoid detection, the employer paid them by cheque at the award rate, but he required the men to return to him the difference between the amount shown on the cheque and the £2 10s. a week which they were allowed to retain. He thought that he was clever enough to cover his breach of the award by producing the cheque butts as evidence that he had paid the correct amount. I first brought this matter before the Department of the Interior, but was informed that, although it was responsible for administering the machinery by which the refugees were brought to Australia, the complaint was one for attention by the Attorney-General’s Department. When I approached that department, I was told that the complaint concerned the State, not the Commonwealth. I then got in touch with the Industrial Department of New South Wales, and was told that all that it could do was to advise the men concerned to take civil proceedings in the court. I emphasize that these men had recently come to Australia; they had no friends; their knowledge of our language was limited; they did not understand the industrial conditions provided in the award under which they worked; and many of them were on the bread-line and unable to secure legal aid. What chance had they of obtaining justice by proceeding on their own initiative against their employers? ‘ Fortunately, the trade union covering their employment took proceedings in the court with the result that I have mentioned. That is not the only instance of exploitation of refugees; I have heard of many others which have not received the publicity of police court proceedings. When complaints of this character are made, the Government always asks for specific instances; yet when details are supplied, the Government says that it has no power to act. If that be so, of what value is the assurance given by the Government that adequate precautions would be taken to safeguard Australian standards? The fact is, as I have stated, that the Government wanted to have these people in this country, not because it was sympathetically disposed towards them and wanted to help them, but because it desired to have a reservoir of cheap labour which would be available to employers.

I wish now to refer to the exemption of youths from compulsory military training. No doubt, most honorable members have had brought under their notice numerous cases of people who are anxious to secure the exemption of their sons from compulsory military training. Those with which I have been concerned relate principally to the sons of widowed mothers or of invalid parents, and other oases in which such training involves hardship. Unfortunately, the authorities who deal with these applicants are military men and nothing more. They treat with the utmost contempt the sons of workers who apply for exemption. I have in mind the case of a young man who applied for exemption personally at the drill hall. He represented to the officer in charge that he supported his widowed mother and a sister, for which purpose he had a small carrying business. He said that if he went tff camp for three months his business would be ruined, and his mother and sister would be left destitute. The military gentleman in charge showed his sympathy by saying, “ Well, if you walk out into the road and are knocked over by a motor bus and killed, how would your mother and sister get on ? “ The young man said, “ In those circumstances, I suppose they would have to get on as best they could, but if you dropped out of the war, how would the country get on?” .Because of that reply, which I think, in the circumstances, was warranted, the young man’s application for exemption was rejected, although he had shown clearly that hardship would be caused if he entered camp. I could give innumerable cases of the same kind. It is common talk in the various capital cities that if an applicant for exemption is the son of sufficiently well-to-do parents he has no difficulty in obtaining exemption. When we on this side of the chamber described this militia system as conscription, honorable gentlemen opposite said : “ It is not

Mr. Word. conscription; it is universal training”. If it were really universal training, the sons of parents in all walks of life would be treated in the same way. I am quite sure that if the Government would permit an examination of the cases in which exemptions have been applied for, it would be found that the preponderance of favorable replies had been given to the sons of parents who live in the better-class suburbs of our city areas, and the preponderance of refusals have been given to the sons of working-class parents. As a matter of fact the sons of the workers have been given no consideration whatever in this respect.

I am glad that the Assistant Treasurer (Mr. Fadden) is at the table, for I wish to discuss the Government’s method of financing our war effort. Representations have been made from many quarters respecting more suitable means to finance the war effort of Australia than that which the Government has seen fit to adopt. As the members of this Government are under the control of big business and financial interests they have remained adamant in their determination to adhere strictly to the orthodox methods insisted upon by the big financial institutions. The Treasurer ,(Mr. Spender) has made many speeches to various meetings of ladies and others outside this Parliament, but his statements have been most contradictory. It is difficult to understand what the honorable gentleman means by inflation, and what he calls credit expansion. Parliament itself has had no adequate explanation of the Treasurer’s views on this subject. Consequently, I ask the Assistant Treasurer to give some attention to it in the course of this discussion. The Treasurer said, on one occasion, that there could be no inflation until such time as all assets of the nation were fully employed. I agree with that view. Inflation can only occur when credit is issued after the assets of the nation are fully employed. That time is not yet. The material resources of the nation are not fully employed, and we have thousands of unemployed people who are anxious to give their services to the country. On the plea that our financial resources are required in other directions, the Government has declined to find work for these people. Finance is only an instrument by which we may put our resources into use. I say to the Treasurer, and also to the Government, that what is physically possible is financially possible. It is admitted on all sides that our defence situation is grave. Yet the Government seems to prefer to see men existing on a dole of 8s. Cd. a week than to employ them, under decent conditions, on works that are absolutely essential to the safety of the country. If these works are not put in hand, we cannot tell what our end will be.

Great Britain and its Allies were declared to be the victors in the last war, but many of the people, of those countries, including many of our own fellow citizens, were worse off after the war than they were when it began. When the Government in office at that time in Australia was asked to provide work for our unemployed people it said : “ We have annual interest commitments to meet in relation to the public debt, and have no money available for public works “. When the last war began, our public debt was not great, but when it finished our indebtedness had assumed large proportions. To-day the national debt totals about £1,300,000.000. The Prime Minister and the Treasurer have declared that we are expending money four times as fast as we expended it during the last war. It is said that the war may last as long as, if not longer than, the last war. Assuming that this should prove to be so, it will not be difficult for honorable gentlemen to realize that, at the close of this war, we may have a’ public debt of more than £5,000,000,000. Unfortunnately, the population of this country is not. increasing. It may be expected to decline somewhat as the result of the war, for many of the men who leave Australia to fight abroad may not return to it. Consequently, we shall have a smaller population to meet the war debt.

During the last war, it was said that the Germans would be made to pay the cost of the war. A reparations plan was devised, but, in operation, it was found to inflict great hardships upon our people. Numerous conferences were held by the parties interested iu reparations payments and ultimately the slate was wiped clean. It is not difficult for us to realize, therefore, that we shall have to pay our part of the cost of this war. If our war debt aggregates £5,000,000,000 at the termination of hostilities, we shall face an impossible position, unless the Government can be moved from its present intention to adhere to orthodox financial methods. I fear that we may find ourselves, not only unable to meet the orthodox payments in relation to our indebtedness, but also unable to put in hand any public works to provide employment for the people or to maintain our existing social services.

Is there any means of financing the war other than that adopted so far by this Government? The Labour party has a definite plan for doing so. This reminds me that a certain plan that was adopted after the last war bore very harshly upon the working people of this country, as well as upon our disabled soldier pensioners and our invalid and old-age pensioners. Honorable gentlemen opposite expressed the greatest sympathy with our soldiers and pensioners when financial difficulties overtook the country a few years ago ; but that did not prevent them from bringing down the axe. I fear that, unless we look ahead, the same thing will happen after this war. As honorable gentlemen opposite are urging the workers to co-operate with the Government to the fullest possible degree in relation to the war effort we are entitled to ask them to listen to us when we advocate a financial policy which will avoid the hardship and suffering that followed the last war. Unless the requisite steps are taken now, we shall find honorable gentlemen opposite saying to us after the war, when we ask that money shall be made available for public works: “We have certain honorable commitments to meet which were entered into during the war, and we must meet them first “.

The Labour party contends that there is a more effective and rational way to meet our war expenditure. Thus, we not only criticize the financial policy of the Government, but we also propound a better policy to take its place. One of the greatest calamities that has befallen, this country was the untimely death of Sir Denison Miller, the first governor of the Commonwealth Bank, who was always a thorn in the side of orthodox financiers. It is a matter of history that Sir Denison Miller put into operation a certain financial procedure to enable public works to be constructed. He was prepared to place at the command of the Government, for the benefit of the ‘people, the whole of the credit facilities of the Commonwealth Bank, in order to promote the development of the country. Unfortunately, when he died it seemed that the interest of those who had been associated with him in his financial policy also died. However, I ask the Government to revert to the financial policy of Sir Denison Miller.

We are now being asked to approve of the raising of loans aggregating £68,000,000 at a certain rate of interest. What calamity could possibly befall the country if the Government drew upon our credit resources through the Commonwealth Bank in order to provide the money for the works that it has in contemplation? The only purpose! for which the Government, needs new money at present is for purchases abroad. For this reason, it is necessary to have foreign exchanges. The situation is altogether different in relation to our internal economy. The Government could draw upon the credit resources of the nation through the Commonwealth Bank for all internal works, and even if the amounts so drawn remained indefinitely on the debit side of the accounts of the ‘Commonwealth Bank, the general public would be no worse off. The credit of the nation should be made available for the service of the nation. When we enunciate these ideas, honorable gentlemen opposite usually declare that they are fantastic. I invite them, therefore, to rise in their places and indicate in what way they are fantastic. No effective answer has ever been made to our contention that the credit resources of the nation could be used through the Commonwealth Bank in order to finance the war effort of the country insofar as internal expenditure is concerned, for a great deal of the money that is required in this connexion is used to pay for labour and local raw material and it eventually- finds its way back to the coffers of the bank. It appears, though, that the whole of the political power of the monopolistic financial interests that support this Government is being used to ensure that the orthodox financial policy of years gone by shall be enforced in relation to the cost of this war. I hear the honorable member for Swan (Mr. Gregory) interjecting, though I did not grasp the purport of his interjection. However, if the honorable member for Swan believes that our defence effort can be carried on successfully by private enterprise, let me remind him that he was a member of Parliament at the time of the Kidman-Mayoh shipbuilding scandal, and he was one of those who made excuses for the firm.

Mr GREGORY:

– That is a deliberate lie!

Mr Paterson:

– He condemned the action of that firm.

Mr WARD:

– If the honorable member for Swan did express disapproval of its action, he took no steps to ensure that the firm was penalized. Instead, he approved of payment of compensation to them.

Australia cannot be adequately defended, nor its ordinary activities carried on effectively, by ft Government which must submit its policy for the approval of wealthy and influential interests outside Parliament. Proper living standards can be ensured by only one party, the party which is pledged to the ending of private ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. The Labour party believes that these matters are the function of the State. Eventually, the people will realize that they cannot enjoy good living conditions, or have the benefit of a sane and orderly system of government, while the representatives of private enterprise remain in control, I hope that the Government will realize the seriousness, of its attempts to stifle Labour criticism. The Government can amend the National Security Act, and bring down what regulations it likes, to provide penalties against those who criticize it, but the Labour movement is a powerful organization. Even though action may be taken against one or two men because they resist attacks against their liberties, there are plenty more to take their places, plenty more to step into the -breach. I warn the Government that, by persisting in the misuse of’ its censorship powers, it is forcing the

Labour party into a position where it will have to defy the Government. Some of us may be penalized. That cannot be helped, and it will not prevent the party from stating its case. Even though the Government should proceed to the extreme of imprisoning representatives of the Labour party, it will not succeed in stifling the voice of the party. The Labour party has a great objective, and we are determined to move towards it. I hope that the day is not far distant when we shall have a Labour government in control of Parliament, and that it will ,be a government which is not subservient to a bureaucracy of public servants such as have succeeded in directing governments up to date, and turning Ministers into rubber stamps. “We want a Labour government with complete political power - with power to do things. We will nol agree that those who control private financial interests outside Parliament, the great monopolistic interests, shall be in u position to exercise powers greater than those of Parliament. A Labour government possessed of complete powers will be able to give to the people of Australia a standard of prosperity greater than any ever enjoyed in Australia .before.

Mr GREGORY:
Swan

.- The honorable member for East Sydney (Mr. Ward) has rarely made a speech without getting down into the gutter. Always his utterances have been characterized by dirty attacks on some one, by attempts to malign others. If it is possible for him to employ dirty tactics in order to malign the character of another member of Parliament, the honorable member for East Sydney - or is it the dishonorable member-

Mr Makin:

– I ask you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to take notice that the honorable member’s language is unparliamentary.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Prowse:
FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– The honorable member for Swan.

Mr GREGORY:

– Most offensive statements have been made regarding certain work which I did on behalf of the Government in connexion with a certain contract. The honorable member for East Sydney said that I recommended and approved certain payments to the firm of Kidman and Mayoh. The statement is false. During the last war the then Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) called for tenders for the construction of a certain number of wooden ships in each State. When the armistice was signed he cancelled the contract. Kidman and Mayoh, who had started on the construction of two ships, received a certain amount of compensation. That was a matter for the Government ; I had nothing to do with it. Some time later the Government authorized .the Parliamentary Public Works Committee, of which I was chairman, to inquire whether the ships should be taken over by the Commonwealth and completed at Cockatoo Island Dockyard. Representations had been made that the ships, when completed, should be sent to New Guinea to load copra for London, it being suggested that in two trips the profits so earned would pay for them. The committee found it very difficult to obtain reliable information. None of the members knew anything about shipbuilding and we found it impossible to obtain witnesses with any knowledge of the building of wooden ships. A Western Australian syndicate proposed to tender for the building of six wooden ships and had engaged Mr. Farquhar, a retired managing director of a shipbuilding company in England, who had come to Australia for health reasons. I recognized in him a man with special knowledge, and it occurred to me that, if we could induce him to make an examination for us, we could get at the facts. I found that he was at that time general manager of Walkers Limited, of Melbourne. As chairman of the Public Works Committee I took the initiative and on my own responsibility offered him £200 and his expenses if he would go to Sydney and examine the ships. He did so, and two days later he wired to the committee to come to Sydney. In the first telegram he told me that the supervisor who had been in charge of the work had committed suicide. When we got to Sydney he took us to inspect the vessels, and, in our presence, he probed the joints in the timbers with a long, thin-bladed knife and demonstrated that 75 per cent, of the bolts that were supposed to be there were, in fact, missing. He showed us one scarf in which there should have been four bolts, but there were none at all. The committee recommended to the Government that the contract be cancelled and that the firm of Kidman and Mayoh should repay to the Government £123,000 which had been advanced on account. However, the matter went to arbitration, and it was eventually arranged that the firm should pay £75,000, and the ships were taken out to sea and scuttled. I exonerate Kidman from blame, because he merely lent his name and his capital to the enterprise. It was Mayoh who undertook the work, and I do not know whether it was due to his lack of knowledge of shipbuilding or not that the ships were so badly constructed. I had nothing to do with the matter except to direct the investigation by the committee, and to make a recommendation to the Government, whose duty it was to take action when we reported. The committee saved the Government at least £75,000 by getting Mr. Farquhar to report on the ships, and I and I alone was responsible for bringing in Mr. Farquhar to report to the committee. Had our recommendation been accepted in full we should have saved the country over £123,000. Those are the facts, and I hope that the honorable member for East Sydney will some day apologize for what he said about me.

Mr BARNARD:
Bass

.- About four years ago the Government decided to make money available to the State governments for a scheme of technical training for the benefit of young men who, during the depression years, had been denied the opportunity to be trained. This was a new departure, and I give credit to the Government for what it did. In the circumstances it was, perhaps, inevitable that mistakes should be made, and they are excusable. I believe, however, that the incursion of the Federal Government into the sphere of technical education has been either too great or too small. There is not sufficient cooperation between the Commonwealth and the various State governments in connexion with the scheme. There is no single Commonwealth Minister charged with the responsibility of supervising this work. Part of it comes under the Minister for Health and part under the Minister for Supply and Development, while the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research is also concerned. The Treasurer (Mr. Spender) and the Assistant Minister for Supply (Mr. Fadden) recently visited Tasmania to attend an education conference. Many difficulties were then mentioned to the Federal Ministers, , ana I believe that there has been some effort to straighten them out, but so far no real progress has been made in that direction. I understand that the Commonwealth Government has instituted a kindergarten system, a branch of which is operating in Hobart, where it overlaps the State system, with the result that there is wasteful expenditure. Lack of uniformity in many matters in the States is not new, and it is no less pronounced in this case. There should be greater co-operation and uniformity in respect of the schoolleaving age. The time will surely come when there will have to be complete reorganization, and the Federal Government will have to accept much greater responsibility. A serious aspect to the State of Tasmania is that, when the Commonwealth needs an education officer, it secures one from the State service by offering a higher salary than he is receiving, and one which, for a variety of reasons, the State is unable to pay. The lengthy training of the officer has cost the State a considerable sum, yet it receives no compensation from the federal authorities; and, in addition, it is unable to train quickly another man to fill the position vacated. The area school system of education in Tasmania has become so popular that it is causing embarrassment to the State because of the agitation foi its extension to other areas. Under this system, a school is established in a rural area and children attend it from the surrounding districts within a radius of 25 miles to study not only ordinary primary subjects, but also subjects that are of special interest to those districts. Transport is provided free by the Education Department. During the last three or four years, eleven of these area schools have been established, and more are being established as opportunity permits. Here, also, the

Federal Government is causing considerable loss to the State by enticing State officers into its service by the inducement of higher salaries.

The Sandy Bay rifle range has been the subject of considerable controversy for a period of years. I understand that when the Brighton Camp rifle range is constructed, the Sandy Bay area will no longer be required for that purpose. It would be an act of generosity if the Federal Government were to hand it back to the State for educational purposes. It is admirably suited to the purposes of a university, and if the Assistant Treasurer could succeed in inducing the Cabinet to make a gift of it to the State, for this purpose, his name would go down in history as a public benefactor to Tasmania. The present university is cramped for space, of which it has not sufficient to provide areas for recreation. I do not know whether this is too much to expect from a government which has not only exploited the State Education Department oy enticing away its teachers, but also indulges in profiteering in the sale to the State of land necessary for the extension of existing school areas, one example of which I gave a day or two ago.

For some years it has been represented that Tasmania has been wasteful in its expenditure, and that the ratio of the growth of its expenditure has, in the opinion of some persons, been beyond what is reasonable. The following tables will show that such i3 not the case : -

page 1587

STATE EXPENDITURE FROM CONSOLIDATED REVENUE, 1933-34, 1934-35, AND 1938-39

Showing Increases

page 1587

STATE EXPENDITURE FROM CONSOLIDATED REVENUE- PER HEAD OF POPULATION

Note. - With the exception of Victoria, which is a State which practises great economy and which does not provide the same reasonable scale of services as the other States, Tasmania, in each of these years, bad the lowest expenditure per head of population, while the growth of expenditure in Tasmania between 1934-35 and 1938-39 was lower per head of population than any other State, except Victoria. Those figures not only answer the charge that the Tasmanian Labour Government lias been wasteful, but also clearly indicate that it has kept its expenditure well within bounds. Accordingly I hope that the Treasurer will give consideration to the matters that I have raised. {: #debate-60-s0 .speaker-KRE} ##### Mr SHEEHAN:
.Cook .- I desire to state that before Christmas Parliament voted £12,000 for works to be carried out at the Mascot aerodrome. Tenders were called and the lowest tenderer received the contract, of which, subsequently, he asked to be relieved. Resumption of work is awaiting the calling of fresh tenders and the letting of a new contractAltogether 600 men are registered as unemployed in the Mascot area, and they have been demanding that this work be carried out by day labour. Every one of (hem is capable of doing the work, but the Works Branch of the Department of the Interior is not allowed to engage day la'bour. Eight months of valuable time has been wasted, in spite of the fact that this work is urgent, because, in its present state, the Mascot Aerodrome is limited in its capacity to cater for the needs of modern aircraft. The department has all of the equipment and officers necessary for the work to be proceeded with immediately on a day-labour basis. All that is needed for the work to bo done by day labour is the Government's sanction. The bill makes mention of payments for the education of the children of soldiers. Some years ago Parliament set aside money to be used in detection of tuberculosis in returned soldiers' children; but gradually the amount voted each year was whittled down, until in this .Supply Bill absolutely no provision is made for that necessary social service. The Government thought that this service was important a few years ago, so I cannot understand why money is not provided for the service to-day. It is of vital importance that the development of tuberculosis in children should be arrested. I regret that uo money has been allocated on this occasion. Like the honorable member for Lang **(Mr. Mulcahy),** 1 also press for an increase of the old-age pension. In the last few weeks petitions have been presented by the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** and the honorable member for Hunter **(Mr. James),** and to-day we have one presented by the honorable member for Barton **(Mr. Lane)** on behalf of the organization of old-age pensioners. Old-age pensioners cannot exist on £1 a week. Many years ago the pension was 17s. 6d., but it followed rises of the cost of living to its present level. Since the outbreak of war the cost of living has soared alarmingly; rents in particular have increased. Old-age pensioners have to live in houses and have to pay rent, and being old and feeble, they need warmth, but the price of fuel has risen sharply. The old-age pensioners, who are the pioneers and the trail-blazers of this country, should not be left to die in hunger. It must be recognized that £1 to-day will not buy what £1 would buy a few months ago,' because the flour and sales taxes have increased the cost of the commodities that the poor need to keep body and soul together. The rate of the pension should be at least 30s. a week to enable the pensioners to exist in some sort of security. Some time ago the Erskineville Municipal Council asked the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** to co-operate with it to obtain £20,000 from the Commonwealth Bank to enable it to carry out a slum clearance proposal in its district. The Commonwealth Government and the State Government of New South Wales have done nothing in that regard and in many Sydney suburbs the local-governing bodies, realizing that it is futile to rely on government action have set out to do the work themselves. The Erskineville Council was able to *how that the Commonwealth Bank could not lose if it backed the proposition, but, whereas the Commonwealth Government announced once that it would allocate £20,000,000 for a home-building scheme, the council's £20,000 plan to provide homes for pensioners, indigent people and basic-wage earners was refused. The sum of £400 is set apart in the schedule of this bill for "secondary industries research, training of students ". I do not know whence those students come, whether they are young or old, "but £400 seems to me a very poor provision. It -would pay a decent salary to one man for twelve months, but it is totally inadequate for the purpose which seems to be indicated in this bill, namely, the training of men for secondary industries. It will be necessary to develop many secondary industries in this country in the post-war period. {: #debate-60-s1 .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON:
England · New f6.4]. - I direct attention to the obstinate refusal on the part of many of the boards that have been appointed to control various export industries to consider grievances that have been submitted to them by honorable members. It seems that the Government, having established these boards, which number about 25, has just handed the whole control of those industries to them and that there is no actual ministerial supervision. Theoretically, Ministers are supposed to be superior authorities to the boards, but my experience has been that I may write till the cows come home " stating the grievances of some of my electors, with out getting more than a bare acknowledgment of my letters and a reference to one of the boards, which, very often discourteously, refuses even to consider my representations. I believe that other honorable members have had similar experiences. We have a great responsibility to the people at a time like this, when practically every industry that affects the livelihood of primary producers, and even of some secondary producers, is subject to control; but most of us receive very scant consideration and are treated more or less as if we are nuisances. It is our duty to ventilate the grievances of our constituents and there is no reason why we should be treated by these boards as if our representations should be suppressed altogether. {: type="A" start="I"} 0. have had dealings with three of the Government's war-time boards. The principal one is the Central Wool Committee ; another is the Advisory Committee controlling the tin industry, and the third is the authority dealing with the export of rabbits and rabbit skins. E do not know whether a board controls the export of rabbits and rabbit skins, but I have certainly not been able to obtain any satisfaction from the Department of Commerce whenever I have written to it on the subject. I. understand also that the authority dealing with hides and leather has caused dissatisfaction amongst people interested in the export of hides and skins. One thing which the Wool Committee has done, apparently with the concurrence of the present Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron),** as well as his predecessor, has been to wipe out a. number of wool-selling centres which were established in country districts some time before the outbreak of war. There are two such centres in my electorate - one at Guyra and the other at Tamworth. They were established from two to three years before the outbreak of war, and a considerable amount of capital was put into them by local residents. Stores were erected, staffs were appointed to handle the wool, and a very useful organization was established to conduct auctions in the selling season. But when the Wool Committee was set up, it ruthlessly closed these places, throwing numbers of local residents out of employment, and paying no regard to the complaints of the people who had invested their money in the concerns. I have passed on to the committee reams of correspondence containing protests from the people in those two country towns. No doubt other honorable members have done likewise on behalf of some of their constituents. En both cases with which I have dealt, very good arguments have been submitted in favour of decentralization. It has been pointed out that no advantage is to be gained by closing the two centres, which could be used conveniently as appraising centres under the present system of control. I have gone to a great deal of trouble to state the case on behalf of the two centres, and I have written reams of letters, only to receive in reply letters of about three lines stating that, after consideration of my representations, the committee has decided to adhere to its original decision. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr Mulcahy: -- It does not like to leave the capital cities. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- I want to know why it cannot give more sympathetic attention to the claims of country interests. Honorable members are bound to speak on behalf of the people they represent, whose capital has been wasted and whose businesses have been suddenly closed down, sometimes after a lifetime of activity. Men who have put thousands of pounds into the establishment of woolselling enterprises are to-day out of a job because of the action of the Wool Committee, which will not even consider appointing them as appraisers. I shall not discuss the question of whether it is proper to appoint men of German, Japanese, or French nationality as wool appraisers, because there are exporting interests which must be protected under this system of control ; but when the Wool Committee thinks fit to suppress country wool-selling enterprises, it should at least consider the claims of men who are thus deprived of employment. It seems that the chief disability under which country residents labour is that they do not live in the cities. They would be looked upon probably with much more favour by the committee if they did live in the cities. While country centres may not be large in comparison with capital cities, they are of considerable importance to' the economic life of country districts. Costly stores which have been built are now useless. In Tamworth, the sum of £3,000, representing the investments of 40 small wool-growers and others in that district, was put into the establishment of the selling centre. It was of great value to the district, but the action of the Wool Committee has rendered it entirely useless for the duration of the war. The sponsors of the Guyra and Tamworth centres have even offered to pay the expenses of appraisers to handle their wool, but the Wool Committee has rejected the proposition. It has decided that the number of centres already authorized must be the limit, and the other places can " go hang ". The manager of one concern has applied for appointment as appraiser, but his application has received no consideration. The Minister for Commerce should state the reason why something cannot be done to protect the interests of these country centres. It is stupid to destroy any form of enterprise in time of war. There is too much destruction already and, unfortunately, there will be a great deal more. The Wool Committee will not even go to the trouble of investigating the merits of the cases that are submitted to it. Although it may regard these matters as relatively unimportant, they are in fact of very great importance to country districts and involve the livelihood of many worthy and highly-qualified men. I have been gravely concerned about this matter for a long time, and I am glad to have the opportunity to ventilate my feelings now. I hope that my representations will reach the ears of members of the Wool Committee and indicate to them that they cannot continue as they have done without strong protests being registered by honorable members in this House. I refer now to the war-time control of the tin industry, which was discussed the other day by the honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony).** I subscribe to what he said about the necessity for increasing the price of tin. This is another instance in which the exportcontrolling authority has paid no regard to the welfare of poor people engaged in the industry. In my electorate, the mining centre of Tingha produces approximately 600 tons of tin out of an annual production of 900 tons for the whole of New South Wales. There are not more than twelve dredging companies engaged in the industry, but there are at least 300 fossickers, who have lived there all their lives and who make a bare living from scratching in the ground to produce small quantities of tin. *Silting suspended from 6.15 to 8 p.m. [Quorum formed.]* {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- I have already referred to the economic position of the tin-mining industry, and pointed out that the present system of control is inimical to the interests of the small miners who depend on fossicking for tin for a livelihood. Although there is no official board to "govern tin-mining, certain interests control it unofficially. I protest against the unfair treatment meted out by the unofficial control hoard to the small miners in stipulating that the minimum quantity of ore which will be accepted for assaying .shall be five tons. The smaller men claim that that requirement is excessive, and urge that the minimum quantity should be three tons. On behalf of the miners I have made strong representations to the Minister for Trade and Customs **(Senator McLeay)** in this connexion, and the miners themselves have held public meetings in support of their request for as low a minimum as possible ; but the unofficial control board has remained adamant and insisted upon a minimum of five tons. A similar stand is taken by the Wool Committee; no appeal influences it. Some of these boards adopt a dictatorial attitude. When representations are made to them, their only reply is a short, curt letter saying that they see no reason for altering their previous decision. The miners who suffer because of unfair treatment want to know what is the use of Parliament if their grievances are not redressed. The methods adopted by this unofficial control board are typical of the totalitarian methods associated with the export control system. The representations of members of this Parliament should be given consideration at least equal to that given to the wealthy interests which control most of our export industries. I feel this matter keenly, because I know of the poverty of some of the families engaged in tin-mining. Many of these miners have reared families, of good Australian citizens, some of whom are now serving with our troops overseas. They are entitled to protection from the Parliament of this country, especially when the industry in which they are engaged is subject to war-time control. The Government has fallen down on its job of dealing with the problems associated with the apple and pear industry. For some reason which I cannot understand, the representatives of Tasmania and Western Australia in this House appear to be satisfied. {: .speaker-JXL} ##### Mr Frost: -- How does the honorable member know that? {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- I know it because the honorable member who has interjected was previously the vociferous spokesman of the fruit-growers of his State but he has been quiet for several weeks. The growers of apples and pears in New South Wales are not satisfied; they .believe that they have been treated in a cavalier manner by not only the Minister and the Government generally, but also the Apple and Pear Board. Like the Wool Committee, that body acts in a dictatorial way and the Minister seems to have no control over it. Some time ago we were assured that steps would be taken to meet the wishes of the New South Wales growers, but nothing whatsoever has been done, except that we are told that matters are proceeding as originally intended and that possibly different arrangements will be made next season. That indefinite statement does not satisfy the growers in my electorate, for they have carried resolutions censuring the Minister for Commerce, the Government and the Country party, of which I am a member. I am mast dissatisfied at the reluctance of the Government to remedy the grievances of these growers. {: .speaker-KZF} ##### Mr Lane: -- The Minister appears to be afraid of the Apple and Pear Board. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- I think that is so. Like the Wool Committee, the Apple and Pear Board ignores resolutions protesting against its methods. Some members of the Cabinet made a big noise about these things before the composite Government was formed, but since the formation of the present Government, of which I am a staunch supporter, they have not done anything. I ask the Minister for Commerce, the Postmaster-General and others, who have said that something should be done for the growers of apples and pears, to see that something is done for them. There is a good deal of discontent in the wheat industry. I do ' not blame the Australian "Wheat Board for all of it, but I submit that more notice should be taken of complaints by wheat-growers about their representation on the board. The majority of its members represent the big wheat exporting interests and the millers. I admit that those interests cannot be ignored especially in war-time - they have built up an organization which must be protected - but the 70,000 wheat.growers in this country are more entitled to representation on the board than are the wheat exporting interests. Although the wheat-growers have received a good deal of assistance from this Government, they are definitely dissatisfied with the inferiority of their numerical representation on the Australian Wheat Board. I understood that that complaint was to have been rectified, but nothing has been done. {: .speaker-KZF} ##### Mr Lane: -- The; consumers should be given a chance. {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- I admit it, bat the growers of the wheat, who are the backbone of the rural economy of Australia, should receive the first consideration. They are engaged in a gigantic industry, and they are justly incensed at having been granted only a minority representation on the board which controls their product. It is of no use for the Wheat Board to say: "We know what we are doing. You must leave it to us. Our first business is to win the war". It is true that we must win the war, but that is no reason why we should take from the wheat-growers the power to control their own industry. The members of the Wheat Board are doing a good job, and they are capable men; but the wheatgrowers should have stronger representation. In fact, they should have a majority on the board. No logical argument can be advanced against this contention. The wheat exporting interests which, to-day, are in the majority, simply handle the wheat after it is grown, and that should not entitle them to the measure of authority that they are able to exercise. In general, my view is that the 25 control boards or committees, or whatever they may be called, are doing very good work; but there is, nevertheless, a great deal of dissatisfaction, particularly in the wool, wheat, apple and pear and tin-mining industries, about the kind of control that is being exercised. The interests of the producers are not being adequately considered by the majority of these boards. It has been said that the members of the boards know better than those engaged in the respective industries what ought to be done. That may be so, but if it is, they should give more information to the people who are vitally concerned. The publicity system of these boards is very bad. I suggest that the functions of the Department of Information should be expanded so that its resources could be brought to bear upon the operations of these boards. The people whose product is being controlled should be given the fullest possible information. It is not satisfactory that the boards should do practically as they like and that the Minister, who is theoretically administering them, should be more or less a rubber stamp. Things cannot be done in that way in Australia. When certain action is taken, the reasons for it should be announced. I ask: Are these boards doing the very best that could be done for the industries that they control ? Are they making sufficient information available to the producers who are vitally interested and are entitled to know what is going on? Is the representation on the boards as effective as it could be made? Insufficient consideration has been given to these points. {: .speaker-KZF} ##### Mr Lane: -- Was not the honorable member in the Cabinet when most of these boards were appointed? {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- No; most of them were appointed after the outbreak of the war. I was in the Ministry when the Apple and Pear Board was being formed, and I discovered quite a lot at that time. Among other things I learned that a Minister had quite a .deal to say concerning the personnel of the boards. About the time I left the Ministry, a considerable argument was being waged about representation on the Apple and Pear Board. As the matter had not been finalized when I retired, I shall say no more about it. But I know that a Minister who is well informed in respect of the industry that is to be subject to control, and takes pains to acquaint himself with the wishes of the producers concerned, may do a great deal to ensure that a board is appointed which will give satisfaction to the majority of the people concerned. I do not deny the ability of the members of these boards, but I question their methods. The outlook of the majority of the members of the controlling authorities in respect of wool, wheat, apples and pears and tin is unacceptable to the majority of the producers. The totalitarian policy which seems to be growing in popularity with certain sections of the people in this country, in relation to the control of primary industries, will not "go down" with the majority of our people. A board which is given control of an industry that provides a livelihood for perhaps hundreds of thousands of people should play the game by those concerned. Unless we in this Parliament take care to ensure that this is done, we may become very sorry for ourselves, because the temper of the people engaged in these industries is rising and even getting out of hand. I refer particularly to the wool, wheat, and apple and pear growers. There should be closer contact with the industries concerned. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr Mulcahy: -- Why not have a vote on the subject? {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- It is not before us in the form which will permit of a satisfactory vote. I wish now to refer to our muchabused Department of Information. I am sorry that the Acting Minister for Information **(Sir Henry Gullett)** is not in the chamber to hear what I have to say, for I am, perhaps, in a unique position, in that I am, possibly, the only person in Australia who is prepared to say a good word for him and his department. I consider that this department is doing a very valuable service for the nation. Similar departments have been established in practically every country in the world which is at war, and we in Australia could not do without this service. Yet the department has had to face a perfect welter of criticism. Whence does it come? It comes, in the main, from certain powerful groups of press interests, which always seem to know what they want and why they want it, and go out for it, irrespective of whether they may break political parties, the government, or the nation itself in the process. These interests have been belting the Acting Minister for Information day in and day out. They have accused him of being a weakling, an incompetent, and too old to. do the work of the department. These press attackers arc almost as disastrous to the country as the "fifth column" about which they write so much. I dispute their charges against both the Acting Minister and the department. I speak from a lifelong experience of the press. I can lay claim to be, in a small way at least, an authority on publicity and information. The interests which have been scarifying the department and the Acting Minister have a very poor case. Recently I have been studying British newspapers. I even spent a couple of hours in the library last night reading the *Moscow News.* I was surprised at what I read. It was educational. I am sorry some of the " hands off Russia " critics have not had an opportunity to read that newspaper. Of one thing I was convinced, however, and that was that the *Moscow News* was, without any question, 100 per cent, in favour of the Government. I did not in i* find one word that was in any sense critical of Stalin or of the Soviet regime. The newspaper was, without doubt, an official organ which carried out the instructions, of the dictators. In Australia, however, we find that nine months after the outbreak of the war the press is acting and writing practically as it did before war broke out. There has been no interference with the fundamental liberty of the press of this country. I have read the *Daily News,* the *Daily Telegraph,* the *Sydney Morning Herald--* {: .speaker-K9A} ##### Mr Gander: -- And the *Century?* {: .speaker-KVU} ##### Mr THOMPSON: -- No. It is 4d. a copy and I do not think it is worth it. All of the newspapers that I have read simply teem with criticism of the Government. The leading articles, the cartoons and the other matter published are most forthright and, in some respects, of a scandalous character. I refer particularly to the *Daily Telegraph,* which has been engaged in a ceaseless campaign against this Government, and .particularly against the Acting Minister for Information and his department. I must mention also the *Daily News,* which was recently criticized by the Prime Minister for its treasonable attitude towards our war policy. Can it be said that there has been restriction in respect of these newspapers, or that the censorship has been unfair ? The Department of Information is under the control of one of the most competent journalists in Australia, who not only served in the last war, but also wrote one of the most valuable volumes of our official war history. This honorable gentleman has taken a leading and an honorable part in the journalistic life of Australia, and his experience and ability thoroughly qualify him to give judgment upon publicity methods. Yet, some of the newspapers are flagellating him and his department, and also the Government and members of Parliament day after day, and declaring, in particular, that the members of this Parliament are weaklings and incompetent to express opinions in relation to the nation's war effort. It is extraordinary that the Acting Minister, who knows his job so well, and has a sympathetic attitude towards the press, should, for his pains, be abused and slandered, and declared to be incompetent, weak, and too old for his job. Apparently they are looking for some one a bit stronger. They might get him before long, and then they will be sorry. I speak as one who is associated with a provincial paper, and I say that the newspapers of Australia have a wonderful deal. They have had too much liberty. Look at the posters some of them put out, scare-mongering posters, almost disloyal in their implications, suggesting that everything had gone wrong, and that it is all up with us. It is enough to make the people panic. That sort of thing is an abuse of freedom in time of war. If there were no official control, what kind of stuff would the *Daily Telegraph* publish? There is no length to which it would not go to slander the Government, and hinder the country's war effort. Because it failed in its attempt to have **Mr. Theodore** placed in control of war industries, it has come out with a most vicious and slanderous attack on three capable and respected members of the Government. Surely no paper could enjoy more liberty than that. There is no ground for this attack on the Acting Minister for Information and his department. I have had less to do with **Sir Henry** Gullett than with any other member of the Government, but I know his record, and I know that he is thoroughly competent to control this department and is the most capable man in Australia to direct publicity. If he has any fault, it is that he is too lenient with the press. He is not drastic enough. He is not putting enough restraint on newspapers which are obviously abusing the liberty they enjoy. Some of them are so anxious to wreck the Government that they are prepared to wreck the nation in the process. It is time members of all .parties made a fight in support of their own prestige. The result of all these vicious, sectional, selfish and, in some respects, disloyal attacks on members of Parliament is to lower our prestige in the eyes of the people, to make them feel that they are leaning on rotten reeds in this time of crisis. If we think that to be true, let us get out; if we do not, then let us stand in our places and say what we think about it. {: #debate-60-s2 .speaker-KK7} ##### Mr JENNINGS:
Watson -- I desire to refer to the Commonwealth Investigation Branch, which is attached to the Attorney-General's Department. Several members of Parliament have received information regarding the activities of those associated with what is known as the " fifth column " in Australia. The Commonwealth Investigation Branch is charged with the duty of watching the activities of such persons, yet we are asked to vote the meagre sum of £4,630 for its upkeep. I have previously suggested that there should be more co-operation between this branch and the police departments of the various States. There is no doubt that there are subversive elements in Australia, but should complaints be made to the State police authorities, it will be found that the police have their own work to do, while the 'Commonwealth Investigation Branch has not a sufficiently large staff to investigate the complaints now brought before it. I suggest that the branch should be strengthened by the appointment of 30 or 40 approved returned soldiers. If this were done, it would relieve anxiety by satisfying the public that the subversive activities of members of the so-called fifth column were being properly investigated. {: #debate-60-s3 .speaker-KF9} ##### Mr GREEN:
Kalgoorlie .- The honorable member for New England **(Mr. Thompson)** had something to say about **Mr. E.** G. Theodore. Irresponsible persons outside Parliament often criticize honorable members, but members of Parliament, occupying as they do a sheltered position, and particularly Ministers of the Crown, should set a good example, instead of making slanderous attacks on a man occupying a prominent position in the community, a man whose boots they are not fit to wipe. I have in mind particularly the Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron),** who authorized a press interview in which he attacked **Mr. Theodore,** whom the members of the Loan Council almost unanimously desired to have appointed as co-ordinator of works-. The Minister for Commerce took advantage of the proposal to say some very nasty things about **Mr. Theodore.** As a result, I handed in a question to the Clerk of the House, but it was too strongly worded to be printed on the notice-paper in the form in which 3 drafted it. However, I shall read the expurgated edition. The question is as follows - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is it a fact, as reported in the press, that he said that he would not stand for the appointment of **Mr. Theodore** as Co-ordinator of Commonwealth Works, although at the meeting of the Loan Council on Tuesday repre, sentatives of the State Governments were reported as generally supporting the proposed appointment? 1. Is it a fact that **Mr. Theodore** had a career of service of fifteen years in a Labour cabinet in the State of Queensland, that lie held the position of Premier of that State for many years, and later held the position of Treasurer for the Commonwealth and filled that position with exceptional ability? 2. Did the Minister ever oppose the appointment of **Sir George** Pearce to the highly paid positions he at present holds? 3. Is the Minister's attitude towards the proposed appointment of **Mr. Theodore** solely due to the fact that **Mr. Theodore** is a distinguished member of the Australian Labour party? 4. In view of his attitude to this appointment, can he reasonably expect the workers of Australia to believe that his desire for *thu* unity of the .people is above all other considerations ? **Mr. Theodore** was the greatest Treasurer that the Commonwealth has ever had, and that is the opinion, not of members of Parliament only, but also of the heads of the Treasury. The honorable member for Bendigo **(Mr. Rankin)** protests, but I am not concerned with the opinions of a brigadier-general who is drawing two salaries, and who is only venting his spleen against a man ten times more capable than he is. The Government did not hesitate to appoint ex-Senator Pearce to a lucrative position when he was rejected by "Western Australia after having been tried for years. Because he was of the same political kidney as the Government, he was put into two jobs, but has any one ever heard of anything he has done since his appointment? All this talk of a national government is just humbug, as is proved by the statement of the Minister for Commerce about one of the leading Labourites in Australia. That is all I propose to say on the matter, but I could not let the occasion pass without speaking a word in favour of one of Australia's ablest men, a man who would have been worth millions to Australia in the position suggested. Listening to the criticisms of honorable members opposite, suggests the grotesque spectacle of minnows attacking a whale. I desire to bring under notice the lax attitude of this Government, and the Government which preceded it, towards the Japanese menace in our northern waters, and particularly to the way in which the Japanese have monopolized the pearling industry. Broome, on the north-west coast of Australia, depends almost entirely upon the pearl-fishing industry, and several pearling fleets are based on that port. Of late years, the Japanese ships have been fishing off Darwin, where large pearl beds were discovered by Australians. The authorities had limited the tonnage which each Australian boat could take, the idea being to divide the shell evenly among those engaged. However, the big Japanese sampans, with highpowered engines, swarmed down, and look 10 tons of shell for every ton taken by the Australian boats. Captain Gregory, an old master pearler, has written to me in the following terms: - >Just consider what these people have done there, in 1935 and previous years an average catch was 30-35 .tons, the record catch was 52 tons (as I think you know the quality is poor and does not compare with Broome shell ) . In H)38 we were fishing 14-18 tons and of course losing money, last year I laid up the majority of the fleet* after losing over £4,000 in 1938. Those that worked did very badly. [ merely give this as an illustration of what the Japanese did to the Darwin beds and they are infinitely larger than the Broome. They extend from Thursday Island on the oast to the Holothuria banks on the west, to the Arm Islands and New Guinea on the north, very many thousands of square miles and they are practically as bare as the palm of your hand, few, if any, boats will work this year. Characteristically enough the Japanese have ;even. lifted the seed, pearl shell, and taken it away to develop on their own beds at the Marshall Islands, near New Guinea. The beds off the coast of the Northern Territory having been depleted, it is feared that Broome, the last outpost of any size, with the exception of Wyndham, on the north-west coast of Western Australia, and the sole pearling centre on that coast, will be robbed of its pearlshell and have its beds depleted. 1 have received from **Mr. McKenzie,** the chairman of the Pearlers Committee in Broome, a letter from which I make the following quotation in respect of the sampan menace: - >Last season we had about fifteen of these interests working our waters, and now information is just to hand that at least 40 are coming this year. These people depleted the Darwin beds in about three years and will "do the same with ours, perhaps more quickly, particularly the famous 00-mile Beach grounds. These beds, probably the richest single stretch of marine wealth in the world, produce a particular type of shell which is sought by all markets and it is here the foundation of an; successful season is laid. > >The prospects for a better season, both in catch and price, arc brighter than for some years, and now these foreign interests arc coming to reap the benefit. It is most disheartening and the town as a whole is becoming very restless under the Commonwealth Government's lack of efforts to keep these people off our coasts. What is the reason? Can they do nothing by regulation or through diplomatic channels, or is it. that they just do not care? I can assure you that if these interests are not kept away our fishing beds will be cleaned out in three years, Broome forced to close down, and all the coast from the north-west Cape to Darwin made a present to Japan. I do not object to the Japanese fishing in their own waters, but what, I ask the Government, would be the position of Australian pearl fishers who attempted to fish off the coast of Japan? How long would they last? I have advocated for years that patrol boats should be sent along the coast of the north-west of Western Australia. They have been tried off the coast of the Northern Territory, but no effort has been so far made to patrol the coast of Western Australia. It may, of course, be inadvisable to do this. I recognize that there is a problem to be solved, but what has been done in other countries could be done in Australia if we had sufficient courage to tackle the problem. Perhaps the matter could bo settled in a friendly way. Let us take an almost parallel case in the United States of America. In 1937, off the coast of Alaska, there was an ugly position in connexion with salmon fishing. Off Bristol Bay, which was particularly rich in salmon, the Japanese, in order not to encroach on the 3- mile limit, laid a very heavy net two miles in length opposite Baffin Bay, and caught the salmon as they were entering the harbour. The migration of salmon *if* perhaps one of the most entrancing and unique features of natural history. As honorable members probably know, salmon are spawned in fresh water rivers and having remained in those waters - particularly those to which I am now referring - for upwards of two years, make out to sea and are lost for two years, when they again head for their home waters for the spawning season. No matter in what waters they may happen to be,, they return to those in which they were spawned. The Japanese, by their action, were rapidly depleting the salmon fishing trade of Alaska, to the detriment of the 30,000 persons engaged in it to whom it belonged, and who produced 50,000,000 dollars worth of salmon each year. The Japanese had already attempted to establish the industry in their own waters, but found it impossible to do so and had to obtain leases from the Soviet Government in waters off East Siberia. These very pushing gentlemen control 55 per cent. of the world's fishing trade in whale, salmon, and pearlshell. The salmon fishermen of Alaska sent to Washington representatives who demanded that a bill be passed to meet the position. Those representatives were told that the situation presented difficulties, and that outside the 3-mile limit from the shore line, the Japanese were free to fish. The 30,000 American fishermen in Alaska said, " If the United States of America Government does not do the job, we will do it at the end of a gun ". Consequently, a bill was brought forward. In 1938, a conference was held with Japanese representatives, and it was decided that the Japanese should withdraw from Alaskan waters and that every care would be taken to see thattheydidnotreturn.The bill introduced into Congress declared that salmon spawned in the waters of Alaska were the property of the United States of America and of citizens of the United States of America. With that experience in mind, Captain Gregory has made several proposals. He does not propose to blow the Japanese out of the water. I have been approached in Melbourne by men who have been forced out of the industry. They are of the same type as those Australians who have gone abroad to fight. They haveinformedmethat their boats, which represent their living, are worth nothing to-day, and have said that if the Federal Government is not prepared to take action, but will give them " an open go ", they will deal with the Japanese and retain the pearl-shell industry for a White Australia. Captain Gregory states : - >I feel certain that in three years pearling will be practically finished unless some steps are taken, and I suggest: - > >ThattheJapaneseGovernmentbeapproached through the senior Australian official is Tokyo, and the former be requested to withdraw these vessels from the Australian coast line, as their presence there is inimical to the defence of the coast. > >That the three-mile limit be extended to twenty as other countries have done, this, particularly in war-time, should be fairly easy. No other country would permit foreign vessels to operate near their coast. 3.The closing of the north-west ports to all foreign vessels as a war-time precaution, as the Dutch has already done with Koepang, Dabo and other small ports in the Dutch East Indies. > >The placing of a small patrol vessel on the coast. This would serve the dual purpose of a war-time and fisheries patrol. In most countries there is a fisheries patrol, which generally is nearly always carried out bythe navy in small sloops. 5.ThebetterattentionoftheCommonwealth Government to the matter which, though it may besmallenoughforthem, is draining the life-blood of the industry and must result in its collapse in the near future. > >You will remember the serious trouble of the Japanese poaching in the Alaska salmon fisheries. This was settled by the respective governments, and resulted in the complete withdrawal of the Japanese. > >The Dutch are suddendeath on them, and several boats have been sold in Batavia for poaching. Generous assistance has been given to the industry for several years by the State Government, but I am sure it will be of no avail unless this problem is tackled seriously and. prompt action taken. Even the closing of the ports to foreign shipping would be a simple war-time precaution and deterrent, but not quite sufficient to eliminate this trouble. I present this matter for the thoughtful attention of the Government, to see if something cannot be done in regard to it. I desire now to deal with the building of a road from Salamaua to Wau, in New Guinea. This matter was brought before the Government years ago, and it was supposed to have made arrangements to finance the project. The road was to be built from either Lae or Salamaua to the gold-fields. From Salamaua the distance is 5.5 miles as the crow flies, and from Lae it is over 75 miles. There was a conflict at first as to the route that the road should take. At present the country is being opened up by New Guinea Airways, to whom I give every credit for what has been done. Theirs was a. daring enterprise, and they have done good work. But it is impossible to cater for the needs of big mining companies and prospectors, as well as the living requirements of the people of Wau, without a road. The cost of air transport is so high because, whatever else the company has in mind, its main idea is to look after its own interests. It appears that the Government has permitted a divided sort of ministerial control of New Guinea, the affairs of which are administered in Canberra by both the Minister in charge of External Territories **(Mr. Nock)** - for whom I have considerable admiration - and the Attorney-General **(Mr. Hughes),** who was. Minister in charge of External Territorieswhen the proposalwas first brought forward. The right honorable gentleman considered that, if the matter were left to him, even though he had a full.time job as Attorney-General, he would be able to " put it across ". I have been continually on hi3 doorstep, and he has been as coherent in his replies to me in his office as he is in the replies thai; he makes to questions by honorable members in this House. He said to me, " Only hold off for a little while, my boy, and it will be all right". I have held off. I have been very gentle with him. I remember the time when he was a prominent Labourite who preached the doctrines that I espouse to-day. I thought that he might be " in my corner ". But something is holding him back, and paralysing his efforts. {: .speaker-KZ9} ##### Mr Riordan: -- 'What is it? {: .speaker-KF9} ##### Mr GREEN: -- Big business controls the Cabinet of this country, and Cabinet controls the Attorney-General. I was told that the Government had not decided upon the route that the road should take. There were surveys and re-surveys, until ultimately we heard that the No. 3 route had .been chosen. That is the route from Salamaua, between which town and Wau the distance is 55 miles. The AttorneyGeneral has advised me to wait for a while, because there is one very bad section that has not yet been fixed up. While I am endeavouring to obtain information in this Parliament from the Minister who has control of the matter and ought to know something about it at first hand, I am receiving letters from the secretary of the New Guinea Labour party in Wau, the most alive organization in New Guinea, so far as the needs of the whole of the people are concerned. I am glad to give it whatever assistance I can in this House. These letters say that the information I am given is all " hooey ". I have a copy of a letter sent by the Acting Government Secretary in New Guinea to the secretary of the mining association in Wau, with whom I also have correspondence. One would have thought that this Government would have been able to get something of the kind. That letter reads - I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 8th February, 1940, and to inform you that as the result of the report made by the Director of Public Works that the construction of a road along the route which follows deviation No. 3 does not present any insuperable engineering difficulty. We have been told that there would be landslides if the road were constructed. Even the president of the Guinea Airways Limited, in a speech in Adelaide, said that he was not in favour of the road being built in any circumstances and that it would be a great disservice to the people of Australia. He reached the height of absurdity when he said - Almost daily earth tremors will be far more costly than would appear to the uninitiated. He says, in effect, "If you want to be safe in New Guinea, for God's sake keep in our planes. Don't put a foot on the ground ". The mining association in New Guinea says that this story of daily earth tremors would be too silly for words, if it were not for the fact that there is malice in it. They say that there is a nigger in the woodpile. The Attorney-General has been telling me to wait a little while, but, according to the report of the mining association, on the 2nd April the Administrator, in his presidential address to the New Guinea Legislative Council outlined the road policy. It was the same old story. The report says that - Amongst other things he stated in referring to the Salamaua-Wau road that "the route decided upon by the Commonwealth Government has been divided into four sections and such progress has been made with the specifications for the first section that it is to be able to invite tenders for this portion of the work within the next two weeks ". That was at the beginning of April. Now we are nearly into June and we are told that nothing can be done. We are not even told the truth. The letter from the central administration to the mining association, portion of which I read just now, says that there are really no insuperable difficulties. The letter continues - Additional staff has been alloted to the road survey, and it is intended to expedite the preparation of specifications to permit two sections of the road - " A " " S " section at the Salamaua end - and " D " section at the Wau end - being let by tender as early as possible. Tt is anticipated that tenders in respect of section "A" will be advertised about the end of March, 1940. If one asks in Canberra whether any such advertisement has appeared, no one knows anything about it. The AttorneyGeneral's gestures, grimaces, and incoherencies get one nowhere. The administration's letter adds - A copy of the report submitted by the Director ofPublic Works following his inspection is not at present available for supply to your association- It had asked for it - and, in view of the decision that division No. 3 provides a practicable route for the road, monthly reports made in locating that route are no longer compiled. The work is proceeding as indicated in paragraph 2 above, and, in the event of any special information later becoming available, and likely to be of particular interest to your association, it will be communicated to you. Honorable members will see that some thing is the matter. I go now to the report of Guinea Airways Limited. The president of the company told) the people in 'Adelaide about a month ago that it was useless to contemplate a road, that there were too many earth tremors. "And", he said, " Guinea Airways must go on ". Let us see how Guinea Airways Limited has been going on. It started in February, 1929, with a paid-up capital of £160,000, made up of 80,000 7 per cent. preference shares and a like number of ordinary shares. Seven per cent.wasa substantialpercentage to offer, but what was paid? In 1929 the company had a net profit of £10,898 and paid a dividend of 20 per cent. If then doubled its capital and put aside £6,898 for reserves. As an accountant, the Assistant Treasurer **(Mr. Fadden)** will be able to see that a net profit of £10,898 and an allocation of £6,898 to reserves indicated a particularly sound investment. A dividend of 20 per cent. representing £4,000 was paid in that year. In the next year the company paid a dividend of 40 per cent. representing £8,000, and issued bonus scrip in order to sweeten the shareholders, who were having quite a good time. On £20,000 the bonus scrip represented 5s. all round. Talk about American gangster methods! They are not in it. In the United States of America the gangsters now and again get a visit from the federal officers, and a little shooting is done ; but those people in Guinea Airways Limited are the darlings of this Government. In 1931, the net profit was £24,877, and the dividend again 40 per cent. Transfers to reserves amounted to £4,877. These figures are taken from the *Wildcat Monthly,* which comments that there is an unexplained reduction of reserves by £2,375. In 1932, the company's profit was £28,725 - continuous progression in spite of the earth tremors ! Do not forget that for every man in the air, the company has to have eight men on the ground. Apparently it does not care what happens to those chaps, so' long as it rakes in the cash. As I said, the profit in 1932 was more than £28,000. The dividend was221/2percent. and transfers to reserves amounted to £11,850. The profit in 1933 was only £13,053 and the dividend 20 per cent., but in 1934 the profit soared to £30,202. That was, with the exception of 1930. the company's banner year. The dividend was again 20 per cent. and £15,202 went to reserves. The company had a very poor year in 1937. It wrote off £5,000 worth of doubtful debts and the shareholders received only 121/2percent.in dividends. The figures I have cited show that, whoever is suffering in New Guinea, at least the air companies are in the money. The mining association, which is a body like the Chamber of Mines in this country, states that - >A saving of £15 per ton would be made if a direct road from Salamaua to Wau were built. This is 55 miles in length. Freightsare and have been for the last two years21/4d. per lb. Lots of those aeroplanes can raise 6,000' lb. and get along with it in less than half an hour. Again I leave it to theAssistant Treasurer to use his great ability as an accountant to figure out what 6,000 lb. at21/4dperlb.for22 minutes on an eight-hour day would bring in - >Certain rebates are given to the large companies. Guinea Airways is keeping those large companies in its corner. Saving tominers generally by a road will bo £15 per ton. after paying a toll to provide interest and redemption of road loan. Savings to companies getting rebates will be £12 10s. per ton. I have a lot of matter with which I could clinch my argument, but I do nor desire to trespass upon the time of the House further, except to say that I consider that the matter which I have raised deeply concerns the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth took New Guinea over from the Germans. The people there are trying to develop a wilderness. It is the Commonwealth's responsibility to do right by them and make New Guinea a country worth while to live in. {: #debate-60-s4 .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY:
Richmond .- I do not propose to say very much, but what I do say will be confined to war issues. First of all, I offer my comment upon the suggested appointment of **Mr. E.** G. Theodore as Director-General of Commonwealth Works. I do not belong to the party to which he belonged, but the post of Director-General of Works is one of the most important in Australia to-day. Its purpose is to co-ordinate the works of the Commonwealth and the States and to concentrate on matters of Austraiian defence. Therefore whoever is entrusted with the task of that coordination has to be an individual of the highest calibre and organizing ability. **Mr. Theodore's** name has been thrown into the press as a suggestion. I have never met the gentleman, but I know his reputation, and I admire it : I admire rather his character and ability for getting things done. I am not concerned with what other attributes he may possess or with anything which may be charged or suggested against him. All I am concerned with at present is not what a man's religion is, not what " old school tie " he may happen to wear, but with whether he is a man who can do the job for Australia. Whenever any one comes to me looking for work, all 1 need to know about him is whether he can do the job better than some one else. Before **Mr. Theodore** is discarded, the names of all other people under consideration for the post should be placed upon the table, and then whoever is thought to be the most efficient man should be selected, regardless of all other considerations. It may be that there are other men who will be commended as people who could carry on this very important work, but, in view of the need of Australia for the best man, if **Mr. Theodore** stands above others, in SPitE of the press criticism and other criticism, he should not be discarded. This is probably the last occasion on which honorable members will be able to discuss matters of national importance during the present sittings of Parliament, and, therefore, I wish to raise another serious matter. I have no desire to raise a needless hue and cry after suspected Communists and subversive elements, but 1 point out that there is a very great need to secure unity of purpose in the conduct of this war. At no time in the history of this country have we been in greater peril than we are in to-day, and at no other time has it been more necessary that every section of the community should work towards one supreme goal. If there are individuals who are endeavouring to undermine the community from within by destroying the faith of citizens in the Government and in the cause for which we are fighting, then they are serving the enemy equally as well as if they were fighting against the British troops on the battlefields of France. It is necessary to take a very practical view of this matter. It is all very well to talk about civil liberties and civil rights, but all of our liberties and rights are in jeopardy at the moment, and the Government's duty is to investigate closely the activities of any person or society that may be suspected of endeavouring to weaken the national will to carry on this struggle. Many scurrilous stories are abroad. I quote an instance of the sort. I received a letter to-day from a person living far in the country. Its contents were along the following lines : - >I have heard in this town that British airmen, although they are supposed to be bombing the roads and communications behind the German lines, are scrupulously avoiding bombing the Krupp works at Essen. A friend of mine also received a letter couched in similar terms. The implication is that the Krupp works are being allowed to go free of attack because the money of British capitalists is invested there. This is not an isolated case. Had it been only one letter from an individual living far away in the country, I should have said nothing about it, but similar letters have been received by some of my colleagues from residents of Western Australia, northern Queensland, Victoria and central New South Wales, showing beyond doubt that the dissemination of this rumour was organized and carried out with one purpose - to make the people suspicious of the motives of Great Britain in entering this war. Individuals who retail a story like that should read the tales of the heroism of British aviators over France and Germany to-day. Such individuals are probably those who sit safely at home and do nothing at all to help to win this war. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- Why make a fuss about it? {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- That is a point to bc considered. Somebody suggested to me that this matter should not be talked about, saying that the worst thing to do would be to discuss it publicly; but it is so serious that it should be ventilated. It has even gained currency in our universities. The son of a friend of mine returned from a university the other day with this rotten story. A good loyal boy, the son of a returned soldier, had been undermined by this filthy propaganda and believed this story. {: .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr Wilson: -- Is the story untrue? {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- It is rottenly untrue to suggest that orders are given to British airmen to leave the Krupp works unscathed when the best blood of the British. Empire is being shed in the cause for which we are fighting. {: #debate-60-s5 .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- The son of the Tasmanian Premier has given his life for that cause. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- That is so. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr Martens: -- This story might not bc untrue. {: #debate-60-s6 .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY:
RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · CP -- It is. It is a modification of another story, which was current only a few months ago, that during the last war German armaments factories were within the range of British guns but were never shelled, because the money of British capitalists was invested in them. That story has been brought up to date. One honorable member suggested to me that I should say nothing about it, but I believe that the best thing to do in a case of this kind is to drag the untruth out and let the public know what is happening. It is the duty of the Commonwealth Investigation Branch to trace these stories to their source, and, having found the traitor, put him where lie cannot cause any more trouble. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- The Commonwealth Investigation Branch is doing its job quietly. It does not make any fuss. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- I . am npt satisfied that the branch is doing its' job so well as the honorable member.' suggests. I know from cases that ha ve -.come to my notice, but which I do not think it wise to discuss iu detail, that the Commonwealth Investigation' Branch.: Could. do a great deal more work than it is doing {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- If the Government would let it. . ' .v.';. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- The. branch should be very busy. These . matters are supremely important at .the' present time, and honorable members will.: not have another opportunity, to discuss them during the next few weeks. Within that time, the course of events may change considerably. Conditions are altering from day to day, and within the next month we may be called upon to make sacrifices that we cannot even imagine to-day. We are now living, under conditions that we could not have imagined three weeks ago, before the German forces broke through in Belgium. . I hope the tide will turn within the next month. I am confident that the war is. not. lost because a battle has been -lost. I repeat the words of Hitler-" The British Empire has always won the last battle ". I believe that it will do so on this occasion. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: -- -Napoleon uttered those words before Hitler. . ; {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- At any rate Hitler repeated them in *Mein Kampf.* But the Allies can win only under one condition - (hat every individual shall play his proper part. This Commonwealth will not be able to play its proper part if subversive elements, which are aiming secretly to bring the British . Empire crashing into ruins, are allowed .to carry on their work unfettered. I conclude my remarks on that subject by expressing the hope that while Parliament is in re: cess the Government will, give serious attention to the matters which I have raised. {: #debate-60-s7 .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr WILSON:
Wimmera .- We are all very concerned at the gravity of the situation that has developed overseas,, and when we hear references like those of the honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** . to the alleged activities of what is popularly known as the " fifth column ", we must think very hard. I have ideas that ".fifth-column " activities are not confined to one section of the people. I am convinced that this country has been sabotaged over a period of years, but not by the section of the community referred to as Communists. I believe that many of the people who are called Communists would be the first to take up arms in the defence of Australia if the enemy were at our gates. 1 am not defending people who are disloyal to the country, but I say plainly that the bogy of communism has been magnified beyond its true proportions. When I think of what has happened al) over the world during the last decade, 3 think of how the international financial hierarchy has held progress in check and tow the British banking system advanced millions of pounds to Germany to lay the foundations of that country's rearmament programme, at the same time starving the defence requirements of the Empire. What applies to the financial institutions of Great Britain applies equally to those of Australia. They are the real " fifth columnists ", the greatest danger this Empire has ever faced. The Government of this country, which we have in the past regarded as progressive, should grapple with this enemy and do whatever is necessary to defend and develop the country and give the people a standard of living commensurate with its natural wealth. The Government should have the courage to work out a solution for this problem and then make that solution financially possible. There is a great deal of cheese-paring in connexion with public works at the pre-* pent time, and in every State retrenchments are being effected. I have learned from many quarters that less money is to be made available for public works, and the recent decisions of the Loan Council have confirmed that news. I know that there are many men still out of work in this country. We are severely handicapped by the lack of skilled mechanics and engineers in our armaments factories, which it is essential to operate at the maximum rate of production. Without doubt, we have men in abundance willing and ready to offer themselves in the service of their country, but it is not enough that we should have men alone. Mere flesh and blood cannot stand up against the implements of war that are being used to-day. The reason why Australia does not possess modern implements to equip its men and give them a chance to defend their homes is to be found in the activities of the financial hierarchy, which has oppressed this and other countries of the world for many years. The totalitarian state, with which we are engaged in a life and death struggle, dealt with this problem long ago. All that it i3 concerned about now is to provide men and materials in sufficient numbers. It can soon produce any finance that is required. Until we adopt a financial system similar to that of Germany, we shall be facing destruction. If we tolerate the confidence tricks of the high financiers any longer, we will richly deserve the fate that will overtake us. A gentleman who holds an important position in one of the major wool-broking firms in Australia has handed to me a memorandum in connexion with the wool industry. I cannot do better than read from it - >This season 1039-40 after pressure from the wool dealers throughout Australia an agreement was reached whereby the National Council of Woolbrokers of Australia agreed for this season to only re-«lass their usual quantities, at the usual charge of id. against )d. per lb. charged by the wool dealers, who now have an association. > >You ' will realize that under auction the mixed lines of wool can be sold as mixed and at times fairly payable to the grower, but under the appraisement it is only when the wool is classed into correct type, does the grower get the benefit. > >The ruling from the Central Wool Committee (in accordance with the above pressure from the wool dealers) at present reads - No woolbroker is to re-class any client's wool unless he has received definite instructions from the growers. The wool is then valued as it stands, naturally not to the growers' interest, as it is only natural the valuer would value on the easy side. The mixed wool is then sent out of the brokers store to be re-classed for which the unfortunate grower is charged Jd. per lb., whereas it could be classed in the brokers stores for t of a penny. Ordinarily when a wool-grower sends his wool to a broker and it goes into the store, the broker, without being specially instructed to do so, will, if he thinks that the wool requires re-classing, have it reclassed. In this case however, he has been informed by the Central Wool Committee that he is not to re-class the wool ; it must be sold as it comes into the store. This direction will mean that woolgrowers will have to pay the added cost of having the wool taken out of the store and re-classed. That is an anomaly to which I hope the Assistant Minister **(Mr. Fadden)** will direct the attention of the Minister for Commerce. I want the Minister to give this matter his close attention, because it relates to a privilege which has been given to the wooldealers of Australia. "We know that every penny that can be realized on wool is needed by the growers to meet their commitments. The memorandum continues - >A movement is on foot at present that all wool under the appraisement scheme for next season, that needs re-classing, be handled 'by the wool dealers and not by the wool brokers, who have in the past, always re-classed clients' wool they thought necessary to re-class so as to obtain a better return to their client. Then follows a statement which I hope is not correct for I should be sorry to think that the Country party stands for any injustice to the small wool-growers - >I am led to believe the Australian Country party is well behind the move and should it come to pass, you can take it from mc, the wool-grower, especially the smaller woolgrower, is going to suffer. The memorandum continues- - >I am a firm believer in controlled marketing and hope and trust that wool auctions will never be held in this country again. I consider the wool dealer one of the many encumbrances in the trade, yet hero they are using a so-called Country party to-day to further blind the wool-growers by trying to create a monopoly of the reclassing of the growers wool prior to appraisement. I have here also a lengthy pamphlet which has been published in Western Australia. It sets out many of the anomalies that have occurred as the result of the present management of the marketing of our wool. There is extreme dissatisfaction in this connexion, despite the assurances of the Minister for Commerce to the contrary. At this juncture, I wish to say that the wool-growers are looking to the Government to correct the numerous anomalies that exist. I ask the Government to take some of the wool-growers into its confidence and confer with them in relation to this matter. After all, they are the people most concerned. The people who control the wool scheme are men who have always handled wool for profit ; men whom the wool-growers in the past have regarded as their servants are now dictating to the growers. As most honorable members know, the district which I represent in this House produces the largest aggregate amount of wheat of any federal electorate. {: .speaker-K9A} ##### Mr Gander: -- Gwydir holds the record. {: .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr WILSON: -- I have received numerous communications from wheatgrowers in my electorate and other wheatgrowing districts of Australia referring to the present straitened circumstances of the industry as the result of the meagre payments that have been made from the No. 2 pool. I have brought this matter forward in this chamber on former occasions and there is very little that I can now add, except to make a final appeal to the Government to be as prompt as it can be in making further payments to the growers. The real problem is one of finance. The wheat-grower expects to be assured that, in return for his service in feeding the nation and producing the means of establishing export credits without which the nation cannot meet its overseas commitments, he -will be able to meet his overhead expenses and the cost of cultivation and harvesting, keep out of debt, retain his equity, and enjoy a reasonable standard of living for himself and his family. If he can be assured that the necessary finance to balance his budget will be available and that his responsibility ends with the efficient and successful carrying out of production, he will not worry about the details of any stabilization scheme, about proposals for restriction of output, or about where the money comes from. That assurance should be forthcoming to any one who renders service to the nation. We are debating a matter of principle, but too many honorable members appear to regard it only as a matter of political necessity or expediency. It is only reasonable that the wheat-grower shall be able to meet his costs, retain his equity, and enjoy a reasonable standard of living. Australia is able to see that that is done. Even if a decrease of production be inevitable, that of itself will not meet with objection, so long as the equity of the primary producers is recognized. Wheatgrowers do not produce wheat just because they particularly like growing wheat; they produce it because they are desperately anxious to hang on as long as possible to what they have built up, and they will resist any proposal which threatens them with what they rightly regard as unfair and unnecessary loss. When any new financial principle is being discussed, the Government is loud in protesting that the people's savings must be protected, but, apparently, it is prepared to disregard the savings of the primary producers, in the form of assets, equipment and reserves, which are the result of many years of labour and national service and are their only security against nearly £200,000,000 of accumulated debts. If those assets are not preserved and the wheat-growers are allowed to get into financial difficulties, it will take many years to reconstruct the position. Wheat-growing is a valuable industry which has rendered wonderful service to the nation and played a most important part in the country's development. I believe that Australia possesses the necessary resources to provide security for its vital industries without loss to others, and therefore I believe, as the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** said in a recent, series of articles distributed by the Commonwealth Department of Information, that " Money is only a mechanism for getting things done". I hope that the Treasurer will live up to his words and assist the wheatgrowers while doing the other things that are necessary for the successful prosecution of the war. The wheat industry is in a position today that other industries may occupy in the future. Indeed, some are in a similar position already. Australian wheatgrowers ask for nothing for themselves that they do not believe others are equally entitled to receive, and that is why they want this problem settled on the basis of a principle that will be applicable to others also. I can see no hope of such a permanent solution other than by the provision of finance which is not burdened by debt and interest. That can be done only by the Commonwealth Bank. Meanwhile, the wheat-growers must bc able to carry on; otherwise when the Government is finally forced to employ the nation's credit, it will be too late to save many of them. Their savings will have. been destroyed utterly, a fate from which the Government claims to be protecting them when it refuses to change it,3 primitive and orthodox financial policy. What is perhaps worse, these men will, by reason of their poverty or bankruptcy, and lack of working capital, be prevented from rendering any productive' service at all to Australia, at least for a time, with the result that the nation's wealth will be reduced, and that, in turn, will mean that the national credit .will be less. The employment of the national credit means the continued employment of men aud resources, so that that credit can be increased in the future, and the wheat-grower will be enabled to carry on as' a producer of wealth with some security of tenure and equity. I am very glad that we have a Treasurer who recognizes these important progressive principles of finance. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I thought the honorable gentleman said something about orthodox methods in relation to me. {: .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr WILSON: -- The Treasurer recognizes these important progressive principles but only time will tell whether he will have the courage of his convictions and give effect to them. If he seeks to do so he will obtain support from honorable members on all sides of the House. I appeal to the Government to employ our resources to the very utmost in our war effort. No time should be lost in regimenting every section of- the community into a united national front. I agree with the statement that the British people never know when they are beaten. When the history of this war is written, the epic stories of previous wars will bc repeated. In the meantime, while we are waging the conflict, every effort should be made to prevent our people from suffering undue hardships, which should not he necessary in a country so richly endowed as Australia is. If the Government will adopt a progressive policy, it will win the united support of the whole Parliament and nation. {: #debate-60-s8 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936 .- I bring under- the notice of the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender),** as the representative in this House of the Minister for Trade and Customs **(Senator McLeay),** the necessity to make an immediate pronouncement in relation to the Government's intentions concerning the cotton industry. The facts in relation to this subject, "which is of great importance to Queensland, were brought under the notice of the Minister for Trade and Customs on the 14th May last by a deputation from the Queensland Cotton Board, which asked for the early introduction of cotton bounty legislation. At the end of last year the Government introduced a cotton bounty bill which was not acceptable to honorable members generally. In consequence of the criticism it evoked, the measure was withdrawn, and the provisions of the .then current legislation were extended for one year. That year will expire on the 30th November next. The sooner legislation is introduced to meet the circumstances of the industry for the next five years, the better it will be for all concerned. The cotton-growers should now be making their plans for felling scrub, clearing land and financing their next year's crops. The cotton crop is planted during September and October of each year. The growers are at present engaged in harvesting last year's planting. The last harvest totalled 12,500 bales of cotton, but the demand of the cottonspinners in the southern States is for approximately 60,000 bales of cotton per annum. Although the members of the Queensland Cotton Board stressed the urgency of the case and the Minister listened sympathetically, no statement giving details of proposed legislation has since been made on the subject. Unfortunately Parliament is about to enter a recess, which will last until early next month and probably until early in August. If the cotton-growers could be given some assurance concerning .the intention of the Government to stabilize the industry, and particularly concerning the rate of bounty to be paid, they would be able to proceed with their operations with a degree of certainty which is at present entirely absent. It would not be sufficient to continue the bounty at the existing rate. This industry should be expanding, and, to enable it to do so, a higher rate of bounty "is essential, at least to cover the next two or three years until certain water conservation and irrigation schemes, which the Queensland Government has in prospect, have actually been provided. The Australian market at' present requires between 60,000 and 70,000 bales of raw *cotton* annually. It is estimated that within the next three years, our requirements will total 100,000 bales a year. Our production amounts to only 12,500 bales per annum. There is, therefore, much room for expansion in this industry. If we could grow all of the cotton we need, it would be unnecessary for us to purchase such large quantities *from the United* States of America. We pay £22 a bale for the cotton that comes into this country from the United States of America, and the expenditure of that money accentuates the difficulties of our overseas credit problem. Efforts are being made to switch over to Indian cotton ; but the Australian spinners require the types of cotton grown in the United States of America, from which country our seed was imported. We are growing the same type's of cotton as those grown in the United States of America, and I do not think that it will be possible for us to use Indian cotton except for low-grade goods. There are approximately 3,000 cottongrowers in Queensland, and the Cotton Board, believes that this number could be greatly increased, if it were in a position to engage in propaganda. I have reason to believe that the Government intends to propose a rate of bounty which will not be satisfactory to the industry. {: #debate-60-s9 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
UAP -- The honorable member must have access to some information! {: #debate-60-s10 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- Sometimes we hear things that, perhaps, we should not hear. I can say definitely, however, that I was not given the information by any officer of the department. The Government of Queensland has made a request to the Commonwealth Government for a higher bounty for the cotton' industry, and to show its own bona fides, it has caused surveys to he made with the idea of establishing water conservation and irrigation schemes in areas likely to be suitable for cotton-growing. Advances have also been made to individual farmers to enable them to ' provide their own irrigation plants. Money is also being provided for cottongrowers to sink bores on their properties to increase their water supply. A great water conservation and irrigation scheme has been planned for the Wura district in the Dawson Valley in central Queensland. Approximately £500,000 is to be used to dam the river and make possible the irrigation of 60,000 acres of land for cotton-growing. There is, therefore, every justification for my request that an early pronouncement should be made that the Government, intends to provide a bounty at a satisfactory rate to cover the operations of the next five years. It is well to remember, however, that water conservation and irrigation will play a big part in increased production of raw cotton in the future, and will be the permanent solution of the production problem. This industry gives a living, not only to the 3,000 cotton-growers, but also to 4,000 seasonal workers, to say nothing of the workers engaged in cotton ginneries and cotton oil mills. As the average cotton farm is only 35 acres, it will be obvious to the Treasurer that it is a small man's industry. Many cotton-growers, of course, engage in other activities, such as dairying and pig raising; but in some of the new closer-settlement areas, cotton is grown exclusively. The delay that has occurred in the announcement, of the policy of the Government in relation to this industry has caused a lack of confidence, and cotton-growers have hesitated to borrow money to clear land, fell scrub, erect fences and buy farming implements. This retarding of development has been observable for several years, and is duc entirely, to the uncertainty of the outlook. As fully 85 per cent, of the cotton-growers reside in my electorate, and as I have been urged in telegrams from representatives of the growers, to bring this matter under the notice of the Government, I ask that immediate consideration be given to the subject and that a pronouncement be made of the intentions of the Government, if not tonight, at any rate, to-morrow, before Parliament adjourns. I also direct attention to the important subject of shipbuilding, a definite Government pronouncement on which is overdue. A day or two ago, I read a press statement by the Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** concerning the difficulty of securing ships to take our produce to the other side of the world. Millions of bushels of Australian wheat which lie at railway sidings throughout the country are being subjected to deterioration through the mice plague. It is important that this wheat should be shipped overseas without delay. The same applies to our butter, meat and dried fruit. The Government should approach the matter in the same spirit as did the Labour Government at the outbreak of the last war. Then a Com-' monwealth shipping line was established, which saved the primary producers millions of pounds. It may be difficult to buy ships to-day, but has the Government made any attempt to buy them in the United States of America or anywhere else? Has it done anything to lay the foundations of a shipbuilding industry in Australia? The Government has not given this matter the consideration which its importance deserves. Undoubtedly, the Government's repeated refusals to do anything .to establish a shipbuilding industry in Australia, and to ensure that all ships necessary for our local requirements are constructed here, show the powerful influence of the big shipping' companies and associated financial interests. The shipping companies here do not want vessels to be built in Australia. Although they want protection against overseas shipping lines, they want to continue buying their vessels overseas, and in that, apparently, they have the support of the Government. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- That is an old one. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- It may be, but it is true. The Bruce-Page Government sold the Australian Commonwealth Line of Steamers for half its value, and there is still £500,000 of the purchase price unpaid. That tragic deal will never be forgotten by the people of Australia.' The last war afforded a remarkable example of the value of shipping. One would have thought that the Government would have profited from our experience at that time when Australia was forced to build vessels at an exorbitant cost, because the British Government was finding it difficult to get vessels for itself with which to transport food, troops and raw material. During the last war £7,000,000 worth of shipping was destroyed. Up to March, 1940, 312 vessels were destroyed, representing 1,065,000 tons, of which Britain lost 157, aggregating 590,000 tons; France 14, aggregating 66,000 tons; and neutral countries 141, representing 408,000 tons. The total losses of British and Allied shipping during the war amounted to 15,000,000 tons. In 1917 Britain lost 911 vessels, aggregating 3,700,000 tons. Early in 1940 **Mr. Churchill,** -the present Prime Minister, warned the Empire that it must be prepared for continued losses of ships. Our Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** has admitted that one of the major problems of the war is the shortage of shipping, and he said that the shortage was certain to become still more acute. Speaking in Perth, in 1938, the Prime Minister said - >I shudder to think that the day might come when Australia, as u Pacific power, would be dependent *on* non-British shipping for carrying on heT ordinary commercial enterprises, and, therefore, for her existence. As the result of the negative policy of the Government, Australia is in a serious position, because it cannot get enough shipping to transport its produce overseas. There would not be the present unfortunate muddle in connexion with apples and pears if we had the shipping space to take our surplus overseas. It was because the Government was unable to guarantee that the surplus would be lifted that the present trouble has occurred. Those who took part in the Corio by-election campaign know how indignant the growers were because of the Government's lack of foresight in this regard. At the beginning of this year **Senator McLeay,** who was then Minister for Commerce, said that the question of chartering ships for the transport of timber, wine, barley and fruit was then being considered, which meant that it was problematical when shipping space would be available for the despatch of those important products overseas. The position in regard to our wheat is much the same. In May, 1940, the present Minister for Commerce stated that vessels still- had to be chartered or booked to take 58,000,000 bushels of wheat, which had been sold to Great Britain, and referred to the magnitude of the shipping task which still lay ahead of the department in connexion with further shipments of wheat. He declared that " The key to the situation is not what we can grow, but what we can ship ". Undoubtedly, had shipping been available, much more wheat could have been sold to other countries. The primary producers are in a very difficult position at the present time, because of the shortage of shipping, but what is the Government doing about it? The Government should be more frank with members of this House. For years past, many foreign countries have been engaged upon an extensive programme of shipbuilding. In those countries, every assistance is given by way of cheap money, grants,- and a substantial mail service, and by legislation providing that local trade shall be reserved for local shipping. It is also required that all repairs be done, so far as possible, at home. In Japan, an extensive shipbuilding programme has been entered upon. Japanese shipowners receive government assistance ranging from 25 per cent, to 50 per cent, of the cost of building vessels. The Australian Government, however, has said that it can give no assistance to the shipbuilding industry. On the 6th January, 1937, an article appeared in the *Sydney- Morning Herald* to the effect that, during the previous three months, the Japanese Communications Department had adopted a five-year plan for the development of the shipping industry, involving budget disbursements amounting to 150,000,000 yen. In the year 1937, British shipping increased by only 250,000 tons, compared with an increase of Japanese shipping by 500,000 tons. The *Sydney Morning Herald* of the 15th March last year stated that Japan planned a merchant marine of 7,500,000 tons by 1942, with a building programme of 750,000 tons a year. America nas also gone in for shipbuilding on a large scale. In the United States of America vessels are built with Government money lent at 1 per cent, interest, and even less. **Mr. E.** E'. Johnson, oriental representative of the United States Maritime Commission, who visited Australia in December, 1939, said that the Maritime Commission had begun a programme for the building of 500 vessels in ten years - one each week. This programme, he said, had been devised to replace 1,350 ships which would he obsolete by 1942. Hepointedoutthat90percent.of theshippingoftheUnitedState ofAmericawasengagedincoastwiseandlakestrade,andonly 9percent.inforeigntrade.America andJapaninsistthatallcoastaltrade shallbedonebylocalshipping.I mentionthesefactstoshowthegreat importance' that foreign countries place on their shipbuilding activities and shippingservices. Theyrecognizethatmerchantshipping is not only an economic necessity to, the life of the nation, but also an essential, link in its defence. Australia, given the opportunity, could alsobecome a great maritime nation. Theimportance of a policy of selfsufficiency inthisregardcannotbe estimated,andtheCommonwealthGovernmentshouldlosenotimeinestablishing, theindustry here.We have built vessels, that will compare favorably with vesselsconstructedanywhereelseinthe World.Undoubtedly we have most of the necessary technical skill. We have the requisite material resources, and it is estimatedbyMrDavis,directorofthe CockatooIslandDockyard, and by **Mr. Jackson,secretaryoftheFederated** Shipwrights Union, that less than 15 per cent. ofthematerialusedonshipconstructionwouldhavetohavetobeimported. Mr.E.E.Johnson,theoriginalrepresentativeofthe United StatesofAmerica MaritimeCommission,haspointedout thatintheUnitedStatesofAmerica, thecostofaboutintheshipyardisabout 50percent.ofthecostofanewship. Healsostatedthatthe total labour costs, includingthose associated with the preparationof material, represent nearly 80percent. of the cost of the ship. This clearlyshows the great importance of the shipbuilding industry to the working conmuinity of Australia. Labour costs in shipyards in 1933 averaged 74.8 cents anhourintheUnitedStatesof America,81cents an hour in Britain and 5.6 cents. an hourin Japan, where 65 hours a week areworked. Despite the high cost in America, the American Government launched out on an extensive shipbuilding- programme to cover a number of years. The Australian Government allows all of our ships to be purchased in England, while, at the same time, British firms are having many of their vessels built in European ports. The American Government also insists that all repairs to ships shall be carried out in American ports. A 50 per cent. duty is imposed on the cost of repairs effected to ships of the United States of America in foreign ports, if those repairs are not considered to be essential to the safety of the ships. **Mr. Johnson** also pointed out that the standard of wages and conditions in the United States of America is the highest in the world, and that the law provides that ships' crews must include 95 per cent. of United States of America citizens. Like Japan, America has reserved its coastal trade for its own shipping. In a recent leading article, the *Sydney Morning Herald* stated that Great Britain had announced a plan for the mass production of vessels in British yards, and the newspaper asked why Australia was not helping in this work. What is the Government doing in this regard? Has it prepared any plans for the launching of a shipbuilding programme? All that it has done is to bring clown a puny bounty scheme providing a bounty on ships up to 1,500 tons. That is only toying with the problem. Between 1919 and 1937, Australian shipping companies had built for them overseas 92 vessels aggregating 137,000 tons. During the same period, Commonwealth and State Governments had sixteen vessels, representing 14,000 tons, built overseas. Australia could have built all of those vessels. Why should it be warned against the establishment of a mercantile marine of its own, as it has been, by those who argue that it is not economical to build ships in this country? The same cry was raised against proposals to manufacture equipment of different kinds. Just as prejudice was broken down in respect of the manufacture in Australia of woollens, worsteds, boots and shoes, and other commodities, so must it be broken down in connexion with shipbuilding. Numerous reports have been made on this important matter, but the Government has been afraid to tackle it. It appointed one of the cleverest men in the Public Service, **Mr. A.** R. Townsend, a chief executive officer of the Department of Trade and Customs, to investigate the matter. That gentleman spent considerable ' time, and went to infinite pains, to draw up a voluminous report, which, I understand, has been in the hands of Ministers for weeks, yet no pronouncement has been made as to what is intended with respect to it. We have the right to ask whether the Government has considered the Townsend report on shipbuilding, and has come to any decision upon it. Does the Government propose to make a pronouncement before Parliament goes into recess to-morrow, or is the report to be pigeon-holed, as have been numerous other reports on shipbuilding which have been made by royal commissions and committees of inquiry at a cost of thousands of pounds? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I assure the honorable gentleman that the report will not ba pigeon-holed. It is rather important, before one gets on a horse, to see in which way it is going. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- The Government takes a long time to see in which way it is going. We have come to the conclusion that it does not know whether it is coming or going, in respect of this matter and quite a number of other matters. To-day it goes forward and to-morrow backward. The Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** is evidently not in favour of thy construction of vessels in Australia. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- On the contrary. The honorable gentleman knows what my views arc. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- According to the *Sydney Morning Herald,* of the 11th January last, the honorable gentleman said that war-time was not the best time to attempt to re-establish this industry. He evidently wants to put the matter "on the long finger". {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- The honorable gentleman should read the whole text, of my remarks. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- I have given the most important part of them, and have como to the conclusion that the honorable Keiitlem.au wishes to treat, the matter in " Kathleen Mavourneen " fashion. We want action now. Who knows how long the war will continue ? Is it not important that a'n immediate start should be made willi the establishment of this industry? I believe that its foundations should be laid to-day, and that if it were established it would contribute very substantially to the post-war employment ot hundreds of artisans who, during the war period, will be engaged in the construction of aeroplanes and in the Royal Australian Air Force. I do not want the Government to pigeon-hole the matter until after the termination of the war. A start should be made with it now, when there is a serious shipping shortage. Millions of bushels of wheat are being ruined because they are lying in stacks at railways sidings, and our beef and butter producers, our dried fruits growers, and other primary producers, do not know when their products are to be shipped overseas. The Treasurer wants to wait until after the war. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I did not say that. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- The honorable gentleman said that war-time was not the best time to attempt to re-establish the industry. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- For the simple reason that during war-time there is a great demand on our trained artisans. I do not say that it should not or could not be done. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- We realize that there is a great demand on our trained artisans; but we also know that many artisans are out of employment and looking for work. Members of Parliament have been approached by them with a view to making representations on their behalf. In the shipbuilding industry, as in other industries, it is not only trained artisans who are required. For every dozen trained artisans, 50 or 60 untrained or semi-trained men could- be employed, and they would become partially trained while engaged in the shipbuilding yards. As opposed to the Treasurer's contention, there is that of his colleague, the Attorney-General **(Mr. Hughes)** who is noted for not seeing eye to eye with other Ministers in all matters. That right honorable gentleman has said that Australia should make an immediate start with shipbuilding. On several occasions he has urged that this course be followed.' I should like to know whether we are. to assume that he is unable to secure the adoption of his view. Who stands in the way? Surely the matter is of transcendent importance? {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr HOLLOWAY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · FLP; ALP from 1936 -- Ministers " pass the buck " from one to another. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- Ministers tell us that we should have a parliamentary recess, so that they may be able to bend their energies to the important problems of state that are waiting to be solved. Let us hope that this will be one of the matters they will tackle, and that when the House next meets they will not repeat the statement we have so frequently heard, that "this matter is still under the consideration of the Cabinet, and until a decision has been come to no pronouncement can be made ". We are tired of hearing replies of that sort. As the honorable member for Reid **(Mr. Gander),** who has been a keen advocate of the establishment of the shipbuilding industry in Australia, has said on many occasions, "We are bored to death by these replies of Ministers ". We have the technical skill that is needed and Australia abounds in all of the requisite raw materials. In the last war, Australia proved its ability to build both merchant ships and naval vessels. Since that time, our industrial position has considerably improved. To-day we have a steel industry, the efficiency of which rivals that of any other similar industry in the world. To-day, it is exporting steel in large quantities to Great Britain. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- It produced 90 per cent, of the material for the construction of the Sydney Harbour bridge. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- That is so. Australian workmen have proved again and again their ability as craftsmen. Australia is in a very much better position to build vessels to-day than it was at the outbreak of the last war, and is able to stand the impact of the war much better than it could in 1914, due largely to the development of its great secondary industries, which make us a more self-reliant people. The development of secondary industries, which employ over 500,000 persons, enabled this country to weather the bitterness of the economic depression with less misery and privation than would have been the case had we been dependent solely upon primary industries. Shipbuilding would provide employment for a large number of persons, and open up opportunities for the training of some of the 50.000 boys who leave schools every year, many of whom seek in vain to be apprenticed to different trades. Cockatoo Island Dockyard has the capacity to build vessels ranging up to 13,000 tons. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- It is now working to full capacity. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- True, it is working to full capacity now, on defence vessels, but on many occasions during the last ten or twelve years it has worked at only half capacity. There are other dockyards that could be utilized. In the past, vessels of an aggregate tonnage of 500,000 tons have been built in dockyards at Williamstown, in Victoria. What was done in the past could be done again. Several vessels were built at Newcastle and are now in commission on the Australian coast. The floating dock and equipment necessary to carry out extensive shipbuilding operations at Newcastle are getting into disrepair because they are not being used. That dock could accommodate vessels up to 10,000 tons. Where there is a will, there is a way. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- At the present time we must count on building vessels of a greater tonnage. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- The Treasurer may voice objections and raise obstacles, but if the Government would only tackle this matter enthusiastically, I believe that something could be done. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- Something will be done. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- Bounties and other forms of assistance have been given to practically every industry in Australia, yet the best that this Government can do in respect of shipbuilding is to offer a paltry bounty for the construction of small vessels of up to 1,500 tons, allowing vessels of a much larger size to be purchased overseas and brought to Australia free of duty. The shipping companies, I submit, have the ear of the Government, and can exercise too much influence in the direction of preventing the shipbuilding industry from receiving necessary encouragement. If this industry were established, they might have to pay a little more for their vessels. The Government should be true to the people of Australia, not to overseas interests or the shipping combine. It should take immediate steps to proceed with an extensive shipbuilding programme, and at the same time establish a. Commonwealth shipping line of the type established by the Labour party after the outbreak of the last war, which was a great boon to the primary producers and the people of Australia generally. The Australian Commonwealth Line of Steamers saved the primary producers millions of pounds during the war period, yet at the behest of the shipping combine was sacrificed by the Bruce-Page Government for one-half of its value ; and only £500,000 of the purchase price has not been received by the Commonwealth. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Price)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 1611 {:#debate-61} ### COMMONWEALTH INSCRIBED STOCK BILL 1940 *In committee* (Consideration of Senate's amendments) : Title- >A bill for an act to amend section fifty-two B of the Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Act 1911-1933. > >Senate's *amendment -* > >Leave out the words "sectionfifty-twoB of". Clause 1 (Short title and citation). *Senate's amciulmen t -* After clause 1, insert the following new clause: - " 1a. After section fifty-oneB of the Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Act1911-1933 the following section is inserted: - 51ba. Any person who contravenes or fails to comply with any term or condition on which a Treasury Bond, Debenture or other prescribed security is issued or sold, shall be guilty of an offence against this Act. Penalty: One hundred pounds or imprisonment for six months, or both and, in addition, an amount equal to Ten per centum of the nominal value of the Treasury Bond, Debenture or other prescribed security in respect of which the offence is committed.' " {: #debate-61-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP .- I move- >That the amendments be agreed to. The purpose of these amendments isto provide a penalty for nonobservance of the conditions of sale of war savings certificates that no person may purchase or own certificates of a face value exceeding £250. During the debate on the second reading of this measure the right honorable member for Yarra **(Mr. Scullin)** pointed out that there was no penalty for a breach of the condition limiting the purchase of securities to £250, and the Assistant Treasurer **(Mr. Fadden)** promised to have the bill amended to provide for such penalty. The clause now proposed to be inserted in the bill will render persons who do not observe that condition liable to a fine up to £100, or imprisonment for six months, or both. An additional penalty is provided equal to 10 per cent. of the nominal value of the securities in respect of which the offence- is committed. Motion agreed to. Resolution reported; report adopted. {: .page-start } page 1611 {:#debate-62} ### TRADE AGREEMENT (GREECE) BILL 1940 {:#subdebate-62-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from the 22nd May (vide page 1094), on motion by **Mr. Spender)** - >That the bill be now read a second time. {: #subdebate-62-0-s0 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE:
Capricornia .- I think that this bill will result in some good to Australia and that it will tend to maintain that friendly feeling which has always existed between Greece and Australia. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted. Bill - *by leave* - read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1611 {:#debate-63} ### SALES TAX ASSESSMENT BILL (No. 1) 1940 {:#subdebate-63-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-63-0-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Treas urer · Warringah · UAP -- I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. The bill is designed to remove certain anomalies in the existing sales tax law which are at present causing serious and unjustifiable loss of revenue and present features of administration that cause the incidence of the tax in certain circumstances to be uneven and inconsistent. The first proposal is that section 17 subsection 2 be amended to delete the excepting words thereof. In 1936 a suggestion was made in legal circles that the then existing legislation gave no authority for the collection of tax from a person who manufactured goods and applied them to his own use unless the goods were of a class which that taxpayer himself sold in the ordinary course of his trade. The law was, therefore, amended 'by inserting sub-clause 2 of section 17, which resolved the expressed doubt by adding the words - >For the purpose of this section, goods manufactured in Australia by a taxpayer and applied to his own use, means goods manufactured in Australia in the course of carrying on a business and applied by the taxpayer to his own use whether for the purpose of that business or for any other purpose, and whether or not those goods are of a class manufactured by that person for sale. But so that the law when adjusted to remove the disability might not err in the opposite direction and cause tax to be payable on all sorts of semi-manufactured goods, made use of in the course of manufacture of other goods, an exception was made in the following terms : - hut shall not include any goods so manufactured and applied if the taxpayer establishes to the satisfaction of the commissioner that goods of the same class and for the same particular case of use are not manufactured in Australia by the taxpayer or by any other person, for sale or for supply to some other person in the circumstances specified in subsection, 4 of section 3 of the act. It was thus hoped that full legal authority would be given to the collection of tax on those goods which a. manufacturer made for his own use, but which otherwise he would have had to purchase, but would. not cause tax to be payable upon other goods used as aids but which were of n'on-commercial character, for example, jigs and certain types of gauges and tools. It soon became apparent, however, that the terms of the exception offered a means of establishing freedom from tax for a class of goods which it was never intended to cover. Notwithstanding the fact that the law places upon the taxpayer the task of establishing compliance with the conditions of the excepting provision and that the Commissioner -of Taxation has required rigid adherence to a comprehensive programme of proof, he now estimates that plant and1 machinery of an annual value of £400,000 are escaping taxation. At the present rate of tax the sum lost to revenue in the forthcoming year would be £33,000. The class of goods which now most commonly form the basis of claims for freedom from tax are machines, machine tools, dies, &c, which are of such high precision finish, or contain some manufacturing secret that is not procurable in the ordinary course of commerce in Australia. Manufacturers are, therefore, confronted with the alternative choice of importing their requirements or making the goods themselves. When they import the goods, sales tax is payable upon them, but when they make them themselves they escape payment of the tax. In the circumstances it is considered that the excepting words should be deleted, and the bill before honorable members does that. Honorable members who may have fears that this withdrawal will require the Commissioner of Taxation to levy tax on the incomplete tools or jig3 . earlier referred to, are reminded that the section applies to "goods manufactured in the course of carrying on a business ", and it is believed that there is sufficient safeguard against such fears in the fact that, first, the articles taxed must be " goods ", and, secondly, they must be "manufactured". The next proposal contemplates an increase of the sale value of goods which are made by a retailer wholly out of tax-paid materials and are treated by him as stock for sale by retail. At present, the proviso to section IS (2) of the Sales Tax Assessment Act (No. 1) provides that the taxable sale value of goods so made shall be the amount of wages paid in respect of the manufacture of the goods plus 20 per cent, of that amount. Thorough investigation has shown that this basis is unduly low, and it is now proposed that the percentage) to be added to manufacturing wages shall be increased from 20 per cent, to 75 per cent. At the same time, it is proposed to give taxpayers the option pf - paying tax either on this sale value, or on a wholesale selling value ascertained in accordance with the ordinary provisions of the law. This last-mentioned factor will preclude any hardship from arising in any case in which the addition of 75 per cent, to the wages cost may result in a value in excess of a fair wholesale selling price. Associated with the foregoing is 'a further proposal to provide a definite and stable sale value for goods made up foi retailers who supply tax-paid materials to " outside " manufacturers. Difficulty has been encountered in determining the sale value upon which retailers should account foi1 tax, and in some instances the department has been obliged to accept payment on values representing merely the cost of making up the goods. Some retailers originally represented that, as tax had been paid on the materials and on another person's charge for making up, the total sale value upon which tax was so paid was generally equivalent to the amount for which comparable goods could be purchased by a retailer from a wholesale manufacturer. This view, however, has been proved by investigation to be unsupported by fact. Persons who make up the goods in question are to a considerable degree home-workers who work in intense competition on margins of profit which earn them a bare living. In other cases the makers-up are persons of alien birth who set up in business with nothing more than a few machines and who, by dint of long working hours and keenly cut prices, endeavour to gain a footing in the manufacturing activities of this country. The charges made by these manufacturers to the retailers do not include a wholesaler's normal gross profit. These traders do not have to take into account the legitimate overhead charges involved in the business of a wholesale manufacturer, who carries the expense, and risks associated with the buying of materials and with the selling of fashion goods and whose factories are conducted upon high standards to conform to the present ideal of social welfare. After full investigation, it has been concluded that, in general, a retailer in paying tax on cost of materials andmaking-up charges is paying tax on total values equivalent to the wholesale manufacturer's costs of corresponding goods, but the wholesaler is paying tax on his sale price of those goods, which naturally includes his profit as well as costs. The present position is thus anomalous. It is considered that a balance would be achieved by requiring retailers in these cases to pay tax on sale values equal to the making-up charges plus 331/3percent.Thisisprovided for in the bill. These two amendments of section 18 of the act will result in the receipt of additional revenue estimated to amount to £32,000 per annum. The bill is commended to honorable members as a measure which will remove anomalies and practical difficulties, and will serve in the total to increase the revenue by approximately £65,000 per annum. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Forde)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 1613 {:#debate-64} ### SALES TAX EXEMPTION'S BILL 1940 {:#subdebate-64-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-64-0-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP -- I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. The first purpose of this bill is to ratify an exemption which was authorized by the Government to commence on and from the 3rd September, 1939, of goods which are purchased, imported or manufactured by organizations not carried on for the profit of individuals, for example, Australian Comforts Fund, Lord Mayor's Patriotic and War Fund, New South Wales; Young Men's Christian Association, Salvation Army, &c, for donation to, or for the use, comfort or recreation of, members of the Defence Forces of the Commonwealth. The classes of goods which are covered by the exemption include: - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. Articles for the personal use and comfort of the forces; for example, socks, shirts, underwear, toilet requisites, &c. 1. Marquees, tents, huts, established at camps and elsewhere for the use of members of the forces. 2. Furniture and fittings for such huts. 3. Equipment for indoor and outdoor recreation. 4. Urns, cooking stoves, crockery, cutlery, &c, for serving food, &c, to the troops. It is probably unnecessary for me to expound at any great length the virtues of the action which is proposed. Every one is well aware of the splendid service which is being rendered by organizations in their efforts to minister to the greater comfort, mentally and physically, of members of our fighting forces. I should, however, explain that the Government has not found it possible to extend the scope of the proposed exemption to apply to individuals who may purchase goods for donation to the troops, not because the Government sees any material difference between the efforts made by individuals and those made by organizations, but because of a real practical difficulty in connexion with the purchases by individuals. The latter, as a rule, purchase small quantities' of materials by retail at a point far beyond the actual taxing point and such purchases are made in hundreds of thousands of transactions. The identification of the sales tax in the selling price £s almost impossible and the amount, if ascertainable, discloses the retailers' margin of profit. Organizations, on the contrary, buy on a much larger scale in considerably fewer transactions and the basis of buying is in most cases different. The Government has the same admiration for individual effort as for organized effort, and it suggests that if the conditions prevail by which organizations could obtain exemption, individuals desiring to bring their transactions into line for exemption might do so by arranging them through a regularly-constituted organization. Provision is also made in the bill to extend exemption to goods for official use by the representatives in this country of other nations. The present item covers trade commissioners and consuls and the amendment now being made is a natural result of this country's progress as a nation of the world. In the existing law an exemption is provided for exposed cinematographic films for facilitating the circulation of international educational matter. The present item requires that a certificate of purpose be given. Since the original item was enacted the certifying authority has been changed, and the clause now inserted rectifies the position. The opportunity presented by the necessity for presenting this bill has also been taken to remove two anomalies which the Commissioner of Taxation reports are causing concern in his administration and which, because of their difficulties of interpretation in their present form, appear to have been widened far beyond what the legislature originally intended should be covered. The goods concerned are shortbread biscuits and medicated confectionery, and the proposal is that in both instances the exemption should be withd drawn The story in regard to shortbread biscuits is not a happy one from the sales tax point of view. Exemption was granted originally, not because any.body thought that shortbread biscuits qualified for exemption by being a basic foodstuff, but because of their allegedly close association with the products of pastrycooks, most of which had been exempted. It was thought that- some competitive anomaly would arise if the biscuit manufacturers were called upon to pay tax on shortbread biscuits, whilst pastrycooks might escape taxation on shortbread products because they were sold as cakes, and so an exemption was enacted for shortbread biscuits. But the last position has proved to be worse than the first. ' Claims have been made in respect of all types of biscuits merely upon the ground that they contain some "shortening". Probably any honorable member who has not attempted to define what shortbread is in Australian commercial circles will wonder why any difficulty should be experienced. He will have in mind that product for which Scotland is famed. But let him not imagine that his task would end so easily. Climatic conditions, marketing conditions, the varying quality of the ingredients and the varying tastes of the people of the Commonwealth and of the people within the States of the Commonwealth have all played a part, it is claimed, in giving to shortbread in Australia a standard which is not necessarily the same as in Scotland. And so the matter has gone on. The Commissioner of Taxation at first invoked the aid of outside expert opinion, but found variation as between experts; also that expert opinion would admit to exemption a very wide range of " fancy " biscuits which appeared to him to be quite incompatible with the intention of the legislature. He next tried a fairly liberal, though inflexible, formula of ingredients only to be met by the flat refusal of manufacturers of certain biscuits, whose products were deficient in some one or other ingredient, to pay tax. The Commissioner now reports that, in his opinion, the exemption is not capable of satisfactory administration. He reports further that the alleged trade anomaly which was feared when the exemption was granted will not, in fact, be experienced. The Government accordingly proposes that the exemption be withdrawn as from Monday next the 3rd June, 1940. The annual benefit to the revenue from this source is estimated at £40,000. As far as medicated confectionery is concerned, exemption is obtained under item 38 of the exemptions act under the heading of "Drugs and Medicines for use in the prevention, cure or treatment of sickness or disease in human beings ". Medicated confectionery may be broadly divided into two classes, viz. - {: type="i" start="i"} 0. products which have a definite therapeutic value, which are marketed for medicinal purposes only, and which are definitely unsuitable for consumption as sweetmeats, for example, " laxative chocolates ", " chocolate-coated worm tablets " iodized throat tablets ", " digestive lozenges ", &c. ; and 1. products which, although they may contain a medicament, for example, menthol, liquorice or eucalyptus, and make some claim to therapeutic properties, are designed to appeal to consumers chiefly as sweetmeats, for example, barley sugar, menthol jubes, honey and glycerine jubes, eucalyptus jubes, voice jubes, . &c. Acting on legal advice, the Commissioner of Taxation has allowed claims for exemption of medicated confectionery if it contains one or more active medicaments, and is sold in containers which bear a definite printed claim that the contents are for the treatment of certain diseases. It is apparent, however, that exemption is being obtained, on the abovementioned grounds, in respect of a wide range of goods which would not ordinarily be classified as drugs or medicines, and which are purchased by consumers primarily as sweetmeats, for example, barley sugar, honey and glycerine pastilles, throat jubes and pastilles, menthol pastilles, eucalyptus chips or drops, Irish moss gums or jubes, menthol and eucalyptus pastilles, black currant and glycerine pastilles, cough drops, gums and pastilles. butter menthol drops, &c. These products secure exemption because of the inclusion therein, in small quantities, of some medicament, and because they are claimed to be for the relief of sore throats, &c. Other like products, for which no medicinal claims are made, are subject to tax. It is considered that medicated confectionery of this kind is outside the intended scope of the exemption, and it is certain that the loss of revenue at present being sustained in this respect will be increased as manufacturers become aware of the conditions under which they can exploit exemption of their products. It is estimated that the additional revenue which will be gained by the withdrawal of this exemption is £20,000 per annum. Medicated confectionery will become taxable on and from the 3rd June. 1940. I commend this bill to the favorable consideration of honorable members, pointing out that apart from the item relating to goods for the use of members of the Defence Forces and representatives of other countries, the proposals will remove anomalies and at the same time increase the annual revenue from sales tax by £60,000. {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr Jolly: -- Have copies of the bill been circulated? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- They should have been circulated. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr Beasley: -- There are no copies here. {: #subdebate-64-0-s1 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE:
Capricornia .- It is very important that honorable members should have an opportunity to peruse this measure, and in ordinary circumstances I would insist upon the adjournment of this debate, as I did in the case of the previous debate. Unless the proceedings of Parliament are to become an absolute farce, it is important that honorable members should first be given copies of the bill in order that they may study them before entering into debate immediately after hearing a rather lengthy and complicated speech by the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender).** I realize that the Treasurer is working at high pressure trying to rush legislation through this House- {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- Copies of the bill were circulated two days ago when it was read a first time. Honorable members must have seen the bill before to-night. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- We are not children; All of us, including our latest recruit, have been here long enough to know that honorable members each morning receive such a volume of bills and papers that it would be unreasonable to expect them to read each one and be conversant with the terms of every bill. Before bills are called on copies should be placed on the table of the House in order that honorable members may have an opportunity to examine them. I am strongly opposed to this method of rushing important legislation through the House in the dying hours of the parliamentary sittings^ {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr Martens: -- The House could sit next week. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- Yes. Even the Treasurer, clever and learned in law as he may be, would not be able to rise and make a satisfactory speech if it had not been very carefully prepared by some distinguished public servant, who probably spent three or four days on the job. However, taking into consideration the circumstances in which the Treasurer finds himself, and the fact that the Government has made up its mind to close Parliament to-morrow, we have no option but to do our best in considering this measure to-night. This method of attempting to force an important taxation measure down honorable members' throats at 11 o'clock at night, when many of us did not realize that it was to be brought forward- {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr Anthony: -- There is nothing in the bill. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- The honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** says there is nothing in it! The Treasurer has just told, us that it will mean the extraction of an additional £60,000 a year from the pockets of the taxpayers. That might not matter to a man who is not affected by the bill, but it is of very great importance to taxpayers. I have bad time for only a cursory glance at a copy of the lengthy speech which the Treasurer has just made. I know that parts of the measure are not objectionable, but I do object to being asked to deal with it without being given proper notice. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- The bill has been on the notice-paper for two days and copies have been circulated. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- Although the bill was read a first time two days ago, I do not think many honorable members have read it. In any case, we did not hear the Treasurer's speech until a few minutes ago. What opportunity did we have, therefore, to grasp the purport of the measure? I protest emphatically against being asked to pass this legislation without proper consideration. {: #subdebate-64-0-s2 .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY:
Lilley .- Although copies of the bill were circulated two days ago, I have not yet had an opportunity to examine it in detail. 3 therefore ask the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** whether the exemption affecting goods used for defence purposes applies to marquees, tents and similar articles which are actually owned by the Salvation Army, Young Men's Christian Association or other organizations, but are loaned to the department? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- Did I understand the Treasurer to say that the result of the removal of the sales tax exemption from shortbread would mean an increase of revenue of £40,000 a year? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KA9} ##### Mr JOLLY: -- That seems to be imposing a hardship on a Scottish-bred product. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- Manufacturers took advantage of the provision, so that exemptions were granted for biscuits which were not truly " Scottish-bred ". They were only "half and half". {: #subdebate-64-0-s3 .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY:
Leader of the Australian Labour party - non.Communist · West Sydney -- I do not know whether it would be in order for me to lecture the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** on the procedure usually followed in this Parliament, but perhaps a word or two would not be out of place. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I do not mind. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Even if copies of a bill have been circulated, it is still the responsibility of the Minister in charge of it to provide the House with copies of the bill when he is making his second-reading speech; in order that honorable members may make themselves conversant with its contents. That is the procedure which I have always expected. After the Minister has delivered his second-reading speech, the debate is adjourned in order that those members who are particularly interested in its provisions will be better able to understand them in the light of the Minister's explanation. For the Minister to challenge our attitude- {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I challenged the honorable member's statement that the bill had not been circulated. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- I move- >That the debate be now adjourned. **Mr. SPEAKER (Hon.** G. J. Bell).The honorable member having spoken to the question before the Chair, cannot now move the adjournment of the debate. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Then I shall vote against the second reading of the bill. {: #subdebate-64-0-s4 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Before putting the question, it is only right that I. should say that the distribution of bills is the work of the officers of the House, for which I am responsible. The statementthat the bill had not been circulated appeared to be a reflection on the officers concerned, as bills are always circulated on the first reading. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to. Clause 3 (Amendment of schedule). {: #subdebate-64-0-s5 .speaker-JVR} ##### Mr NAIRN:
Perth .- An amendment is desirable to cover a group of foods for invalids and infants, namely, baby rusks, milk arrowroot biscuits and baby rice biscuits. Those foods were not included in the general group of foods for infants and invalids, with the result that they thereby lose the exemption under the flour tax. I have communicated with the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** on the subject, and he has suggested that the anomaly can be overcome by departmental action. That method has the advantage of requiring those asking for the exemption to prove that their produets come properly within the definition of food for infants. I accept the suggestion of the Treasurer. {: #subdebate-64-0-s6 .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY:
Leader of the Australian Labour party - nonCommunist · West Sydney -- I gathered from the second-reading speech of the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** that the exemptions were to apply only to supplies for the Military Forces, but if that be so, it seems strange that the Treasurer expects to obtain £60,000 more in taxes. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- Shortbreads and medicated confectionery are being removed from the exemption list. They have no relation to the exemption granted in respect of foods purchased by organizations for the supply to the Defence Forces. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Does this proposal, interfere in any degree with the list of exemptions that formerly applied to foodstuffs which are considered to be requirements in the wage-earning group? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- They are not affected. Only two items have been taken from the list of exempted items and placed in the field of taxation. One relates to shortbread biscuits, which have been removed from the list of exempted articles because the exemption was being abused. From this source it is expected that £40,000 will be obtained. The other item relates to medicated confectionery. Claims for exemption have been lodged in respect of certain jubes and coughlozenges which were not intended to be exempt. They will now come into the field of taxation. These two items are expected to produce £60,000. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- With the exception of foods for the fighting forces, does it leave the sales tax law the same? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- Yes, exactly the same. Clause agreed to. Clause 4 agreed to. Title agreed to. Bill reported without amendment; report adopted. Bill - *by have* - read a. third time. {: .page-start } page 1617 {:#debate-65} ### SALES TAX ASSESSMENT BILL (No. 1) 1940 {:#subdebate-65-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from page 1613. {: #subdebate-65-0-s0 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE:
Capricornia .- In the brief time at my disposal, I have glanced through the measure. I do not intend to oppose the bill, which is designed to remove certain anomalies in the existing law that we are told by the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** are causing serious and unjustified losses of revenue. En view of the financial (position and the necessity to raise as much money as possible for defence purposes, and asthe amendmentswillincrease revenueby about £65,000 a year, the Opposition will support the measure. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate. {: .page-start } page 1618 {:#debate-66} ### INCOME TAX COLLECTION BILL 1940 Bill brought up by **Mr. Spender,** and read a first time. {:#subdebate-66-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-66-0-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Trea surer · Warringah · UAP -- I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. The purpose of this bill is to widen the authority of the Commonwealth to enter into an agreement with any State for the deduction of State taxation from the salaries, wages or allowances of Commonwealth officers. The present Income Tax Collection Act enables the Commonwealth to enter into an agreement to make such tax deductions where the amount of the tax deduction is measured by those emoluments. In the present agreements with four States, the deduction is confined to State taxation which is in the nature of unemployment relief or emergency taxation, and which can be definitely calculated on the rate of salary or wage being paid at the time of the deduction. In the State of "Western Australia, the financial emergency tax will cease on the 30th June next. Thereafter it is to be incorporated as part of income tax. In order to facilitate collection at the source by instalments from all employees, government or private, rates of deduction of 6d. in the £1 on salaries and wages up to £8 a week and 9d. in the £1 over that amount are being imposed by that State. These deductions will enable the employee to build up a credit for application to his income tax liability which will be advised to him in the second half of the financial year by assessment based on his taxable income of the previous year. As the State legislation imposes a rate of deduction from salaries and wages, and not a rate of tax thereon, the Commonwealth has not the power under the existing Commonwealth legislation to continue even the present deductions after the 30th June next. In order to give the State that measure of desirable assistance in the collection of tax from Commonwealth officers, and to afford to those officers the same relief as is extended to others in private or State employ, it has been deemed necessary to submit the present bill to extend the power of the Commonwealth to enter into an agreement for the deduction of taxation, not only where a rate of taxation at the source is imposed, but also where a rate of deduction at the source to meet the taxation is made. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Forde)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 1618 {:#debate-67} ### GOLD MINING ENCOURAGEMENT BILL 1940 Message recommending appropriation reported. *In committee* (Consideration of Governor-General's message) : Motion (by **Mr. Spender)** agreed to - >That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue be made for the purposes of a bill for an act to provide for financial assistance to the States for the development of the goldmining industry and to make provision for and in relation to refunds of gold tax. Resolution reported. Standing Orders suspended ; resolution adopted. *Ordered -* >That **Mr. Spender** and **Mr. Fadden** do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution. Bill brought up by **Mr. Spender,** and read a first time. {:#subdebate-67-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-67-0-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Trea surer · Warringah · UAP -- I move - >That the bill be now. read a second time. The purposes of this bill are to provide - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. for financial assistance to the States for the development of the gold-mining industry; and 1. for refunds of gold tax. In September last a bill was introduced to impose a tax on gold, equal to 75 per cent. of the excess price over £A.9 per fine oz. This bill was held up in the Senate. To avoid loss of revenue an excise duty was imposed at the close of the session to operate from the 15th September, 1939. The rate of the duty was 50 per cent. of the excess over £A.9. The reduction of the rate from 75 per cent. to 50 per cent. was influenced by representations for concessions to prospectors and low-grade propositions. Legislation was passed in December to give effect to the tax previously collected as an excise. It was decided at that time to give relief to the bona-fide prospector by exempting him from tax in respect of the first 25 oz. of gold delivered by him in each year. This relief operated from the 15th December last. The Government has had under consideration the granting of further relief, and this bill is now submitted to give effect to the new proposals. This bill is entitled the Gold Mining Encouragement Bill. It mainly - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. provides for refunds to persons other than bona-fide prospectors; and 1. provides for grants to the States for the assistance and development of the gold-mining industry. Representations have been made from time to time -by persons engaged in the gold-mining industry for rebates or exemptions from the payment of the gold tax in the case of low-grade mines and marginal producers. After full consideration, the Government proposes to provide relief in these cases. Accordingly, the bill provides for the grant of a refund of the whole of or part of the tax in those cases where producers are working at a loss or at a profit not exceeding 30s. per oz. of fine gold. The refund will, in no case, exceed the amount of the tax, and profits with the assistance of the refund will not in any case exceed 30s. per oz. of fine gold. It is proposed that the refunds shall be made by the Commonwealth after report and certification by the Mines Department of the State concerned or such other competent officials of the States as may be agreed upon. In considering the basis for the refund allowance will be made for the cost of - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. Mining or obtaining ore or other material actually treated for the purpose of producing gold; 1. Treatment; 2. Realization; 3. Development; 4. Depreciation ; 5. Administration expenses. The details in connexion with the fixing of these costs will be prescribed by regulation, except that development will be fixed on the actual cost for the period under review, provided that it does not exceed the average cost over the preceding two years or the average of £2 per oz. of gold, whichever is the lower. Depreciation of plant and machinery will be allowed at the rate of 121/2 per cent. on the reducing values. The effect of this provision for refunds will be to guarantee to marginal producers, on the present price of gold, namely £10 133. 3d., a profit of 30s. per fine oz. if their costs exceed £8 6s. 7d. per oz. but do not exceed £9 3s. 2d., and to producers whose costs exceed £9 3s. 2d. but do not exceed £10 13s. 3d. a profit ranging from 30s. decreasing to nothing, according to the excess of costs over £9 3s. 2d. To the extent to which their costs exceed the full price of gold - £10 13s. 3d. per oz. - they will, of course, make a loss. It is anticipated that this refund to marginal producers will cost about £100;000. In addition to the marginal producers for whom provision has been made by way of a refund of tax, there are a number of companies to whom some assistance by way of loan would be advantageous from the point of view of increasing the production of gold and thus benefiting Australia's dollar exchange at the present time. As a step towards practical assistance to these producers it has been decided to make a grant to the various States of £150,000, to be distributed on the basis of the 1939 production of gold. It was felt that this was the only reasonable basis to adopt. As 75 per cent. of the gold produced in Australia is won in "Western Australia, that State will receive about 75 per cent. of the grant. Other States will receive assistance in the proportion that their production bears to the total Commonwealth production. The allocation of the grants to States on this basis is - It is realized that the amounts provided for South Australia and Tasmania are very low, but as these States are very small producers of gold this is unavoid-able. The amounts made available to each State will be paid out by it to the mining industry at its own discretion for the development of the industry. Any amounts repaid to the State by the producers to whom advances are made will be Used by the State for further advances of a similar' description, and will not be repayable to the Commonwealth. No variation is proposed in connexion with the refunds to bona fide prospectors, which still remain at 25 oz. for each prospector in each year, commencing on the 25th December. It is estimated that this refund might cost about £90,000 per annum. In order that the whole of the provision for assistance to the industry will be made in the one act, the " refunds to prospectors" clause is included in this bill, and, if the bill be passed, I shall introduce a short bill to amend the Gold Tax Collections Act by deleting the " refunds to prospectors " clause. The total assistance to be provided is estimated as follows: - The tax on the gold produced in Australia is estimated at the present price of gold to produce about £1,400,000 per annum. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Green)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 1620 {:#debate-68} ### MOTOR VEHICLES AGREEMENT BILL 1940 {:#subdebate-68-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from 29th May *(vide* page 1512), on motion by **Mr. Menzies** - >That the bill bc now read a second time. and upon the amendment by **Mr. Curtin** - > >That all words after " That " be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following words: - "the opportunity to manufacture motor-car chassis, including the engine, be afforded to more than one Australian company whose capital, structure and control arc iu accordance with section 0, sub-section (1), paragraphs (o) and (&) of the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Act 1939, and that immediate steps be taken to amend the proposed; agreement between the Commonwealth and Australian Consolidated Industries Limited to give effect to the foregoing; and, furthermore, that in the event of more than one Australian company being established for the said purpose, the number of engines ami the total amount of bounty payment bo reviewed ". {: #subdebate-68-0-s0 .speaker-N76} ##### Mr MENZIES:
Prime Minister · Kooyong · UAP *.- by leave-* The Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** has asked' me to explain the position in relation to this bill. Honorable members will recollect that this afternoon I moved, pursuant to notice, for leave to bring in another bill on the same subjectmatter. After further consideration it has been decided not to proceed with that motion. Consequently the bill that was being considered last night is now again before the House, not as a Government measure, but as a measure to which I, as the leader of a previous Government, am committed. It is well understood that some of my colleagues are opposed to this measure and that, upon joining the Ministry, they retained the right to vote against it, if they so desired. In those circumstances I do not propose to proceed with the bill referred to in my motion of to-day. My colleague, the Vice-President of the Executive Council **(Sir Henry Gullett),** made a statement last night respecting the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition. To the object of that amendment, I take no exception. Its purpose is to broaden the basis of the payments to be made under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Act, so that more than one Australian company may be able to take advantage of them. If amendments designed to achieve that end are moved at the committee stage of the bill - assuming that the measure reaches that stage - I, .as Minister in charge of the measure, will accept them. I am prepared to go that distance but no farther. I understand the object aimed at by the Leader of the Opposition, but I point out to him that if his amendment be agreed to in its present form, the motion for the second reading of the bill will be defeated, and the bill will pass from the notice-paper. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- That is as it should be ! {: .speaker-N76} ##### Mr MENZIES: -- The honorable member for Ballarat **(Mr. Pollard)** will have an opportunity to support his opinion when the division is taken. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- How does the Prime Minister know that that will be the position ? {: .speaker-N76} ##### Mr MENZIES: -- I have been exercising my mind in recent years, in marked contradistinction to the honorable member for Batman **(Mr. Brennan).** In order to make my position quite clear I repeat that if the bill reaches the committee stage, and amendments are moved to it, in committee, to give effect to the purpose which the Leader of the Opposition has in mind, I shall accept them. My colleagues in the Cabinet will, of course, remain free to vote as they please, in accordance with the arrangement that has been made with them. {: #subdebate-68-0-s1 .speaker-009FQ} ##### Mr CURTIN:
Leader of the Opposition · Fremantle -- *by leave* - The proposal I had in mind in moving my amendment to the motion for the second reading of this bill was to ensure that the agreement which it was proposed to make between the Commonwealth Government and Australian Consolidated Industries Limited would be in such terms as would not debar any other Australian company from undertaking the manufacture of motor-vehicle engines in accordancewith the terms of the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Act, which was specially mentioned in my amendment. {: .speaker-N76} ##### Mr Menzies: -- That means, I take it. that the structure and control of the companies must comply with the terms of the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Act? {: .speaker-009FQ} ##### Mr CURTIN: -Yes. Having regard to the statement just made by the Prime Minister, that the general purport of my amendment is acceptable to him, and that amendments moved at the committee stage of the bill to attain that end will be accepted by him, Iask leave to withdraw my amendment. **Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. G. J. Bell).Is** there any objection? MrArchie Cameron. - Yes; I object. *Leave not granted.* {: #subdebate-68-0-s2 .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr WARD:
East Sydney .- I desire to draw attention to the fact that, although certain members of the Government held very definite opinions on this subject some time ago, they have, during this debate, remained conspicuously silent. I do not claim to know everything about the agreement, but I believe that there are certain members of the Government who know quite a lot about it, but they are not prepared to tell the House what they know. The Minister for the Navy **(Mr. Archie Cameron),** before he became a member of the Government, demanded, when this question first became a matter for public controversy, that a royal commission should be appointed to inquire into it. Even after the Government had received the resignation of the Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. John Lawson),** the Minister for the Navy was still dissatisfied, and wanted a royal commission; yet during the course of this debate he has had not one word to say about the need for an inquiry. So far, the whole discussion has been on the need for the establishment of a motor-car manufacturing industry in Australia, and the terms of the agreement which should be made with any firm prepared to undertake the work. As a matter of fact, Parliament would not have had an opportunity to discuss the matter at all had it not been for the leasing of the race-horse Billie by the ex-Minister for Trade and Customs and for the disclosures of the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** during the Corio byelection campaign. I should like the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** to explain why he was prepared to enter into this agreement behind the backs of members of Parliament, and why he agreed to have it brought before Parliament only after the disclosure of certain transactions between the ex-Minister for Trade and Customs and the principal of Australian Consolidated Industries Limited. I am not satisfied merely to see the amendment carried when that course might mean the loss of the bill. As a matter of fact, I think the Government would be very pleased to hear the end of the whole thing, and so would many honorable members opposite, but the public would not be satisfied. This is an unsavoury agreement, and the Government should institute an inquiry into all circumstances surrounding the making of it. Certain honorable members have claimed that the Government was actually negotiating the agreement while Parliament was still considering the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Bill, but .. not one word regarding those negotiations was mentioned in Parliament. I understand that the Prime Minister himself commented very strongly on certain transactions associated with the negotiations, but he put them down to the indiscretion of an inexperienced Minister. He will agree that, but for the vigilance of the Opposition, we should never have known anything about the leasing of the race-horse, nor had an opportunity to discuss this matter in Parliament. The Minister for the Navy is cutting a very poor figure. When he was trying to apply the screws to the Government so as to get into the Cabinet he was loud in his demands for the appointment of a royal commission, to inquire, not only into the agreement itself, but also into the transactions between the ex-Minister for Trade and Customs and the principal of Australian Consolidated Industries Limited. There were rumours going around Sydney that certain members of the Government had been freely visiting **Mr. Smith** before the contract was made. They may, of course, have been discussing matters other than the agreement, but the whole thing seems highly suspicious. The assertion of the Government that this bill is urgent leaves me cold. When the Prime Minister saw that the numbers were against him on the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition, he looked for a cushion to fall on, and offered to withdraw the bill with a view to introducing a new measure embodying the amendment. Apparently, however, the honorable gentleman's own supporters would not allow him to escape bo easily, but demanded that he should proceed with the original measure, so that they could vote on it according to their opinions. What would be the position now if the bill were defeated? The Australian companies would be back in the position they were in before - they could take advantage of the bounty legislation if they wished. If the monopoly clause is removed from the bill, all companies are in the same position as they were in before the agreement was ever entered into. It is evident that the Government is trying to bury the schema altogether, but public opinion will not allow it to do so. The only way to satisfy the public is to have an impartial inquiry into the whole matter, and a proper report submitted. {: #subdebate-68-0-s3 .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley .- If we are ever going to produce motor cars in Australia, now is the time. Every one in the House, with the exception of some members of the Country party, originally welcomed - the scheme under which a tax was placed on imported cars for the purpose of establishing a fund out of which to subsidize the manufacture of motor cars in Australia. This agreement provides an opportunity to establish the industry in Australia. As far back as 1936, the Governmentimposed a tax on imported engines and chassis in order to raise money with which to pay a bounty on engines manufactured in Australia. As a protectionistmeasure that policy could not be faulted. If it is desirable to establish a new industry, it is better to raise money for its encouragement by a tax on imports than by direct revenue taxation, as has been done in the case of the wheat bounty. It seems remarkable that, during the last four years, though every one knew that the Government had established this fund, and although customs officials, and even the then Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. John Lawson)** himself sought to interest industrialists in the scheme, no offers for the manufacture of cars were forthcoming. It was not until an Australian organization indicated its willingness to undertake the work that the big motor importing interests took any notice of the matter at all. Why was no interest displayed up to that time by General Motors-Holdens Limited and the Ford Motor Company, two organizations which are possessed of vast wealth? They have a large market for cars in Australia, but so far all they have done in the way of manufacturing in this country is to make bodies. Evidently they find it cheaper to import the engines and chassis than to manufacture them here. Those companies are organized on a basis of world production, and have a quota for every country in the world. Cars are made on a system of mass production, and if the manufacturers lost their quota for any country, they would have to immobilize a certain quantity of plant. They find it cheaper to keep the plant running at full pressure in the United States of America, and import the engines from there, than to set up their own manufacturing establishments in Australia. Although they have made a show of interest, and although there has been considerable wire-pulling on their behalf, I do not believe that they would be prepared to undertake the manufacture of engines and chassis in Australia. The opposition of the importing motorcar companies is a piece of political bluff. No substantial scheme has been submitted by them, and no member of the House would say that they are interested in the actual manufacture of cars in Australia. In December, 1939, the Government introduced legislation to authorize the distribution of the bounty. Section 6 of the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Act provides - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Bounty under this act shall not be payable to any manufacturer other than a company incorporated and carrying on business in the Commonwealth and in respect of which the Minister is satisfied - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. that the memorandum and articles of association of the company provide for the control of the company by its shareholders; 1. that not less than two-thirds of the paid-up value of the total shares issued and not less than two-thirds of the paid-up value of any particular class of shares issued are owned, whether directly or indirectly, by British subjects who are resident in Australia or in a territory under the control of the Commonwealth; and 2. that the engine units are not manufactured for or on behalf of a person who is not a British subject resident in Australia or in a territory under the control of the Commonwealth or for or on behalf of a company which would not be entitled to the bounty if it manufacturedthe engine parts itself. The intention was that the bounty fund, which had been created by means of a duty on imported chassis, was to be specially set aside for the purpose of establishing in Australia an industry that would be financed, owned and controlled by Australian residents. It is gratifying that a company which is in a position to comply with all of the requirements of the bounty act has now come forward. The letter from Australian Consolidated Industries Limited, dated the 22nd November last, shows that it is prepared to float a company with a nominal capital of £1,000,000 and an initial subscribed capital of £250,000. The whole of this money will be subscribed in Australia. The letter then proceeds to deal with the dimensions and horse-power of the car which it is prepared to manufacture. *Sitting suspended from 11.50 p.m. to 12.2 a.m.* *Friday, 31 May 1940* {: #subdebate-68-0-s4 .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- Australian Consolidated Industries Limited also made it clear in its letter that, although it would establish its main industry in one State, it intended to have various motorcar parts made in all of the principal States. The company further pointed out - >With an output of 20,000 units per annum, the company and its parts-making associates should give employment directly to from 5,600 to6,000, and indirectly to from 4,000 to 7,000. In view of the possibilities of this company with regard to post-war reconstruction, its establishment should prove of considerable value. {: .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr Wilson: -- But other men would be displaced in industry. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- That fear, I think, is unfounded. The letter of the 22nd November continues - >The company is firmly of the opinion that in the initial stages the manufacturing problems will not be so great as the marketing problem. Wemust all agree with that statement, because the powerful companies distributing Chevrolet and Ford cars already have an established market here. According to the honorable member for Macquarie **(Mr. John Lawson),** Australian Consolidated Industries Limited would import machinery to the value of £350,000, and I suppose that the total plant would be worth £500,000. It would be necessary to engage a large staff which would have to .be employed for a considerable time before a single car could bo placed on the market. Therefore, the difficulty confronting . a new company would be primarily that of marketing its product. Practically every small garage proprietor is an agent for one of the two large companies now distributing popular cars, and would naturally endeavour to prevent the successful introduction of a rival product. A company which is prepared to contend with the prejudice that would inevitably be created is as game as Ned Kelly. Apparently, the first suggestion made by this company was that, for the first 30,000 chassis, the bounty rate should he £30 an engine; for the second 30,000 chassis, £25 an engine; and, for the third 30,000 chassis, £20 an - engine. Under this agreement, however, the company is prepared to manufacture cars on the basis of a bounty of £30 an engine on the first 20,000 chassis; £25 an engine on the second 20,000 chassis, and £20 an engine on the third 20,000 chassis. The House should bear in mind the fact that no competitor appeared in the field until this company was prepared to make an offer to establish the industry. It appears to mo that the only mistake the Government made,, throughout the negotiations, was in regard to the short notice given to other interested companies when it was prepared to enter into an agreement with Australian Consolidated Industries Limited. The Government would have been on firmer ground if it had found a basis upon which an organization was prepared to establish the industry, and had then submitted its proposals to other potential manufacturers, but I admit that it was justified . in believing that the potential competitors of Australian Consolidated Industries Limited were not interested in any event. At the initial stage, all parties in the House, except the Country party, were in favour of the establishment of the industry in Australia. In my electorate, thousands of young men find themselves in dead-end occupations, and, at the age of eighteen or nineteen years, their prospects of profitable employment disappear. A large industry of this character will save thousands of lads from dead-end jobs by giving them work in highly and partially skilled occupations. It will be the means of keeping a tremendous amount of capital in this country. The amendment of the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** has one fata) weakness. Members of the Opposition must have realized its weakness when they framed it, because, in the first part, they inveigh against the idea of a monopoly and in the second, they say that "in the event of more than one Australian company being established . . . the number of engines and the total amount of bounty payment be reviewed ", clearly indicating that they think that there is a prospect of not more than one firm offering to establish the industry. I am not particularly concerned about whether a monopoly is granted or not. The other day in this House, I strenuously endeavoured to have an investigation of an existing monopoly and had more condemnation than support. The same people who opposed that investigation, particularly the honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony),** a wholehearted supporter of the sugar monopoly, are greatly concerned because we are about to establish another monopoly in Australia. On principle, I do not stand for monopolies, but, if the only means to establish an important industry in this country is by the creation of a monopolistic right, I do support its creation. The honorable member for Corio **(Mr. Dedman)** left no doubt in my mind as to bis attitude towards this scheme. He is opposed to the manufacture of motor cars in Australia. {: .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr Dedman: -- No, no! {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- I do not caro whether the honorable member denies it or not. I shall deal with the reasoning that he put forward. The first fault that lie found with the scheme was that it should not be established in war-time, because we wanted all of our artisans for war work. {: .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr Dedman: -- I did not say that. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- The honorable member for Corio argued that we needed all of our skilled artisans for war work. {: .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr Dedman: -- No, I said that a survey of our man-power and materials should first be made. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- We have been surveying the whole proposition since 1936, and how much further have we got? Then the honorable member went on to show that if more than one factory were established, the shortage of artisans would be even more accentuated. The honorable member for Corio, and the honorable member for Bourke **(Mr. Blackburn)** discussed paragraph 12 of the schedule. The honorable member for Bourke dwelt on that paragraph but I feel that he realized the weakness of his own argument. He sought to prove that paragraph 12 would have such a detrimental effect on the motor industry in Australia that Australian Consolidated Industries Limited would be given a monopoly of practically the whole motor industry of Australia. He followed that by saving that to give the right implicit in paragraph 12 would mean that many thousands of men already engaged in the industry would lose their positions. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: -- More than implicit, [ said "expressed". {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- Expressed, then. The honorable gentleman realized the weakness of his argument and began to trim it a little and said that, even if that was not so now, later, when the lawyers drew up the agreement, they would interpret paragraph 12 as he had interpreted it. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: -- I did not say that. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- The honorable member expressed the opinion "you do not know what the lawyers will do when they get together ". {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: -- No, I said that we did know that they could not help doing a certain things {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- In my opinion they can help doing it. That is the point that I shall take in. a moment. Paragraph 12 says - >That the Commonwealth will use its best endeavours to limit production of motor cars and trucks of 15 h.p. or over to the proposed company for a period of five years. Well, it all depends, I suppose, on what interpretation is placed on "motor cars and trucks ". My opinion is that the only monopolistic right that would be given would be on the manufacture of the complete car or truck. I do not think that the Ford Motor Company Proprietary Limited or General MotorsHoldens, Limited would be prevented from doing what they are doing to-day, namely, importing the engines and chassis and putting the bodies on out here. That is implicit in that paragraph. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- I refer the honorable gentleman to paragraph 15. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- I have not heard that paragraph discussed yet. What I am discussing now is the fact that it has been claimed that paragraph 12 will give to the Australian Consolidated Industries Limited the exclusive right to do the work that Fords and General Motors are doing to-day. I contest that, and say that the phrase " motor cars or trucks " means complete, not a portion, of motor cars and trucks ; that the work now being done by those two companies will not be interfered with by paragraph 12. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- Does the honorable member suggest that the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Act provides a bounty on the manufacture of cars and trucks, or engines? {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- I can only suggest what is in- the paragraph. What the Government proposes to contract to do is to- >Use its best endeavours to limit production of motor cars and trucks of 15 h.p. or over to the proposed company for a period of five years. The only protection that the Government is guaranteeing to the Australian Consolidated Industries Limited is in respect of the manufacture of the whole motor car - the engine, chassis, and body. It will be argued that the Government will pay a bounty only on the engine. That is exactly right. I do not contest that. But I do contest the point put forward by the honorable members for Corio and Bourke that paragraph 12 can be construed into meaning that the company will have such a monopoly in the manufacture of cars that Fords and General Motors will be prevented from doing the work that they are doing to-day. The clause is not capable of that interpretation, and I do not see the danger that has been forecast by them. The Government is justified, if necessary, in order to establish this industry, in giving a monopoly for a limited period. I do not think that in Australia there is any other group of financiers or industrialists prepared to gamble the amount of money that this company will have to put up under the agreement in the face of enormous competition. If paragraph 12 is cut out, this undertaking will have to set up the industry under the everpresent threat of Fords and General Motors entering the enterprise and undercutting it. If the Ford and General Motors companies were prepared to do what this firm is prepared to do, they could produce cars, I have no doubt, cheaper than this company will be able to do. Firms like they are, with their colossal wealth, could raise sufficient Australian capital, with sufficient Australian " dummy " shareholders, to set up in the industry if they wanted to do so. The plain fact is that they do not, and that they are endeavouring, by wirepulling and every other means at their disposal, to destroy the- possibility of the establishment of this industry in Australia. If, in order that this Australian company shall be able to establish the industry here, it must be given a monopoly of the manufacture of complete cars, that monopoly must be given and, for that reason, I intend to support the bill. The honorable member for Macquarie put a colossal amount of work into the negotiations. Courage was needed to bring to Parliament the proposals that are before Parliament to-day. Mud has been slung, but that is politics and always will be politics. The honorable member did the best that he could with the means at his disposal. The Government made only one major mistake and that was the means that were adopted to offer this scheme to others, although it was well justified in believing that those others were not serious. For those reasons I trust that the House will confirm the decision made in 1936 to subsidize the motor industry, and that we shall pass this measure with the enthusiasm displayed when the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Bill, passed in 1939 in order to set up one of the most valuable and important industries that could be established in the Commonwealth. {: #subdebate-68-0-s5 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY:
Swan -- On Thursday last the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** delivered a fine speech, not only to the members of this Parliament, but also, through this Parliament, to the people of Australia, in which he said that we must make every effort, not only to defend Australia, but also to exert every effort to prosecute the war to a successful conclusion. Yet on the evening of the same day he brought forward this proposed agreement providing for the establishment of the motor-car industry in Australia, which, in no circumstances - notwithstanding the pleadings of the honorable member for Macquarie **(Mr. John Lawson)** - can be said to embrace a war effort. And that it should be brought forward under the powers given to the Commonwealth by the National Security Act is a gross misuse of those powers conferred. No one thought for a moment that when those powers were taken the Government would abuse them in such an extraordinary way. The Minister for Supply and Development **(Sir Frederick Stewart)** has already informed us that technicians, fitters and qualified mechanics cannot be obtained for urgent defence work, and the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** has spoken of the delays in aircraft construction that are taking place in Sydney due, to a great degree, to the fact that qualified tradesmen are not available. Yet we are told that this industry, which, particularly in the initial stages, requires patterns, machine tools and other equipment, can be started economically. Some time ago the present Acting Minister for Information **(Sir Henry Gullett)** made strenuous efforts to establish a similar project and to do so without reference to the Tariff Board, and I recall how Parliament forced the Minister to refer the whole subject to that authority. We have read the reports of the Tariff Board which inquired exhaustively into the whole project, and, after hearing evidence from many witnesses on oath, submitted a very definite report to the effect that the industry should be introduced only by gradual stages. If there are some who desire to establish the industry under the bounty system, no objection would be offered, because a fund has been accumulating for some years from duties specially imposed ; and with ordinary tariff protection those people could, if they so desired, engage in the manufacture of motor cars. But under the present proposal it has been decided to grant noc only monopolistic control but also extraordinary tariff concessions. The honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear)** said that paragraph 12 of the schedule of the bill is the only important provision ; but that paragraph has to be read in conjunction with other paragraphs. Paragraph 12 provides that the Commonwealth shall use its best endeavours to limit production in the interests of this country, but paragraph 15 reads - >That the Commonwealth will retain the import control established in the year 1936 over the importation of motor vehicle engines and chassis, and will use this import control, if necessary, to counteract any unfair trading methods which may he adopted by overseas interests in selling competitive vehicles in Australia. It will therefore be seen that pressure will be exercised through the Customs Department or by other means to prevent any other company from carrying on even its present business. Under the proposed agreement this undertaking will be able to establish a factory in Australia and, notwithstanding the provisions of the Ottawa Agreement, import from America all its machinery working parts, engines, chassis - in fact, everything except the parts which are being made in Australia. All of these components can be admitted free of duty or under special concessions to enable the undertaking to commence the manufacture of cars with one very valuable addition - the manufacture of the motor bodies. Practically all plant will be admitted free of duty or at concession rates. Part 18 of the agreement reads - >That with respect to those engines and chassis parts which are either before or during the initial stages of production in Australia, by the proposed company, admitted free of import duty or at concessional rates of duty, the Commonwealth will sympathetically consider the request of the company that twelve months' notice be given of any contemplated change in order to enable the proposed company to recast its manufacturing programme. This also goes to prove that this undertaking will be able to import machinery, parts, engines and chassis either free of duty or at concessional rates of duty and to carry on manufacturing without interruption. The Labour party is now endeavouring: to save its face. I sympathize with the honorable member for Corio **(Mr. Dedman),** particularly in view of the promises made and the views expressed at the Corio by-election concerning the Ford company's factory. I do not care if twenty such establishments are started provided they operate under the bounty system. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- That is all that ii wanted. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- But if twenty factories started operations they would all face ruin. Does the honorable member for Melbourne Ports **(Mr. Holloway)** say that that is all this undertaking requires? Does he say that they only want the right to start? Any company can start under the bounty system; but we do not want to set up a monopoly and to grant to this undertaking special concessions that are not available to others. Under this proposed agreement the company may erect a factory, purchase all of its plant and machinery duty free, and be permitted to import almost every part of the motor car, including engines, duty free. The Government has to give it twelve months' notice before it can enforce duties. The agreement will enable the company to import almost the whole of the chassis duty free and, by building its own bodies, to seriously affect the works in Geelong and Adelaide. Labour has doublecrossed the honorable member for Corio and his constituents. The capital to be provided for this venture is to be supplied by a company which, in consequence of its profitable operations under high customs duties, has interfered with the big market Australia had in Belgium for barley, and for meat from the Kimberleys. These people made contact with the Customs Department and exercised a strange influence in that direction. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Sir Henry Gullett: -- What does the honorable member mean by "strange influence " ? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I do not mince words; I mean a strange influence. I know that if this had been done 30 years ago Parliament would have taken very decisive action and dealt severely with those responsible. They put up certain proposals to the present Acting Minister for Information. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Sir Henry Gullett: -- The honorable member is getting cheap, and should be ashamed of himself. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- The Acting Minister for Information should be ashamed of himself. I am referring to the power which this company exercised. Every dealer in glass throughout Australia knows what happened, but all opposition was removed and the company got its concessions. {: #subdebate-68-0-s6 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPE AKER: -- Order I The honor- able member is not discussing the bill. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- Glass products are cheap enough now. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- According to the honorable member for Corio the products of the Australian Glass Company are costly. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr Mulcahy: -- What has this to do "with the bill? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I am showing the influence which has been exercised on the Customs Department by the same old crowd - .the Australian Glass Company. I am quite prepared to assist the establishment of the motor-car building industry on sound lines; but I cannot support this agreement which purports to grant extraordinary concessions to the persons who propose to establish the industry. The amendment of the Leader of the Opposition is merely to save the face of the Labour party. Opposition members say that they will support the bill provided that it applies to more than one company operating under the same conditions. They know perfectly well that once a company is established it would be practically impossible to start another similar industry in Australia within the next ten or fifteen years. Investors would not provide the capital for another company; there would not be a market for its product. Members of the Opposition were opposed to this monopoly a month or two ago, but they are now prepared to accept a monopoly so long as other companies can participate in it. I am astonished that the Leader of the Opposition should lend himself to a proposal which still provides for a monopoly and is so contrary to his policy stated at Corio. Should the bill pass, a grave injustice will be done to other industries. I shall vote against the measure. {: #subdebate-68-0-s7 .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI:
Werriwa -- Listening to the speeches that have been delivered, I wondered if the honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear)** was one of those who said that the works of the Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited in Australia would close if this industry were started. If he were, the honorable member has adopted a different attitude to-night. I have fought consistently for the manufacture of complete motor cars in Australia, and I do not retract one word of what I have said on this subject. If the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** thinks that the payment of £160 or £170 in Australia for a machine which can be bought in the United States of America for £100 or less is not bleeding this country, and that an Australian industry could not prevent such exploitation, the history of the development of industry in this country contradicts him. If primary producers must have cars and trucks, and if the honorable member wants .the American monopolies to continue to bleed them, he will continue his present attitude. The Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** moved his amendment because we on this side object to the monopoly provision in the agreement. It may be that this industry will develop along the lines of the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited, the Colonial Sugar Refining Company Limited and other big concerns in Australia, but the Opposition does not believe that the Government is justified in using the National Security Act to give monopoly rights to any company. The Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** has indicated that, should the second reading be carried, he is prepared to accept, in committee, amendments along the lines suggested by the amendment of the Leader of the Opposition. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- What price will the people of Australia have to pay for a locally-made car? {: .speaker-L07} ##### Mr LAZZARINI: -- I do not know; but I predict that when the Australian factory is turning out cars, American cars will be cheaper in Australia than theyare now. I remind members of the Country party that the International Harvester Company of America, another monopolisticconcern, charged £98 for a harvester in Australia, where there was local competition whereas farmers in Argentina, where there was no local manufacture of harvesters, had to pay £198 for a similar machine. Similar conditions exist in the motor car industry, and will continue to exist so long as there is no local manufacture of cars. In order that effect may be given tothe Prime Minister's undertaking to amend the bill in committee, the bill must pass its second reading. For that reason, the Opposition will vote against the amendment moved by its leader. We, on this side, are determined that the Minister for the Navy **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** will not outmanoeuvre us on this occasion. The Prime Minister indicated that members of the Opposition Were responsible for the trouble which Occurred in connexion with the arrangement entered into by the ex-Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. John Lawson)** in respect of the lease of a certain race horse, but I remind the fight honorable gentleman that his colleague, the Minister for the Navy, said more about the ex-Minister than was said by any ten honorable members on this side of the. House. The Prime Minister's present colleaguedemanded the resignation of the honorable member for Macquarie from the Ministry, and the appointment of a royal commission to inquire into the transaction. He impugned the honesty and integrity of the honorable member for Macquarie. I do not know whether members of the Country party wish to break up the coalition Ministry, but it would appear that the necessity for a national government is not so strongly held by the Minister for the Navy as it was. That honorable gentleman is prepared to disrupt the Ministry of which he is a member rather than that there should be appointed to a position Of importance a gentleman whom he does not favour, even though he be eminently fitted for it. The Minister for the Navy is the same honorable gentleman who has been ranting about the need for a national government. The honorable gentleman is awrecker: heis prepared to adopt wreck ing tacticsin order to defeat thismeasure. If he were in a position of responsibility where hecould wreckthis country, he would do so. The Opposition will give to the Prime Minister theopportunity to take this bill into committee, so that amendments which are implicit in the amendment moved by the Leaderof the Opposition to thesecond reading may fee made. There is no other way by which the principle embodied in thatamend- ment can be incorporated in the measure and still leave the door open to save this industry for Australia. The Opposition gives wayto no One in its desire to see complete motorcars manufactured in Australia, but it does not 'think that the National Security Act should be used in order to give a monopoly to any company. Should the passing of this measure mean that, for some time at least, only one company will attempt to manufacture cars in Australia, and should that company develop into a big concern, that would be a natural development of capitalistic production, and not the result of this Parliament deliberately passing legislation to create a monopoly. {: #subdebate-68-0-s8 .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY:
Richmond -- It is a great pity that the motor car agreement cannot be regarded as the most important thing in Australia today, because we should then have what is most desirable in this country at the present time, namely, a national government. This bill has united the Government and the Opposition whereas the great issues confronting the country in this time of crisis have failed to do so. I sincerely hope that the Opposition; having once entered into a partnership with the Government, will continue to co-operate with it in respect of the greater issues confronting Australia. Should this bill become law, and should motor car's actually be produced in Australia; I suggest to the manufacturer of them that the name for the car be either " Discord " or " Victory ". In the knowledge that this project has resulted in the union oftwo opposing forces, I have no doubt that he would choose the latter. I propose to relate the events leading up to the negotiations for this agreement The billto provide for a payment of a bounty on the manufacture of motor car engines was brought before the Parliament in the last hours of a session, when it was hurriedly rushed through. Honorable members who wished to express their views were urged to be brief, because members wanted to catch their trains. On this occasion I shall not be concerned if members have to remain here all night. I propose to avail myself of the full time at my disposal, if necessary. In 1936 the manufacture of motor car engines and chassis in Australia was first suggested. In December of that year, the then Minister negotiating trade treaties **(Sir Henry Gullett)** introduced a bill for the purpose. In reply to an interjection, he made the following definite statement - >I give the committee my assurance at this stage that if the Tariff Board itself, after an inquiry, arrives at the conclusion that I am totally wrong, and that this industry would be uneconomic and expensive, I shall be finished with the proposal. In that regard, I speak for the Government. It will not proceed with the expansion of this industry if the Tariff Board declares that it will be uneconomic. {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- A scrap of paper! {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- A few nights ago, in reply to an interjection, the same honorable gentleman said that when he gave that undertaking he belonged to another Government. That is the most extraordinary evasion that I have ever heard from a Minister. The honorable gentleman is the last person in the world who should have cried " Shame " to the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** to-night when he made a certain remark. Only a few weeks ago the Minister condemned the coal-miners for not adhering to an. agreement which they had entered into. The Tariff Board did report on this proposal. In its report that body said- - >The evidence before it convinced the board that it would bc unwise at present to encourage, or enforce, the complete motor vehicle in Australia. Yet the Minister says that he is not bound by that report. Let us proceed further with the sequence of events. One of the first actions of the present Prime Minister after he assumed the leadership of the Government was to deal with the proposal to manufacture motor cars in Australia. On the 17th May, 1939, he made a statement on the subject in this House. 1 submit that that announcement and statements by other responsible Ministers did much to mislead potential manufacturers of motor cars as to how far the Government was prepared to go. In his statement to the House on the 17th May of last year, the Prime Minister made four points, the third of which was - >The Commonwealth Government is not able to grant a manufacturing monopoly to any single company. Those are very definite words; but since that date a construction, anything but definite, has been placed upon them. I understand that the files reveal that in writing to certain interests who were then contemplating the manufacture of motor cars, the Prime Minister actually used those words. He did not qualify them by saying that the Government was unable to grant a monopoly to any company because of constitutional difficulties. He made the plain statement, " The Government is not able to grant a manufacturing monopoly to any single company". If a man who applies to a bank for an overdraft receives a reply that the bank cannot grant him an overdraft, he does not take the statement to mean that the bank is short of funds, but simply that the bank is unwilling to accommodate him. I submit that, upon hearing the Prime Minister's statement to which I have referred, any prospective manufacturer of cars must have drawn the conclusion that the Government would not grant a monopoly to any other company in any circumstances. Nevertheless, it must have been in the Prime Minister's mind that a monopoly was desirable. At this juncture I might add that much is to be said for and against the proposal that the best way to establish this industry in this country would be to grant a monopoly of manufacture. However, I emphasize that had other companies known that there was a possibility of a monopoly being granted, they might have approached the Government on a totally different basis. Subsequently, in June last, the Prime Minister proposed to a Premiers conference that the States should confer upon the Commonwealth certain powers in order to enable it to grant a monopoly. The States were not willing to do that, and, consequently, the matter lapsed until the outbreak of war. A few months after war broke out the proposal was again taken up by the honorable member for Macquarie **(Mr. John' Lawson),** who was then Minister for Trade and Customs, and on the 22nd November he received a proposition from **Mr. Smith,** of Australian Consolidated Industries Limited, suggesting that **Mr. Smith's** company would manufacture cars if it were given certain privileges, including monopoly rights, additional protection, and one or two other very important privileges. Later the honorable member for Macquarie again discussed the proposition with **Mr. Smith,** and subsequently placed **Mr. Smith's** proposition before the Cabinet. The Cabinet made one or two alterations of it, and on the 2nd December the honorable member had another discussion with **Mr. Smith.** On the 4th December **Mr. Smith** wrote to him turning down the whole thing. What I am suggesting is this: That a fair opportunity was not given to other companies in this matter, and that before the bounty bill was introduced into this Parliament, **Mr. Smith** was given certain privileged information which was denied to the other companies. Two days after **Mr. Smith** wrote to the Minister dropping the proposition, the Minister introduced the bounty bill, and made his second-reading speech on that measure, which was passed on the 8th December, during the closing hours of the session, after a debate which lasted only a couple of hours. The 8th December was a Friday. Early in the following week the Minister must have resumed discussions with **Mr. Smith,** because on the 15 th December, eight days after the bounty bill was passed, the Minister sent out telegrams to other motor companies giving them 48 hours in which to put up a proposition. What was the reason for this haste? The time limit could easily have been extended to one month. The reason, I suggest, becomes apparent when we study what took place subsequently. On the 19th December an agreement was concluded between **Mr. Smith** and the Minister, which gave to **Mr. Smith's** company virtual monopoly of the manufacture of motor cars in Australia in circumstances which were not revealed to this House when it was considering the bounty bill on the 8th December. I suggest that had the Minister, in the course of his second-reading speech on the 6 th December, informed this House of the intention, which he apparently had in mind, to grant a monopoly and other concessions to any one company, the result of the vote on the measure would have been different. I now wish to deal with one or two arguments which have been touched upon by both the Prime Minister and the honorable member for Macquarie in the course of this debate. It strikes me as extraordinary that we should find on this side of the House men of such calibre as those who have spoken in this debate prepared to defame any foreign company which has sunk capital in this country. If there is any country in the world which should welcome the investment of outside capital, it is Australia. Our progress as a nation has largely been founded on capital that has been expended in this country by foreign investors. To British- and American investors we owe the rapid development of our railway systems, harbours and many other essential services. Consequently, I was amazed to hear honorable gentlemen of the calibre of those who have spoken *in* this debate belittle foreign investors. As a matter of fact, had it not been for the pioneering work of the Ford companyfor which I hold no brief, but feel impelled to say that it has provided employment for many thousands of Australian workmen - General MotorsHolden's and other companies, the industry would not have been developed here to the stage at which we are able to construct *engines* and chassis. The people of Australia, therefore, owe a. debt of gratitude to these companies for the work they have done up to date in this industry. I am not implacably opposed to the manufacture of motor car engines in Australia. I say that quite frankly. In view of events overseas, we shall be obliged to establish industries of this kind in this country, but hand in hand with any policy for the establishment of such industries must go a programme of immigration, in order to increase our population. The two are complementary; but honorable members opposite, who appear to be so anxious to establish new secondary industries, do not evince any enthusiasm in any proposal to attract immigrants to Australia. In his attack upon the Ford company, the honorable member for Macquarie made certain statements. I have not had an opportunity to check up on some of them. I have not been able to find in the report of the Tariff Board any reference to' the amount of protection which the manager of the Ford company stated his company considered to be essential for the building of engines and chassis in Australia. I find no reference in the report that he fixed that amount at £135. {: .speaker-KZZ} ##### Mr JOHN LAWSON:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP -- It is referred to on page *T* of the Tariff Board's report. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- I had not previously noticed that reference. However, I point out to the honorable member for Macquarie that the manager of the Ford company would not be far out in his calculation if he was also allowing for the margin of protection that would be required. {: .speaker-KZZ} ##### Mr JOHN LAWSON:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP -- He wanted a very high duty as well. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- A Plymouth 5-passenger sedan in Australia costs £492, made up as follows: engine, including ocean freights, buying commission, Sc., £112; exchange £30; marine insurance £2; duty and primage £44; and wharfage, stacking, carting, &c, £1 lis. 4d. When we add to these items the sum of £30 in respect of bounty, we find that the margin of protection given to the Australian engine aud chassis as against the imported Plymouth car, is £108. I submit, therefore, that the estimate of the manager of the Ford company was not far out, if he had protection in his mind. Another point made by the honorable member for Macquarie, who is naturally regarded as having a particular interest in this measure, was that the Tariff Board report could not be accepted as against the advice of the industrial panel. He said that the panel, which was composed of leading industrialists in this country, had reported that cars could be manufactured in Australia, and that the launching of such an enterprise would not seriously diminish the supply of fitters and other artisans available for munition factories and other important works. We are in the strange position that, although the Tariff Board, which is a highly-qualified body, has made a report on the subject after taking voluminous evidence, the Advisory Industrial Panel, which is a quasi-government body, bas made a different report, without having taken any evidence or making any inquiry. We are told that the Advisory Industrial Panel knows what it is talking about. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- So it does. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- Well, we must make up our minds as between the two authorities. It has been alleged that the Advisory Industrial Panel informed the honorable member for Macquarie that the establishment of the motor-vehicle enginemanufacturing industry would not make a heavy drain on the number of fitters and engineers available in this country, whereas the Minister for Air **(Mr. Fairbairn)** and the Minister for Supply and Development **(Sir Frederick Stewart)** have told the House this week that we are unable to put our munitions and aircraftmanufacturing projects into full operation because of the inadequate number of fitters and engineers available. As between these two authorities, I prefer to rely upon the Ministers who are responsible to this House: If an adequate supply of fitters and engineers is to be had I suggest that the Advisory Industrial Panel be asked to make them available for munitions and aircraft work. {: .speaker-KZZ} ##### Mr JOHN LAWSON:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP -- Very few of those men would be required for the motorvehicle engine industry. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- That statement seems strange to me, for the honorable member for Macquarie has stated that this industry will ultimately require the services of 6,000 men. In its initial stages, in particular, it would seem that men of the highest executive and engineering ability would be needed. 1 can quite appreciate that this industry will attract fitters and turners, to the detriment of our munitions and aircraft work, because better wages will probably be offered. Would the members of the Advisory Industrial Panel deny that fitters and engineers must provide the basic staff of this enterprise ? Another interesting statement that has been made during this debate is that this industry will be valuable in the postwar period. At an earlier stage, we were asked to support the proposition on the ground that it would be a useful wartime activity. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- 'Could it not be both ? {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- What I fear is that it will hinder the enlistment of men for overseas. In any case, as a returned soldier who found difficulty in obtaining work after he returned to Australia, I suggest that if this industry is established now, all of the good jobs will be allocated to men who remain on the home front, and only the processing and transport work is likely to be available for soldiers who return from the war. That is what happened in connexion with other industries after the last war. It is too much to expect me to believe that the good jobs in this industry will be reserved foi returned soldiers. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- If any other honorable gentleman had made such statements the honorable member for Richmond would have accused him of interfering with recruiting. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- If conditions had been normal, or if this proposal had been submitted to us after the war, I should have gladly supported it; but, having regard to the present world situation and our changed economic circumstances, I cannot support it now. The argument that it will provide work for soldiers who return from the war makes no appeal to me. I fear that it will prevent men from offering their services for munitions and aircraft work because of the more attractive conditions the motor-engine industry would offer. In introducing the bill the Prime Minister referred to **Mr. Smith's** very generous offer to forgo any rights he might have under the agreement if any other body was prepared to undertake the manufacture of motor-vehicle engines in Australia without a monopoly clause. The right honorable gentleman did not say that **Mr. Smith** was willing to transfer any rights he might have to another company if the monopoly provision remained in the agreement. If any other company were to be given exclusive rights, **Mr. Smith** would decline to have anything to do with the business. The fact of the matter is that **Mr. Smith** recognizes that he has certain exclusive rights and, apparently, the Opposition, including the honorable member for East Sydney **(Mr. Ward),** who has so trenchantly criticized monopolies in this House, intends to vote in favour of the measure. The Prime Minister also made the extraordinary statement that monopolies were nothing new in Australia, or in a democracy, and that, in fact, a monopoly was only granted the same kind of rights as were given to a patentee. He said that **Mr. Smith** was, in a large degree, in the position of a patentee. That was a most interesting argument. It caused me to consult the *Encylopaedia of the Social Sciences* to see what was said in it about patents, and I found these observations - >The modern patent system has its background in the monopolies and exclusive privileges of the Middle Ages. The grantees sold the privileges at high prices to persons who imposed severe burdens on their use. Gradually even the necessities of life came into the hands of the patentees. The article proceeded - >In England the abuse of exclusive privileges and monopolies was ended during the reign of James I. by the famous Statute of Monopolies, enacted in 1623, which abolished the restrictive privileges and established an exception in favour of new inventions. That is a complete answer to the Prime Minister's statement. This encyclopaedia also made it clear that monopolies are generally exercised to the detriment of the community. I shall not assert that the activities of Australian Consolidated Industries have not been beneficial to Australia in many ways, for they have provided employment and so forth. But it cannot be denied that motor cars should be marketed in this country at ' more reasonable prices. The Tariff Board reported that the present price of motor cars is far too high. I can find nothing in this agreement that suggests even a remote possibility of a reduction of the price of motor cars. Indeed, if after this new company began operations, the organizations at present engaged in the partial manufacture and assembly of motor vehicles in Australia took steps to reduce the price of their products, they would lay themselves open to the charge of unfair competition and would become liable to government action. As a matter of fact, the Government is undertaking in this agreement to see that the price of motor cars remains high. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- The honorable member was not particularly interested in the high price of axe handles when he was seeking an increase of the duty on axe handles some time ago. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- At that time I was making representations in the propel way at the request and in the interests of some of my constituents, and I shall always be prepared to do that irrespective of my own views on the subject involved. I think I can carry out my duties as a member of Parliament as conscientiously as the honorable member for Melbourne Ports. It was made abundantly clear in the speech of the honorable member foi Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson),** who has forecast a further amendment, that the crying need of this country at the moment is an adequate supply of fitters and turners for munitions and aircraft work. This has also been emphasized by the Minister for Air and the Minister foi Supply and Development, who have said that it is practically impossible to secure the services of a. sufficient number of skilled engineers for these undertakings. At this critical stage of the war we should not do anything that may even tend to retard our war effort. I notice that th«honorable member for East Sydney is attempting to wave me down. I suggest that he would render a signal service to the House if. at times, he resumed his own seat more promptly. From what has been said this evening by honorable gentlemen opposite, it appears that this bill will be carried. But the agreement even in its proposed amended form, will give favorable conditions to Australian Consolidated Industries and deny to such organizations as the Ford Motor Company the opportunity to engage in motor vehicle engine manufacture. In fact, it is clear that even if that organization, and other similar concerns, were to undertake the manufacture of complete motor vehicles, without bounty, they would not be permitted to do so. If this should turn out to be the case, we shall have achieved something of a revolution in relation to these matters. The passing of this measure . will prevent the introduction of fresh capital into this country, capital for which some day we shall be crying. Most of the great industrial development of this country has been due to the introduction of outside capital in years gone by. I have made my protest, and when the history of this matter is written, I at least shall not be ashamed of the part which I have played. {: #subdebate-68-0-s9 .speaker-KJQ} ##### Mr JAMES:
Hunter .- 1 am glad that the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** has agreed to accept the principle embodied in the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** when the bill reaches the committee stage. The honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** endeavoured at great length to criticize the agreement, and complained that other manufacturers had only been given 48 hours in which to tender for motor car construction in Australia. 1 do not agree that that is altogether correct. As other honorable members have pointed out, many firms have had ample opportunity to enter thu field if they so desired. No doubt, in view of his party associations the honorable member for Richmond will vote against the bill, but I shall support it. 1 believe, however, that the amendment should specify a time limit, because time is of the essence of any contract. The honorable member for Richmond urged that the manufacture of motor cars in Australia should be left in abeyance, and that our whole efforts should be concentrated upon the production of munitions and essential war requirements. I remind him, however, that motor car engines are internal combustion engines, and are of vital necessity from a defence point of view. Internal combustion engines are required for aeroplanes and, as has been demonstrated in the last few weeks, efficiency in the air is of vital importance in modern warfare. In view of that fact alone, the establishment of this industry in Australia should be no longer delayed. The honorable member said that he would hae supported this proposal had not other matters been more vital in this time of national crisis. My view, however, is that nothing could bo more important than the manufacture of motor car engines at the moment. I do not wish to indulge in unnecessary criticism, but honorable members are to-day confronted with a sorry spectacle. Here we have the Minister for Commerce and the Leader of the Country party **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** and his crew, definitely hostile to the establishment of this industry. Their attitude on this occasion is the same as it has always been, although they have always managed to overlook party principles in order to obtain portfolios. I remind the House that on one occasion when even I was supporting a government, some people forgot the principles on which they were elected. The Minister is, of course, a rebel, and I think it was the then honorable member for Bourke, **Mr. Anstey,** who said, in effect, " If you want to kill a rebel do not send for a policeman; do not stone him; be kind to him; put something in his pocket, bring him inside - take him inside the Cabinet doors - and his desire to revolt will become weaker and weaker until finally you will hear him sing his song of revolution no more ". Honorable members hear very little of what happens behind the Cabinet doors. I remember well a speech made by the right honorable member for Cowper **(Sir Earle Page)** at, West Maitland, in my electorate, at about the time of the formation of the first Lyons Government. The right honorable gentleman said then that it was necessary to put principles before portfolios. That was a matter of expediency, however, because at that time the United Australia party had a majority in the House and did not need the support of the Country party. But when the Lyons Government was returned at the next elections, its numbers were insufficient, and when an appeal was made to the right honorable member for Cowper, he very conveniently forgot principles and accepted a portfolio, just as his successor, the honorable member for Barker, has forgotten his principles on this occasion and entered the Cabinet. **Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. G. J. Bell).Order** ! The honorable member is not debating the bill. {: .speaker-KJQ} ##### Mr JAMES: -- The organization which is to undertake the manufacture of motor cars under the provisions of this legislation is an Australian concern, and I believe it works in the interests of the nation. At a time when no other offers were forthcoming, this firm has been big enough to come forward and offer to undertake the establishment of the industry, and I believe that the organization is sincere in its aims. Not only will this undertaking give employment to our iron and steel workers; it will also provide employment for workers in important primary industries, particularly the coal-mining industry, which will he engaged in producing raw materials necessary for such things as motor panels. Consideration must also be given to the many thousands of boys throughout Australia who have finished their apprenticeship in various trades, and have reached &. dead-end. The establishment of this industry will provide an opportunity of employment for these boys. Apart from that aspect, however, this industry will be of great importance to our defence ' preparations. At present, all of our internal combustion engines are imported and are carried over many thousands of miles of sea. There is ,no assurance that the trade routes will remain open, and so it is essential that we must depend upon our own resources. Australia must stand on its own legs; the time has come for us to forsake the parish pump outlook. Is there any honorable member here who can honestly claim to be a Simon Pure? I think not. We are all prone to make attacks upon the other fellow. I know what it is to be caught in the spotlight of public ridicule, and I sympathize with a fellow-member of this House who has been subject to that unenviable experience, merely because he made a petty error. It is true that mistakes made by a man in his lifetime are carved in granite, whereas his successes are written in water. I speak feelingly on this matter. Our good deeds are very often written in sand and our mistakes are engraved on steel. I sympathize deeply with men who are held up to public ridicule because of small misjudgments. In his humble way, the honorable member for Macquarie. (Mir. John Lawson) has tried to pioneer an industry, the establishment of which is recognized as being long overdue. I honestly and sincerely believe that in all this talk of petty matters such as race-horses there i3 no real crookedness, but merely an insignificant error. We should be above attacking a man merely for an error of judgment. Let us be big Australians, determined to make this country self-reliant. As the famous New Zealand poet, Thomas Bracken, wrote - >Poor souls of stunted vision, Oft measure giants by their narrow gauge, The burning shafts of falsehood and derision > >Are oft impelled 'gainst those who mould the age. This firm, which has come forward 10 undertake the work of motor-car manufacture in Australia, when other firms hung back, is doing its share to mould the age industrially in Australia. My admiration goes out to the exMinister for Tirade and Customs, who first brought down this proposal which, if accepted, will make possible the establishment of an important industry. If Parliament passes this bill, I believe that the country will support the enterprise. We have now to rely upon our own resources, not only as regards defence, but also in .regard to providing employment for our people. I hope that the bill will go through with the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition. {: #subdebate-68-0-s10 .speaker-KMW} ##### Sir CHARLES MARR:
Parkes -- I support this measure because I am in favour of the establishment in this country of a worth-while industry. I congratulate the ex-Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. John Lawson)** on the big part he has played in bringing the scheme to its present stage. Parliament passed the Motor Industry Bounty Act, and those who opposed it were, for the most part, those who oppose this measure to-day. They said then that the time was not opportune to embark on such an undertaking. There was no war in 1936 when the then Minister for Trade and Customs **(Sir Henry Gullett)** first propounded the Government's policy of encouraging the local manufacture of the complete motor car. To-day the excuse is that the waa- should occupy the whole of our attention. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- And should it not? {: .speaker-KMW} ##### Sir CHARLES MARR: -- Yes, but we must remember that provision will have to be made for the employment of soldiers who return from the war, and we' may, therefore, regard this bill as essentially a war measure. The motor-car manufacturing industry will provide employment. No one believes that a great industry can be created by merely waving a wand. All such industries have been built up by sincere application, by the expenditure of money, and by hard work. I have always opposed monopolies. I have watched the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited grow and, knowing thai it was a monopoly, I was largely opposed to it, but can any ona deny that the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited is a credit to Australia to-day? We can point with pride to the fact that this great company is exporting steel, and producing it cheaper than other countries can. We have to ask ourselves whether it is possible to establish the motor-car manufacturing industry in Australia without granting a. monopoly. I take my hat off to the Labour Government in New Zealand, because it has set up an industrial board with power to say what industries should be established. It issues licences for production, taking into account the ability of New Zealand to absorb the goods produced. It decides that one or two or more firms are sufficient for a particular industry. The action of - the New Zealand Government in this respect is worthy of commendation. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- The honorable member is prepared to praise a Labour government when it suits him. {: .speaker-KMW} ##### Sir CHARLES MARR: -- I am prepared to admit that the honorable member for Ballarat **(Mr. Pollard)** and his colleagues have always supported Australian industry. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- It is more than, the honorable member has done. {: .speaker-KMW} ##### Sir CHARLES MARR: -- No one can accuse me of ever having done anything against the interests of Australian industry. I recognize that secondary industries are necessary if we- are to develop Australia properly. Are we always to be hewers of wood and drawers of water? There are some amongst us who think we should. I believe that the best market for primary produce is the home market. There would be no shipping shortage to-day if we had in Australia a market for all of our primary products. During the 21 years I have been associated with this Parliament I have done all that I could to help the primary producers, because I recognize that all of our wealth - mineral, pastoral and agricultural - comes from the soil. Just as I believe it is necessary to help the primary producers to get the best out of their industry, so I believe that it is necessary to help the secondary industries in order that they may absorb our primary products, and provide employment for our people. The present shortage of mechanics and skilled artisans 1 believe to be largely due to our arbitration laws. I say to the Labour party that the provision that only one apprentice may be employed for every four journeymen is a grave mistake. The honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** said that we should consider means by which to provide employment for mon when they return from the war. I remind him that it will take eighteen months or two years to get the motor-car manufacturing industry into full production. The Government's offer was first made in 1936, and repeated in 1939. Eventually it was accepted by an Australian firm - not by one of those firms which were already engaged in the motor industry here, and were making enormous profits, and whose interests my friends in the Country party are supporting. Evidently they believe that those firms should be allowed lo carry on and continue to make profits out of Australia. Members of the Country party shelter behind the excuse that the time is not ripe for establishing the industry, but that excuse is hoary-headed. The Acting Minister for Information **(Sir Henry Gullett)** said that the scheme would not be proceeded with until the Tariff Board reported on it. Well, the board did report, and I was struck with several features of its report. The first point to consider is: Who gave evidence before the board? A magistrate on the bench judges the value of evidence by the kind of person who gives it. Who gave evidence before the Tariff Board ? {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- People who know something about this industry. {: .speaker-KMW} ##### Sir CHARLES MARR: -- Representatives of General Motors-Holdens Limited and of the Ford, Dodge and Chrysler organizations declared at first that the industry could not bc profitably established without a bounty of at least £135 a unit. After four years of waiting, Australian Consolidated Industries Limited submitted a proposal. As it was prepared to put its own money into the industry, what right had the other companies to object to its entering the field? We now hear rumours in the parliamentary corridors that the other companies are prepared to submit counter-proposals; but their sole object is to prevent the establishment of this industry, and the loss of any of their enormous profits. {: #subdebate-68-0-s11 .speaker-K0D} ##### Mr COLLINS:
Hume .When the bill dealing with this matter was introduced in December last, I expressed the view that the establishment of the motor-car manufacturing industry in Australia was long overdue, and, whilst I agree that the matter of paramount importance is the manufacture of munitions, aeroplanes and ships, it is necessary to encourage the development of secondary industries in every possible way, if the fullest use was to be made of the resources of this country. The honorable member for Deakin **(Mr. Hutchinson),,** in opposing the bill, said that, after the war, another depression would be experienced. That may be so, but I hope that we shall not again have the sorry spectacle of thousands of Australian youths, who up to the age of 25 years, are unable to obtain employmentMany of them had no occupation until they enlisted for service in the present war. It is necessary to provide employment for the boys who are now leaving school. Two or three years may elapse before the motor-car manufacturing industry is fully established, but I am creditably informed that it will eventually give employment to between 7,000 and 8,000 persons. The engines proposed to be manufactured by Australian Consolidated Industries Limited will be of 32 horse-power and will develop to 120 horse-power, may be used -in aeroplanes, will be capable of driving from 8-ton to 20-ton tanks and, if needs be, should be capable of propelling light tanks and could be utilized for many of the purposes for which American engines are now employed in Australia. A company that is willing to invest £1,250,000 in an Australian industry is entitled to protection against the multi-millionaire foreign companies that will make every effort to smother it. For the last four years the foreign companies were invited to assist in this project, but they were too concerned about their own monopolistic undertakings. Immediately an Australian company announced its preparedness to establish an Australian industry, provided it was given adequate protection for a few years, its rivals endeavoured to prevent it from putting its proposal into effect. As an honorable member opposite has said, Australian Consolidated Industries Limited is as game as Ned Kelly, and, even if it made large profits out of the Australian glass industry, it showed capacity to make a success of a business undertaking. The honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** stated that the banks would not guarantee this industry, but that would depend on the capacity of the men proposing to launch it. Some people make fortunes where others fail. As this company has already shown its capacity to develop an industry, I am pleased that the Government is prepared to assist it. I congratulate the honorable member for Macquarie **(Mr. John Lawson)** upon his good work when he was a member of the Cabinet, in conducting the preliminary negotiations with the company. Reference has been made to the operations of the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited, which has been described as an octopus. Recently, as a member of the Public Works Committee, I visited Whyalla, which is in one of the remotest parts of South Australia, where that company has provided shipbuilding facilities. It has already expended between £3,000,000 and £4,000,000 there. In the first place it engaged in reclamation works, dredging operations and the establishment of homes for workers, despite the fact, that a water supply for domestic purposes is not yet available. Water is conveyed as ships' ballast from Sydney and Melbourne, and Whyalla is now a, growing town, and in future years will, I predict, vie with Newcastle. The enterprise at Whyalla was begun in earnest only about seven years ago, and the company topes to lay the keel of its first vessel in July next. The number of men already employed there is 1,800. The company ships 2,250,000 tons of iron ore annually from Iron Knob to its works at Newcastle. I hope that similar development of secondary industries will be witnessed in other parts of Australia. One honorable member referred to the money that the Australian Consolidated Industries Limited had made out of the glass industry, but what does it matter where the money was made, so long as the company has it, and knows that it can establish this industry and will not be coming to this Government for assistance because it has made a failure of the enterprise? We have been waiting too long for the complete Australian car, and I have pleasure in supporting the bill. {: #subdebate-68-0-s12 .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr DRAKEFORD:
Maribyrnong -- Every honorable member should support this bill subject to the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin),** because the establishment of the motor car manufacturing industry iu this country would provide an essential field of employment, and training at the conclusion of the war, and even during the war, if it lasts a long time. Whatever can be done to establish more secondary industries in Australia, and make us independent of outside countries must receive the support of all but the most reactionary people in this Parliament. If the Minister for the Navy **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** and his friends in the Country party had their way, we would, as the result of their policy, not be manufacturing munitions for the ships that the Minister controls. The motor manufacturing industry should commend itself to all. The conditions of the projected agreement have been debated at great length, but the real question is whether we should have this industry established, and whether it should be established under monopolistic control. I want, if possible, to prevent the establishment of a monopoly, but if, finally, it comes to the question of monopoly or no industry, I shall yield, because, monopoly or no monopoly, Australia must have the industry. It would be better for Australia to have a monopoly than to continue to be without this industry, but it would be better still to leave the industry without a monopoly. Attention has been devoted to the question of the supply of skilled labour. N01 such a high proportion of skilled labour, as some honorable members would try to make out is necessary in the manufacture of motor car engines. A proportion of highly skilled labour is needed, but, as everybody who has given any study to the industry knows, much of the work is done by partly skilled hands, process workers, who can be trained in a short space of time. I point out, however, that if there be a shortage of artisans in this country to-day, it arises from the fact that during the depression they could not be trained, not *h-om the* arbitration laws. Employers themselves recognize that much time cannot be taken up in training apprentices if there is no opportunity to absorb them in industry. {: .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr Holloway: -- *No* industry has ever carried its full capacity of apprentices. {: .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr DRAKEFORD: -- That is so. It is safe to say that the fault for any shortage of artisans does not lie with the Arbitration Court awards. Whatever be the position regarding artisans, however, I impress upon the House that whilst highly-trained toolmakers, fitters and turners will be necessary in this industry, a great many of the hands employed need not be tradesmen. I want, and every man of honest convictions wants, *the* field for employment in this country to be widened. We shall have to establish new secondary industries, so that the men who have gone to war may be re-absorbed into industry when they come back. This bill does not provide the opportunity to 'canvass them, but there are various other industrial developments which this Government should be planning for the absorption of people into employment at the end of the war. I shall not traverse the paragraphs of the proposed agreement. I understand some honorable members believe that paragraph 12 will affect existing industries, but why should we be solicitous for the big importing companies which have been making a huge profit by charging the Australian too high a price for his ear? We should be more considerate of those who will put Australian capital into the industry, and provide employment for Australians at reasonable rates of pay and working conditions, although, of course, I would welcome the investment of American capital. There is no question about what should be done. Only those honorable members who would have Australia .get all of its needs from overseas will vote against this bill. {: #subdebate-68-0-s13 .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD:
Ballarat . It is a late hour to be talking on any subject, but some important aspects of this question have not yet been touched. For many years, I have advocated the establishment of motor-car manufacturing in Australia, but I have never believed that, in order to establish that industry, a monopoly should be created. I have been convinced that by the imposition of a prohibitive tariff, and the limitation of the period in which motor engines may be imported into Australia we should, by sheer weight of economic circumstances. force the already established motor-body building firms into the establishment in Australia of the enginebuilding part of their industry, or encourage other Australian enterprises immediately to enter into the manufacture of motor engines. There is no lack in Australia of the raw materials or, indeed, of skilled labour or experience necessary for the manufacture of motor-car engines. The internal combustion engine i3 an engine which works at a relatively low rate of speed. Internal combustion engines have been manufactured successfully in Australia for more than twenty years, mainly in the form of single-cylinder engines for use in Australian secondary and primary industries. That industry has developed to such a degree that for a number of years practically the whole of our requirements of engines of that type have been supplied in open competition with imported engines. The quality of the Australian product has been quite equal to that of the imported. Indeed, such is the efficiency of this industry in the manufacture of the single-cylinder engines, which are not so different from a four-cylinder engine, that to-day, at Ballarat, the workshop of Ronaldson Brothers and Tippett is producing a high-pressure singlecylinder motor engine of a kind which requires in its manufacture a greater degree of skill and accuracy than do the motor-car engines as we know them to-day. In those circumstances, I have always held that this industry, given effective protection and encouragement, even to the point of prohibition of imports, could have been effectively established ere now. I was astounded when the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies),** in justifying the creation of this proposed monopoly, said something complimentary and encouraging about monopolies. I do him no injustice when I say that he said that, in the main, monopolies indicated great efficiency, and worked for the benefit of the nation. What astounded me was the desertion by the Prime Minister and the United Australia party of the traditional conservative policy, which, in the past, has always been that competition is the soul of industry and the life blood of trade. Now we see a departure from that policy and a wholehearted support of the principle of monopolies. {: .speaker-L1L} ##### Mr Wilson: -- The Prime Minister is not consistent. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- No. I, too, believe that in the main, monopolies are efficient, but the party to which I belong stands for the principle that, if there must be a monopoly, that monopoly should be owned, controlled and; directed by thu people for the people. If we had had men of courage and wisdom in power in this country from 1932 onwards, many of the dreadful results of the depression could have been avoided. I saw the spectacle in Victoria of hundreds of apprentices in the railway workshops who, having trained at the Melbourne Technical College as fitters and turners, were thrown back on to labourer's work, and employed only short time. Some of them were dismissed. The story told by the opponents of Labour was that there was not the wherewithal with which to employ these young men on reproductive work. It was then that the National Parliament should have used the great Australian railway workshops for the construction of an Australian motor car. If that had been done, the apprentices and the skilled tradesmen, who had been engaged in the manufacture of locomotives and railway rolling-stock, would not have come to the end of their careers, but would have been units to-day in a flourishing new industry. When we consider the need for a monopoly franchise, we should ask ourselves what are those industries in Australia which, although they are difficult industries, have, nevertheless, made good ? My" mind goes back to the establishment of the Broken Hill. Proprietary Company Limited. I speak subject to correction, but I know of no legislation whereby the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited was given a monopoly or the exclusive right to manufacture iron and steel within the boundaries of this great Australian Commonwealth. My mind also goes back to the successful manufacture in this country of the reaper and binder. Up to the year 1921, the Australian wheat-farmer had to get his reapers and binders from the United States of America or Great Britain at the cost of £105 a machine, but in that year, given the protection of the tariff, the firm of H. V. McKay Limited, sold on the Aus, tralian market, a first-class machine, the product of Australian workers and Australian plant, for £95. Hundreds of other Australian secondary industries without a monopoly franchise have successfully produced for the Australian market. The manufacture of motor cars will require a vast amount of capital, a large supply of labour, and a strong executive, but if it be efficiently organized, it can survive without a monopoly and it will not be challenged by any other company, provided, of course, that the product which it manufactures is of a satisfactory quality, and meets the requirements of the community. I have always believed that the most satisfactory defence of this country will be an increased population. At the moment arms, munitions and aircraft are absolutely essential ; but a long-range defence plan demands a vastly increased population, with which there must be. a deliberately planned policy of decentralization.- There is no industry that lends itself more to decentralization than the motor-car industry. The engine blocks, pistons, crankshafts, valves, carburettors, sparking plugs, and all other components of motor cars should be made in inland centres far removed from the coastal areas. From time to time I have listened to politicians and other public men advocating decentralization, but until the governments of the day compel those establishing industries to commence their operations far removed from the coastal areas, such a policy will never be adopted. If, unfortunately, this country should be attacked, such attacks will be made upon the capital cities where most of our industrial activity is carried on. If the enemy destroyed the cities, the great industries which are so. essential to. the defence of this continent also would be destroyed. I should like the bill to provide that whenever a company received governmental assistance in the way of tariff protection, or in any other form it should bc on a distinct understanding that the industry should operate a prescribed distance from the capital cities which are already overcrowded and a danger to our national welfare. 3 would inform the captains of industry proposing to start new undertakings that they could not be allowed to commence operations iri airy capital city or in any centre which had a population exceeding 10,000 or 20,000 persons, as, only by forcing a wider distribution of industry can we secure effective decentralization and afford adequate protection for our people. {: #subdebate-68-0-s14 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE:
Capricornia -- The bill before the House had its origin in the Motor Engine Bounty Bill passed by this Parliament on the 7th December, 1939. On that occasion I was the principal speaker for the Opposition, and stated - >Id the opinion of the Opposition this measure is long overdue. We have consistently urged the Government for a number of years to be courageous enough to pass the necessary legislation to provide a bounty to assist in the establishment of the motor vehicle engine industry in Australia. I do not want this industry to get into the hands of a monopoly. That has been the policy of the Opposition during the last ten years; we have consistently advocated .the establishment of the industry in Australia. The policy of the Labour party has not changed, but the Government changed its attitude when it supported the monopoly principle. "We applauded the speech made, by the honorable member for Henty **(Sir Henry Gullett)** in 1936 when ho succeeded in influencing the composite Ministry composed of members of the United Australia and Country parties to approve the proposal to impose a duty of .7d. per lb. on chassis imported into Australia, the proceeds to form a fund for the payment of a bounty on the manufacture of motor car engines. The honorable member made a most convincing speech to the House, and impressed every, one that what he proposed was one of the most important steps for the expansion of the motor industry in this country. The members of the Labour party were very disappointed when subsequently there was a change of front and the Government hesitated and vacillated on the subject. It was even said by the honorable member for Henty that some sinister influence was at work to prevent the Government from going on with the project which, on the basis of manufacturing 35,000 engines annually, would, in the opinion of the Government, give direct employment to 10,000, and indirect employment to 50,000 persons. The late Prime Minister, **Mr. Lyons,** who we were assured by the honorable member for Henty had carefully read every word of his speech and submitted the proposal to Cabinet, said in Sydney - >The arguments used against the manufacture tn Australia of engines applied with equal force to the manufacture of motor cai bodies and many accessories now manufactured here. They also applied with equal force to every other established manufacturing industry. We agree with the views expressed by the late Prime Minister. I have heard a great deal of opposition to this measure from certain honorable members; but the engine bounty bill was carried in December, 1939, by 46 votes to 11. Those who opposed the measure were the ardent low tariffists headed by the present Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron).** I have great respect for his courage and candour because, when Leader of the Country party in the South Australian Parliament, ho admitted that he was an ardent free-trader and believed in buying goods in the cheapest markets in the world, irrespective of labour conditions. He stands to-night where he stood then, and where he stood on the 7th December, 1939, when he voted against the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Bill, and on numerous other occasions when he opposed increased duties which had for their object tha encouragement of secondary industries in Australia. When the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Bill -was before this Parliament on the 7th December, the present Minister for Commerce had the support of all free-traders, including the honorable member for Swan **(Mr. Gregory)** and the honorable member for Forrest **(Mr. Prowse),** two honorable members who have always been ardent low tariffists. But when tobacco duties were before this Parliament, the honorable member for Forrest supported the imposition of a duty of 300 per cent, on that product. The honorable member also adopts a similar attitude with respect to wheat. He believes in the imposition of duties of 300 per cent, on rice, tobacco and other primary products but when the products of our secondary industries are under consideration he does not care how low the duties are, and fails to recognize that the 500,000 persons engaged in our secondary industries provide the best market for the commodities which the rural workers produce. 1 would have been more impressed with the arguments against this bill on the ground that we are at war, were it not for the fact that the same honorable members have objected to the introduction of similar proposals in peace-time. The honorable member for Macquarie **(Mr. John Lawson)** has informed us that this proposal was referred to an industrial panel, which, when asked whether the industry should be established in Australia and also if it should be started in war-time, replied in the affirmative to both questions. Some of the leading industrialists in Australia were members of that panel. One of its members was **Mr. Essington** Lewis, the managing director of the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited, a gentleman who has been appointed by this Government to co-ordinate all production for defence purposes. Another member of the panel was **Sir Colin** Fraser, a director of the Electrolytic Zinc Company and a noted engineer who has played a leading part in the industrial life of this country. When this proposal was placed before these gentlemen by the then Minister for Trade and Customs, they recommended that the Government should establish the industry even in wartime. I was amazed to find that the Government had decided to proceed with the scheme, because I thought that it had toyed with it so long that it would not have the courage to bring the legislation before Parliament. The Germans have been able to make the progress they have through Holland, Belgium and into France by using 80-ton tanks manufactured in their own country. Factories for the manufacture of motor car engines in Australia should be able to turn out motor engines within about eighteen months and eventually make tanks which, unfortunately, may be necessary to defend Australia against aggression. The proposal now before us is definitely linked with the defence of this country. I am not deterred by the fact that the Tariff Board did not recommend the establishment of this industry. It is true that the board took evidence, but it was one-sided evidence. The only persons in a position to give evidence were distributors of motor cars and representatives of overseas companies who were not in favour of the establishment of this industry in Australia. However estimable those witnesses may be as individuals, they appeared before the Tariff Board as representatives of companies in the United States of America or Canada. They could not give evidence contrary to the wishes of their parent companies abroad and retain their high positions. Before the Tariff Board inquiry concluded it was obvious what the verdict would be. It is only reasonable to assume that in the transition period during which Australian industries are being built up, some injury is done to importing industries every time a new secondary industry is started in this country. That may happen in this case. A study of the fiscal history of the Commonwealth makes it clear that every application for imposition of duties has had the effect of transferring workshops from Birmingham, Bradford or Leeds, in England or from different cities of the United States of America to Australia, thereby causing some dislocation of the trade carried on by importers. When I was Minister for Trade and Customs I frequently received deputations from importers who complained that if duties were increased on certain imports they would lose their business. I felt sorry for them, but later many of these men engaged in manufacture in Australia and later benefited more from the protectionist policy of the country than they had previously imagined to be possible. Some had induced their parent companies to set up establishments here; others themselves had undertaken the manufacture in Australia of the goods which they had previously imported. After careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that we have gone as far as is advisable in the step-by-step process of manufacturing the complete motor car. Recently, an expert in the motor-car business told me that in his opinion we had reached the limit of the step-by-step process; he recommended the manufacture of complete cars in Australia. At that time, he held an important, position in a foreign company. There are SO different types of motor cars on the Australian market, and any attempt to make parts for each type of car by step-by-step methods would undoubtedly prove to be uneconomic. By selecting a common utility type of car, and confining manufacture to a maximum of 25,000 out of the 83,000 engines required in a peak year, motor-car engines could be manufactured in this country with a minimum of dislocation of the motor trade which" to-day depends on. the imported chassis. This enterprise cannot be firmly established in a few months. *No* doubt fifteen months, or longer, will elapse before any company can get into production. It is possible that the war will be over before production commences. But the establishment of this industry will provide employment for trained artisans who, during the war, will be engaged in the production of munitions, as well as to many trained men who have gone overseas and will come back as the honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** did from the last war, only to find great difficulty in obtaining employment. Had secondary industries been developed then to the degree that they have developed now, the honorable member for Richmond, being intelligent and physically fit, would have had no difficulty in getting a lucrative position in secondary industries in Australia. It is possible, however, that the honorable gentleman is doing better from his association with primary industries. Phenomenal progress has been made in the secondary industries of Australia during the last 25 years, and consequently Australia will be able to pass through the war period with less inconvenience than during the last war. This country is now more self-reliant than it was then. Fears have been expressed that the establishment of this industry now may cause a shortage of fitters for the manufacture of munitions. *From* my study of the industry, I am convinced that it requires, not so much fitters, but designers, tool-makers and machinists. The bulk of the labour will be semi-skilled. because motor-car engines will be made on a mass-production basis. If, as is expected, common utility types of cars can be sold at £25 less than the present charge, it will be a good thing for Australia. I draw the attention of the House to the following statement made by the managing director of Australian Consolidated Industries Limited as reported in the *Sydney Morning Herald: -* >We would sell the Australian car at a price substantially lower than the price of comparable imported cars. Consequently, the bounty would go into the pockets of the purchasers who, in many instances, would be working mcn, and in that way the total number of cars on the road should be increased. The honorable member for Deakin **(Mr. Hutchinson)** and members of the Country party compared the retail prices of similar cars; In Australia and in the United States of America. I submit that, if the complete car were made here, the Australian purchaser would get it at a lower price. The necessity to alter body designs annually in order to meet chassis alterations leads to uneconomic conditions in the industry. In Australia we have been for years making car bodies, the fashion parts of which change frequently, whereas the design of the engine is more static. American engineers will alter the design of a chassis if by so doing they can save a dollar, because, with an output of 4,000,000 cars, that represents a saving of nearly £1,000,000. Frequent changes of body design involve body manufacturers in huge outlay for dies and tools. One director of a car body manufacturing firm told me that an outlay of over £200,000 a year was required, for new dies and tools to keep up with the changes. If the output of a factory is 4,000,000 car3 a year, £200,000 does not mean much per car, but on an output of 20,000 bodies, it is a heavy burden. Motor-car body production in Australia is based upon the American conception of the chassis, but were the whole car manufactured here, body changes would not have to be made so frequently. Savings could be effected by less-frequent changes of design. At the moment, Australian motor-car body builders have to conform to the chassis manufacturing programmes of the United States of America and Canada instead of having the design under their own control. I am convinced that the manufacture of complete cars here would result in cheaper cars. I am reliably informed that at the end of this year, American motor-car chassis will undergo considerable alteration. If that be so, Australian body-builders will be involved in heavy outlay for. new dies and tools. The Labour party has been consistent in its attitude towards this proposal. On several occasions, I was authorized by my party to move the adjournment of the House in order to draw attention to the neglect of the Government to establish this industry. We on this side would be recreant to our trust, and inconsistent with the attitude we have adopted during the last five years, if we went back on our decision to support this industry. We differ from the Government in regard to the granting of a monopoly. The bill which was before us towards the end of last year did not contain any provision for a monopoly. Speaking ou behalf .of the Labour party, I opposed the granting of a monopoly. However, this bill does provide for the granting of a monopoly to one company and, therefore, the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** moved an amendment. The Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** has agreed to embody the principle of that amendment in the bill when it reaches the committee stage. Because of that, the Leader of the Opposition sought to withdraw his amendment on the second reading with a view to moving an amendment of similar import in committee. I do not fear that the Government will go back on the Prime Minister's undertaking, but if it did so, the third reading could be opposed. Labour stands, as it has always stood, for the establishment of this, industry which it believes will play a big part in providing employment for a considerable number of the 50,000 lads who leave school every year, many of whom desire to become apprentices in the engineering trades but fail to obtain employment. This will be an additional industry, that will enable us to train a great number of fitters, turners and artisans generally. Because it is in accordance with Labour's traditional policy of protection for the scientific development of our secondary industries side by side with our primary industries, we wholeheartedly support the proposal for the establishment of this industry, subject to the conditions stipulated by the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** that the objectionable monopoly feature he eliminated. {: #subdebate-68-0-s15 .speaker-C7E} ##### Sir EARLE PAGE:
Cowper -- It is a national tragedy that at this hour of crisis in the greatest war in the history of the British Empire we should be arguing a measure of this kind to the exclusion of matters more directly associated with the war. Indeed, I understood that during this session we were to deal with amending repatriation legislation which would specify the pensions and conditions to be granted in respect of members of the new Australian Imperial Force. I have been a member of this Parliament since the last war ended, and during the whole of that period this Parliament has been endeavouring to rectify anomalies in our repatriation law, because that legislation was passed during the last war, when we were unable to give to the measure the consideration it required. I also regard it as a national tragedy that the Government's proposal for the establishment of so important an industry as the manufacture of engines - it might be called the heart of the motor-car industry - should be hurriedly dealt with during an all-night sitting, when it could be just as conveniently handled next week, or at some later date. Even Ministers have admitted, in reply to questions asked by me, that sufficient skilled operatives are not available to enable three shifts to be worked in factories engaged in the manufacture of aeroplanes and munitions. We should be more justified also in dealing with the revival of the shipbuilding industry in preference to this measure. I have not the slightest doubt that the demand which the establishment of this industry will make on our reservoir of skilled operatives will seriously decrease the skilled man-power available for war industries. We should be given ample opportunity to discuss this proposal. As I have been associated with nearly every one of the important steps that have marked the development of the motor industry in Australia, I cannot be accused of being hostile to the manufacture of cars in Australia. I submit, however, that the appropriate time to discuss a proposal of this kind is certainly not at four o'clock in the morning, when we are rushing into recess. Australians will be staggered to-morrow when they read in the press the policies enunciated by the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** on one hand, and the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** on the other, and find that these policies are diametrically opposed in the evening to what they were in the morning. Never before in my experience in this Parliament have I seen two notices on the one business-paper dealing with the same subject. On to-day's notice-paper the first and last notices each deal with the same subject, because the Prime Minister has made a complete *volte face* in connexion with this measure. To my great astonishment I learned to-night that the Opposition intends to vote against its own motion standing in the name of the Leader of the Opposition. What a spectacle! We find contradictory motions on the notice-paper standing in the name of the Prime Minister and the members of the Opposition proposing to vote against their leader'3 motion. When the public of Australia are informed of this position they will wonder what sort of leadership we are giving to the nation's war effort. There is no time in war for this sort of change of direction every few hours. What confusion would be caused if we were to give contradictory directions to our gallant soldiers who are now fighting desperately in Belgium? We cannot run a war along such lines. I feel certain that the people of Australia will be staggered when they learn of what is now happening in' this Parliament of the utter lack of leadership being displayed, and the absence of a continuous policy. I can claim to have done as much as any individual in Australia towards building up the car industry. In 1924 representatives of the Ford Motor Company of Canada approached **Mr. Bruce** and myself, and discussed the question of establishing body-building and chassisassembly works in Australia. We told them that we were prepared to give to them every reasonable assistance in that project. We allowed them to import free of duty the machinery they required to equip their Australian factories and gave them the protection they needed owing to the gradual growth of the industry. Since those days the industry has expanded tremendously. I think that the honorable member for Corio **(Mr. Dedman)** will admit that it is now one of the largest and most efficient in Australia. But when we took that action we did not deny similar concessions to other companies who might desire to follow the Ford company's example. Consequently, other companies such as General Motors-Holden's Limited have established body-building and chassis assembly works as well as factories for the manufacture of motor parts, with the result that to-day 35,000 employees are engaged in this industry throughout Australia, apart from distribution and repair operations. The granting of a monopoly to any one company in the industry was not a part of our policy. The concessions we were prepared to offer were available to any company which desired to take advantage of them. Surely, that is the proper way to encourage the establishment of new industries. That policy should be adhered to on this occasion. In addition to attracting American and Canadian companies to this country we made equal efforts to induce British capital and British manufacturers of cars to establish factories here. Originally the duty on motor cars was 5 per cent. British and 10 per cent, general. The duty on foreign cars was then increased to 17-J per cent, and later to 27^ per cent, whilst. British cars unassembled were allowed in duty free. Four years ago and, more recently, two years ago, the late Prime Minister, **Mr. Lyons,** the present Prime Minister, the honorable member for Balaclava **(Mr. White)** who was then Minister for Customs, and I, in the course of visits overseas, attempted to induce overseas manufacturers of motor cars to establish plants in this country. We tried very hard to induce the great British manufacturers to come here. The point I emphasize is that if those companies had agreed to our request and had invested capital amounting to £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 in this country, thus giving employment to thousands of Australian workers, we surely ought not to have gone about talking of them as foreign concerns, as some honorable members have described the companies which have established plants here and, for many years, have been providing employment for thousands of our workmen. They are surely Australian companies. These companies have extended their operations to the manufacture of motor parts and accessories. Fifteen years ago they did practically nothing in that direction, whereas to-day nearly £2,000,000 is being expended by them annually. How can it be suggested, therefore, that companies which have done such good work, should be discarded because they fail, within 48 hours, to tell the Government that they will come in :and do this job of work? Surely we must handle a matter of this kind in a more businesslike manner. We should pay regard to the activities and achievements of these companies. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Forde)** stated that it was useless to endeavour to establish this industry step by step. The point I make is that it has been due to. the application of stepbystep methods that the industry has reached its present stage of development. That policy was adopted on the recommendation of the Tariff Board - a body which has no axe to grind, and, therefore, can be relied upon. So soon as the Lyons Government received the Tariff Board's report it placed certain proposals before this Parliament. It said that it was prepared to provide a bounty to encourage the manufacture of engines. That offer was made to the public and all manufacturers by the honorable member for Balaclava **(Mr. White)** in 193S, when he was Minister for Trade and Customs. We then said that we would go even further, and provide a. bounty to encourage the manufacture of radiator cores and other parts of the chassis. Those industries have been established since the bounties were made available, but at no time was it ever suggested that a monopoly should be granted. Those offers were open to any company which was prepared to undertake this work. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was Minister for Trade and Customs he did not suggest that a monopoly be granted in respect of any industry which he sought to encourage, or that the concessions which his Government was prepared to give should be limited to any one concern. He merely said that his Government had provided sufficient protection for Australian industry to manufacture this or that article, and left it open to any company to take advantage of that concession. Owing to the Scullin Government's policy of protection, eighteen companies undertook the manufacture of refrigerators. Obviously, the number was too great, but eventually the companies which turned out the best articles survived, with the result that the number was ultimately reduced to two or three. Contrast that policy with the proposal now placed before this Parliament. It is now suggested that rather than leave it to interested companies to prove their worth, we should start off by picking out one concern, which, it is said, will do the job best, even though it has had no previous experience in car manufacture, and, therefore, should be given the job entirely and to the exclusion of others. That policy is wrong. No monopoly should be granted in respect of any industry in this country, particularly at a time like the present when, in order to meet existing difficulties, we all must be prepared to share the nation's burdens equally. Let us see how the industry has been built up in Australia. "We commenced with the manufacture of motor bodies, in respect of which substantial protection was provided when it was found that the assistance was not sufficient. When that industry was established allied industries associated with body manufacture grew up. To-day, these industries, independent of body-building, pay wages amounting to £2,000,000 annually. Next a start was made with the manufacture of chassis parts for both original equipment and replacement. To-day, 6,200 employees are engaged in that section of the industry alone, manufacturing tyres and tubes, storage batteries, shock absorbers, bumper bars, sparking plugs, springs and radiator cores. That achievement is dismissed by some honorable members as being insignificant, yet the proposal now before the House will not involve work for any more men than was the case when the industry was being developed step by step. Chassis parts for replacements only are also being manufactured in this country. I understand that about £2,000,000 a year is being distributed in wages to the 2,000 employees engaged in these undertakings. A policy "that has been so successful in the past ought to be equally successful in the future. The Tariff Board, which is an independent body, recommended that the manufacture of the complete motor vehicle engine should be developed by this step-by-step policy. **Mr. Guy,** who was the secretary of the Chamber of Manufactures of Victoria, before he became a member of the Tariff Board, and also **Mr. Kelly,** recommended in their report that the first development towards the construction of the complete engine should be the manufacture of the parts of the chassis still imported, which represented, they pointed out, double the value of the engine. At the time of their investigation the value of the chassis from the United States of America was £94, and the value of the engine £30. There was plenty of scope to proceed with the stepbystep programme and yet make substantial and steady progress towards the achievement of our ultimate objective. Instead of acting on the recommendation of the Tariff Board, the Government has formulated a policy which, in effect, said to the interests that had been working in the motor car industry in Australia for the last six years, and which had been induced by government promises to bring millions of pounds of new capital into the country : " A new programme must now be adopted that completely excludes you from participating.'' It must be obvious to everybody that we cannot develop all of our big industries here with only local capital. The United States of America obtained capital from Great Britain, Holland and other countries for 100 years, between 1800 and 1900, and so increased its population - it is now about 140,000,000 - that a beginning could be made to return the imported capital, because an extraordinarily effective production programme had been put into operation by that influx of capital from outside. If we attempt, to confine our operations to such developments as are possible by the exclusive use of Australian capital we shall seriously retard the progress of this country. I have always found that it is best for the cobbler to stick to his last. A trained doctor achieves better results than a novice with sick people, and a trained automotive engineer is likely toachieve better results in the motor engine manufacturing industry than, say, persons trained in the glass industry, or any other industry. I congratulate **Mr, Smith** and his colleagues on their successful establishment of the glass industry in this country. They have alsodeveloped other projects, including themasonite industry. But the manufacture of motor vehicle engines is a complicated' undertaking, which will need the guidance of thoroughly qualified and experienced automotive engineers. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said a few moments ago that certain factories in the United States of America weremanufacturing millions of motor vehicle- engines in a year. He referred to ono organization which manufactures 4,000,000 engines annually in one place. We must have skilled and experienced engineers and artisans if this project is to succeed in competition with such rivals. When the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited decided to undertake the manufacture of steel in Australia, it obtained the services of experts from abroad to train local men. That course has .been followed in the establishment of other important Australian industries, and in my opinion it must be followed in connexion with the manufacture of motor vehicle engines in order ' to make a real success and one which justifies government assistance. We should not do anything at this stage to endanger the industries associated with motor car production, which have already been encouraged to operate in Australia, for they are providing employment for thousands of people, and affording great conveniences to the whole population. I take it that no one desires to destroy these established industries: yet it is now proposed to give to another company a monopoly for the manufacture of motor vehicle engines. What wo should say is : " We are prepared to provide a bounty for the manufacture of motor vehicle engines in Australia for any interests which are prepared to invest the necessary capital derived from Australian sources; but we shall not agree to place an " undue handicap on certain enterprises which are already making motor bodies and many motor engine parts in this country and prevent them from manufacturing, if they so desire, without a bounty". The effect of the letters, or the agreement, now submitted to us will be to grant a monopoly to one organization. That, in my opinion, will be most unjust, and I do not see how any fair-minded member of the Labour party can stand for it. I understood the Leader of the Opposition to say that he would not agree to that form of exploitation, for it is, in fact, a form of exploitation. We should aim at attracting overseas capital to an everincreasing amount to this country, and it is unthinkable that we should be unjust to the motor car interests which, since the last war established operations here. Surely it is obvious beyond the need for argument that we must increase our population. Our 7,000,000 people cannot hope to continue to hold this country. We are in a position of extraordinary danger because of our small population. By encouraging the investment of overseas capital in enterprises we should, undoubtedly, attract a greater population and be able to find work for more and more people. At this critical period in our history, we should, as the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson)** has pointed out, do everything, possible to concentrate upon industries which are vital for defence purposes. The people of Australia would applaud the policy of putting first things first. We should not diffuse our energies at a time when we should be concentrating on the manufacture of tanks and aeroplanes for our gallant men who are going overseas to fight for our safety. The shambles in Flanders at present is due, to some degree, to the lack of mechanical aids which a greater concentration of the manufacturing resources of Great Britain would have prevented. We should be doing everything in our power to supply this urgent need. As I was a member of the Ministry when the proposal to provide a bounty to encourage the manufacture of motor vehicle engines in this country was first mooted, I must express my surprise that after a letter had been forwarded by the Ford Motor Company in April of last year to the Government, no other communication was sent by the Menzies Government to the company until the telegram of the 18th December, 1939, was despatched to it by the then Minister for Trade and Customs **(Mr. John Lawson).** A hiatus of nine months cannot be bridged in 48 hours. It was not fair to the Ford Motor Company or any other company to expect it to be able to reply in that time, particularly as it had not had an opportunity to consider the act, which the Parliament had just passed. Question put - >That the words proposed to be omitted **(Mr. CURT!IN'S amendment)** stand part of the question. The House divided. (Mr. Speaker - Hon. G. J. Bell.) AYES: 40 NOES: 15 Majority.. . . 25 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. Amendment negatived. {: #subdebate-68-0-s16 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member has already spoken to the motion for the second reading and cannot now move an amendment. I can accept an amendment only from an honorable member who has not spoken at the second-reading stage. {: #subdebate-68-0-s17 .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
BarkerMinister for Commerce · CP -- As the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson)** is debarred, I move - >That the following words be added to the motion : - "Provided that consideration of the manufacture of motor vehicle engines in Australia be deferred until such time as, in the opinion of Parliament (expressed by Resolution) arrangements have been made and proved to be effective to overcome the inadequacy of the war-time supply of munitions and aeroplanes, and to commence a programme of shipbuilding, so that Australia's maximum industrial effort in the production of the things most essential to win the war may not be impeded ". {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The amendment which the Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Cameron)** desires to move is not in order. It is laid down very clearly in Mays' *Parliamentary Practice* that words may not be added to a motion that a bill be read a second time. Question put - >That the bill be now read a second time. The House divided. (Mr. Speaker. - Hon. G. J. Bell.) AYES: 42 NOES: 13 Majority . . . . 29 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In committee:* Clause 1 agreed to. Clause 2 - >This act shall come into operation on the day on which it receives the Royal Assent. {: #debate-68-s0 .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr PATERSON:
Gippsland -- I move - >That the words "on the day on which it receives the Royal Assent " be omitted, with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following words : - "when in the opinion of Parliament (expressed by resolution) arrangements have been made and proved to be effective to overcome the inadequacy of the war-time supply of munitions and aeroplanes and to commence a programme of shipbuilding, so that Australia's maximum industrial effort in the production of the things most essential to win the war may not be impeded." Dealing with aircraft construction to-day, the Minister for Supply and Development **(Sir Frederick Stewart)** said that there was a shortage of machine tools and skilled workers, and that the shortage of skilled workers was preventing aircraft construction from being carried on as rapidly as it would otherwise have been. A few days ago the following question, *upon notice,* was asked of the same Minister by the right honorable member for *Cowper* **(Sir Earle Page : -** {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Are there sufficient trained men to work three shifts in the manufacture of aeroplanes in the various factories? The reply was - >No, not at present. The right honorable member for Cowper also asked - {: type="1" start="2"} 0. If so, are three shifts being worked? 1. If not, can arrangements be made for the working of three shifts to expedite the output of aeroplanes? In reply the Minister said - >The working of three shifts in the factories is dependent upon - > >Training of supervisors, > >Availability of materials, > >Obtaining of tradesmen and other operatives. The Minister went on to say that the training of personnel was proceeding, and every effort would be made to secure a sufficient number of trained men to serve the needs of this industry and other industries, vital to defence requirements. It is indisputable that at present sufficient trained men to enable our aircraft factories to work continuously on three shifts are not available, and. we should not permit men to be drawn from that field of industry in order to undertake work of a less essential character. Honorable members were pro foundly moved 48 hours ago when the news came through that Belgium had capitulated. The Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** made a most stirring speech at the "Win the War " Rally in Sydney in which he urged the necessity to make the greatest possible effort to provide materials necessary for the successful prosecution of the war. Only thisafternoonthe Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** used words to the effect that we would be called upon to make a greater effort in our war preparations. His words, and those of the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies),** were brave words. Were they only words, I ask, or did they mean something? The bald fact is that the supply of skilled labour capable of making guns, aeroplanes, munitions and ships is admittedly inadequate to permit of the maximum output which everybody professes to want. Is there any one in this committee who does not believe that priority at this time should be given to the production of those things which are essential to the winning of the war? The manufacture of motor vehicle engines is not at this moment essential to the winning of the war; guns, ships and aeroplanes are. In support of my contention that the immediate manufacture of motor engines is not essential to the winning of the war, I quote what was said by the secretary of the Defence Department when giving evidence before the Tariff Board. These are his words: - >The military authorities are of opinion that there are ample lorries and motor cars in Australia to meet the requirements of the fighting services in war extending over a considerable period, even after allowing for essential civil requirements, as civil motor transport is likely to be severely restricted by shortage of fuel. I appeal to honorable members, irrespective of party, to give priority in the use of skilled labour to those factories which are definitely helping Australia to play its part in the great struggle in which we are engaged. I assure honorable members that there is no petty purpose behind this amendment. It is not designed to hold up the project indefinitely. It is an honest attempt to put things in their proper perspective. Sitting in the shelter of this splendid building 12,000 miles away from where the greatest war in history is being waged, we are apt to forget that there is a war at all, and that we should put forth our utmost effort to win it. Not a single trained man should be diverted from essential war work, or prevented from taking up such work, by "employing him in something that can very well wait a little longer. Reference has been made to the fact that **Mr. Essington** Lewis, a member of an advisory panel, has stated that there will be no labour difficulties in connexion with the establishment of a motor car manufacturing industry. If he carries out his new job in the efficient manner of which we believe he is capable, he ought very soon to be able to bring about the conditions stipulated in this amendment as a preliminary to the manufacture of motor engines. If he does so, our objections to the establishment of the industry will be removed. If **Mr. Lewis** can get things moving in such a way that Parliament can express by resolution its conviction that those conditions have been fulfilled, then there will be nothing to prevent an immediate beginning of the manufacture of engines and cars. The carrying of this amendment would not involve indefinite delay; it would involve merely the giving of priority to those things which are necessary to win the war. {: #debate-68-s1 .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR:
Dalley -- It is not often that we hear the patriotic plea put forward so strongly as -it was by the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson)** to-night. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- Is the honorable member suggesting that I arn not patriotic? {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- No, but I do suggest that 'the honorable member is using patriotism to support his notorious free-trade principles. If the amendment means anything, it means that the manufacture of motor cars in Australia is to be dependent upon an expression of opinion by this Parliament regarding the time when it shall begin. If we had every mechanic we wanted, and every shipwright that we could use in our shipyards, the honorable member for Gippsland and his colleagues would still be opposed to the establishment of a motor-car manufacturing industry. Can the honorable member guarantee that, if the conditions he postulates were fulfilled, his party would support tho scheme ? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- Not with the present conditions attached. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- No, nor would any other member of the Country party. This amendment has no other purpose than to delay the proposal. The amendment provides that, when arrangements have been made and proved to .be effective - to the satisfaction of whom? {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr Gregory: -- The Parliament. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- Very well, and if Parliament decided that the arrangements were effective, the honorable member would still be opposed to the manufacture of cars in Australia. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- 'Put the provision in the bill, and then production could start automatically when the necessary resolution had been carried by Parliament. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- The amendment is designed to prevent the establishment of a new secondary industry in Australia. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- I deny that. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- The honorable member may deny it as much as he likes, but he cannot deny that he is not prepared even now to say that, if all the conditions set out in his amendment were satisfied, he would support the proposal. {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- If the monopoly provision were removed from the bill I would support it. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- Ob, that is something new. This is merely an attempt to capitalize the patriotic sentiment of honorable members in order to delay tho establishment of this industry. How long has the honorable member for Gippsland been in favour of a shipbuilding industry in Australia? If I am not mistaken, he was a member of the Government which sold the Australian Commonwealth Line of steamers. How sincere, then, is his expressed desire to establish a shipbuilding industry here now? Since when has he become so enthusiastic? {: .speaker-KXT} ##### Mr Paterson: -- Since the beginning of the war. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr ROSEVEAR: -- What interest has the Country party ever taken in shipbuilding? Not one member of that party has ever urged in this Parliament that a shipbuilding industry should be established. Yet, to-night, they say that we should not build a motor car in Australia until we have first built a ship. It is pure hypocrisy. {: #debate-68-s2 .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
BarkerMinister for Commerce · CP .. - I support the amendment. It cannot be denied that in Australia to-day we lack the quantity and variety .of arms, ammunition, aircraft and ships necessary for the proper conduct of the war. The honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** only this week castigated the Government because there w.er.e not enough aeroplanes. Is he now going to vote in favour of the manufacture of motor cars in preference to aircraft? The fact has to be faced that this country *is* at war. First things must come first. If we take things in the order of priority, motor cars will be very far down on the list. We have seen some interesting changes in this House during the last few hours. We have seen the honorable member for Corio **(Mr. Dedman)** stripped and naked, as Joseph was when despoiled by his brethren. We have seen the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** vote against his own amendment. We have seen the Opposition sold hoof and hide, and exposed like a little black calf on the mountain side. If ever there were a time when a bill ought to be defeated or postponed, that time is now. If this country is to defend itself, and play its part in equipping its forces overseas by supplying them with arms and munitions, it should not dissipate its energies on the manufacture of motor engines, but should concentrate on the production of those things mentioned by the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson).** {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- What about the demand of the honorable member for a royal commission? {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- Let the honorable member go back to Sydney, and see that the workers on the *Daily News* are paid. That will be job enough for him. The country is divided on this question. No other measure brought before Parliament since the outbreak of war has .produced such division and dissatisfaction as this one has. With all the sincerity of which I am capable, I say that the Government ought to withdraw the bill. It should not .be proceeded with .until provision is made for those things which are necessary for the prosecution of the war. I can foresee that, if this scheme is gone on with, we shall have represents*tives of the manufacturing firm coming to Canberra to explain that things turned out differently from what was expected, and that they will how need bigger bounties, and different conditions from what were agreed to. If we had sufficient ships and the command of the seas we could obtain all the motor .cars we need from the United States of America. If we lost -the command of the seas, we should be in a sorry plight with regard, to our exports and the whole of our internal economy. I return to my original conclusion that, in war-time, the manufacture of motor car engines is very low in the order of priority. Aircraft, artillery, machine guns, anti-aircraft guns, anti-tank guns, munitions for the Navy and all others arms, and steel plates for warships and merchant ships come a long way in front of motor cars. From what I have heard in this chamber in the last 24 hours, I should say that the object of honorable members is not so much to see the motor car engine industry established in Australia as to grant a monopoly to **Mr. Smith.** {: #debate-68-s3 .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY:
Leader of the Australian Labour party - nonCommunist · West Sydney -- The accuracy of the statement that there is a lack of skilled artisans in Australia has not been demonstrated to my satisfaction. A proper survey of the available man-power has not been made. The services of skilled men with whom I have worked are still available, but have not been sought by the Government. These men are scattered in various parts of the country, and, if they have not offered their services to the Defence Department, it is because the rates of pay are too low. The 80 electrical and mechanical fitters who were specially selected from the railway service and sent to England to be trained in the Bristol Aircraft Factory, returned to Australia four months ago ; but they have not yet been employed in the work for which they were trained overseas. Motor transport is of vital importance in the movement of troops in present-daywarfare, and in Australia, with its great distances, mechanized transport is of the utmost importance. {: .speaker-KWC} ##### Mr Thorby: -- We have more motor ears in Australia than the Defence Department can use. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- I am not satisfied on that point. The department recently purchased a large number ofFord and Chevrolet motor trucks, with the result that trucks of certain sizes are not now available to other buyers. The new war technique, requiring the rapid movement of troops, will create a stronger demand than ever for motor vehicles. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- The use of this form of transport will depend on petrol supplies. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- No obstacles should be allowed to stand in the way of the rapid transport of troops. Honorable members have frequently drawn attention to the importance of encouraging the extraction of oil from shale and coal, thus utilizing our natural resources. No member has been more insistent than I have in impressing on the Government the need for establishing the shipbuilding industry in Australia. The Townsend report has been in the hands of the Government for months, but whathas the Minister for the Navy done about it? {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- More than I am prepared to tell the honorable member. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- Nopractical proposition has been submitted to the Parliament. {: .speaker-KZZ} ##### Mr JOHN LAWSON:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP -- Had I not given instructions for the preparation of the report, it would not have been made. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- The Country party has never been keen about the establishment of the shipbuilding industry. {: .speaker-KZZ} ##### Mr JOHN LAWSON:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP -- The Government of which I was a member introduced the Ship Bounty Bill in 1939. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- The inadequacy of that measure was largely due to the fact that the Government was not satisfied as to the extent to which the Country party could be relied upon to support the proposed bounty.Uip to the present time, not one rivet has been driven. I had hoped that an opportunity would be presented during the present sittings to discuss the Townsend report, so that the preliminary work associated with the construction of ships in Australia could be put in hand. I should be happy to see as many shipyards established as could possibly be provided, because the plants could be utilized for defence purposes in a national crisis. We should get plants of this nature under way throughout Australia. Thousands of men, perhaps not fully skilled, are available, and are anxious to do work that would be worth while. We should not throttle the country's development, but should set in motion the machinery needed for increased industrial development in the interests of Australia. {: #debate-68-s4 .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY:
Richmond -- When the history of this war is written, if we ever have an opportunity to have it recorded, the fact will be disclosed that, when the British Expeditionary Forces were struggling for their lives in Flanders, when it was unknown whether they could be evacuated, and when Italy was on the verge of entering the war against us,this Parliament was engaged in a debate on a bill to determine whether motor cars should be manufactured in this country, although there was not sufficient petrol available to operate them. The honorable member for Dalley **(Mr. Rosevear)** has questioned the sincerity and patriotism of the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson)** in submitting his amendment, but the members of the Country party realize the importance of putting first things first. Honorable members opposite have not been able to refute the statement by the Minister of Supply and Development **(Sir Frederick Stewart),** who, in reply to a question asked in the House this week, said that there were not sufficient trained men to work three shifts in the manufacture of aeroplanes in various factories. {: .speaker-KV7} ##### Sir Frederick Stewart: -- Read the last paragraph of my reply. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- It states- >The working of three shifts in these factories is dependent upon - > >Training of supervisors. > >Availability of materials. > >Obtaining of tradesmen and the training of operatives. > >The training of personnel is proceeding, and every effort will be made to secure a sufficient number of trained men to serve the needs of this and other industries vital to the defence requirements. We have been eight months at war, and since the Minister for Supply tells us that our ability to work three shifts is still dependent on our being able to obtain tradesmen, there is full justification for the contention by the honorable member for Gippsland that the operation of this bill should be delayed until our munitions, aeroplane and other defence works are in full swing. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- Even then, the honorable member would' vote against the establishment of this industry. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- I have said that I would not. Our responsibility is no less than the responsibility of the Government of Great Britain, and can any honorable member who is honest with himself visualize the British Government at this moment endeavouring to establish an industry which was not directly concerned with providing its soldiers with munitions and means of defence? If there is any question as to the order of priority in which tanks, motor cars and so forth, are required, the Government should defer this bill until it has had time to consult the chiefs of the Army, Navy and Air forces in order to discover whether they want motor cars. They are the people who should say what is needed. If the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** could produce a declaration by them, " We want men *working* on motor cars rather than aeroplanes", there would be justification for voting against the amendment. A great industrialist is to build motor cars in Australia. He has a fine reputation as an executive and organizer, and the Government should take advantage of his knowledge and skill, and also of his plant, to help us to build aeroplanes and do those other things which he is equipped and has the knowledge to do. He could later get on with the motor car proposition. Is that not a wise and sensible proposal? I suggest to **Mr. Smith** that even if he does get this bill through Parliament, he should give his attention, as a patriotic duty, to that phase. I do not wish to speak at further length, because the case is so strong that it does not need amplifying, but I submit that we are fighting this proposal, because it is ill-timed, and not for the purpose of holding up the business of the committee. I regret to see the Prime Minister, whose energies should be conserved for the tremendous task that he has in hand, sitting here at 4.30 a.m. to listen to a debate of this character. It is regrettable also that the Minister for the Army **(Mr. Street),** whose responsibility to the nation is similar, should be here. I, therefore, suggest to honorable members of the Opposition, and to other honorable members, that they might see something other than mere political gain or mere political battle in this matter. {: .speaker-L08} ##### Mr Rosevear: -- The honorable member would be better advised to put that suggestion to himself. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr ANTHONY: -- I have. I sincerely trust that the amendment will be treated, not as a political ruse, but on its merits, as it deserves to be treated, and according to the sincerity with which the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson)** spoke. If it is treated thus, in view of the known facts - the scarcity of tradesmen and others, the peril of the Empire, the proper relationship of things and the crisis in world affairs - we shall proceed with first things first, and build aircraft, ships and armaments, which are more urgently needed than' are motor cars. {: #debate-68-s5 .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr HOLLOWAY:
Melbourne Ports -- I have not the slightest doubt about the patriotism of any member of the Country party. I believe that members of that party are sincere and that, if it be possible, they may be more concerned about the position that Australia is in to-day than even I, myself ; but it is indecent for honorable members repeatedly to play upon patriotism in such a way as to suggest that they have a monopoly of that spirit. Let us examine the situation. The Minister for the Navy **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** and the members of his corner party, have not attempted to do so. They! have only made patriotic speeches which would be more fitting at a public meeting, and have not given the slightest consideration to this question since the amendment was moved by the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson).** I concede that there is a shortage of skilled labour in Australia; that it is difficult to get fitters aud turners. But that does not mean anything at all. One would be led to believe, if one did not know better, that members of the Country party in their hearts believe that Australian Consolidated Industries Limited, if it decides to accept this proposal and to begin operations in Australia, will compete with the Government for employees of the type wanted by the Defence Department. Such a suggestion is inconceivable, and nobody knows better than the Minister for the Navy that no such thing is in the air. At least eighteen months or two years will elapse before the production of Australian cars is started. I give more credit to the intelligence of the Minister for the Navy than to imagine that he believes that this company is going to enter into competition for men with the Defence Department this week, next month, this year or next year. But, let us suppose the worst. If the company does try to attract men of the kind wanted in the Defence Department - such an anti-British attitude could not be contemplated - it is in the hands of the Commonwealth Government to decide whether or not that shall be permitted. The Commonwealth Government has the power under the National Security Act, power which it has already exercised in this matter, to say when the company shall start operations. The Minister for the Navy would not hesitate for one moment to demand a regulation to prevent Australian Consolidated Industries Limited from taking into its service men who were needed in defence factories. If this matter had been examined as it should have been, and had not been made just a medium through which to attack the Government, the Country party's own government, half of the time wasted here to-night would have been saved. I return the jibe thrown by the Minister for the Navy, and say to him that, when the people of Australia read the newspapers and find out what has happened here, they will wonder what sort of a Deputy Prime Minister it is that spikes his own government at such a critical period as Australia and the Empire are passing through to-day. {: #debate-68-s6 .speaker-KFS} ##### Sir HENRY GULLETT:
HentyActing Minister for Information · UAP -- I rise in no spirit of controversy.I take this subject as it is to-day, and intend to speak in no retrospection. I consider this proposal, to begin the manufacture of the combustion engine in Australia, on its merits now in the midst of this war, and with the war situationin its present state I consider it to be the absolute duty of all who are concerned with the future safety of this country to give their wholehearted support to this bill. This is a very war of the combustion engine, and Germany is in the ascendancy - we pray only temporarily - because it is so much ahead in the possession and use of the combustion engine. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- The diesel engine. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Sir HENRY GULLETT: -- Which is a combustion engine. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- Diesel engines are made by the hundreds here. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Sir HENRY GULLETT: -- I wish to speak only on facts. I am too borne down by the situation to engage in a controversy, but, as I say, Germany's ascendancy to-day lies in its lead in the combustion engine. Our relative position of inferiority in France and Flanders at this moment is due to our relative weakness in the combustion engine. We are in peril to-day because we and the French in recent years have allowed the German people to make a great break upon us in the type and size of the engines of the kind that we are in this measure proposing to build in Australia. I heard some one say here to-night that we shall have none of these engines for two years. I believe that, and I say, in passing, that I, therefore, do not believe that this proposal will make a considerable demand on what I admit is a limited supply of artisans, fitters and the rest of them in this country within the next year or two. I do not believe that it will make a demand on young workmen of that type which this country cannot meet. If the Government pushes on vigorously, as I know that it will, in the training of those young men, in eighteen months or two years, when the real demand of this industry for skilled men sets in. we shall have all of the skilled labour required. I take a long view of this war. I speak out of a lifetime of experience and observation throughout the world, and I could not take a graver view. Trance is in imminent peril and Great Britain is in greater danger than it has been in for over a thousand years. Where does Australia stand? The honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** said that soon we shall be opposed not by one enemy but by two. I am no alarmist, but we shall be fortunate if. we can get through this war with only two enemies. I believe that before the conflict terminates we in the Pacific shall be fortunate if we are not challenged upon our own soil, and if that is to happen we have no more chance of defending this country, unless we are self-contained in the matter of motorized transport and in the engines we require for the air, than if we were left depending only on pop-guns. This industry can be established without interfering in the least degree with the war effort upon which we are concentrating. Whatever may be said to the contrary, the action of one company in diverting a small part of its capital, executive ability and workers to the beginning of the manufacture of combustion engines, will not have the slightest effect upon our war effort. Unless Australia can undertake the manufacture of internal combustion engines, whence are we to obtain them? We are not manufacturing them in Australia. Should the enemy obtain control of the seas we should be without supplies. Where would be obtained diesel engines if they were not made in Australia? We should begin to make engines in a small way; we should lay down the foundations of "the safety of this country. We should manufacture the best possible class of internal combustion engines that have been proved in Europe. Honorable members should see where their duty lies. Our national safety cannot be assured unless we take every step to equip ourselves with the latest type of, shall I say, weapon which, during the last three weeks, has been winning the day in Europe. Honorable members should take a broader view with respect to the defence of this country, and realize where we would be in the matter of internal combustion engines if this country were invaded. The engines now in use would be out of commission in a couple of years through wear and tear. It is useless to suggest that we should begin to build such engines within a year or two. We do not need one unit of 20,000 engines ; I believe there is room in Australia for two or three economic units of that capacity. We have not to start from the beginning, and there is no more difficulty -in building an internal combustion engine in Australia than there is in making so many jam tins. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- We have to import tin plate used for jam tins. {: .speaker-KFS} ##### Sir HENRY GULLETT: -- I trust that that will not be necessary much longer. We have to ensure the safety of Australia for at least the next ten years, and aim at making it independent of overseas supplies. I know of. no step which is more essential in that regard than by passing this measure. {: #debate-68-s7 .speaker-JNX} ##### Mr BARNARD:
Bass .Although there appears to be a general desire for a vote on the amendment moved by the honorable member for Gippsland **(Mr. Paterson),** despite the early hour of the morning, each honorable member has a right to express his opinion on the important proposals now before the committee. The amendment has been supported by some members of the Country party, but I am at a loss to understand its significance. I give honorable members credit for being sincere in what they submit for our consideration; but is appears to me that the object of the amendment is to delay the commencement of the manufacture of internal combustion engines in Australia. All of the argument adduced in support of the amendment suggests that if the bill becomes law internal combustion engines will be manufactured within the next few weeks. Nothing is further from the truth. Before this industry can be established approximately £1,000,000 of capital has to be provided, £400,000 of which will be expended abroad on the purchase of suitable machinery and plant. Those who have had experience in establishing industries, particularly those designed for the production of mechanical equipment, will appreciate that for many months attention has to be devoted to the erection of buildings and the purchase of machinery. In these circumstances, this industry will not interfere with our war effort, because mechanics and other skilled artisans now engaged in the manufacture of munitions and other equipment will not be attracted by it. But it is essential that we should establish industries to absorb men who will be no longer required for defence activities when the war is over. I know of no industry that offers greater possibilities in that respect. It is for that reason that I believe that the bill should be passed in its present form. Question put - >That the words proposed to be omitted **(Mr. Paterson's amendment)** stand part of the clause. The committee divided. (The Temporary Chairman Mr. Collins.) AYES: 39 NOES: 14 Majority .. ... 25 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. Amendment negatived. Clause agreed to. Clause 4 agreed to. Schedule - Assurances by Commonwealth. {: #debate-68-s8 .speaker-009FQ} ##### Mr CURTIN:
Leader of the Opposition · Fremantle -- I move - >That paragraphs 11 and 12 be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the following paragraphs : - > >That the Commonwealth will pay bounty in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Act 1939 and that, in the event of more than one Australian company being established for the purpose of manufacturing motor vehicle engines and becoming eligible to receive payment of bounty under that act, the Commonwealth will review the relevant provisions of that act with a view to ensuring that the proposed company will bo provided with the opportunity of obtaining payment of bounty on engines manufactured by it for the numbers specified in and at rates in accordance with the provisions of section eight of that act. > >That the Commonwealth will, for a period of five years, use its best endeavours to limit production of engines and chassis for motor vehicles of fifteen horse-power or over to companies in respect of which the Minister administering the Motor Vehicle Engine Bounty Act 1939 is in the exercise of all the powers conferred by section6 of that act, satisfied that paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1) of that section apply and which give undertakings satisfactory to the Commonwealth with respect to the following: - > >Capital investment: > >Type of engine and chassis to be manufactured, > >Purchase of partsfrom established Australian manufacturers of motor vehicle parts; > >Number of engines and chassis to be produced annually; > >Support to Australian machine tool manufacturers; > >Use of bounty to give price concession to the Australian public; and > >Arrangements to ensure availability of technical information from other countries." The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that other Australian companies which may be formed and which seek to engage in the manufacture of motor vehicle engines shall not be precluded from doing so, but will be given an opportunity, if they feel disposed to embark on the enterprise, to compete for the supply to the Australian public of motor vehicle engines to be manufactured in Australia. The amendment will carry out the general purport of the objection which the Opposition had to the original agreement. It ensures that there will be open to Australian enterprise an opportunity to compete, if it so desires, even against Australian Consolidated Industries Limited in the manufacture of motor vehicle engines. I have only to say that the Opposition has always been in favour of the establishment of this industry. It has a stronger conviction now than ever that in this time of dire national crisis we cannot do all that is required of us unless we do something to establish this industry in Australia forthwith. {: .speaker-N76} ##### Mr Menzies: -- I am agreeable to the amendment. Amendment agreed to. Schedule, as amended, agreed to. Title agreed to. Bill reported with an amendment; report - *by leave* - adopted. Bill - *by leave* - read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1658 {:#debate-69} ### AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS' REPATRIATION BILL 1940 {:#subdebate-69-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from the 29th May, 1940 *(vide* page 1508), on motion by **Mr. Street** - >That the bill be now read a second time. {: #subdebate-69-0-s0 .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr HOLLOWAY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · FLP; ALP from 1936 -- This is a bill to amend the Australian Soldiers' Repatriation Act 1920-1938. Its purpose is to provide for the grant of pensions upon the death or incapacity of members of the Defence Forces of the Commonwealth whose death or incapacity arises in connexion wi th the war which commenced on the 3rd September, 1939, and for other purposes. The bill is one which I think will find universal acceptance. I thank the Minister for Repatriation **(Mr. Street)** for the manner in which he introduced it, and for his free admission that members of all political parties are responsiblefor the character of the present act. I hope that this new measure will not develop into the immense thing that the principal act is. I am sure that every one will agree that we must do the best that we can to meet the possibilities arising out of the present war. The people of Australia do not know the complicated character of the work associated with the present act, but the Minister gave to us some idea of its immensity when he said that last year 250,000 pensions were paid to soldiers and their dependants, at a cost of about £8,000,000, and that during the last 25 years £243,500,000 has been expended on the repatriation needs of the last war. I hope that we shall not have to repeat that expenditure as the result of the present conflict. Those who have any personal knowledge of the working of the present act will admit that the repatriation commissioners have had a difficult task. As a member of the Public Works Committee I have seen the ramifications of the Repatriation Commission. Its work in providing pensions for soldiers and their dependants, in helping to educate the children of soldiers, in connexion with hospitals, asylums and sanitoriums, is much greater than the average man realizes. Australia is fortunate in having had such a wonderful staff as has been in control of this work during the last twenty years. The repatriation commissioners and their officers, all of whom are Australians and 90 per cent. of them returned soldiers, are excellent men, and the Government is indeed fortunate to have the benefit of their services. From the chairman of the commission down to the most junior member of his staff, every officer can be described as excellent. Those who know of the work of the doctors, nurses, wardsmen and others, must raise their hats to them for the way in which they perform their duties. This bill does not contain any contentious provisions; its object is to straighten out some anomalies in the existing act. Even where something is taken away, it is done in order to make the legislation more elastic, and not to make conditions worse. The measure does not worsen any provision in the principal act. At the same time several alterations which represent improvements are made retrospective. The period allowed to parents in which to claim pensions for children, who have passed the age of sixteen years, is to be extended from six months to twelve months. Another provision is designed to overcome the anomaly arising in cases in which claims were made simultaneously for pensions by the wife and the unmarried wife of a soldier. In future, only one person will be entitled to draw a pension at the one time. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- That provision is not retrospective. {: #subdebate-69-0-s1 .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr HOLLOWAY: -- No. It illustrates my statement that no alteration of the principal act worsens the provisions of that act in any way whatever. Men who had known physical afflictions when they enlisted will be debarred from receiving a pension. This provision, however, does not relate to men who served in the last war, because no soldier who was known to suffer from any physical disability was accepted for service in the last war. Despite that, difficulty has been experienced in getting the Repatriation Commissioner to recognize that disabilities in respect of which pensions are claimed, did not exist when the applicant enlisted. However, the reason for this new provision is to cover the cases of old men who will be accepted in the present conflict for home service, although they suffer from disabilities arising out of service in the last war. Men who come within this class will not be eligible for a pension later in respect of these disabilities. I anticipated that provision would be made in this measure to cover members of the Merchant Service Marine, but I understand that they will be covered by a- separate measure to be introduced by the Minister for the Navy **(Mr. Archie Cameron).** I repeat that whilst the bill affects several improvements, it does not worsen the provisions of the principal act in any way, and, therefore, it should meet with the approval of honorable members on all sides of the House. {: #subdebate-69-0-s2 .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr FRANCIS:
Moreton -- I congratulate the Minister for Repatriation **(Mr. Street)** on having introduced this measure. After examining the bill very carefully in conjunction with the principal act, I took the opportunity to discuss it with the federal presidents of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League of Australia and the Blind Soldiers Association, the federal vice-president of the Tubercular Sailors and Soldiers Association, and the federal president, secretary and some of the members of the Limbless Soldiers Association. I am happy to be able to say all of those gentlemen are very satisfied with it. This measure is based on the provisions of the old Repatriation Act, and is designed to meet the requirements of members of the new Australian Imperial Force. The principal act is the finest piece of legislation of its kind, in the. world. It was my duty for a period of two years as Acting Minister for Repatriation, to administer that legislation. When I was framing an amending measure which was introduced in 1933, I sought the co-operation of officers of the Repatriation Department in examining the repatriation legislation of Great Britain and each of the other dominions. From that experience I am convinced that the Australian legislation is the finest in the world. The principal act provides medical benefits, hospital treatment, and pensions. At the 30th June, 1939, 249,393 pensions were in force, and these involved payments amounting to £7,819,000 in that year. Payments in respect of_ medical treatment, pensions, vocational training,, employment, educational, and general repatriation benefits up to that date totalled £186,352,922. In addition, further payments made included war gratuities £27,524.000, and war service homes £29,755,000, bringing the total repatriation expenditure for the last 25 years up to £243,633,000. The whole of the experience gained during that long and eventful period has been drawn upon in the framing of this legislation for the benefit of those who will serve in the Australian Imperial Force and as garrison and home service troops. Consequently, I am not surprised that the measure has met with the approval of all returned soldier organizations, representatives of which visited Canberra to-day in order to study the measure. As these organizations have had considerable experience in the administration of the principal act, I am prepared to value their opinion highly. Such widespread approval of the bill should prove of great encouragement to the Minister and officers of the Repatriation Department who have been responsible for the framing of this legislation. I pay tribute to the repatriation commissioners and deputy commissioners for the valuable service they are rendering to Australia in doing their utmost to see that justice is done to ex-soldiers. The one provision of the measure with which I am not completely satisfied is that which places upon the applicant for a pension the onus of proving that his disability is due to war service. An applicant often finds it impossible to produce such proof because many of his comrades in arms have died, and he does not know of the whereabouts of the others.- For this reason much hardship, injustice, and suffering are caused to many applicants. I hope that in respect of members of the forces who serve in the present conflict medical records will be kept, and will be available should applicants in future be obliged to rely upon them when applying for a pension. Much of the difficulty of proving disability arises from the fact that many soldiers have avoided, for as long as possible, reporting their disabilities to the Repatriation Department. These men have borne their sufferings in silence, and rather than approach the department have preferred to pay private medical practitioners for attention. The result is that, when their health breaks down, and they are eventually obliged to seek a pension, they find it impossible to prove that their disability is due to war service. I hope that members of the new Australian Imperial Force will be schooled right from the beginning to avail themselves of the services provided by the Repatriation Department, and thus avoid premature breakdown of health. The department should impress upon them that prevention is better than cure. With a view to overcoming difficulties associated "with proof of disability being clue to war service, sub-section 2 of section 45w was inserted in the principal act in 1934. That subsection reads - (2.) Subject to this act, an Appeal Tribunal and an Assessment Appeal Tribunal shall not. in the hearing of appeals, bo bound by any rules of evidence but shall act according to substantial justice and the merits of the case and shall give to an appellant the benefit of the doubt: That was the best provision that could be devised to meet the position, and if any honorable member can suggest some- *ifr* Francis. thing better I shall be prepared to sup-, port it. There are two provisos to the sub-section, which read as follows: - >Provided that if the appellant or a representative of the appellant should make out a prima facie case in support of his claim that the incapacity from which he is suffering or from which he has died was caused or aggravated by war service, the onus of proof that such incapacity was not in fact so caused or aggravated should lie with the commission. > >Provided further that in the case of the death caused by an accident, of a member of the forces who is wholly or partially incapacitated as the result of war service, the burden of proving that such incapacity did not contribute to a material degree to the death of the member shall lie upon the commission. These were inserted in 1934, when I was Acting Minister, specially to meet problems which arise on appeals. If any more effective provisions can be suggested, I shall be glad to hear them and will support them. I am quite satisfied that the best thing to do in relation to the Australian Imperial Force is to school the men to take the greatest possible care to see that their medical history is fully recorded, so that, if the need subsequently arises for them to take advantage of the Repatriation Act, they will have all of the evidence available to do so. This bill in no way abrogates the rights and privileges of the members of the first Australian Imperial Force. Its purpose is to extend those rights and privileges to the men who enlist in the second Australian Imperial Force, andalso to the members of garrison battalions and to officers and others of the militia who are called up to serve at. defence head-quarters for the duration of the war. I hope that this will be merely the first of a series of measures to meet the new situation that must arise. The bill will, I am sure, be given the warm support of all honorable members. {: #subdebate-69-0-s3 .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY:
Leader of the Australian Labour party - nonCommunist · West Sydney -- In my opinion the bill does not entirely meet the needs of the situation. I have had years of experience in dealing with repatriation cases. I do not think that the suggestion of the honorable member for Moreton **(Mr. Francis),** that soldiers should be schooled to see that their medical history is kept up to date, will get us very far. In any event, most of the problems that I have to face arise iia relation to .soldiers' widows. This is what frequently happens : A man returned from active service and married. Probably for some period after his return he suffered from certain disabilities in respect of which he received a pension. The pension was, in many cases, cancelled at a later stage; in others it may have been maintained at an assessed rate of disability. After the ex-soldier reached the age of, say, 45 years his general health began to break down, and ultimately he passed away. It. has been held in many cases that have come under my notice that death in such circumstances was not due to war service because some other cause was recorded on the death certificate. The result of those decisions was frequently that the soldier's widow was unable to obtain a pension. The repatriation authorities reserve to themselves the right to determine whether death was due to war disabilities or to some other cause. <> {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- The determination of the cause of death surely rests with the specialists or the medical practitioners, not. with the commission? {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- That is only putting it one step further back. My contact with specialists and medical practitioners has not been such as to lead me to place complete reliance on their decisions. May I diverge from this point for a moment to direct attention to the case of an invalid who, on many occasions, tried to obtain an invalid pension. This was denied her, and ultimately she died from a complaint which the medical evidence showed she did not have. Specialists and medical practitioners are in the same category as lawyers in that they frequently disagree, or commit errors of judgment, as the case I have just mentioned clearly indicates. Who would be so likely to know what an ex-soldier suffers from as his wife, who has to nurse him? Yet, after his death her testimony is very frequently rejected. What chance has she then to obtain satisfactory evidence of the state of his health in the days of his youth, when she probably did not know him? Such evidence is not often obtainable. Consequently, many pension claims made by widows ave rejected. The present provision in relation to onus of proof is, in my opinion, unsatisfactory. If an exsoldier has received a pension that should be prima facie evidence that he has suffered from a war disability. In such a case there should be no hesitation in ascribing the cause of his death to his war disability. The repatriation authorities should be prepared to take a broader view of these cases than they are disposed to do. Only so will justice be done to. claimants for war pensions. I wish now to make a few remarks upon the subject of relevancy. The procedure necessary for an applicant for a pension is first to submit a complete case to. the Deputy Commissioner of Repatriation in the State concerned. Let us assume that the Deputy Commissioner, after considering the evidence, rejects the application. The files are then forwarded to the headquarters of the commission in Melbourne. If that body, after considering the matter, also rejects the claim, the applicant may submit it to one of the appeal tribunals. We shall assume, further, that that tribunal rejects the claim. The applicant is then informed that the claim may be resubmitted after the expiry of six months, if additional material evidence can be obtained to support it. But before such material evidence can be submitted to the tribunal, the commission has power to determine whether it is or is not relevant. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- On the honorable member's own showing, each claim may be considered by three tribunals before being rejected. No other country has such a liberal procedure. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- I have no wish to pattern our procedure on that of other countries. I desire to eliminate the possibility of injustice. *Widows who* make claims for pensions are often in difficulties, due to the necessity to maintain homes for their families. To do this they often have to go out to work, and to perform household duties in the early mornings and the late evenings. It is not fair that they should be required to run the gauntlet of the commission when they wish to submit additional material evidence in support of an unsatisfied claim for a pension. In any case, it is very much like an appeal from Caesar to Caesar, which is an unsatisfactory pro.cedure at any time. The commission should not be a barrier between the applicant and the appeal tribunal, and certainly should not be entitled to determine the question of relevancy. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- If the appeal went straight to the tribunal a second time, it would still be, in a sense, an appeal from Caesar to Caesar. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- That may be so in one respect, but we must remember that the Government has declared that these tribunals are independent and entirely free from compliance with the ordinary rules of evidence. We have attempted to shift the responsibility for final decisions from the ordinary administration. The tribunals are expected to give judicial consideration to all claims. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- Even if the additional material evidence is not considered relevant by the commission, an applicant may make a second approach to the tribunal ? {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- In my experience, that has not been the case. I have known the commission to rule that new evidence is not relevant, and to give no reasons for its ruling. We should remove that possibility. The points in relation to onus of proof and relevancy has not been satisfactorily covered in this bill. I was surprised to hear the honorable member for Moreton say that the returned soldiers organizations had approved of the bill, because on many occasions in this House the honorable member for Balaclava **(Mr. White)** has endeavoured with, we understood, the approval of the ex-soldiers' organizations, to £et the Government to appoint a select committee to report, on the anomalies in our repatriation legislation. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- I doubt whether returned soldiers' organizations would like *o* select committee to inquire into the anomalies of the Repatriation Act, {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- The rank and file of the organizations have been complaining about these anomalies, and have been seeking some method by which they might be eliminated. That is the advice which I have been given. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- If that were so it would be reflected from their branches through their head-quarters. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- I am speaking of my experience with the men themselves. {: .speaker-KQB} ##### Mr Scully: -- Honorable members on this side of the House have received hundreds of letters. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- It appears to me that there is a wrong impression with regard to this matter. I have mixed, with the returned soldiers themselves at smoke concerts in halls and in other places, and I have heard this matter discussed. That, however, is apart from the question now before the House. The matters which 1 have mentioned in relation to this mea.sure are very important, and I submit that immediate steps be taken to remedy the anomalies. I understand . that the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Makin)** has circulated an amendment dealing with the onus of proof, and I shall be pleased to support it. In due course I hope to move an amendment myself. {: #subdebate-69-0-s4 .speaker-KK7} ##### Mr JENNINGS:
Watson -- I shall not deal with the many matters which this bill covers or with the activities of the Repatriation Commission, the valuable work of which is generally recognized among all sections of the community, for I support the second reading. In my electorate I have a large repatriation hospital, the operations of which have been commended from time to time because of the splendid work done by the medical section, doctors and nurses alike. The mere fact that since the last war Australia has spent the huge amount of £243,500,000 on repatriation is evidence of the vast work done by the Repatriation Commission, and undoubtedly, that huge amount has an important bearing on the Commonwealth debt to-day. Fortunately, we have now had a great deal of experience of repatriation matters, and we have the knowledge of what is required. The fact that stringent measures are being taken in regard to the records of those now seeking to enlist, will no doubt have an important bearing on the future operation of the act; we should not be confronted with the same difficulties in regard to the new Australian Imperial Force as we were in regard to the old Australian Imperial Force. The Government now has at its disposal the advice of various returned soldiers' organizations throughout Australia, and that advice is of great value in the consideration of new measures such as this. The new Australian Imperial Force has the backing of the old Australian Imperial Force, and the fact that the returned soldiers' organizations have been able to offer advice to the Government in connexion with this bill, is something that should be borne in mind. I congratulate the Government *for* having brought in this legislation. {: #subdebate-69-0-s5 .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh -- I appreciate the necessity to extend the provisions of the Repatriation Act to those men who are now members of our fighting forces, but I regret very much that this bill does not correct many anomalies which have become apparent in the act in the light of experience. For some time past honorable members have complained that the rigidity of the act has in many cases prevented full justice being done to claims. A month or so ago I brought up a case which I felt was worthy of more consideration than had been given to it. It concerns a man named Tilby, and no doubt departmental officers will recall it. The man received a war injury which became gangrenous, and as the result, his arm was amputated. Subsequently there occurred a condition in the man's system which ultimately necessitated the amputation of both legs. The Repatriation Commission decided that, although compensation was payable with regard to the loss of the arm, it was not payable with regard to the loss of the legs. It was claimed that the loss of the man's legs could not be co-related to the loss of his arm, but there is no doubt that the conditions were definitely linked, and resulted from war service. As the result of my experience wiTh cases such as the one I have mentioned, I should have liked very much to see the provisions of the Repatriation Act liberalized by amending legislation, and shall not feel satisfied until that liberalization takes place. I should like also to deal with service pensions. In my opinion, the scope of the present legislation with regard to the various classes of returned soldiers to whom service pensions may be paid, should be widened. It is only fair that men who served in the British fighting forces in the last war, but have been living in this country for a long time, should be eligible for a Commonwealth service pension. Many of them are now burnt out or unemployable. I am referring particularly to ex-Imperial soldiers, many of whom are suffering disabilities as the result of their war service, but because they were not members of the Commonwealth military forces they are not entitled to any benefits under our Repatriation Act. I come now to a more serious aspect of repatriation administration. To-day, there exists a glaring anomaly with regard to the giving of the " benefit of the doubt " to claimants for repatriation benefits. I am not lacking in my appreciation of the sympathetic consideration given in many cases by the administration. My complaint is aimed mainly at the decisions of the various appeal tribunals which are not giving the benefit of the doubt to claimants. I had brought before me the case of a man who suffered from a skin disease, which brought with it defective eyesight. The disease is one that has baffled medical authorities all over the world and only 35 cases of it have been known to medical science. It was only by the merest accident that **Dr.** Tostevin, of Adelaide, recognized the disease as being the same as that which he had seen at a medical science congress in America. No other medical practitioner in Adelaide knew anything of the disease. When the sufferer, **Mr. F.** E. M. Ward, applied to the Repatriation Commission, the tribunal which heard his claim determined that the disease was of pre-existent origin, but I submit that there could have been no possible proof whatsoever that the disease was of pre-existent origin. The patient's mother had died when the man was born ; his father was still alive, and he had no brothers or sisters. 1 regard this case as the most outrageous one that has come under my notice during my long experience of repatriation matters. The determining feature was not merely the text of the act, and it was only by the merest accident that I stumbled across the other important consideration, which was a ruling secured from the Solicitor-General. Had I not accidentally learned of that ruling, I would have had no idea of the reasons which actuated the authorities in regard to this matter. The case was brought before the tribunal and I appeared on behalf of the patient. Quite rightly, I had to give the interpretation of the ruling by the Solicitor-General with regard to the section of the act relating to pre-existent conditions. When I started to argue the matter a member of the tribunal said that notice would not be taken of the Solicitor-General's opinion. The fact was, however, that it was the SolicitorGeneral's opinion which actually influenced the medical decision. Although a departmental doctor had given the patient the benefit of the doubt, his report was sent back with instructions that he take notice of the fact that a ruling had been given by the SolicitorGeneral. When the doctor read that ruling, he reversed his decision, and, unfortunately for the patient, the case was decided against him. When I went before the tribunal I endeavoured to establish the fact that the SolicitorGeneral's ruling should not have influenced the doctor, but the tribunal escaped its obligations by saying that it took no notice of the ruling of the Solicitor-General. Members of the tribunal failed to realize that there was someone before them who had taken notice of the ruling, and had influenced the report mads by the medical officer on the condition of the patient. That is not right. When a tribunal gives a decision, there should be set down in the records the reasons which actuates it, so that the applicant or his representative may know what has to be done to establish his claim. I have been told that this might work to the detriment of the applicant. It certainly should not do so if the tribunals reach their decisions in a reasonable and fair-minded way, and I am convinced that it would benefit far more applicants than it would injure. I feel that, at the present time, the benefit of the doubt is not being given to our returned soldiers. The acceptance of a man for service should be prima facie evidence that any disability developed subsequently was due to war service, and the onus should be on the department to prove the contrary. At present, the tribunal does not accept the certificate of the enlisting doctor as evidence of a clean bill of hen 1th at the time of enlistment. I have been told by members of the tribunal that men were accepted during the last war without a rigorous medical examination, and that the certificate ot the enlisting doctor could not, therefore, be accepted in all cases. I say that, if a man . is accepted for war service, the department should then accept responsibility for his health. Therefore, I propose, when the bill is in committee, to move to insert a new clause as follows : - 10a. Section forty-five w of the principal act is amended by omitting the first proviso of subsection (2.) and inserting in its stead the following proviso: - " Provided that if the appellant or a representative of the appellant shall prove that the incapacity from which he is suffering or from which ho has died was caused or aggravated by some occurrence which happened to him after the commencement of his war service, the onus of proof that such incapacity was not in fact caused or aggravated by war service shall lie upon the commission." I am confident that I shall receive for this amendment the support of all honorable members who desire to do justice to returned soldiers. {: #subdebate-69-0-s6 .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON:
Wentworth -- I regard this bill as an honest attempt by the Government to deal equitably with members of the Australian Imperial Force in repatriation matters. In common with other honorable members, I am pleased that the proposed innovations do not interfere in any way with the benefits conferred under the old act. Though that act has come in for much criticism during the years, and though honorable members have criticized it to-night, I do not think that their criticism is merely destructive. I believe that they are actuated by a real desire to make the act better than it is. If they consider it impartially, they can 'Only come to the conclusion that it is a generous act, the most generous in operation in any of the Dominions. During my tenure of office as Minister for Repatriation, I dealt with many thousands of cases. Whereas I entered the department feeling, as a returned soldier, that some general re-org'anization might be attempted, I found before I was there long that, in the main, and with few exceptions, the Repatriation Act covered every reasonable application, and was administered generously and reasonably by the commission. I might have come to this conclusion earlier if I had realized that the various commissions and boards charged with the administration of the act were composed of returned soldiers. That should have been sufficient to convince me that the diggers were receiving the maximum consideration. Surely a body consisting of returned soldiers is in a better position to know what is the light thing to do by returned soldiers than are members of this Parliament, who know nothing of the conditions under which the " diggers " served overseas. Not long ago an inter-departmental committee was appointed to examine the Repatriation Act with a view to proposing amendments that would cover the needs of members of the Australian Imperial Force, to make the act more just, to meet criticism, and to rectify anomalies. I do not know what the report of the committee was, but I know that, after it was submitted, Cabinet did not see fit to make any drastic alterations of the act. Notwithstanding the fact that returned soldiers' representatives have been in attendance in Canberra during the last few days, men who possess an intimate knowledge of the working of the act and the needs of the rank and file of returned soldiers, they are satisfied that the act, as proposed to be amended, will give justice to the returned soldiers of the old war, and also to those of the present one. Therefore, though honorable members are justified in drawing attention to specific cases, they are not, in my opinion, justified in condemning the act in general terms. Do honorable members realize tha t £10,000,000 a year is being paid out in pensions and repatriation benefits? {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- Quite right, too. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- I am not objecting to it. In support of my contention that ours is a more liberal act than those operating in the other British Dominions, let me say that the percentage of soldiers receiving repatriation benefits in Australia is greater than that in any other part of the Empire, as the following table shows : - Australia's percentage of war pensioners is 50 per cent. greater than that of Canada and 25 per cent. higher than that of New Zealand. In both Canada and New Zealand, when an ex-soldier dies, his dependants immediately lose their pensions unless it can be shown that the death has resulted directly from the effects of his war service. This does not occur under the Australian act, which is not only generous in its provisions, but also liberally administered. I now turn to observations by the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley),** whose criticism is usually of a constructive form. I do not believe that he would exaggerate unduly the strength of any claim placed before him. No doubt he feels keenly with regard to the cases mentioned by him, but we should also consider them from the point of view of the Repatriation Commission. He referred to an instance in which an ex-soldier in receipt of a pension died, and his widow could not prove that his death was due to his war disabilities. I admit that it is difficult at times to deal with a case in which a widow considers that her husband's condition was made worse by reason of his war service, and that his death was due to a war disability. This is only human, but the onus of proof requires the widow to go a little further than that. A large panel of medical specialists is associated with the department, apart from the medical officers who are closely engaged in the work of the department. In the first place, the medical officer determines the nature of the disability from which an ex-soldier is suffering, and, having placed that on record, the cause of his subsequent death is determined by the RepatriationCommission. The honorable member said that, in his opinion, when a soldier in receipt of a pension dies, it should be assumed that his condition was made worse by reason of disabilities due to war service, and the widow should receive the benefit of any doubt by being automatically granted the pension. Surely that is too wide an interpretation of the act. I do not believe that the honorable member, on reflection, would advance that argument. To take an extreme case, suppose the war disability from which a soldier suffered was the loss of one eye. If he subsequently died from pulmonary tuberculosis or cancer, surely the honorable member would not contend that hia widow should automatically receive the pension. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr Beasley: -- It is surprising what a considerable effect one disability may have on the general condition. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- We have an excellent medical service in Australia. Although our doctors do not know everything about the diseases to which mankind is heir, they know a great deal. If a doctor had reasonable grounds for supposing that an ex-soldier's death was due to a war disability, I have no doubt that he would testify accordingly. Then the department, would be in duty bound to accept his decision, and his widow would automatically get the pension. Nothing could be more just than that. I do not think that the honorable member for West Sydney would say that, no matter what disability was responsible for a soldier's death, it should be accepted without question that it was due to war service. {: .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: -- But his widow has to live. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- In many cases, the decisions of the department are hard on the widow, but the provisions of the act must be observed. The honorable member for West Sydney also dealt with material evidence. He considers that the fact that the commission determines whether additional evidence is relevant bears unjustly on the appellant. I suggest to the honorable member that he should read closely sub-section 7 of section 45k. of the act, which states - >If, at any time after a decision of an appeal tribunal made under sub-section 3 or subsection 0 of this section, the appellant submits to the commission in writing any further evidence which, in the opinion of tho commission, is material to, and has *a* substantial bearing upon, the appellant's claim, the commission shall reconsider the claim, and, if the claim is refused by the commission, the appellant may, within twelve months of the decision of the commission. appeal in writing to an . appeal tribunal which shall consider the further 'evidence and decide the appeal. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr Beasley: -- If a case is submitted to the commission, weeks are occupied in dealing with it. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- If the commission decides that the evidence is not relevant, the appellant may appeal to the tribunal. This happens as a matter of daily routine. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr Beasley: -- I wish to cut out the commission altogether. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -! do not agree with that. The appeal tribunal was established to hear appeals from decisions of the commission. It is essential that the appeal tribunal should be entirely dissociated from the administration of the act. When those administering the act determine that evidence advanced is not relevant, there is a right of appeal to a body entirely dissociated from the administration of the act, in order that justice may be obtained. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr Beasley: -- My point was that the question of the relevancy of evidence should be determined by the appeal tribunal, and not by the commission. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- That would be doing the ex-soldier's widow a disservice, because she now has at least two bodies to which she may appeal. The wider her"* choice the greater would be the possibility of success with the appeal. I have read with great interest the amendment submitted by the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Makin),** and I fail to see that it would be of any benefit to a returned soldier. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- It would increase the difficulty of the position. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- Yes. The only feature of the proposed amendment that appears to widen the interpretation is the suggestion of aggravation, but otherwise the suggested provision would make it much more difficult than it now is for a soldier to prove that his disability was attributable to his war service. Soldiers' organizations have deliberated upon this matter for many weary days throughout the years, and each has tried to evolve some method whereby the onus of proof might be thrown on the commission to a greater extent than it is under the act, and the ex-soldier might receive additional benefits. In 1904 this was done, and the commission is now satisfied that the wording of the act could not be improved upon. The honorable member made a point with regard to recruiting doctors giving a clean bill of health. He pointed out that the disabilities of exsoldiers have been aggravated by war ser- vice, and that the responsibility for their condition has been placed on the recruiting authority. If the honorable member bad known the conditions under which men were examined during the last war, and, if he had compared the number of rejections, after a preliminary examination with the number of rejections now, after a second examination, he would understand how careful the commission must be to make sure that the disabilities were not existent prior to enlistment, but were directly due ' to war service. At the present time, men are being rejected after the second examination because defects are revealed which were not disclosed by the first examination. Take a case pf pulmonary tuberculosis. It was thought at one time that the stethoscope would reveal such a disability. That was an accepted theory of the medical profession, but it has been discarded. N"o doctor worth his salt would accept the evidence of a stethoscope, because the X-ray frequently reveals a tubercular condition which the stethoscope misses. That is the best example that I can give to the House to show that it must be established beyond all reasonable doubt that a man is suffering from a disability due to war service and was not suffering a latent disability before his enlistment. The administration of this act, therefore, is very difficult, but the commission has been liberal. Mistakes have been made - the commissioner admits them - but you could not expect a body of men to be 100 per cent, perfect, and I have no doubt that mistakes are still being made. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- That is why the appeal tribunals were established. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- Yes. Because of that, another body entirely dissociated from the Repatriation Commission was appointed to check the decisions made by the commission. "When honorable members come into contact with cases which seem to be unjust and not in accordance with the generous principles of the act, they should consider them merely as isolated cases, and not accept them as indicating the shortcomings of the act, or failure of the administration. I, have noticed one striking departure in this bill from the old act, namely, that once soldiers have embarked for overseas service, their disability will be accepted as being due to war service. That class of soldier is covered by one schedule. There is a second schedule which covers those who are found to be suffering from a disability sustained during their training before their embarkation. They will not be entirely deprived of the benefits under the act. This is essentially a committee bill and I leave it now, commending it to honorable members in its broad terms, and suggest that they endeavour to give it a speedy passage. {: #subdebate-69-0-s7 .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD:
Ballarat -- This bill, unfortunately, is essential and taking it as a whole it is a fairly good measure, but there is room for improvement. Before I suggest the improvements that should be made, I say that I am quite satisfied that the administration by the Repatriation Commission has been as generous a3 the act allows, and has gone to all possible limits to give the benefit of the doubt to the soldier. In one case in which I have been interested it went as far as it could possibly go to remove the last element of doubt, but that element of doubt is still outstanding. I recognize that it is exceedingly difficult to determine whether the benefit of the doubt has or has not been given, but I am satisfied that the soldier applicant in that case has been done a substantial injustice, because it is beyond the bounds of human judgment to determine whether his disability is due to war service. If the act were as generous as it should be, the only thing to do would be to give him the benefit of the doubt. On his return from the last war, he rejoined the staff of the Victorian Railways. He alleges that from time to time he suffered. His mates and those people with whom he had been in contact for years after his return from the war confirmed his statement that he showed distinct signs of a disability. In 1937, about sixteen years after his discharge from the Army, he was superannuated from the Railways. Department as suffering from tuberculosis. After the Repatriation Commission had decided against his application for a pension, he appealed to the tribunal, which, in- its wisdom or otherwise, rejected his appeal. Subsequently his case was before the independent medical referee, who, conscientiously, expressed the opinion that his disability was not due to war service. It might justly be said that my association with this man has made me sympathetic towards him, but. I am satisfied that no human authority could with full determination say that his disability was not, caused by war service. I suggest to the Minister for Repatriation. **(Mr.. Street)** that section 45 w of the act should be made more generous than it is. The. worst day's work that the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League of Australia and other kindred bodies ever did on behalf of the returned soldiers and other people entitled to war pensions was to ask for the appointment of the assessment and appeal tribunals. I know of other cases, but one case is striking. The chairman of the Victorian assessment tribunal is the nominee of the returned soldiers of Victoria, but I have had repeated complaints from returned soldiers that his temperamental outlook was so unfriendly that he made them uncomfortable in cross-examination ; generally, his attitude appeared to be anything but sympathetic and understanding. It is reasonable to assume that in circumstances like that, justice is not always done. The appeal tribunal is supposed to be absolutely independent. It decides whether a man's disability is clue to war service or not. The relevant section, section 45w. reads - (2.) Subject to this act, an appeal tribunal and an assessment appeal tribunal shall not, in the hearing of appeals, be bound by any rules of evidence but shall act according to substantial justice and the merits of the case and shall give an appellant the benefit of the doubt: The appeal tribunals are charged with that responsibility and duty, but about 1935, the Auditor-General went to great length in his report to criticize illustrated cases in which the appeal tribunal had allowed the appeals of returned soldiers. My view is that decisions by repatriation appeals tribunals should be as far above criticism by the Auditor-General as are decisions of the High Court. It is fair to assume that the. decisions by those tribunals have not. always since then been made without some regard to the possibility of similar criticism in the future. In these circumstances, the returned soldiers would get a better deal and a deal more open to review if the cases were dealt with solely by officers of the Repatriation Department, with appeals to be made to a tribunal of skilled medical men. who understand the cases with which they would have to deal. That is all past history. I do hope that my criticism will be heeded by the people concerned. It is repugnant to reflect on decisions by people charged with these duties, but it is. necessary that the criticism should be offered. It should not be taken as personal,, but should be judged on its merits. The other matter on which I wish to place emphasis is the fact, that in this measure the rates of pension payable to men who may be incapacitated in this war are the same as the rates of pension laid down in the first schedule to the principal act. Since that basis of pension was laid down, the purchasing power of money has been almost halved, which means that incapacitated soldiers in this war will receive, in actual value, only half of the pension that wa3 granted to incapacitated soldiers at the end of the last war. It may be said that a depression and depreciated currency may follow this war, and that if we took steps now to base the pension rates on what has happened to our currency in the last few years, amendment of the rates would not be precluded' and the rates of pension could be reduced. The trend in monetary reform advocated by various individuals, organizations and indeed governments, is in the direction of stabilizing currency rather than of allowing it to depreciate. In these circumstances, I ask the Minister to incorporate in the bill a scale of pensions much more generous than that provided in the principal act. In that measure a pension of £2 2s. a week which was provided in 1920 is to-day equivalent to only 22s. 6d. a week. I trust that the rate will be increased, and that the onus of proof will not be thrown on returned soldiers who are suffering disability. A man suffering from a complaint believed to be due to war service. should 11()t have to prove that that complaint 13 due to such service. The benefit of the doubt should be given to the applicant. I trust that the Government will consider the improvements I have mentioned, and will not refuse to amend the bill. If the rates of pensions in this bill bo increased it may involve increasing those now payable under the principal act, but as the Government has the capacity to provide all the money that is required for the defence of this country, surely sufficient can be made available to pay a reasonable rate to those who suffer disability in consequence of war service. Current interest rates are paid, and, as others benefit in different forms owing to fluctuations of prices, the pensions provided in the schedule to this bill should be increased so that their purchasing power will, at least, be equal to the pensions provided in the principal act. {: #subdebate-69-0-s8 .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS:
Herbert -- I tate this opportunity to refer to the administration of the Repatriation Act. F have heard what the honorable member for "Wentworth **(Mr. Harrison)** has said in that regard, but I know a* good deal concerning the three gentlemen on the entitlement tribunal, who in turn know a good deal concerning the subject to which I wish to refer. On numerous occasions I have brought under the notice of the authorities the case of a widow residing at Bondi whose husband's death certificate does not disclose syphilis as the cause of his death, but because he is alleged to have succumbed to that disease, his widow is not entitled to a full pension. When I interviewed the doctor who attended him before his death I was told that the certificate does not state that syphilis was the cause of his death, but that is why the Repatriation Department has refused to pay his widow the full pension. If, as has been alleged, a report was received from another source stating that the man died from the disease, the entitlement tribunal has failed to produce it. I was informed thatI could see the file if I called at eleven o'clock one morning, but although I attended at the time arranged, and waited some time, it was not produced and I have not seen it yet. The deceased man's brother asked me if I was satisfied with the position and I said that I was not, and I informed the entitlement tribunal to that effect. I do not believe that a report which is alleged to have been received from another source ever reached the tribunal, and if such a report was prepared, it was submitted after the death certificate was issued and the man had been buried. If the widow is receiving a half pension, she is not entitled to it because she should receive either a full pension or nothing at all. I was told by the honorable member for Wentworth, when Minister for Repatriation, that the report had not been made available because the department did not wish to hurt the widow's feelings, but it did not hesitate to send her a letter stating that her husband's death was due to syphilis. A blood test of the widow produced a negative result. The chairman of the Repatriation Commission, the chairman of the entitlement tribunal, and the ex-Minister all admit that it is a difficult case. I informed the exMinister at the time that considerable distress and inconvenience had been caused by informing the widow by letter that her husband died of the disease mentioned. The widow said that the person who prepared the report is alleged to have attended her husband quite unknown to his wife in order to give injections. I deny that, because the widow said that she will swear on oath that her husband did riot consult the man who made the report for two months prior .to his dearth. The doctor who examined the certificate secured by the widow's brother from the Registrar-General in New South Wales says distinctly that it does not state that the man died from syphilis. The widow has informed me that her husband was in such indifferent health that he could not interview any one alone. He was known by many persons in the locality, all of whom say that he could not have paid a secret visit to any one, because he could not even put on his clothes without the assistance of his wife. The widow has been treated most unfairly by the Repatriation Commission or by the entitlement tribunal. The doctor is a capable man and I would place more trust in him than I would m any lawyer. The chairman of the commission is well known to me, but I believe that in this case a mistake was made in the earlier investigations and that the authorities will not now admit it. The ex-Minister said that the department would put the doctor on his oath. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES · UAP; LP from 1944 -- I did not say that. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- The chairman said that he had recommended that that was the only way out of the difficulty; but nothing was done. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- I said that no doubt that might be done; I have not the power to direct the tribunal. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- The tribunal is not subject to the direction of any one, and if its conduct in all cases is similar to that displayed in this instance applicants for pensions are not likely to receive much consideration. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- I am only too willing to allow the honorable member to peruse the file. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- I was told that 1 could see the file at 11 o'clock one morn' ing and after waiting some time I was informed that it was in Melbourne. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- That is rather extraordinary. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- I received a letter from the tribunal stating that the file would be made available, but I have never seen it. I interviewed the secretary, who told me that I could see it the next day, and I informed him that I could be there at 11 o'clock. I arrived an hour before the tribunal met and when 1 mentioned the name of the honorable member for "Wentworth the chairman said, " I do not want politics brought into this ". The chairman of the tribunal, who is a bounder and a brass hat, shows very little sympathy towards returned soldiers and their dependants, and particularly widows. The deceased had suffered from war wounds which were so severe that his system became poisoned sufficiently to suggest that he had the disease which is alleged to have caused his death. He drew a full pension when alive, and after his death his widow, who is now receiving only a part pension, should be entitled to a full amount or nothing at all. I trust that the Minister will give the matter bis personal attention. {: #subdebate-69-0-s9 .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr MULCAHY:
Lang .After listening to the speeches of the honorable member for Moreton **(Mr. Francis)** and the honorable member for Wentworth **(Mr. Harrison),** both of whom are returned soldiers, I am convinced that they have very little sympathy for those unfortunate men who are endeavouring to obtain justice. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- That is a scandalous thing to say. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr MULCAHY: -- When the honorable member for Balaclava **(Mr. White)** endeavoured to introduce a private bill to amend the principal act, his action was opposed by the honorable member. When any effort is made to grant increased pensions to returned soldiers, or to benefit them in any way, honorable members opposite who wear returned soldiers' badges are the greatest opponents of any reform. While the honorable member for Moreton was in charge of war service homes, numbers of returned soldiers were given a very rough deal by him. Many people in my electorate suffered severely at the hands of the honable member when he was the Minister in charge of the department. The honorable member said that he could not suggest one amendment to the bill. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- I did not. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr MULCAHY: -- The honorable member gave his blessing to the bill. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- That is a different matter. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr MULCAHY: -- The honorable gentleman praised the bill, and said that he could not suggest any amendment to it. Later, he referred to one glaring anomaly, but he did not suggest any amendment. I shall cite a number of cases in order to show that the act should be amended. A man who applies for a pension may find it most difficult after 25 years to obtain evidence to place before the tribunal in order to prove that his disability is due to war service. I have in mind the case of a tramway man who was in a hospital in Sydney suffering from a chest complaint. His wife wanted to get him into the Prince of Wales Hospital at Randwick. The man had not had any medical attention for some time, but he had previously been attended by **Dr. Harvison,** of Cooma, who was nearly 70 years of age. I found that the doctor was living at Chatswood, on the north shore line, and I sent a letter to him. He had retired from practice, but he forwarded a letter which was sent on to the commission. Before a reply came from the commission, the man died. His widow gets a pension because she was able to establish that his disability was due to war service, but had the doctor, who was an old man, died before sending his letter, she would not have received any pension. Should a local medical man who had treated returned soldiers die without leaving any record of such treatment, it is almost impossible in those cases to prove that the disability is due to war service. One such case concerns a man who had beentreatedby **Dr. Larkins,** of Marrickville. The doctor died, leaving no record that he had attended to the man, whose dependants wore thus left without assistance. Totally and permanently incapacitated soldiers who are in receipt of pensions areperiodically required to attend before repatriation doctors for examination. In one such case, transport was found for the patient from Punchbowl to the Repatriation Department, but after his examination, when his brother asked for money to take the patient to the railway station, he was told that the injured man must get back the best way he could. With assistance, he struggled on, and eventually reached the railway station, but he could not climb the ramp. His brother then took him on his back, but they both fell, and the returned soldier had to be taken to the Sydney hospital in an ambulance. When the Repatriation Department was informed an officer of the department said, " We expected him to collapse. " These totally and permanently incapacitated men should be examined in their homes. If that cannot be done, they should at least be provided with transport on such occasions. The man to whom I referred is suffering from Parkinson's disease. I knew him before he left for the war in 1914, and I have seen him regularly since his return. He is a physical wreck. Another case is that of a man who had an accident on the vessel which was taking him to Egypt. He was sent home, and is suffering from spondylitis, but although he can submit evidence from other men on the ship that he had an accident on board the Repatriation Department says that as he did not serve in a theatre of war, he cannot have a pension. He gets an invalid pension. The act should be amended to embrace cases like those which I have mentioned. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- He could get a war pension if he suffered as the result of an accident on the vessel, but not a service pension. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr MULCAHY: -- Only a fortnight ago I had word from the Repatriation Department that his claim was rejected because he did not serve in a theatre of war. Would men who went to New Guinea soon after the war commenced be entitled to a pension? {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- They would be entitled to aservice pension if they had enlisted. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr MULCAHY: -- Complaints have reached me of the treatment of returned soldiers by specialists to whom they are sent by the department for examination. I have in mind a man who is suffering from general nervous disability. He was a patient at the Randwick Hospital. He became a mental case and attempted to commit suicide by cutting his throat. He was then taken to the Reception House, and later was sent home. Eventually he was given a special pension of £4 a week. He could not walk without assistance, but the department sent him to a specialist in Macquarie-street, who reported that he was not totally and permanently incapacitated. His pension was reduced by 50 per cent. That was three months ago. I saw him last Sunday, and he is still as bad as ever. When his pension was reduced he appealed to the tribunal, but his appeal was rejected. Some of the specialists treat these men harshly. This man earned £12 or £14 a week before his case became really bad, and he nows finds it most difficult to exist on £2 a week. A returned soldier who served in the last war as a stretcher-bearer in the Army Service Corps returned suffering from varicose ulcers of the legs, and was given a special pension. After being treated at the Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, for two or three months he was told that one of his legs had been cured. Subsequently his pension was reduced by 50 per cent. Some years later both, of his legs again became affected, but he found that he could secure treatment for one leg only at the departmental hospital, and was obliged to have the other leg treated in a private hospital. I took this case up with the Minister who informed me that he could not do anything in connexion with the matter. This man's only alternative was to enter the departmental hospital for three months for an operation on one of his legs, and to enter a private hospital for treatment of his other leg. This ex-soldier, who was engaged in business in Sydney, was practically ruined. I urge the Government to give more sympathetic consideration to cases of this kind. When an ex-soldier enters a departmental hospital he should also be treated there for any other affliction from which he may be suffering, even though it may not be due to war service. I do not know whether the Minister has come to any decision with regard to another case which I brought under his notice yesterday. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- That matter is still under consideration. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr MULCAHY: -- The Minister informed me by letter that no provision is made for the payment of compensation to dependants of a man who may be permanently injured while undergoing training as a member of the Militia Forces. A man, in the course of his duties at the Liverpool camp, was kicked by a horse, and received injuries to which he succumbed. He is survived by aged parents who are in indigent circumstances. In cases of this kind the department should accept the same degree of responsibility as employers do in respect of employees. The attitude adopted by the department in this case gives very little encouragement to young men to volunteer for military service. {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- Will cases of that kind be covered by this measure? {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- No; members of the Militia are covered by one of the finance regulations, which I am at present investigating. {: .speaker-JVJ} ##### Mr MULCAHY: -- If the Minister should find that no provision is made to meet this case,' I hope that he will take steps to provide for compensation for dependants of a member of the militia forces who is permanently injured. I believe that the amendment foreshadowed by the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Makin)** will bring about improvements of this legislation and, therefore, I intend to support it. {: #subdebate-69-0-s10 .speaker-KQB} ##### Mr SCULLY:
Gwydir .T commend the Minister for Repatriation **(Mr. Street)** on some of the improvements which will be effected under this measure. However, an investigation by a select committee would result in the removal of many anomalies in this legislation, and, therefore, I intend to support the amendment foreshadowed by the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Makin).** The department administers the law very sympathetically, and I have no complaints on that score. However, repatriation appeals seem to me to be a matter of appealing from Caesar to Caesar, and, in view of the fact that very few appeals succeed, applicants who have their claims rejected have not much cause for hope. Large numbers of soldiers who served in the last war are now in the evening of their lives. We should make a special effort, therefore, to see that justice is done to them. Today many applications for pensions fail because of technicalities. Some time ago a case was brought under my notice of an ex-soldier whose health is now hopelessly broken. His application for a war service pension was refused, and his appeal was unsuccessful. I knew this man before he enlisted, and also all of the members of his family. I know that he had no disease when he enlisted. He was on active service overseas for four years. Soon after he went into the front line he was badly gassed and was obliged to enter hospital overseas for a period of six months. ' On recovering, he returned to active service in France and remained there until the end of the war. He was a hardy Australian. Although it was apparent that he had been gassed, he refused to apply for a pension. . To-day he has six children. He worked a farm on the share system until his condition became so bad that he was persuaded by the Returned Soldiers League at Gunnedah to apply for a war service pension. His condition is worsening rapidly. Local medical practitioners state that his condition is definitely due to the effects of gas, but the departmental doctors contend that his disability is in no way due to his war service. A select committee should be appointed to inquire into anomalies of this kind. Another case brought under my notice is that of a man who enlisted just before the end of the war, and was invalided after enlistment. After hostilities ceased he was employed for some time by the War Graves Commission in France. However, ho was invalided home. His application for a war service pension was turned down because he did not serve in a theatre of war. A further case which comes to my mind is that of a young man with whom I was reared. He saw active service overseas in Egypt and Palestine .and contracted malarial fever. To-day, when he becomes a little overheated, he suffers attacks of fever and collapses. He was in receipt of a small pension for some time, but that was cancelled, and his application for its renewal was rejected. He has been granted leave to appeal, but I do not hold out much hope for him in that direction, because very few appeals succeed. This man cannot do hard work. Such cases as I hove instanced are heart-rending. These men risked, their all for their country, but to-day, owing to technicalities in the law, they are refused pensions. This man was told that his disability was not due to war service. Surely this is not the way to treat men who have done so much for their country. It is useless for any honorable member to say that returned soldiers are unanimous "in their commendation of this legislation. Numbers of returned soldiers' leagues in my electorate have expressed dissatisfaction in regard to many phases, of this legislation. The number of exsoldiers is gradually dwindling. Many of them have gone to their last resting place. The Government should give earnest consideration to the plight in which hundreds of returned soldiers and their dependants now find themselves. I shall support the amendment foreshadowed by the honorable member for Hindmarsh, because I believe that it is an honest attempt to liberalize the provisions of the bill. {: #subdebate-69-0-s11 .speaker-KZX} ##### Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1936 -- I commend the Govern-, ment for having introduced this bill at this juncture, for it will be a good thing to inform those who enlist in the Australian Imperial Force just where they will stand on their return to Australia after the war. The first soldiers of the original Australian Imperial Force to return to Australia were home for a good while before any repatriation legislation was passed to meet their circumstances. I had the honour to be a member of the first voluntary repatriation committee that was formed in Brisbane, before the passing of the original Repatriation Act, and I know that many returned men in those early days suffered considerable anxiety about their future, because no appropriate legislation had been passed to deal with the situation that had arisen. This bill does not go far enough. It is true, as the honorable member for Moreton **(Mr. Francis)** has said, that the representatives of the returned soldiers' organizations who are now in Canberra have signified their satisfaction with the measure, but their view is that it is better to accept this bill as it is at this stage than wait for a more complete measure to be introduced later. I have had considerable experience in these matters, and I am aware that many hundreds of returned soldiers in my electorate have been unable to obtain any redress of their complaints. The officials of the Repatriation Department have always shown the greatest courtesy to me when I have approached them, and I believe that they have shown similar consideration to the returned men who have . submitted their cases direct. I cannot speak with any authority about the members of the appeal tribunals, because I have not had any personal experience of those bodies. I am satisfied, however, that the majority of the complaints now being made in relation to pension claims are due to adverse decisions of the appeal tribunal. For that reason I believe that the bill will be improved if the amendment which the honorable member for Hindmarsh proposes to move be accepted by the Government. For some time the honorable member for Balaclava **(Mr. White)** had a motion on the business-paper which provided for the appointment of a select committee to recommend remedies for anomalies in the Repatriation Act. Unfortunately he did not obtain sufficient support from his colleagues to compel the Government to give him an opportunity to submit his motion. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- The proposal did not have the support of the federal organizations of the returned men. {: .speaker-KZX} ##### Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1936 -- It had the support of many branches throughout the Commonwealth, for I received a list of proposed amendments which one branch in Brisbane desired to submit to the select committee if it were appointed. Many complaints that are being received to-day relate to the difficulty that ex-service men and their dependants are experiencing in obtaining pensions for disabilities due to war service. Many men find it hard to satisfy the authorities that their disabilities are actually due to war service. I have in mind an application made by a soldier's widow for a pension. I knew the man personally before he enlisted, and I had frequent conversations with him after his return to Australia and up to the time of his death. Prior to his enlistment he was a big, strong, healthy man. On his return to this country he had a slight cough. I advised him to consult the repatriation officials as to what he should do in the matter. He said, " I have had enough of all that business. I want to get out of my uniform and back to civil life ". His cough gradually became worse, but he said that he would not apply for a pension while he was able to work. Subsequently he was examined by the medical officers of the department and they declined to endorse his contention that his disability was contracted on war service. The man suddenly became seriously ill; he was taken to the Brisbane Genera] Hospital, and be died there from tuberculosis. When his widow's claim for a pension was considered she was informed that it had not been substantiated that his disability was due to war service. She also received the stereotyped letter to the effect that if she could obtain additional material evidence in relation to her claim it would be reconsidered. I have endeavoured to obtain additional evidence from Western Australia to help her, but it is almost impossible to secure testimony that will be accepted by the appeal tribunal. As many other cases of the same kind could be mentioned, I intend to support the proposal of the honorable member for Hindmarsh that the onus of proof that a disability was not due to war service shall rest upon the commission. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- That foreshadowed amendment will make it possible for an ex-soldier to obtain a pension in respect of an illness that may overtake him, even to-day. {: .speaker-KZX} ##### Mr GEORGE LAWSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · FLP; ALP from 1936 -- I think the honorable member for Wentworth has misread the amendment. No doubt the honorable member for Bourke **(Mr. Blackburn),** who will follow me in this debate, will give a clear legal interpretation of the words that have been used. I urge the Minister to accept the amendment in the interests of the returned men who are to-day finding it difficult to furnish satisfactory evidence to justify their pension claims. I shall support the bill. {: #subdebate-69-0-s12 .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN:
Bourke -- It is a pity that this bill was not introduced a few days ago in order that full consideration could have been given to it by this House. The Repatriation Act is very difficult to follow because it is continually being amended, and is not consolidated. As I see it, this bill materially improves the position of members of the first Australian Imperial Force, but it places members of the second Australian Imperial Force in an inferior position in regard to benefits. A member of the first Australian Imperial Force had pension rights should he die or be incapacitated at any time when he was a member of the forces, but, under this legislation, a member of the second Australian Imperial Force, who enlists for overseas service, and does not actually go on active service, will not have pension rights in the event of incapacity or death unless that incapacity or death is directly attributable to his employment as a member of the forces. In the case of members of the 1st Australian Imperial Force, it appears from the wording of the Repatriation Act that no such condition would be imposed, and it would only be necessary to show that the incapacity or death had resulted from something which had happened to the claimant after his enlistment. The new words " directly attributable " correspond to the words in the Workers Compensation Act " arising out of or in the course of his employment ". I cannot understand why a distinction is being drawn between the enlisted man who has gone abroad, and the enlisted nian who has not gone abroad. I can understand a distinction - unjust though it may be - between the man who voluntarily enlists and the man who is enlisted compulsorily. The man who is compulsorily enlisted for home defence does not of course go abroad, but the man who voluntarily enlists for home defence or overseas service, and does not go abroad, will not have pension rights in the event of his incapacity or death, unless that incapacity or death is directly attributable to his employment as a member of the forces. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- It divides the forces into two classes - those who go abroad and those who do not go abroad. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- That is so. When a man enlisted in the old Australian Imperial Force for service overseas, then, whether he went abroad or not, incapacity or death following his enlistment gave rise to a claim for a pension; but now, unless he goes abroad, his death or incapacity will not give rise to a claim for a pension unless the death or incapacity is directly attributable to bis employment as a soldier. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- That is so. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- He would receive no pension at all? {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- No. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- He would get a pension only if his incapacity arose from his war service. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- Say, for instance, a member of the second Australian Imperial Force was knocked down and killed by a motor lorry while he was carrying out private business such as drawing money from the bank, no pension, would be payable to his widow, although in those circumstances a man who had enlisted in the first Australian Imperial Force would have been eligible for a pension. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- I think the honorable member will agree that the new course is the more logical one. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- I do not see any reason why there should be discrimination against members of the second Australian Imperial Force. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- We have different classes of men to consider now. For instance, there are the soldiers of the garrison battalions who definitely will not go abroad. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- Many soldiers of the garrison battalions will be precluded from drawing pensions, because they come under superannuation provision. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- No. Members of the garrison battalions are not covered by superannuation. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- I was assuming they were permanent soldiers. I am not at all satisfied with that. Discrimination between the new Australian Imperial Force and the old Australian Imperial Force is also found in the provision relating to the enlistment of men known to be suffering from physical weaknesses. If a recruit for the new Australian Imperial Force is suffering from a complaint and, although the enlisting authorities know of that complaint they are still prepared to accept him, should the soldier become incapacitated or die as the result of that complaint, no pension will be payable unless conditions of war service contribute materially to his incapacity or death. In my opinion, the Government should not accept men who are known to have a weakness, and most certainly enlistment should be refused unless attention is first directed to the fact that the recruit will not be entitled to a pension in the event of incapacity or death through that weakness unless war service materially contributed to that incapacity or death. Air. Street. - Had that provision applied to the old Australian Imperial Force we should not have been able to enlist any of its members in the garrison battalions. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- Members of garrison battalions could be excluded. Sub-section 2 of section 45AU provides - (2.) Notwithstanding that in the case of a member of the forces, who, after enlistment or appointment for active service outside Australia with those forces, served in camp in Australia for at least six months or embarked, forsuch active service, the origin of the cause of his incapacity or death- existed prior to his enlistment or appointment, when, if in the opinion of the commission or a board - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. the conditions of his war service contributed to any material degree to his incapacity or death; and 1. neither the incapacity or death, nor the origin of the cause of the incapacity or death, was due to the default or wilful act of the member the Commonwealth shall, subject to this act, be liable to pay to the member or his dependants, or both, as the case may be, pensions in accordance with Division 1 of this Part. Take, for instance, the case of a recruit who enlists for active service, leaves Australia, and subsequently dies on board ship as the result of his weakness. His widow would not be pensioned unless the conditions of the soldier's war service contributedmaterially to his incapacity or death. In these matters there appears to be unjust discrimination against members of the Australian Imperial Force. If I am incorrect then I would be glad of an explanation. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- If a soldier enlists and embarks for overseas service at all he is entitled to a pension. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- Only if in the opinion of the board the conditions of the war service contributed in a material degree to his incapacity or death. That is quite clear. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- That provision is sufficiently wide. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- I am informed that this particular clause is precisely the same as the provision which applied to the 1st Australian Imperial Force. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- I thought from my private discussion with the Minister for the Army **(Mr. Street)** that that was not so, but I have no objection to the same conditions applying. There can be no objection to the Australian Imperial Force being put on the same footing as the old Australian Imperial Force in this particular, but certainly, members of the new Australian Imperial Force should not be on an inferior footing; that is to say, men who are enlisted for overseas service should have pension rights in the event of their being disabled or killed before they have a chance to go a broad. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- Does the honorable member realize that we would then have people serving within Australia on a different pension basis? {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- Can the honorable member, with his logical mind, defend that? {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- I can. Members of the first Australian Imperial Force were all enlisted for service overseas, and I think it is a fair thing to say that whatever applied to them should apply to members of the second Australian Imperial Force. All men who enlisted in the Sixth Division of the Australian Imperial Force have enlisted for overseas service, but now it is proposed to enlist men for service anywhere, and a soldier who is enlisted for active service, or in such a way that the Government can send him on active service, should be eligible for a pension on the same basis as members of the first Australian Imperial Force. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- The honorable member wants "enlisted", and the legislation says " embarkation ". {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- That is so. I also draw attention to the conditions under which a service pension is payable. A service pension is payable to men who have served in a theatre of war and who are " permanently unemployable ". These words " permanently unemployable " are given too narrow a meaning. I contend that a man should be regarded as permanently unemployable if he is so incapacitated that he cannot be expected to earn a living in competition with other men. It is not sufficient defence for the department to say that there is something the man could do; yet that is the view that has been taken by the commission. A similar problem occurred in connexion with workers' compensation, and in that connexion the High Court dealt with the words "permanently and totally disabled " which means practically the same as " permanently unemployable ". What the High Court said is reported in the case of Wicks and the Union Steam Ship Company, reported in 50 *Commonwealth Law Reports* at page 328. The words of the judgment are - >The commission was therefore called upon to decide whether the worker had been permanently and totally disabled, an expression which, in our opinion, means physically incapacitated from ever earning by work any part of his livelihood. The condition is satisfied when capacity for earning has gone except for the chance of obtaining special employment of an unusual kind. lt is of no use to say that a man is not permanently unemployable because there is something he can do. A man is permanently unemployable if, as the result of his incapacity, he cannot earn a living in competition with other men. I proceed from that to section 45w which, up to a certain point, is, by legislative intent, very much in favour of the applicant, because that is the section which says that the applicant shall be given the benefit of the doubt. But, after that, come the words which have been used to destroy the benevolent intention of the legislature. They are - >Provided that, if the appellant or a representative of the appellant, shall make out a prima facie case in support of his claim that the incapacity from which he is suffering or from which he has died was caused or aggravated by war service, the onus of proof that such incapacity was not in fact so caused or aggravated shall lie with the commission. That gives the applicant nothing at all. When a man in a court of law establishes a prima facie case, he throws the burden on the other side to disprove it. I have looked in **Dr.. Wyld's** *Universal Dictionary* for a definition of " prima facie," and this is what it says - >A prima facie case in law is one which is sufficiently clear to bc sent to a jury. **Dr. Cockle,** in his *Gases and Statutes of Evidence,* says - >Prima facie evidence is evidence of a fact which a court must take as proof of such fact unless disproved Try further evidence. In the well-known case of *The King* v. *The War Pensions Entitlement Tribunal and another, ex parte Bott.* the court dealt with this point. Bott had been a member of the Australian Imperial Force, and had contracted rheumatic fever in Egypt. He received a pension until 1920, when it was cancelled on the ground that he was no longer suffering from any incapacity caused by war service. He claimed its restoration unsuccessfully, and was told that he had a right of appeal. He applied *for* an invalid pension, and was granted it on the ground of his rheumatic condition, and he was admitted to hospital on that ground: I now read from the judgment of the High Court as follows : - >On 24th February, 1933, the applicant was represented upon Ids appeal to the respondents by **Mr. T.** W. McLaren. He called two medical witnesses. The first was **Dr. H.** J. Brennand, Commonwealth Medical Referee for Invalid Pensions. He was duly sworn, and stated that not only was the applicant suffering from chronic rheumatism, but he was actually receiving an invalid pension on account of that very condition. Asked whether the condition was referable to the rheumatic fever which the applicant had contracted at Gallipoli in 1915, **Dr. Brennand** said, "Yes, definitely, it is related to the old trouble ". The chairman, Colonel Ralston, asked **Dr. Brennand** if he had seen the appellant's war history, and the reply was "No". The chairman then turned to **Dr. Kenneth** Smith, who was present on behalf of the Repatriation Commission, and inquired if he desired to ask Di. Brennand any question. **Dr. Smith** replied, "No". > > **Dr.** Brennand's evidence was corroborated by **Dr. J.** E. Sherwood in the essential respects, namely - (1) a present condition of chronic rheumatism, and (2) a definite medical relation between that condition and the contraction of rheumatic fever at Gallipoli. Again, the Repatriation Commission's representative, though invited by the chairman to cross-examine the witness, asked no questions. The chairman swore that, in the opinion of the tribunal, no prima facie case had been established, and, therefore, the onus of proof was not shifted. After that, X-rays were taken of Bott and sent to two physicians who had not previously examined him. They were told that, before the appeal was decided, they should examine him, and give an opinion. Their report was to the effect that they could not find any evidence of rheumatic fever. Bott was not allowed to crossexamine. McLaren came before the tribunal, and asked if Bott could be present, but his request was refused. Then the chairman read the certificate stating that Bott's condition was not attributable to war service. I am not complaining of the action of the tribunal in taking the opinion of the two doctors, but I am complaining that the chairman should have sworn that the tribunal was of opinion that no prima facie case had been made out. Not only did he swear that, but the tribunal's counsel contended it before the court. The High Court said, by a majority, that the matter did not concern it. It said that the tribunal was not a judicial body, but a statutory body created by Parliament, and that it could do as it liked. It is suggested by some honorable members that a prima facie case is a very slight one, but the tribunal itself has taken a very strong view of what prima facie means. The tribunal said that, although the applicant had two doctors to say that he was suffering from chronic rheumatism, and that both doctors attributed his condition to war service, it still maintained that a prima facie case had not been- made out calling upon the commission to accept the onus of proof. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- That is a false interpretation. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- Yes, but we cannot get past it. I think the intention of the legislature was that the substantial onus of proof should be accepted by the commission, and that all a man need do was to set up enough facts to connect his case with the war, and, having done that, the burden of proof should then automatically fall on the commission. I am sure that if honorable members object to the word " prove " the honorable member for Hindmarsh will be prepared to substitute the words "make out a prima facie case ". What he wants is to establish the position that all a man has to do is to show that his condition was caused or aggravated by something which happened to him since he enlisted. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- If a man broke his arm to-day, he could come along and say that it had happened to him since the beginning of his service. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- The commission, with its medical advisers, could easily discharge the onus of proof in a case like that. We submit, however, that all Bott should have been required to do was to show that he had chronic rheumatism, and that he did not have it when he became a soldier. Having done that, the commission should have to prove the contrary, if it so desired. *Sitting suspended from 8.12 to 10 a.m.* {: #subdebate-69-0-s13 .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr DRAKEFORD:
Maribyrnong -- The honorable member for Melbourne Ports **(Mr. Holloway),** who led the debate for the Opposition on this measure, said that, generally, the attitude of the administrators of the Repatriation Act is greatly appreciated. I join in that eulogy. I have no wish to take advantage of the introduction of this bill to offer undue or unfavorable criticism on that score, but I think that there are some improvements that could be made in the act itself. I regard it as my duty to say that I have found the members of the commission, and the officers who administer the Repatriation Act, generally courteous, kindly and sympathetic. I say that, because I have been asked in my electorate to support a request for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the administration of the act, and that request is supported by a number of letters that I have received. One gentleman in my electorate wrote to the press of Victoria, asking for cases to be forwarded to him. In due course his letter elicited a number of replies, all of which voiced complaints, and these have been sent to me. They deal mainly with the difficulty of obtaining proof that illness is due to war service. The act aims at giving protection to returned soldiers, and, generally it does so. I join with the honorable member for Ballarat **(Mr. Pollard),** who, I think, stated a very clear case, in criticism of the different tribunals. A lot of dissatisfaction is felt in that regard, almost everywhere. In Footscray and Essendon, a good deal of criticism comes from members of the returned soldiers' organizations. I know, that these organizations exercised a strong influence in the framing of the act, and that a good deal of what it contains expresses their wishes, but nevertheless, there are some features of it which, are felt to be not at all favorable. The provision which causes the most trouble is that which places on the applicant for a pension the onus of proving that his disability is due to war service. There are a number of returned soldiers who -have reached the age at which they are suffering pretty badly, but who made no application at the conclusion of their war service. They find that many of their comrades have passed away, or have gone to other States or left Australia altogether, so that they have little chance of proving that their condition of health has arisen from war service. Whenever I have sought advice or direction from the commissioners or their officers, I have never failed to get it. I feel sure that the aim of the measure we are now discussing is mainly to deal with those men who are leaving Australia to take part in the present war, and to amend the act in other minor respects, and that further amendments will be brought forward at a later date. I put it to the Minister for Repatriation **(Mr. Street)** that, if it cannot be clone now, when that time arrives, the Government should review the provision which lays on the applicant for a pension the onus of proof. From both sides of the House, comment has been made in respect of that particular provision. I am acquainted with cases of hardship, both in my own electorate and in other electorates. In my opinion, an applicant for a pension should be given the benefit of any doubt that may exist, but, in almost all cases, that is not done. In fact complete proof seems to be demanded by the tribunals. I am glad that the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Makin)** proposes to move in committee an amendment which will improve the position, even though the Minister has pointed out that, as drawn, it hardy meets the situation, and, ns a matter of fact, may not achieve the object intended. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- It would increase the present difficulty. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: -- The Minister has not pointed that out, but has merely made that contention {: .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr DRAKEFORD: -- Apparently, the contention is not accepted by honorable members who sit on this side of the House. Every body desires a provision that will give to applicants for a pension a better chance to establish their right to it than they have to-day. When the onus of absolute proof is placed on persons who are associated with men living in other States whose whereabouts for any reason are not obtainable or with whom they are unable to get in touch, it is an impossible task. I am quite sure that the honorable member for Wentworth **(Mr. Harrison),** who at one time was Minister for Repatriation, must have had placed before him many cases in which he felt quite sure that the appli cant for a pension had a good case. I understand that one provision of the act allows the commission itself to appeal against decisions already given. I do not know whether that right is exercised - the section may not be operated - but it is objected to by some of those who desire to associate themselves with the appointment of a committee of inquiry. All that I can do is to speak from personal experience. I have in mind a man who died suddenly, and undoubtedly the cause of his death was heart disease, but because the doctor did not arrive for some time after he had been sent for, the statement on the death certificate was that death was due to some stomach complaint. Later, it was admitted that the man might have died from heart disease. He had been accepted as a locomotive enginedriver, and had actually worked as one. i He died within a few minutes of a seizure of the heart after he had gone to work. He had been a driver for some years, and it was contended that because he was able to drive an engine there could not have been anything wrong with his heart. As a matter of fact, he had suffered without mentioning the fact. I was .with him when he had one of his turns, and advised him to seek medical attention, but he was afraid to undergo a medical examination because he feared that he might lose his job, as a man with a heart complaint would not be tolerated on the footplate of an engine. When he entered the Commonwealth Railway Service there was no medical examination, consequently his condition of health was not put to the test. Although his widow had a small superannuation allowance, she was left in a difficult position because, although every effort was made, in which I. assisted, she could not definitely prove to the tribunal that the complaint which had caused her husband's death was due to war service. It was a case in which the benefit of the doubt should have been given. Similar cases are within my knowledge, showing that it is practically impossible in many genuine instances for the persons concerned to furnish proof. I commend the efforts that are being made to improve the circumstances of returned soldiers, and also congratulate the Minister upon the impartial way in which he presented the bill and has handled it. I ask that consideration be given to the matters that I have raised when further amendments of the act are projected. {: #subdebate-69-0-s14 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET:
Minister for Repatriation · Corangamite · UAP -- *in reply* - I believe that honorable members on both sides of the House are generally in agreement with the bill as presented. Criticism has been directed, not so much at what is in the measure as at what it does not contain. I say quite definitely that all that it sets out to do is to make provision with respect to the existing forces of the Commonwealth - the new Australian Imperial Force and those who are to serve for the duration of the war. A number of individual cases of hardship have been cited by honorable members who have spoken. I agree that it is possible to cite quite a number of cases in which, on face value at any rate, hardship has been inflicted by the decisions of some tribunals. I point out, however, that we hear a good deal of applications that are not granted, but not nearly so much of those that are upheld. The three tribunals - the State, the commission, as such, and the appeal tribunal - handle throughout the year quite a number of cases; in fact, during last year, the number was over 16,000, of which 6,794 were granted, 7,54.1. were rejected, and 1,722 are pending. I give these figures, because it .would appear from what has been said that on very few occasions does an appellant succeed in hi3 application for a pension. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr Martens: -- Less than one-half of them succeed. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- I point out to the honorable gentleman that it is over twenty years since the war ended. I imagine that the majority of cases have now been heard. The honorable member mentioned a particular case. In the circumstances, it might perhaps be better if I were to discuss it privately with him, and make the file available to him in order that his doubts may be dispelled. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr Martens: -- What is the use of looking at the file ? The Minister has no authority whatever. The Entitlement Appeal Tribunal is insulting, and does not want to hear anything. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- I cannot accept that statement. If the honorable member does not wish to peruse the file, that is his affair. I suggest that it would be wiser if he did so. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- I have already asked the commission to allow a representative of the widow concerned to see the file. I hope that the Minister will not close down on my representations. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- I believe that this bill can best be discussed in committee. There has been lengthy discussion of individual cases and certain other items. {: .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr Drakeford: -- They are examples. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- There has also been rather close discussion of certain clauses of the bill, particularly of clause 11. I would again point out that the Australian repatriation legislation provides for three separate hearings, by three different administrative bodies; before a claim is finally accepted or rejected. First, there is a hearing by a State Repatriation Board, composed of three returned soldiers, one of whom is the nominee of returned soldiers' organizations. This board has a completely free hand to arrive at decisions. Every applicant for a pension has the right of appeal against a decision by that board to the Repatriation Commission itself, which is composed of three returned soldiers, one nominated by the returned soldiers' organizations. Against a decision by that commission,- every applicant has the right of appeal to the War Pensions Entitlement Appeal Tribunal, which also is composed of three returned soldiers, one of whom is a direct nominee of the returned soldiers' organizations. Under these conditions, it can fairly be said that every appeal has every chance of a full and just hearing. I do not think that any other country in the world provides three distinct administrative bodies for the purpose of enabling appeals to be beard. It would, perhaps, be better to get to the' committee stage of the bill, in which discussion can best take place. I shall then deal in detail with some of the points that have been raised. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- It appears that there is an injustice, when a man has to make an appeal to a tribunal which is composed principally of legal men. The entitlement tribunal has on it two legal men, yet an appellant is not permitted to hare legal aid in the presentation of his case. That is a distinct disadvantage. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- He is allowed to be represented. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- I know, but not by a legal advocate. His representative has not an equal chance with the man who is dissecting the case from a legal point of view. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- The honorable gentleman is, perhaps, approaching the problem from the aspect that the purpose of the commission or tribunal is to refuse to give benefits. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- I have had experience of what occurs at the hearing of appeals. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- Admittedly, one hears a good deal about the cases that do not succeed. I have had cases that have failed. {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr Martens: -- One death certificate is excluded, and another, issued after the man is buried, is accepted. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- I have no knowledge of any such case. The tribunals administer the act in a fair and impartial way, but obviously they cannot give satisfaction in every case, because to do that they would have to allow all appeals. Of about 15,000 appeals heard last year, 6,800 were upheld. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In committee:* Clauses 1 to 9 agreed to. Clause 10 (Appeals to assessment appeal tribunals). {: #subdebate-69-0-s15 .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY:
Leader of the Australian Labour party - non» Communist · West Sydney -- I desire to see a new section inserted in the act to provide that, where the relevancy of fresh evidence to be submitted on the re-hearing of an appeal that has been, disallowed, is to be considered, a representative of the appellant may appear before the tribunal to state the case, instead of its being submitted in writing. I desire the relevancy of this evidence to be determined, not by the commission, but by the appeal tribunal. The representatives of the returned soldiers would be satisfied with an arrangement whereby they would be permitted to discuss before the tribunal the relevancy of the evidence. They would be more satisfied if they could submit the matter in detail to the tribunal. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- Does the honorable member consider that the representative of the appellant should be a layman? {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY: -- The procedure now adopted in that regard could be followed in submissions to the tribunal on the question of the relevancy of new evidence. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- Then I support the honorable member's proposal. {: #subdebate-69-0-s16 .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh -- I support the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** in his contention. I have been called upon to present additional evidence which I have endeavoured to show was sufficiently material and substantial to justify the re-hearing of a claim, but I have always considered myself to have been at a disadvantage in having had to state the matter in writing instead of presenting it personally to the tribunal. The result has been that the tribunal has been left to interpret a written statement of the case. {: #subdebate-69-0-s17 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET:
Minister for Repatriation · Corangamite · UAP -- It must be assumed that the tribunal has already heard the kind of case under consideration and is conversant with the relevant facts, which have received its full consideration. If further evidence were tendered, it would not be at all flattering to the commission to suggest that, after having heard the evidence in the first place, it was not in a position to say whether further evidence was material to the case. {: #subdebate-69-0-s18 .speaker-KYI} ##### The CHAIRMAN (Mr Prowse:
FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA I shall allow a discussion of this matter under clause 10, but the proposal of the honorable member for West Sydney should take the form of a new clause, which will have to be considered when the end of the bill is reached. {: #subdebate-69-0-s19 .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr FRANCIS:
Moreton -- I agree with the suggestion of the honorable member. If an appeal is to be made against a decision of the tribunal, it .is essential to produce additional evidence, which must be relevant to the appeal. Should the appeal tribunal say that the further evidence proposed to be tendered was not relevant, that would be the end of the matter, and the right of further appeal would disappear. If a representative of the appellant could appear personally before the board, he would have a chance of obtaining a re-hearing of the case. The machinery of this legislation would be improved if it were possible for the representative to be given an opportunity to appear before the tribunal, in order to prove the relevancy of new evidence. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- The honorable member will realize that the amendment will mean the appointment of additional tribunals. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr FRANCIS: -- It will not. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- It will mean either that or delay. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr FRANCIS: -- I am satisfied that the tribunals could be so organized as to set aside certain days for the hearing of these appeals which would not take much time, because the experienced advocate for the appellants, since they do not receive handsome emoluments for their work, would see that there was no delay. I refer the committee to section 45 *r* of the act, which reads - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. An appellant to an Appeal Tribunal or to an Assessment Appeal Tribunal may attend in person at any sittings at which his appeal is being heard. 1. Any appellant shall be entitled - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. if he attends a sitting of a tribunal - to receive such expenses of his attendance as are prescribed; and {: type="1" start="6"} 0. to be represented, at his own expense, at the hearing by a person other than a legal practitioner. 2. Where tho tribunal is of opinion that an appeal is frivolous, it may declare that the appellant shall not be entitled to receive any of the expenses of his attendance at the hearing of the appeal, and thereupon the appellant shall not bc so entitled. Subject to the spirit of the act being preserved, I am anxious to support the amendment which the honorable member for West Sydney proposes to move. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr Beasley: -- I agree to do that. {: #subdebate-69-0-s20 .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON:
Wentworth -- I also ask the Minister for Repatriation **(Mr. Street)** to accept the proposed amendment, because, although the legislation contains adequate safeguards of his interests, the returned soldier should be given the benefit of any doubt. In order to clear our minds as to just what those safeguards are I shall place on record what happens when a man makes an application for a pension. If a returned soldier complains of illness, he is admitted to the repatriation hospital for observation and diagnosis. He is given every opportunity to make the necessary representations. He makes his claim for a pension, first, to the State Repatriation Board. If that board finds that the applicant's disability is not associated with war service, he has the right of appeal to the commission itself.. Then if the commission decides that the disability is not associated with war service, he has the further right of appeal to an appeal tribunal, which is independent of the administrative side of the Repatriation Department. Should that tribunal decide that the disability is not attributable .to war service, the returned soldier has the opportunity to bring relevant, fresh and material evidence before the commission. If the commission, after having looked at the evidence, decides that it is not relevant or fresh material, the applicant can approach the appeal tribunal again. If that tribunal also decides that the evidence is not fresh, relevant, or material, quite obviously the returned soldier should be perfectly satisfied that his case has had a very fair hearing. But there may be cases which are not fully presented as the result of the applicant or his representative not being aware of the whole of the facts. Subsequently, he may come into possession of evidence which, in his opinion, clinches the argument. To the appeal tribunal it may appear that this evidence, away from the main context, is of minor importance, whereas it could be of major importance, if fitted into the whole scheme. That evidence might not be acceptable to the appeal tribunal, which may have lost sight of the main facts. In cases like that the returned soldiers should be given the benefit of the doubt. I agree with the Minister's contention that the amendment moved by' the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** would, if carried, cause delay, because I know what would happen when the soldiers' advocates tried to convince the tribunal that certain new evidence was material. They would argue for. a lengthy period, and the "whole case would be traversed in order to fit the new evidence into its proper place. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- It is proper that that that should be so. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON: -- Yes. I ask the Minister to accept the amendment, even though it will mean increased administrative costs. {: #subdebate-69-0-s21 .speaker-JVR} ##### Mr NAIRN:
Perth -- I am led to support the idea suggested by the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley).** I probably have more than my fair share of these cases. Most of the cases that come to members of Parliament come to them only as a last resort, every other possible means of success having been exhausted. My experience is that most of the people who come to us with their appeals are people who have no capacity for representing their cases either verbally or in writing, and I do believe that very many of those cases do not receive fair representation before the tribunals. Members of those tribunals are only human, and it is a trait of human nature that once a person's mind is made up in one direction, and a request is made for reconsideration of that decision, the person who made it is always disposed to look for new reasons to support it. That failing is in all of us, and it is difficult to eradicate. For that reason, it is in the interests of justice that there should be means to give all cases fair representation. I do not" subscribe to the belief that the proposal would cause delay, because these cases are generally handled by representatives of the returned soldiers' organizations, who have become experts in repatriation practice. They are not likely to waste time. They know what evidence is material and what is not worth putting up. On practical grounds, I do not see what further administrative costs could be incurred. {: #subdebate-69-0-s22 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET:
Minister for Repatriation · Corangamite · UAP -- I have no great objection to the proposed amendment, but I point out that it must inevitably involve a great deal of extra expense. It must involve delay, or the appointment of additional tribunals. I should say that additional tribunals would be inevitable. Honorable members must realize that sometimes a dozen appeals are submitted in the course of a year. The applicant generally has somebody to support his appeal, and he might have to be brought from, say, Cairns to Brisbane at the expense of the commission. Although new evidence might consist of one letter, he would have to accompany it. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr Beasley: -- The representative of the soldiers' organization in Brisbane would be able to argue before the tribunal. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- Only if he knew the details of the case. Very often applications for pensions are handled at a local branch of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League of Australia. I am quite satisfied myself that the tribunals are perfectly competent to judge whether new evidence is material or not, if it already is well aware of the facts before it, hut if the honorable member's proposed amendment is in the form in which he stated it, I shall have it incorporated in the bill. {: #subdebate-69-0-s23 .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN:
Bourke -- As I understand the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** his amendment does not deal with the appeal tribunal directly. He is not concerned with that body. What he is concerned with is the case in which the appeal tribunal has already acted and, under section 45a the appellant submits fresh evidence for the consideration of the commission. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- And if it is rejected there is no further chance of appeal. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- There is further chance of appeal. Section 45ic 7 reads - If, at any time after a decision . . . the appellant submits in writing any further evidence which, in' the opinion of the commission, is material to, and has a substantial bearing upon, the appellant's claim, the commission shall reconsider the claim and, if the claim is refused by the commission, appeal in writing to an Appeal Tribunal which shall consider the further evidence and decide the appeal : The suggestion of the honorable member for West Sydney, instead of increasing the appeals to tribunals, will probably diminish them. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- How will they be diminished ? {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- The man states in writing that he has further evidence and the commission says, " We will consider that and notify you if we reject it ". On the other hand, if he had had an opportunity ( to state his position orally either by himself, or through the medium ofan advocate, the board might have been able to prove to him that the claim was hopeless. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- We are dealing with the case where a man has applied to a board, and has been rejected, and then, after six months, has produced in writing what he believes to be relevant evidence, but which the tribunal says is not relevant. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- The evidence should first be submitted orally. Although the board will not hear the claim, it should have power to advise whether the evidence is material or not, so that the applicant may decide for himself whether it is worthwhile to go ahead with his appeal. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr Makin: -- But there can be no representation- {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- I am dealing only with the Minister's contention that the acceptance of this amendment will increase the number of appeals. I say that it will not do so. The trouble is that sub-section 7 of section 45n of the act provides that further evidence must be submitted in writing. I suggest that the Minister should insert a new subclause as an amendment to the act in the following terms : - >A submission by an appellant pursuant to sub-section (7.) of this section may, atthe appellant's option, be made in writing or by any person, other than a legal practitioner, on his behalf. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- That would meet the case. {: .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr Beasley: -- I agree. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- I suggest to the honorable member that, in view of the shortage of time, it might be. advisable to have that amendment inserted when the bill is before the Senate, in order that it may be incorporated in a newly-printed form of the bill. {: #subdebate-69-0-s24 .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr FRANCIS:
Moreton -- My chief anxiety is thatthe hearing of appeals should not be unnecessarily protracted. Officers of the Repatriation Department have pointed out to me that if applicants choose to send letters which are identical with previous correspondence, it certainly could not be claimed that the evidence contained in those letters is relevant. I should like to see an amendment to provide for such an unfortunate case. My wish is that applicants should have all assistance that can possibly be given to them, but I do not want an amendment to be inserted in such a way that repatriation boards will not be protected from applicants whose claims have no chances of success. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- Somebody must exercise discretion as to whether evidence is relevant or not. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr FRANCIS: -- The wish of the committee is that the bill should not be made to look ridiculous by providing opportunities for old evidence to be submitted again. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- Is there no provision in the act to cover frivolous appeals? {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr Harrison: -- That should cover the point raised by the honorable member for Moreton **(Mr. Francis).** Clause agreed to. Clauses 11 to 15 agreed to. {: #subdebate-69-0-s25 .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN:
Hindmarsh -- I move - >That after clause 10, the followingnew clause be inserted: - " 10a. Section forty-five w of the principal act is amended by omitting the first proviso to sub-section (2.), and inserting in its stead the following proviso : - > >Provided that if the appellant or a representative of the applicant makes out a prima facie case that the incapacity from which a member of the forces is suffering or from which that member has died was caused or aggravated by some occurrence which happened to him after the commencement of his war service, the onus of proof that such incapacity wag not in fact caused or aggravated by war service shall lie upon the commission.' " Under the existing law it is essential that an applicant for a pension should have almost a complete set of evidence to justify in every particular the case which he has drawn up. Proof that disability is due to war service is the responsibility of the applicant. This amendment provides that a man, by the fact of his enlistment and the contraction of any subsequent condition of ill health or injury, shall have established a prima facie case for the granting of a pension and that the onus shall then be upon the commission to prove that the disability is not due to war service. In that way men would be able to obtain the full advantage of the law without being obliged to fulfil every condition of evidence, although some of the details of their records might not be available. Very often it is difficult to draw up the full story of a man's disability. Some years after his discharge from an arm of the defence services a man may develop some affection of the chest; he may, through the passage of time, be unable to provide a complete chain of evidence in the form that is required today to justify an application to the Repatriation Commission. In such circumstances it would be almost impossible for him to prove that his disability was due to war service, in spite of the fact that there might be a definite belief that such was the case. This proposed clause provides that the fact of a state of ill health occurring after enlistment is sufficient to establish a prima facie case, so that the Repatriation Commission must prove that the disability is not due to war service. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: -- It provides for a state of ill health arising at any time after a man has enlisted. {: .speaker-KLL} ##### Mr MAKIN: -- That is a reasonable proposal. The proposed clause will give to an applicant for a pension a much better chance of having his claim considered than is possible under the present conditions. I ask the committee to accept the proposed new clause as a means of providing benefits to men who are to-day suffering disabilities due to war service, but who have been unable to prove conclusively that their condition is due to such service. Although the commission could not possibly prove that theseconditions are not due to war service, pensions are not granted because the law provides that the onus is upon the men to prove the origin of their disability. {: #subdebate-69-0-s26 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET:
Minister for Repatriation · Corangamite · UAP -- The Government cannot accept the proposed new clause, which proposes to alter the existing act by removing the words "by war service " and inserting in their place the words " by some occurrence which happened to him after the commencement of his war service ". An explanation of the procedure adopted in the investigation of all new claims for war pensions should be helpful to the committee at this stage. When an ex-soldier applies for a war pension he is asked to advise the Repatriation Commission of all particulars in bis possession regarding his post-war employment and his health history. He is asked to give the commission the names of any doctors, hospitals, chemists or nurses who have treated him, and the names of employers for whom he has worked. The commission then communicates with each of those persons or institutions and asks for reports regarding any events which may affect the applicant's case. The commission pays all expenses connected with these inquiries. Then the applicant is admitted to the nearest repatriation hospital and given a complete medical examination. In every case, as a matter of routine, the applicant is subjected to an X-ray examination of the chest and to certain other pathological tests. Not only is the complete overhaul given entirely free of charge - and at this stage the man is only an applicant, not a pensioner - but also his wife and family are paid full sustenance for the period during which he is in hospital undergoing diagnostic tests. The full record of his overseas service and any illnesses suffered by him during that service, and any reports made by various medical boards to the date of his discharge, are obtained from the Base Records Office of the Department of Defence. Thus, it is possible to obtain a complete picture of the applicant's health history from the time of his enlistment to the timewhen he is admitted to the hospital for examination. These facts are examined by the State Repatriation Board, which consists of three members, all returned soldiers, one of whom is a nominee of returned soldiers' organizations. The claim is never disallowed by the Repatriation Board if the decision is not unanimous. Should only one member dissent, the case must go on to the next higher authority. In every case the applicant has the right of appeal from the decision of the State Repatriation Board to the Repatriation Commission, and the commission does not hesitate to secure the opinions of the best medical authorities in order to assist it in arriving at a decision. Those opinions are secured at considerable cost to the commission, which feels that it is, nevertheless, justified in taking every possible step to secure completely independent medical advice in every case.Shouldthecommissiondisallow the applicant's claim, he then has the right of appeal to the War Pensions . Entitlement Appeal Tribunal. That tribunal hears him in person, and hemayhaveanadvocate,whomaynot be a legally qualified man, to represent him. The tribunal also secures evidence from specialists. That shows that, before any application is finally rejected, every ex-soldier has had his claim considered by three distinct bodies on each of which the returned soldiers have a direct representative. In the determination of appeals, each authority arrives at its decision in accordance with the merits of the case. In practice, it arrives at a favorable decision wherever there is any reasonable doubt. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- Is that not required by law? {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- Yes, by section 45w. The law provides that if the appellant or his representative makes out a prima facie ease that the injury was caused or aggravated by war service, the onus of proof is on the commission. That provision will remain. The amendment serves to cover any occurrence which happened after the commencement of his war service. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- The amendment that has been circulated proposes to omit the first provision of sub-section 2 of section 45w? {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- Yes. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- If that is done, you do away with the question of not requiring rules. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- It substitutes a new proviso. The Government considers that the . present drafting of the act is eminently satisfactory. In both theory and practice it has proved excellent as well as generous. It is now proposed to make an extremely wide alteration of the act, by which an individual who breaks his arm to-day, may go to the commission and claim that the injury was due to. war service. The commission would have to prove that it was not due to his war service. I am confident that the provisions of the act adequately protect returned soldier applicants, whilst its practical working over about six years has proved that it is satisfactory. I am. convinced that the provision that once a prima facie case has been made out by the appellant the onus lies with the commissioner to show that the disability is not due to war service, is most reasonable. The clause, as now drafted, is wider in its scope than when in its original form." For the reasons I have stated, the Government cannot accept the amendment, and I ask the committee to reject it. Mr.BLACKBURN (Bourke) [11.5 a.m.]. - If an appeal is made which, in the opinion of the tribunal is frivolous, the commission may decide that the applicant shall not be paid any expenses. Consequently, a man whobreaks his leg and submits an application is not likely to get much encouragement, for it would be difficult for him to prove that the injury was due to war service. {: .speaker-K4X} ##### Mr Nock: -- If he had lost his eyesight in the war, the injury could be regarded as the result of war service. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- Supposing that his accident were unconnected with war service, his appeal would be frivolous, and he would not get any expenses. At present, the appellant, or his representative, must make out a prima facie case that the incapacity was caused or aggravated by war service, not that it exists. When he has done so, the burden of proof is thrown upon the commission. That is what always happens when a prima facie case is made out. The amendment proposes that the only prima facie case to be made out is that he has an injury, and that he did not have it before he went to the war. The burden is then thrown on the commission to prove that it is not the result of his war service. {: .speaker-JWT} ##### Mr Francis: -- That argument applies to a broken arm or leg. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- An appeal in respect of a broken arm or leg would be regarded as frivolous. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- In practice, the expenses of the appellant are paid to him before the case is heard. Moreover, appeals are never deemed to be frivolous. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- After having read that case to the House this morning, I am astonished that the Minister should now say that this provision has always worked well and, indeed, in favour of the appellant. A more disgraceful abuse of the section by any tribunal than in the Bott case cannot be imagined. Bott had contracted rheumatic fever while he was on war service in Egypt and Gallipoli. As the result, he received a pension which continued for about five years until it was cancelled. Bott applied for an invalid- pension, and it was granted on the ground of hia having had chronic rheumatism. He was admitted to a hospital for chronic rheumatism. Before that, he had applied to have his pension restored, but it was refused, although he was told that he could appeal. He appealed, and when the case came before the tribunal, the medical referee of the Pensions Department, **Dr. Brennand,** who had decided that he was entitled to an invalid pension, was called as a witness. Bott also called the doctor who had treated him at the hospital. Each of those doctors said that, in his opinion, the trouble was attributable to his having had rheumatic fever at the war. {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET: -- The weight of evidence waa in the other scale. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: **- Dr. Brennand** was asked by the president of the tribunal, Colonel Ralston, whether he had read the man's war history, and he replied that he had not done so. The chairman then turned to **Dr. Kenneth** Smith, who was present on behalf of the Repatriation Commission, and inquired if he desired to ask **Dr. Brennand** any questions, and **Dr. Smith** replied "No". The hospital doctor gave evidence to the same effect and was not questioned. Nevertheless, the commission decided that Bott had not made out a prima facie case. That is what I complain of. After two doctors who had examined the man had said that he had chronic rheumatism which was the result of war service, and after their evidence had passed unchallenged by the commission- {: .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street: -- The honorable member is more familiar with the case than I am. Does he say that the doctors' evidence was not challenged? {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- It was not challenged. Subsequently, the commission did the unfair thing that I have already mentioned. In the proceedings before the High Court, affidavits were filed by the chairman of the tribunal, in which he said that the tribunal had decided that a prima facie case had not been made out. I cannot conceive of any one being satisfied that that section is any protection to the soldier when, in the case mentioned, the tribunal could decide that a prima facie case had not been made out. The High Court has said that the tribunal can do as it likes in that connexion. {: .speaker-KZF} ##### Mr Lane: -- It certainly does do as it likes. {: .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr BLACKBURN: -- One judge said that a prima facie case had been made out, but the other judges said that that was not their concern. The tribunal is not a court, but a statutory body which is not bound by the rules of evidence; its decision cannot be reviewed, and it cannot be ordered to hear evidence. The tribunal decided that Bott should be X-rayed and they sent him, together with the X-ray films, to two doctors. Those doctors sent a written certificate ' to the tribunal. The tribunal then informed Bott's advocate that he could appear before the commission, but although the advocate was admitted, Bott was not admitted. When. **Mr. McLaren,** who represented Bott, protested against the case being disposed of by setting up the unsworn statements of those doctors, who had not been subjected to crossexamination, against the sworn evidence of doctors who bad been available for cross-examination, the tribunal brushed his argument aside. Bott then applied for a mandamus to appeal to the court to proceed on sworn evidence, hut the High Court' said that it was not a matter for it to decide, as the act freed the tribunal from being bound, by the- rules of evidence. At the moment I am not concerned about What it did after, it finished hearing Bott's case, and decided that he had not made out a- prima facie case. That was a most scandalous abuse of power - I use the word "scandalous" without reservation.. ,1 have no faith in a tribunal whiCh would do such a thing. If. my memory serves me aright, that happened in . 1933. . I know that the matter came before the High 'Court in 1933. This provision will not protect applicants from arbitrary action' by the tribunals, but it will ensure- that if an applicant makes out a prima facie case he will sustain his claim to the extent that the commission will have to disprove it. He will only need to show that he has sustained an accident or is suffering from a disability that had not befallen him up to the time he enlisted. The burden will then be thrown upon the commission to show that this had nothing to do with his war service. Question put - >That the new clause proposed to be inserted **(Mr. Makin'samendment)beinserted** The committee divided. (The Chairman-mr.j.h.prowse.) AYES: 28 NOES: 25 Majority . . 3 AYES NOES Question so resolved in the affirmative. New clause agreed to. Title agreed to. Bill reported with an amendment; report - *by leave* - adopted. Bill - *by leave* - read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1688 {:#debate-70} ### GOLD MINING ENCOURAGEMENT BILL 1940 Debate resumed from page 1620 (on motion by **Mr. Spender)** - >That the bill be now read a second time. {: #debate-70-s0 .speaker-KF9} ##### Mr GREEN:
Kalgoorlie -- I am glad that the Government has introduced this bill to encourage the goldmining industry. This action is in accord with its declared policy to take all possible steps to stabilize the exchange position during the war period. Gold production should undoubtedly be encouraged to the utmost. If ever a large production of gold was needed in Australia it is now. The purpose of the bill is to grant financial assistance to the States for the development of gold-mining, and to provide for certain refunds of gold tax. An amount of £90,000 is being provided to assist bona fide prospectors; £100,000 is to be granted to assist producers in marginal areas and low-grade mines, and £150,000 is to be granted to the States to assist the industry as the States may determine. The total amount involved under these headings is £340,000. The grant to the States is to be allocated on the basis of the 1939 production of gold and it will therefore be distributed as follows : - As 75 per cent. of the gold we produce in Australia comes from Western Australia, that State will receive 75 per cent. of the total grant under this heading. This is not to be taken as greed on the part of Western Australia, but it is an acknowledgment that the State is at present very largely dependent upon its gold-mining industry, for its wheatfarming activities have fallen on evil days and the farmers have not been able to obtain from this Government the assistance to which they think they are justly entitled. If the honorable member for Boothby **(Mr. Price)** who, by interjection, has expressed his dissatisfaction, thinks that £1,000 is inadequate for South Australia, I suggest that he should go out and do a bit of prospecting in his State. It is expected that Commonwealth receipts from the gold tax, with gold at its present price, will total about £1,400,000 per annum. The main burden of a speech I delivered in this House on the 2nd May last was that it was unjust to exact the gold tax from unprofitable gold-mines. When the first gold tax bill was under consideration, the Government demurred against a proposal to remit the tax on the first 25 oz. of gold produced each year by individual prospectors, but the agitation raised by Labour representatives from Western Australia in both Houses of the Parliament has now borne fruit in that regard, as also has their contention that assistance should be provided for unprofitable mines and mines exploiting lowgrade ores. Producers in such circumstances will now be permitted a profit of 30s. per oz. of fine gold without tax. When their profit exceeds 30s. per oz. the tax will be applied on a sliding scale until the full rate of the tax becomes payable. I disclaim any responsibility for the fixing of 30s. per oz. profit on the gold produced as sufficient to encourage the working of lowgrade propositions, or as sufficient to attract capital from abroad to develop low-grade propositions; but I presume that the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** has received advice from authoritative sources on this point, and I must leave the matter there. The refund will be granted through the Mines Departments of the various States. 1 agree with that, recognizing as I do that any attempt to administer the provision through a federal department would be futile. No one could know better than the Mines Departments of the States how the money should be distributed. They are noi likely to make mistakes. The development amount is to be assessed on the average cost over the last two years, or, at the rate of £2 per oz., whichever is the lower. Depreciation will be allowed for at the rate of 12£ per cent, on the reduced value. Profit, is to be allowed at the rate of £1 10s. per fine oz., if the costs exceed £8 6s. 7d. per oz., and do not exceed £9 3s. 2d. per oz. - That is to say, a producer will in no case receive more than the return of the gold tax, except for such assistance as the State may make by way of special grant. Today's price of gold is £10 13s. 3d. per oz., and the maximum amount receivable under this provision is 16s. 8d. per oz. The amount is to be fixed on a sliding scale according to the needs of the producer, profit to he allowed at the rate of £1 10s. per oz. I state the following example, so that the working of the provision may be made clear : - If the cost of production is, say, £9 3s. 2d. the producer will obtain a refund of another 2s. 2d., representing the return of the whole of the tax of 16s. 8d. per oz. which he has paid. If his costs are higher than that, he cannot receive a greater refund as it would then he considered that the mine was uneconomic. If he thinks that a bigger plant, or some improvement to his machinery, would make for cheaper costs, further assistance may, if considered justified, be obtained from the State governments from the grant under this bill of £150,000 to State governments to assist the industry. It is expected that the refund to marginal producers will cost about £100,000. I frankly admit that I am not in a position to say whether the rate of £1 10s. per oz. profit will be sufficient to attract investors from outside Australia to put their capital into low-grade mines. I presume that the Treasurer has had advice from mining men in this matter. I only hope thai the margin of profit allowed will have the effect desired. Except for this provision, certain mines in Western Australia would have to go out of production immediately. The Hill 60 mine, on the Murchison, is one, and the Wiluna gold mines is a classic example. This companyispaying£50,000ayear in tax, although it has paid no dividends forseveral years. It would have had to go out of production very soon, unless another lode be discovered. Under the refund provision, however, it will be able to carry on as one of the leading mines in Australia providing, of course, that payable ore is opened up. We endorse the . action of the Government as far as it has gone. The defects which it is sought to remove have been the subject of complaint in mining circles for some time. The hill is intended to encourage gold-mining, and it will do much in that direction. It is not, I think, taking undue credit for members of the Labour party, both hereand in the Senate, to say that we have lost no opportunity to draw attention to the hardships inflicted by the gold tax upon the prospector, and also upon producing gold mines which were not showing a profit. Prospectors have now been exempt from tax on the first 25 oz. of production. In this connexion I desire to pay.tribute to the Treasurer, one of the busiestmenintheCabinet,forhis unfailing courtesy and his readiness to listen to the representations of honorable members. This bill is the fruit of our representations. We sought to have nonpaying gold mines exempt altogether from the tax. This bill does not quite provide for that, but at least it covers those deserving shows that are finding it impossible to carry on and pay the tax!. The bill provides that the average cost of treatment should be assessed upon the cost of the previous two years, or at the rate of £2 per oz., whichever is the lower. Even in some mining quarters it was thought that 30s. per oz. was a fair rate. In the extreme case where the cost of production amounts to £9 3s. 2d., the producer may receive the full amount of the gold tax, 16s. 8d. This remission of tax is estimated to cost £100,000, and there is a grant to the State governments amounting to £150,000, while it is estimated that the tax exemption granted to prospectors, amounting to a maximum of £20 16s. 8d. to each prospector entitled to it, will cost £90,000. The concessions total £340,000, or roughly, one-quarter of the total tax collection. I have submitted a question to the Treasurer, asking for information regarding the price paid by the Commonwealth Bank for gold. There is a general feeling that the price is somewhat lower than the equivalent of 3.443/4dollars, which is the present price of gold. {: #debate-70-s1 .speaker-KYH} ##### Mr PRICE:
Boothby .I support the bill. The honorable member for Kalgoorlie **(Mr. Green)** suggested that more prospecting might be done in South Australia, with the object of producing more gold from that State. According to the estimate of the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender),** South Australia is to receive only £1,000 under this scheme, and I point out that this is not very generous encouragement to prospectors. I should like the Treasurer to explain why the amount is so small. How is it expected that men will go out prospecting if they receive such meagre encouragement? Here is an opportunity for the Government to do something to encourage mining. I believe that there is gold in South Australia, and that, if greater facilities were provided, it would be discovered and worked. I also point out that there is no reference in the bill to the Northern Territory, and no amount is set down in the schedule for that area. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- No amount is set down, but the provision regarding the 30s. per oz. profit applies to the Northern Territory. {: .speaker-KYH} ##### Mr PRICE: -- If the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** examines the matter more carefully, he will recognize that South Australia is entitled to better treatment. I am anxious to encourage mining in my State, but this bill does not do much in that direction. {: #debate-70-s2 .speaker-JVR} ##### Mr NAIRN:
Perth .This bill comes before us just as the House is about to rise, and there is no opportunity to examine it so carefully as to express a useful opinion as to whether or not the methods proposed are the best that could be adopted for the assistance of the gold-mining industry. I do not, however, disguise the fact that we very much appreciate this measure of assistance. As to whether or not the amount is adequate, I do not know, and I do not think that anybody will be in a position to express an opinion on that point until the results of the working of the act have been observed. I make the request that the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** will not push the measure through at this sitting. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- If it does not go through at this sitting, it may not go through at all, because we may not have the revenue. It would be better to get what can be obtained now. {: .speaker-JVR} ##### Mr NAIRN: -- That is not a sincere observation. If the bill be passed, we can attend to the collection of the revenue. We are not experts in respect of gold production, and in order that the matter might be properly considered it should be referred to those who are identified with the gold-mining industry. There are claimants of different classes connected with this industry. That was illustrated very strikingly when the present gold tax was imposed. The more firmly established and more profitable companies were satisfied with that tax in its present form, and expressed their satisfaction, but many other companies were hit very much harder. That is illustrated by the special position of companies operating lowgrade ores, companies that are in the developmental stage, and companies that own mines which have passed the zenith of production and are approaching the condition in which it is no longer profitable to operate them. The tax is having the effect of closing down prematurely some of the old mines which would have continued to produce a good deal of wealth and to give employment to many people. Closing down is most disastrous in connexion with the winning of gold, which is the one commodity that has always commanded a sure and, within recent years, a rising market. Gold is always saleable, and is the best support we could have for our exchange position. Therefore the vice of the tax was that it attacked an industry which necessarily should be maintained at the present time. In the developmental stage, many mines are worked at a loss, even though they produce a considerable quantity of gold, because of the costs that have to bc mn in the initial operations. To levy a tax on that production, when the proprietors of the mine are losing money, ip surely immoral. I suppose that such cases will receive special consideration under this measure. Many mines never reach a profitable stage. Gold-mining is notoriously a hazardous venture, in which the prizes are few. Like other industries, the goldmining industry, when profitable, should bear its proper share of taxation. I consider that a wrong method, was adopted with respect to the gold tax, even in its application to profitable mines. The proper method is to tax according to capacity to pay. A precedent had been established in South Africa, and it was followed by this Govern: ment, but now South Africa has abandoned that precedent because it has realized that the tax hit too severely those mines which were operating on low-grade ores. The greatest damage has been done by the gold tax, not so much by the amount which it has taken- out " of the industry, but more by reason of the fact that it has hit unfairly mines' ''that are carrying on at a small margin' .of profit,-' which has in consequence sometimes been' turned into a loss. Australia' has been rich in surface outcrops, and, so long as they were available, profits could be made. They were made, even when the price of gold was £4 per fine oz. But when these rich lodes were exhausted, and it became necessary to work the lower grades of ore, the industry was no longer profitable. That was the experience of Ballarat and Bendigo in Victoria, of Mount Morgan - one of Australia's richest mines - in Queensland, and of the mines in Western Australia. During a period of twenty years, the gold-mining industry progressively retrogressed, and it was revived only by the granting of a bounty and by the greatly increased value of gold. Investigations have not led .to the discovery of any appreciable number of 'new lodes, although the old prospectors did their work extraordinarily well, and had the advantage of improved means for the transport of machinery. Australia is therefore dependent upon, the working of the lower-grade ores, and these are the concerns that we should protect. Without the benefit of the advice of those who are engaged in the gold-mining industry, I am not in a position to say whether the scheme proposed by the bill is quite the best that could have been devised. The principle of making a uniform levy on the gold produced is wrong. That is proved by its having been found necessary to ask this' Parliament for about £250,000 to rectify the wrongs that followed the imposition of the gold tax. It would be very much more desirable if the Government were to adopt with respect to gold the principle that it adopts in relation to all other taxation. The matter is especially serious to the State to which I belong, because three-quarters of the gold production of Australia comes from that State, and therefore it is providing about three-quarters of the amount derived from the tax. It is significant that the amount estimated to be taken by way of the gold tax represents more than 60 per cent, of the total dividends declared by the gold-mining companies of "Western Australia during the year 1939. This indicates that the impost is unnecessarily heavy and unfair. There is the further and more serious feature that, by the imposition of the tax in its present form, the burden does not fall equably on all shoulders. A proprietary which has a comparatively rich lode is not hit nearly so badly as is a company working' a lowgrade proposition, which has to meet very heavy costs in respect of both capital and production, because, although the former produces much less gold than does the lower-grade proposition, it nevertheless makes a larger net profit. In hitting the low-grade proposition, the Government is penalizing the class of mining to which Australia must in the future pin its faith for the maintenance of the industry. It is too much to expect that there will be fresh discoveries of rich lodes. There are enormous lodes of low-grade quality which might be worked profitably and be able to bear the tax if they could be worked by cheap labour, but having to maintain Australian conditions they cannot do so and return a profit. I do not fail to recognize that substantial relief will be afforded by the proposal we are now considering, and I am very grateful for it. I suggest for the Treasurer's consideration that the bill be deferred until we meet again five weeks hence. By then, he will have been able to get expressions of opinion from the mining industry. {: #debate-70-s3 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY:
Swan .- I have been assured by the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** that the Western Australian Government is satisfied with the methods adopted in this bill to abate the gold tax to those companies which engage in goldmining, either at a very low rate of profit, or at a loss. It was grossly unfair that the tax as first imposed fell equally on poor, as well as wealthy, gold-mining companies, and I suggest that the Treasurer should consider making rebates of the tax so far collected to all of those companies which have been paying tax on unprofitable operations. I cite among those companies the Hill 60 and thu Younmi gold-mines, which have been established to work low-grade ore with capital subscribed in England. A large increase of capital is necessary to take those mines out of the developmental stage into the stage at which mining might be carried on at a profit, instead of at a loss, as at present. Probably, no industry, in proportion to the labour .directly employed, provides so much employment as does gold-mining. Low-grade mines should never have been classified on the same level for taxing purposes as the wealthy concerns which earn profits of 10 to 15 per cent. We heard of one industrial company last night which was able to distribute £400,000 in bonus shares. That is a company that has received a great deal of consideration from the Government. The companies ou whose behalf I am appealing to-day do not exploit the people through the concessions which they receive from a very sympathetic Prime Minister. Another big low-grade mine is the Big Bell. An American company has invested £1,000,000 in machinery for the development and working of ore which assays 2-J to 3 dwt. at that mine. That company has shown marvellous courage in taking the risk, not only of not making a profit out of the venture, but also of not getting back its capital outlay. The imposition of the tax on low-grade ore mines at the same rate as is imposed on profitable ventures was most unfair, and I again ask the Treasurer to make rebates of the tax to them. {: #debate-70-s4 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
UAP -- I gave consideration to that, but I am afraid I cannot accede to the request. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- If the Western Australian Government is satisfied with the provisions made in this bill, I shall not oppose it, but if the Treasurer finds that the assurances, which he has given me, that the tax will work out fairly are ill-founded, he should immediately further amend the legislation. I should be inclined to support the suggestion of the honorable member for Perth **(Mr. Nairn)** that the bill be deferred until the next parliamentary period but for the fact that, if it were, the disability under which the low-grade ore mines are now labouring would still continue. {: #debate-70-s5 .speaker-JPT} ##### Mr BLAIN:
Northern Territory -- I support the bill. I thought that some assistance would be given in clause 4 for the mining industry of the Northern Territory, when I interjected to the honorable member for Boothby **(Mr. Price)** who said that no provision bad been made for that territory. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- If the honorable gentleman refers to the Estimates, he will sec that £17,500 has been provided for the assistance of the gold-mining industry in the Northern Territory. {: .speaker-JPT} ##### Mr BLAIN: -- I gladly accept that assistance, little though it be. The amount is less than was originally intended. The States have been allocated certain moneys, South Australia, unfortunately, only £1,000. In clause 4 prospectors will be granted a rebate on the first 25 oz. of gold that they produce, but unless a new attitude is taken by the Government in regard to the Government batteries in the Northern Territory, the prospects of fossickers there reaping any benefit from that provision will be very limited. I have correspondence to prove that the charges levied at the batteries are exorbitant, but before reading that correspondence, I shall address myself particularly to this tax. It is high time that this trial-and-error method of legislation was ended. This bill is a glorious example of the Government admitting the errors that it made when it imposed the gold-tax, first, as a straight-out tax of 75 per cent, of the amount by which the price of gold exceeded £9 an oz., and, secondly, after the Senate had rejected the tax, by an excise of 50 per cent. The excise was eventually supplanted by the tax which this bill now seeks to alter. The fact that it. is necessary to amend that tax so soon after its introduction, proves that the *Government acted with tittle* thought in imposing it. The chief reason for this amending legislation is the fact that the tax, as it now stands, is too heavy a burden for the mining companies operating marginal mines to carry. I visited the vast electorate of the honorable member for Kalgoorlie **(Mr. Green)** two years ago, in an endeavour to secure officers for the re-organization of mining in the Northern Territory. Incidentally, I got the men I needed. I saw the Wiluna and Big Bell mines, and, in conversation with the managers, learnt that the richer mines were considered a menace to the mines which handled low-grade ores, because they meekly bowed to any request for increased wages without arbitration or any penalty taxes from the Governments. The low-grade ore mines had to comply. In legislation of this sort, we must discriminate between tho rich and the poor. At Tennant Creek, there are some mines which are more like jewellery shops because they can extract from 4 to 5 oz. of gold to the ton of ore crushed. Four tons of ore from one mine returned £20,000 worth of gold showing that southern people do not realize the value of the field. In juxtaposition there are " shows " which assay at only 8 or 12 dwt. That ore is scorned as dirt because it cannot successfully be worked without further governmental assistance. Similar cases occur in the Pine Creek areas. It is a shame that Australia, which is crying out for gold, should have to do without the gold that could be extracted from ore carrying from 8 to 12 dwt. to the ton. An economic survey is needed to delineate the " jewellery shops " from those ore deposits which cannot be developed without assistance. The Tennant Creek field has been developed with governmental assistance to such a stage that two batteries arc working and one i3 in course of construction. The secretary of the Mining Lessees Association, who works his own mine, is putting up a great fight for umpire samples to be assayed at the School of Mines, Adelaide, as a check on the Tennant Creek batteries, but the Director of Mines at Darwin will not grant the right. I shall read the correspondence to which I referred earlier in the hope that the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** will grant the concession that is asked for. The secretary of the Mining Lessees Association, **Mr.** Rowe, visited Canberra in December and, with my assistance, placed his case before the Government. The letter which I have received from him showed that anxiety still exists among the Tennant Creek miners that they be allowed to use umpire samples, assayed in Adelaide, to check the assays at Tennant Creek. The letter is in the following terms: - >Replying to your telegram of the 19th February. The case of my umpire sample is now as follows. We finished crushing the parcel No. 115 on Thursday, the 23rd November. The sands samples were brought in by the manager on Saturday, the 25th November, we were given our sample. The warden sent the umpire sample by air mail to Darwin next day, the 26th November. He sent the check sample to Darwin by road mail on the following Tuesday, the 28th November; so that the check sample and the umpire sample were both in Darwin, or on the way, before our sample was assayed and before a dispute had arisen, between our sample and the manager's. The fact that the umpire sample had been sent away and probably assayed before a dispute had arisen, nullifies the umpire sample as a determining factor. As a matter of fact, the umpire sample had already been assayed when you interviewed the Minister on the question of getting the umpire sample assayed by the School of Mines. On this particular parcel we had two samples done at the School of Mines. The sealed sample assayed 20 dwt. 3 gr., the tails sample assayed 19 dwt. 8 gr., the battery manager's sample gave us 17 dwt. 19 gr., a difference of 2 dwt. 8 gr. between the School of Mines and the Manager's samples. What the warden is pleased to call the umpire sample gave us 16 dwt. 8 gr., or 3 dwt. 19 gr. difference between the School of Mines assay and the so called umpire sample, and 1 dwt. 11 gr. less than the battery manager's assay. In consequence we have refused to take the umpire sample result, as we cannot, under the circumstances, recognize it as an umpire. The Treasurer has pointed out that provision is made in the Estimates' for assistance to the gold-mining industry in the Northern Territory to the amount of £17,500. But the Government is giving it with one hand and taking it away with the other. I am confident that that dump at Tennant Creek will prove to be one of the richest mines in Central Australia, but the Government not only refuses adequate assistance to prospectors in order to maintain the Government batteries, but also takes away from the men, in a ruthless manner, that which they have found through their own exertions. I have been closely interested in this matter for more than twelve months, and it is time that some check was placed upon the actions of the Director of Mines. He is a very competent officer, but he is overstepping the mark by trying to make these batteries pay, within a few months, for the initial mistake in building these batteries. That mistake was not made by him; he was appointed subsequently. But he is in error in trying to make good the mistake of the past in too short a time. The Government should ask the geological adviser in Victoria, **Mr. Baragwanath,** to go to Tennant Creek and check up on what the secretary of the Miners and Leaseholders Association has said. The secretary of that organization is an experienced miner from Queensland and cannot be hoodwinked. There are many more miners like him at Tennant Creek, who have knowledge gained from 40 years' experience of the gold-mining industry. After that letter was written, the Administrator and the Director of Mines, realizing that criticism was becoming stronger, admitted that an injustice was being done, and went to Tennant Creek to hold a conference with the miners. There has been a dispute with regard to the automatic samplers, which the miners say do not give them a fair deal. They want samples to be taken' every fifteen minutes from the face of the plates. It would be easy to do an injustice to the men merely by slightly tilting the level of the launder carrying the solution. The practice of sampling every quarter of an hour from the face of the plates is in use throughout the world. Following the conference I received the following letter, dated the 21st April, from the secretary of the association - >Enclosed are the minutes of a conference my association had with Messrs. Hughes and Abbott. By this you will see that the screen question is now settled and the automatic sand samplers are being tested out. > >The policy of paying premiums on thesands is still in the air. I sent you a copy of a letter addressed to the Minister on this matter among other matters, and we would ask you to press this matter with the Minister. In order to explain the reference to premiums, I point out that the sand dumps have been there for more than twelve months. The authorities at Darwin refused to pay the miners even an advance, and I suggest that, in view of the fact that the sand is so rich, the men could be paid at least a percentage of their gains from that dump. **Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. G. J. Bell).Order** ! The honorable member's statement is very interesting, but it does not appear *'to* be related even distantly to the bill. {: .speaker-JPT} ##### Mr BLAIN: -- The failure of the Government to provide money to enable the prospectors to feed the Government batteries is unjust. Although the Treasurer said that money was granted for the working of the batteries, my statement proves that the Government is taking away with one hand the assistance that it is giving with the other. In the closing paragraph of his letter of the 21st April, the Secretary of the Miners and Leaseholders Association said - >Hughes does not intend paying any premiums on the huge heap at the Mammoth Battery (No. 2) until the whole heap is' treated. This will take about another five months. In the meantime, he is holding thousands of pounds of gold already sold from this heap and we want this sum paid out on parcels in rotation from the first parcel treated. The answer the Administrator gave, you can see for yourself. > >The umpire samples question is not satisfactorily answered. We want an independent umpire assayer. > >The cyaniding schedule we want is the South Australian one; no need to go into details about this as you already know all abou! it. > >You might ask in the House, seeing that the money for a new battery was passed in September last, what was the cause of delaying the start in building, to the 15th April. I ask the Treasurer to take a long-range view of the situation and provide a grant of at least £1,000, as has been done in South Australia, so that prospecting mav be further encouraged in Central Australia, thus enabling Government batteries to continue large-scale operations, instead of being confined to dealing with the output of a few rich mines. {: #debate-70-s6 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP -- in *reply* - I shall not refer to the principles of the Gold Tax /Act, which were fully discussed in this House when the measure was passed. I shall direct . my attention solely to the contents of this bill, and to the criticism of it which' has come from several honorable members. The honorable member for Boothby **(Mr. Price)** suggested that South Australia had not been treated fairly in the allocation of grants to the States. He asked me to explain how the Government calculated the various amounts. In the first place, they were worked out approximately upon the basis of production last year; but upon that basis, South Australia would have been granted only about £400, so the Government decided to give the State a larger sum ; the amount of £1,000 was eventually decided upon. {: .speaker-JLZ} ##### Mr Anthony: -- From which States was the extra £600 taken? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- It was spreadbetween the remaining States. When the honorable member for the Northern Territory **(Mr. Blain)** was speaking, 1 referred by way of interjection to certain items of the Estimates which were directed to the assistance of the goldmining industry in the Northern Territory. I point out to the honorable member that provisions of the act are applicable to the Northern Territory as well as to the States. Some honorable members have referred to the amounts which will be received by low-grade propositions working on marginal rates of production and making little profit. The amount of profit that will be made by the producer will vary in accordance with the cost of production. It will diminish as the cost of production rises, until the producer will sustain a loss if the production cost rises above £10 13s. 3d. The rebate allowed to persons producing at a cost of £9 3s. 2d. an ounce, will be the full amount of the tax and will give the producer a profit of 30s. per ounce. At £10 13s. 3d. the profit will be extinguished. There is nothing else that I can usefully add to the debate. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In committee:* Clauses 1 to 7 agreed to. Cause 8 (Refunds of gold tax to producers other than bona fide prospectors). {: #debate-70-s7 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY:
Swan .- Will the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** reconsider the subject of refunds to those mines producing at a loss which have been paying taxation since the original act was brought into operation? I ask the honorable gentleman to insert a new subclause along the following lines: - >Where it is proved that the gold produced by a producer prior to the operation of this act has been produced at a loss a refund of the tax shall be made but not to any greater extent than to cover such loss. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I ask the honorable member not to press his request. I shall endeavour to do as much as I can for those mines, but I am not prepared to accept the suggested new sub-clause. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- Iam not criticizing the Treasurer personally, but {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I cannot accept the amendment. {: .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY: -- I would have preferred a thousandfold to have seen a provision for some refund to those mines which are working at a loss, instead of this bill. The States themselves can well provide money for the purpose proposed in this measure, and I do not believe that the companies working at a loss, which have been specifically taxed, should be denied the assistance I propose. Had the Treasurer looked at the matter properly, he would never have introduced legislation that would provide for a tax on producers showing a loss on their operations. It is a most extraordinary method of taxation and the Treasurer is being hardly fair. Three big mines, since the operation of the act, have been working at a loss. It is grossly unfair to tax people whose operations are conducted at a loss. The gold-mining industry had been making good profits since the price of gold rose, and it has given employment to thousands of people. I move - >That the following new sub-clause be added: - > >Where it is proved that the gold produced by a producer prior to the operation of this act has been produced at a loss, a refund of the tax shall he made, but not to any greater extent than to cover such loss. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I am not prepared to accept the amendment. {: #debate-70-s8 .speaker-KK7} ##### The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Jennings:
WATSON, NEW SOUTH WALES -- As the amendment would necessitate a further appropriation of revenue, it is not in order. Clause agreed to. Clauses 9 and 10 agreed to. Clause 11 - >A person shall not- > >Penalty: One hundred pounds or imprisonment for six months. Amendment (by **Mr. Spender)** agreed to - >That the words " hundred pounds or imprisonment for six months " be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words " thousand pounds or imprisonment for two years ". Clause, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 12 and 13 agreed to. Preamble and title agreed to. Bill reported with an amendment; report adopted. Bill read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1696 {:#debate-71} ### GOLD TAX COLLECTION BILL 1940 Bill brought up by **Mr. Spender,** and read a first time. {:#subdebate-71-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-71-0-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP -- *by leave* - I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. This measure is consequential on the bill which has just been before us. It proposes to omit from the Gold Tax Collection Act the provision relating to bona fide prospectors. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted. Bill - *by leave* - read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1696 {:#debate-72} ### INCOME TAX COLLECTION BILL 1940 {:#subdebate-72-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from page 1618 (on motion by **Mr. Spender)** - >That the bill be now read a second time. {: #subdebate-72-0-s0 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE:
Capricornia .-I listened to the second-reading speech of the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** last night, and as it is not a contentious measure, the Opposition will not oppose it. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendmentordebate; report adopted. Bill - *by leave* - read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1697 {:#debate-73} ### IMMIGRATION BILL 1940 {:#subdebate-73-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from the 22nd May, 1940 (vide page 1140) on motion by **Mr. Nock** - >That the bill be now read a second time. {: #subdebate-73-0-s0 .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE:
Capricornia .- The main purpose of this measure is to tighten up the regulations concerning the admission of aliens into Australia, and in relation to undesirable aliens and their deportation. Its provisions can better be discussed in committee. There is no doubt that the alien immigration laws need tightening up very considerably. Indeed, I am of the opinion that further legislation should be introduced in regard to aliens who make their homes in Australia. Aliens within Australia can be classified into two sections. People who come to Australia should be prepared to adopt this country and everything that goes with it. If they desire to make their home here, they should become true Australians. Many of the aliens who come here do that. I know numerous people who came from various foreign countries and are some of the finest citizens in Australia to-day. We may well be proud of them for they are hard-working, conscientious, and law-abiding folk. My experience in Queensland is that the overwhelming majority of the foreigners who come to Australia observe the laws of the country and are good citizens. Only a small percentage of them cause trouble. Many of them have played their part nobly in pioneering the State. There are others, however, who do not come within this category, and consequently it is necessary that Australia should take action to prevent them from doing anything which may be detrimental to our social and economic order, and thereby preserve the welfare of our people. On the question of immigration generally I do not intend to makeanyamplified statement, except to say that the policy of the Labour party has always been that it is futile continually to encourage more migrants to come to Australia while large numbers of unemployed exist. There are problems however associated with our foreign migrants which we must face up to. The first problem we have confronting us is the continuous undermining of our economic standards by many of the foreigners who come here. Trades hall officials point out that they have had endless trouble in trying to keep Australian awards and standards observed by certain foreigners. Hundreds of these people cannot speak a word of English. They do not know the conditions prevailing here, and as a result they are exploited, and in most cases are willing to be exploited in order to get work. Some time ago **Mr. Prior,** . Chief Industrial Magistrate, in fining a foreigner £30 for not having paid award rates, said - >These cases provide another instance of the startling breaches by European foreigners against conditions which are enjoyed by our awards. This time it is the boot trade industry. Recently I made reference to foreign fruit and vegetable shopkeepers. In these cases and others, there are particulars given of appalling sweating conditions againstwhich employers of our own nationality cannot possibly compete while observing award conditions, which the majority of them, I believe, do. {: .speaker-KYH} ##### Mr Price: -- Will this bill rectify that position ? {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- It does not deal with award rates; its purpose is to tighten up the immigration laws generally. It is true that there is a tendency on the part of foreigners to form colonies. Unfortunately, as the Attorney-General **(Mr. Hughes)** pointed out some time ago, some of the aliens who come to this country retain the nationality of their birth and may be said to have a dual nationality. **Mr. Baker,** the Leader of the Opposition in Tasmania, commenting on this subject after his return from the United States of America, referred to the number of people who " remained foreign ". He said - >Instead of advancing the interests of the country to which they have gone, they create a section of their own nationality so that when trouble arises it means that, instead of being good Americans, they really favour and uphold the nation to which they originally belonged. > >I have heard on more than one occasion the same argument put forward. When I was in America some years ago I was astonished to find there was not an alphabetical telephone book, whole sections being devoted to different nationalities. I was told that those people would not become assimilated with the rest of the community. We must discourage that kind of thing in Australia. I think. we are loss troubled than the United States of America by segregations of foreigners in colonies. {: .speaker-JSC} ##### Mr Brennan: -- We could perhaps examine our own conscience to see how far we are the cause of the segregation of foreigners. {: .speaker-F4U} ##### Mr FORDE: -- I agree with the honorable member. Probably, instead of extending the right hand of friendship to these people, we have given them the cold shoulder. Some years ago there was a tendency in Queensland for foreigners to acquire land and work in groups. In such districts, three generations of people with foreign names may be met. The Australian Natives Association at its 1939 conference put forward certain suggestions concerning alien migration, and stated that - >This conference expresses doubt as to the wisdom or desirability of the existing system of alien migration, and submits the following plan as the basis for a scheme of controlled alien migration. Amongst its recommendations were - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. No concentration of aliens as communities or colonies be allowed anywhere in the Commonwealth. 1. No separate schools for alien children staffed by alien teachers and teaching alien languages be allowed. In the Australian Natives Association's *Advocate* of May, 1938, the following statement appears: - >In the Queensland sugar cane fields and on the Shepparton and Murrumbidgee irrigation areas there have grown real Italian communities, who refuse to become Australians and worse, are teaching their children to be Italians, not Australians. > >The New South Wales educational authorities recently demanded that these children be taught in English. They refused and suggested that Australians should learn Italian. That may have occurred in the irrigation areas of New South Wales, but 1 have no personal knowledge of anything of the kind in Queensland. It is true, however, that in certain parts of Queensland a system of blackmail has been operating among foreigners. The Minister for the Interior **(Senator Foll)** referred to this when he introduced this bill in another place, and said that under the existing law certain difficulties were encountered in deporting the guilty persons. The practice of those who engage in these activities is, I am informed, to demand the deposit of sums of money in certain places. If the money is not forthcoming, the person who fails to provide it has been shot. That kind of conduct must be discontinued. Those who indulge in it are not citizens of the kind we desire. I sympathize with the wish of the Government to deport them. Fortunately, very few instances of that kind have occurred, and such isolated cases will, no doubt, be met by the thus strengthening of our immigration law and the granting of the additional power which the Government is now seeking. I shall support the measure. {: #subdebate-73-0-s1 .speaker-KK7} ##### Mr JENNINGS:
Watson .- I desire to refer to one or two matters related to this bill. Relatively few aliens may be entering Australia at present, but it is quite likely that after the war a larger number will seek admission to this country. I would say, in connexion with possible difficulties that may thereby arise, in the light of experience, that prevention is better than cure. We should have officials stationed in certain embarkation centres in Great Britain and some other countries to examine the credentials and records of all migrants who wish to come to Australia. In other words, the migrants should be handpicked. It must be quite clear to everybody that the restrictive legislation in relation to immigration that is normally in operation in Australia is far less drastic than that enforced in other countries. Aliens, who are permitted to enter our country, should be required to learn to read and write the English language. A reasonably short time after their arrival, they should be required to submit themselves to a simple test in reading and writing English. Some time ago, I suggested that the Immigration Branch of the Department of the Interior should, for this purpose and for instruction to aliens, consider adopting the system of Basic. English, under which 7,500 common English words have been reduced to 850 basic words. Perhaps the Assistant Minister **(Mr. Nock)** could inform me whether any investigations have been made as to the practicability of applying my suggestion on a large scale. I also ask the honorable gentleman to indicate the exact relations between Commonwealth and State authorities in regard to aliens. In view of the complaints that have been made regarding a lack of co-operation, and some differences of policy, I ask whether a greater degree of co-operation may not be practised between the Commonwealth and the various States in relation to immigration generally. {: #subdebate-73-0-s2 .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS:
Herbert .- I support this bill. I have a considerable knowledge of the habits and outlook of aliens, for probably more aliens reside in my electorate than in any other electorate in Australia. I say without hesitation that the majority of these people in my electorate are as law-abiding as the Australian people. Only a small minority are bad and of that minority not all are unnaturalized. We have some undesirable people among the Australian-born population in the areas in which the aliens live, and they are not all engaged in cutting sugar cane. A number of the aliens in my electorate have been hindered, in some degree, from becoming naturalized, because of a certain reluctance on the part of the immigration authorities to accept applications for naturalization. I am not worried about this at the moment, for I appreciate that there might be some danger in granting naturalization under existing conditions; but I have directed the attention of successive Ministers for the Interior to difficulties that have arisen at Halifax, Ingham and Innisfail. A number of applications for naturalization have been rejected on the ground that the applicant is insufficiently instructed in the English language; but it is a fact that some of these persons who have made representations to me on the subject have been able to put their case in English more clearly than the naturalized persons who have introduced them to me. We do not help to make these people better citizens by refusing them naturalization if they are reasonably well qualified. In fact, wo simply provoke in them a spirit of hostility which tends to keep them segregated from the British people in their districts. In some instances, parents who have been denied naturalization on the ground of their inadequate knowledge of English have ordered their children not to speak English at home. The result is that the children grow up in a domestic atmo sphere in which Italian is the common language. I do not know of the existence of any Italian schools in my electorate, but there are some tutors of Italian, to whom the children are sent. The children of some English parents are also sent to those persons to learn Italian, which is not a bad thing. I wish to deal briefly with the subject of deportation. I can safely say that the police in Queensland do their best to assist the officers of the Commonwealth Investigation Branch to make all necessary inquiries in relation to the activities of aliens in that State. The great difficulty is to secure proof of allegations that are made from time to time against some of these people. Reference has been made to the Camorra, or "Black Hand" Society, which is alleged to engage in blackmail. It is very difficult to ascertain who is really responsible for these actions. I have been talking at times to some of these people, and I have had said to me, with a nod in a certain direction : " Communists - him bad fellow ". But it is always difficult to obtain proof. [ know of one business man in the Ingham district who has a good knowledge of English, Italian, and two or three other languages. Although he is such an accomplished linguist, the Italian people do not trust him. The method adopted by those who engage in blackmail is to demand a certain sum of money from a person and direct that it shall be left at a certain place by a certain date. It may be wrapped in a paper parcel and left without a word in writing. n more than one case the person who has been directed to leave money in these circumstances and has failed to do so, has disappeared, or has been shot. No one will say anything about such incidents. I know of a certain young man who is to be deported. I shall not mention his name, but His Honour **Mr. Justice** Douglas, who tried the case, sentenced the man to six months' imprisonment, but said that he did not believe that he was a member of the " Black Hand " society though he appeared to be a victim of that organization. I do not believe that the young man is a member of the society. I concur in His Honour's opinion. But it is highly necessary that effective steps shall be taken to put a stop to the operations of the Camorra. In this particular case, the Government has decided to act upon the recommendation of the Queensland Commissioner of Police, **Mr. Carroll,** and deport the man. One thing I can say quite definitely is that these people greatly fear deportation. I was addressing a meeting at Ingham one night when I said to a man who was interrupting the proceedings : " If I had my way, 1 would give you a long water trip ". He called out, " No, no, no ". These people fear deportation. When they are deported to their own country, we are given to understand that they do not live very long afterwards. {: .speaker-JPT} ##### Mr Blain: -- Are they " fifth column " agents ? {: .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS: -- I do not think so. Count Mazano, who was the Italian Consul, and a very fine man, always impressed upon these people that the Italian authorities desired them to obey the laws of the country. They were told that if they intended to make their home in Australia they must obey its laws. The fear of deportation is always pres011. with them. I am quite agreeable to the passage of this bill in order to give the Government the additional power that it needs, so that it may have complete control of the situation. *Sitting suspended from 1 to 145 p.m.* {: #subdebate-73-0-s3 .speaker-JOM} ##### Mr BEASLEY:
Leader of the Australian Labour party - nonCommunist · West Sydney -- This measure is more important now than it would be in peace-time. I should like the Assistant Minister **(Mr. Nock)** to tell us who is to police the regulation controlling aliens, what organization the Commonwealth possesses to carry out the work, what steps have been taken to deal with any situation that may arise, and whether it is true, as stated in last week's issue of *Smith's W Weekly,* that there are 3,000 unregistered aliens in Australia? The public is very interested in this matter, and only this morning 1 received the following telegram from the chairman of tlie Blacktown Municipal Council : - >Council shocked to find prospect reservoir and Sydney water supply in area thickly populated by aliens entirely unprotected against sabotage immediate action imperative. As the Prospect Reservoir is situated in that municipality, the authorities are naturally concerned for its safety. {: #subdebate-73-0-s4 .speaker-K4X} ##### Mr NOCK:
Assistant Minister · Riverina · CP -- *in reply* - The Deputy Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Forde)** referred to the general desire that alien immigrants should abide by the laws of . this country. That desire I, of course, share. When aliens are allowed to come here, they should adopt Australia as their country, as well as their home. Most of them are, in fact, law-abiding citizens. The honorable member for Herbert **(Mr. Martens)** told us that, before Italian migrants left Italy, they were officially instructed to obey the laws of the country to which they were going. The original Immigration Act did not give the Minister sufficient power to enforce obedience to the law. The honorable member for Watson **(Mr. Jennings)** said that, after the war, alien immigrants admitted to Australia should be hand-picked. Steps have already been taken to set up an office in London, presided over by an officer from the Department of the Interior, whose duty it will be to receive applications from Europeans desiring to enter Australia. Those who are obviously acceptable will be approved, those obviously unacceptable will be rejected, while doubtful applications will be further investigated. It would not be practicable, however, to establish an office of that kind in every foreign country from which a few people might desire to come to Australia. At the present time, no alien can enter Australia without a valid passport, *vised* by the British Consul for the country from which he comes. The department insists that the immigrant must be in good health, and must have a certain amount of capital. It has also been the practice to ask the person who sponsors the immigrant to guarantee that he will obtain employment, and will not become a charge on the community. The honorable member for Herbert complained that naturalization had been refused in some cases although the immigrant had resided for five years or more in Australia, the reason given being that he was unable to speak English. I am informed that the language test applied by the Department of the Interior is nol nearly as stiff as that applied by the British authorities. It is a reasonable test. If the applicant can pass it, and he is a person of good character, he is granted naturalization. A further condition is that the children of aliens must attend schools where English is taught, but no restriction is placed upon teaching them at home the native language of their parents. At present there is no organization for policing the movements and behaviour of aliens. Registration is compulsory, and the Government is now considering what further action is necessary. I have no information as to the truth or otherwise of the statement published in *Smith's Weekly* that there are 3,000 unregistered aliens in Australia. The honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley)** referred to measures for the protection of the Prospect Reservoir, and other national assets. That is a State responsibility, and the States have their own police forces. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted. Bill - *by leave* - read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1701 {:#debate-74} ### TRADING WITH THE ENEMY BILL 1940 {:#subdebate-74-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from the 30th May, 1940 (vide page 1572), on motion by **Mr. Hughes** - >That the bill be now read a second time. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debute; report adopted. Bill - *by leave* - read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1701 {:#debate-75} ### PATENTS, TRADE MARKS, DESIGNS AND COPYRIGHT (WAR POWERS) BILL 1940 {:#subdebate-75-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from the 30th May. 1940 (vide page 1572), on motion by **Mr. Hughes** - >That the bill be now read a second time. Question resolved in the affirmative- Bill read a second time, and reported from committee without amendment or debate; report adopted. Bill - *by leave* - read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1701 {:#debate-76} ### RABBIT SKINS EXPORT CHARGES BILL 1940 *In Committee of Ways and Means:* Motion (by **Mr. Archie** Cameron) agreed to - >That a charge be imposed on all rabbit skins exported from the Commonwealth after a date to be fixed by Proclamation and on or before a date to be fixed by Proclamation as the date upon which the act passed to give effect tothis resolution shall cease to to in force. > >That the rate of charge be as prescribed by regulations made under the act passed to give effect to this resolution, after report to the Minister by the Australian Rabbit Skins Board constituted under the Rabbit Skins Export Charges Appropriation Act 1940, but that the rate of charge do not in any case exceed ninepence for each pound of rabbit skins exported. > >That the Governor-General may, from time to time, by order published in the Gazette, after report to the Minister by the Australian Rabbit Skins Board, exempt any rabbit skins from the charge imposed by or under the act passed to give effect to this resolution. > >That any such exemption may be unconditional or subject to such conditions, and shall apply in respect of such period (if any ) , as are specified in theorderof exemption. > >That where the Governor-General line, by order published in the *Gazette,* cancelled any such exemption, or where the period in respect of which any such exemption applies has expired, the charge imposed by the act passed to give effect to this resolution shall, from the date fixed by the order, or from the expiration of the period of exemption, as the case may be, become payable in respect of the rabbit skins to which the exemption related. Resolution reported. Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted. *Ordered -* >That **Mr. Archie** Cameron and **Mr. Fadden** do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution. Bill brought up by **Mr. Archie** Cameron, and read a first time. {:#subdebate-76-0} #### Second Reading **Mr. ARCHIE** CAMERON (Barker- Minister for Commerce) [2.5]. - I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. This bill is introduced for the purpose of imposing a charge on the export of rabbit skins which will provide a sum of money sufficient to cover amounts that it will be necessary to appropriate from the Consolidated Revenue Fund from time to time, in connexion with the administration of the marketing scheme for which provision is being made by regulations under the National Security Act. Honorable members are> no doubt, aware of the great rise of rabbit-skin prices since the commencement of the war. The effect which these increased prices would have on the cost at which the Commonwealth Government could be supplied with military hats, and the public with hats for ordinary wear, has made such a scheme necessary. When the Minister for Supply and Development **(Sir Frederick Stewart)** consulted the felt hat manufacturing industry in relation to contracts for military hats, the quotations that he received showed that, if hat manufacturers were obliged to buy on the open market, the cost to the Government would be unreasonably high. After an investigation by his department, the Minister asked that some form of marketing control should be established which would enable hat manufacturers to obtain, their requirements of rabbit skins at prices that would allow them to quote for military hats at a reasonable figure. The Commonwealth Prices Commissioner has also taken cognizance of the price rise of rabbit skins, and has determined, for grades of rabbit skins suitable for hat manufacture., a set of domestic prices above which such skins may not be sold. The prices fixed by him are naturally below ruling market rates. Honorable members will appreciate that, unless some controlling machinery were installed, the effect of the Prices Commissioner's determination would be that hat manufacturers would not be able to obtain skins at those prices in competition with persons buying for export. The scheme proposed has been prepared with the object of interfering with ordinary trade practice as little as possible. It is proposed that the manufacturers shall purchase their requirements at open auction. Their purchases for normal domestic requirements, plus the additional quantities needed to complete military orders, will be appraised in accord- ance with the table of limits prepared by the Australian Rabbit Skins Board, and the appraisement value will represent the final net cost to them of those purchases. The quantities for which manufacturers will pay appraised prices will be closely regulated. Skins are coming onto the market very freely this winter and, as the quantity available for export will directly affect the charge, it is anticipated that the levy necessary will be considerably below the maximum rate of 9d. per lb. being provided, unless prices soar to extraordinary heights. It is proposed that the charge will not operate for another two weeks, in order to give to exporters an opportunity to clear stocks of skins already purchased for export. The export charge will be reflected in somewhat lower prices at the auctions, but rabbit-skin price-levels are such today that, returns to trappers will show a very high percentage increase over last year's returns. Hat manufacturers ordinarily purchase their requirements of skins at the winter sales and, as they are ready to operate now, this is in the nature of an urgent measure. I commend it to honorable members. {: #subdebate-76-0-s0 .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
CP -- A good proportion; but some are also to be retained for the manufacture of hats for the local trade. **Mr.** pollard (Ballarat) [3j8].This bill *h* a natural corollary of the general marketing schemes adopted by this Government since the outbreak of war. It appears to me that many features of it are of a character of which the Opposition can naturally approve. The Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** has said that the main purpose is to assure that the people of the Commonwealth will not have to pay exorbitant charges in respect of rabbit skins required for felt hats or for the manufacture of hats for military- purposes. That is quite a good idea, with which, I believe, every honorable member will be in agreement. But it is questionable whether those who should be called upon to make this sacrifice should be the unfortunate rabbit-trappers. {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- Exactly. {: #subdebate-76-0-s1 .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- That, in effect, will be the result. In order that hat wearers and the members of the military forces of the Commonwealth may be supplied with hats at a reasonable cost, the proposal is to call upon the rabbit-trappers of Australia to make what, to my mind, is a considerable sacrifice. {: .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr Prowse: -- The result will be to glut the local market. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- That may be the result. The Minister has told us that it is anticipated that the prices paid foi rabbit skins this year will be substantially in advance of those obtained last year. They would need to be. Consulting the export figures prepared by the Commonwealth Statistician, I find that in 1935-36 Australia exported 10,292,763 lb. of rabbit skins, the net return for which -was £1,744,834. In 1936-37 the export figures were 7,522,000 lb., the net return for which was £1,649,412. In 1937-38, the exports amounted, to 5,021,002 lb., the net return for which was £1,052,709. But in 1938-39, although we exported 4,432,863 lb., the net return was only £425,000. I hope that the Minister and his appraisers - who will be appointed, I take it, under National Security Regulations to be gazetted - will not use the powers conferred by this bill to see that reasonably-priced hats are obtained for the Australian public at the expense of the Australian rabbittrapper and the man who purchases theskins. Anybody with a knowledge of rabbit trapping knows that it is one of the most arduous and onerous occupations undertaken in the Commonwealth. A man goes out at dusk with a hurricane lantern, carrying his traps over his shoulder. He sets the traps at suitable places, and leaves them until the early hours of the morning, when he returns with his hurricane lantern to collect the results of his labours. He is entirely at the mercy of the buyers of the skins. 1 know from personal experience, and from the experience of others with whom I am in contact, that up to the present the trappers have been exploited shame' fully by skin buyers, merchants, and people who rig and operate the rabbit- skin market. I believe that the Minister will see that the powers conferred by this bill are used in the right way, and that those who do the most arduous work in connexion with Australia's rabbit-skin yield will suffer the least. An Honorable Member. - What is the value of skins to-day? {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- Skins are worth to-day approximately from 3s. to 4s. per lb. The men engaged in this occupation are the sons of farmers, the farmers themselves during leisure hours, shearers, labourers, and other nomadic workers. This Parliament should make doubly sure that they are protected under this bill. I am sorry that, in connexion with the board to be appointed to control the scheme, the Minister is putting into practice a policy which he condemned in season, and out of season prior to joining the Government. The board to control the scheme is to be a non-grower control board. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON: -- Who grows the rabbits? {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- Who catches them? Who is responsible for the arduous labour? As a matter of fact, the man who grows and feeds the rabbits is under a great obligation to, and welcomes with open arms., the trapper who does the hard work and relieves him of the presence of the pest on his property. The landholders would rather invite trappers to their properties to reduce the rabbits than impose a charge on them for being there. My main point is that the Minister for Commerce, in season and out of season, ever since the outbreak of war, has declared, on behalf of his party, the policy that on all boards established to control the marketing of Australian commodities there should be a preponderance of representatives of producers. The four members of the board to be set up under this bill will be: A representative, of the original suppliers of rabbit skins, a representative of the rabbit-skin brokers, a representative of exporters of rabbit skins, and a representative of persons engaged in the manufacture of fur felt hats. The composition of the board will enable the representative of the suppliers of rabbit skins, the primary producer, not only to be outvoted, but also to be absolutely ignored at meetings of the board. The occupation of rabbittrapping is carried on by men who have been in all walks of life. It is an intermittent occupation, and the difficulties that are associated with it are increased by the fact that it baa no trade union. I understand that the Minister proposes to appoint a representative of the Australian Workers Union to represent the trappers. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- That is so. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- The Minister should either reduce the representation of the brokers, exporters and manufacturers on this bill, or increase that of the trappers, so that both sections will have equal representation. The Minister should elaborate what is proposed to be done with the equalization fund. I have made a rough calculation that if the price of rabbit skins is ls. 3d. per lb. at auction, the price to be determined by the board will be 3s. 6d. The other 9d. will go into a fund which will be used to maintain the price of rabbit skins to the user at 3s. 6d. per lb. and to the supplier also at 3s. 6d. {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- The object is to get a certain loaded price for the manufacturers, and, incidentally, the price of the commodity to the consumer will be stabilized. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- I notice from the. national security regulations dealing -with this industry that there will be in each State committees of three persons. Will the Minister give me some idea as to who will be on those committees! I realize that this bill is necessary, but I hope that the Minister will give effect to his own affirmed policy that such boards as this should be controlled by the primary producers themselves. {: #subdebate-76-0-s2 .speaker-KNX} ##### Mr HARRISON:
Wentworth -- This is another of those export industries which must be controlled when the country i3 at war. No exporting industry lends itself to greater abuse than the rabbit-skin industry, because the multiplicity of grades of rabbit skins makes it possible for unscrupulous individuals illegally to get money out of this country. This is the way they work: The skins are sold at open auction. Certain purchasers buy first-grade skins and, by con nivance with the sellers, have their purchases registered as third-grade. They then export those skins to the United States of America for re-sale. That portion of the money represented in the third class, or lower grade, value is returned to Australia, and the balance is kept in the United States of America. The money of which Australia is so depleted could easily run into £20,000 or £30,000 in a single shipment of rabbit skins. I have already directed the attention of the Treasury to this manipulation which takes place, not only in the rabbit-skin industry, but also in all other export industries. Foreign exchange must be preserved, and, as a step towards that preservation, there must be the most thorough control over exports. I have no doubt that the board, which will be established under this legislation, will itself go into this question, but I suggest that a register of the different quality skins purchased should be kept,, and that all applications for export should be checked against that list. Vigilance could then be exercised to ensure that, when permission was granted for the export of low-grade rabbit skins, the shipment would not consist of high-grade rabbit skins. Until such time as the proposed board is functioning, the Minister for Commerce should, through his own department, immediately institute a scheme to check the remarkable fluctuations of value that will take place between now and when the bill becomes law; otherwise there will be tremendous speculation. {: #subdebate-76-0-s3 .speaker-KQB} ##### Mr SCULLY:
Gwydir .- This bill is an infliction upon the rabbittrappers, because, whereas the purchasers of rabbit skins and the local manufacturers are not to be restricted in any way, the trappers are to be mulcted of 9d. per lb., and perhaps more. That, definitely, will stifle the export trade to which the trappers look for sustenance in the peak periods of the industry. In the summer months rabbits are mostly killed for their carcasses, because the pelts are not then of much value; and the trappers find it hard to make enough to make ends meetThroughout the year they live under conditions of untold hardship, working at night, whatever the weather conditions be, and doing a yeoman service for primary industries in reducing the depre- dations caused to farms and pastures by the hordes of rabbits that infest this country. The rabbit-trapper lives a hard life. He is out in all weathers, and at all seasons. His income during the summer months is small; only in the winter months, when the pelts are of good quality, does he get anything like a reasonable return for his labour. Many of the men engaged in rabbit-trapping are rearing families under great difficulties, and it is strange that the very men on whom the whole industry depends should be singled out for harsh treatment. The Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** admits that this legislation will cause hardship to the trappers. Why is it that this section of the community is treated in this way? Is it because the rabbit-trappers are scattered throughout the country, and unable to organize themselves as are the big business interests, which are treated much more generously? I regard the rabbit-trapper as a very valuable asset to the rural life of this country, and therefore I cannot find anything in the bill to commend it, particularly as it will not accomplish what the Minister desires. The hat manufacturers will not reduce the price of hats because they get rabbit skins morecheaply. I protest against the harsh treatment of these deserving citizens, and shall vote against the bill. {: #subdebate-76-0-s4 .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr PROWSE:
Forrest .- This is a bill which should be opposed, and 1 shall vote against it. For a considerable time, officers of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, and other scientists throughout the world, have been trying to discover some virus or other means of destroying rabbits which have cost this country, as well as others, many millions of pounds by their depredations. I should imagine that shipping difficulties are sufficiently great to make this bill unnecessary as a means of supplementing the local market. The honorable member for Gwydir **(Mr. Scully)** was right in pointing out that this bill imposes hardship upon the poorest persons engaged in the trade. Should it become law it will cause a glut in the local market which, while benefiting the manufacturer of hats, will strike a blow at the man who supplies him with the raw material for his product. The manufacturer is protected by the fiscal policy of this country, but the rabbittrapper is entirely unprotected, notwithstanding that he is rendering wonderful service to the country for little return. Rabbits have proved a veritable pest in this country, and those who make a living in keeping their numbers down are rendering a valuable service to the community. They are engaged in a seasonal trade, because the winter skins are the only really profitable ones. I urge the Government not to proceed with the bill. There is no need for it. The Australian manufacturers of hats should not be afraid of competition, because they have the advantage of supplies of skins close at hand. Surely their competitors 13,000 miles away are at a disadvantage. It is absurd and unjust to penalize the trapper in the way proposed in this bill and I am astonished that the bill is being sponsored by the Leader of the Country party **(Mr. Archie Cameron).** Rabbits have caused so much damage that we should encourage those who destroy them. [ hope that the men engaged in trapping and destroying rabbits will not be driven from their occupation, and therefore I hope that the House will reject the bill. {: #subdebate-76-0-s5 .speaker-KYH} ##### Mr PRICE:
Boothby .- Unlike the honorable member for Forrest **(Mr. Prowse)** I shall support the bill, which I believe is along the right lines. £ should like to know from the Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** whether this measure covers frozen rabbits as well as rabbit skins? {: .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr Archie Cameron: -- It does not. {: .speaker-KYH} ##### Mr PRICE: -- The Minister is aware of the importance of the rabbit-skin industry. The rabbit-trapper is the means of bringing considerable revenue to this country. Australia can make hats equal to the best hats in the world, and I desire to see the local hat-making industry prosper. That can be done by encouraging rabbit-trappers to obtain the skins of rabbits. Rabbits have cost this country hundreds of thousands of pounds. On one occasion, I stayed overnight at a station in the interior of South Australia, and in the morning around one dam. which had been enclosed with wire netting, it was estimated that there were 500,000 dead rabbits. I hope that the House will agree to the bill. {: #subdebate-76-0-s6 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY:
Swan .-] shall oppose the bill. I do not know why it has been introduced, unless it be in the interests of a few people in the cities. Certainly, none of the men who do the real work associated with the industry will benefit from this measure. They will suffer from an excise of 9d. per lb. on rabbit skins. Australia has no greater curse than the rabbits, which have cost this country many hundreds of thousands of pounds in rabbit-proof netting. Various local authorities throughout the Commonwealth impose taxes to pay for their destruction, and appoint inspectors to see that the rodents are destroyed. The trapping of rabbits enables considerable numbers of people, if not to make a good living, at least to eke out an existence. Many sons of farmers add to their meagre incomes by selling the skins of rabbits which they either shoot or trap. Reference has 'been made to the experiments conducted by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in the hope of finding a virus which will destroy the pest. This bill is not to assist the trappers, it is not to assist those suffering from the depredations of the rabbit curse, but it is in the interests of a few manufacturers who desire to obtain skins at their own prices. It is proposed to appoint a board, but I think that the Minister will have great difficulty in getting a representative of the rabbit-trappers to accept appointment to it. The proposed excise charge will reduce the value of the rabbit skins that are exported. I hope that sufficient honorable members will realize the injustice, which this bill contemplates, of reducing the already meagre incomes of the rabbit-trappers, and will combine to defeat it. These men live a hard life, and we should not do anything to make their lot harder. If their chances of earning a livelihood are reduced, as they will be by this measure, we may find that many men who now render a service to the country, while at the same time earning small incomes, will abandon their calling, thereby allowing the rabbits to make even greater depredations. {: #subdebate-76-0-s7 .speaker-KQ8} ##### Mr SCHOLFIELD:
Wannon -- I ask that further information be made available in relation to this bill. I am not clear whether the proposed export duty of 9d. per lb. on rabbit skins is to be used to pay a bounty to the manufacturers of felt hats and similar goods, or whether it is to go to some other interests. As I understand the position, the money is to go to the manufacturers in order to permit the Prices Commissioner to take certain action to limit the retail price of felt hats and other felt goods. An export duty on' rabbit skins will undoubtedly hinder the activities of the rabbit-trappers. Rabbits are a great pest in many country districts and the Government will do a disservice to rural industries if it takes any action which will discourage trappers from continuing their very useful occupation. I am informed that the value of the rabbit skins used in the making of fur felt hats is trifling in relation to the price of the finished article. If the only object the Government has in mind is to reduce the cost of the raw material of the hat manufacturers, it is scarcely worth consideration. This action may result in a curtailment of rabbit-trapping operations, in which event the disadvantage of this legislation will be far greater than any possible advantages that may flow from it. I also ask whether the members of this proposed board are to receive salaries or allowances? {: #subdebate-76-0-s8 .speaker-KZF} ##### Mr LANE:
Barton -- I shall oppose the bill because it appears to me a taxing measure, the effect of which will fall most heavily upon the poorer section of the people. The Government seems to have a fetish for appointing boards. I understand that 25 Commonwealth boards of one kind and another are now operating. If to these be. added the number of boards appointed by State authorities, the aggregate would be greater than the total number of the members of this Parliament. It seems to me that there is a danger of these boards breeding, faster than the rabbits do. If the purpose of the Government is to add to the scope of the operations of the Prices Commissioner, I am against it. I hope that the bill will be given a rapid exit into oblivion. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In committee:* The bill. {: #subdebate-76-0-s9 .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
Minister for Commerce · Barker · CP -- If this bill is not passed, and the price of fur felt hats and other fur felt goods increases within the next few weeks, honorable members will have only themselves to blame. My information is that rabbit skins are fetching 70 per cent. more in the market now than they did last year. This greatly-increased price is likely to result in a substantial increase of the price of certain goods required tor both defence and civilian purposes unless the action which the Government is now proposing to take is endorsed. The honorable member for Ballarat **(Mr. Pollard)** referred to the representation of certain interests on the proposed board. The honorable gentleman is, as a rule, reasonable in his outlook, and I think he will appreciate that certain difficulties are likely to be encountered in appointing a board of this kind. It is proposed that the chairman of the board shall be an officer of the Department of Commerce, who will watch the interests of the Government. The deputy chairman will also be chosen by the Government. I hope that he will be a person entirely unconnected with the trade. One representative will be chosen to represent the rabbit-trappers. So far as I am aware - and I have a fairly wide knowledge of country districts - the only organization with which rabbit-trappers are connected is the Australian "Workers Union, and my present intention is to appoint a member of that organization to the board. As an honorable member has stated, the trappers have no organization of their own. It seems to me that if a member of the Australian Workers Union is appointed to this board he may be relied upon to watch the interests of the general public to some extent. One representative will be appointed to give attention *to the* interests of the rabbit-skin brokers. The income of these brokers is dependent upon the prices obtained for rabbit skins, which are usually sold' at auction on a commission basis. It is, therefore, in the best interest of the brokers to get the best price possible for the skins sent to them. It is also pro vided that the exporters of rabbit skins, and the interests engaged in the manufacture of fur-felt hats shall be represented. If the honorable member for Ballarat is able to suggest any more effective way to ensure the representation on this board of all the interests concerned, I shall be pleased to give his submissions due consideration. Bill agreed to and reported without amendment; report adopted. Bill read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1707 {:#debate-77} ### RABBIT SKINS EXPORT CHARGES APPROPRIATION BILL 1940 Message recommending appropriation reported. *In committee* (Consideration of Governor-General's message) : Motion (by **Mr. Archie** Cameron) agreed to - >That it is expedient that an appropriation of revenue he made for the purposes of a bill for an act relating to charges on the export of rabbit skins. Resolution reported. Standing Orders suspended; resolution adopted. *Ordered -* >That **Mr. Cameron** and **Mr Spender** do prepare and bring in a bill to carry out the foregoing resolution. Bill brought up by **Mr. Archie** Cameron, and read a first time. {:#subdebate-77-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-77-0-s0 .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
Minister for Commerce · Barker · CP -- I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. This bill is being introduced for the purpose of appropriating from the Consolidated RevenueFund such amounts as are from time to time received by the Commonwealth in respect of a charge to be imposed on the export of rabbit skins. The bill is complementary to the Rabbit Skins Export Charges Bill, and makes provision for the appointment of an Australian Rabbit Skins Board, and for the payment to that board of amounts so appropriated for the purpose of administering the marketing scheme whichI have already outlined to honorable members in my second-reading speech on the Rabbit Skins Export Charges Bill. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. *In committee:* The bill. {: #subdebate-77-0-s1 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY:
Swan -- I regard the excise rate of 9d. per lb. as excessive. Why would not 6d. be enough ? If the charge were smaller, it would allow the price to rise sufficiently to encourage people to go out trapping, and thus help to get rid of rabbits. {: #subdebate-77-0-s2 .speaker-JTY} ##### Mr ARCHIE CAMERON:
BarkerMinister for Commerce · CP -- This matter has been very carefully thought out. At the present time, prices for rabbit skins vary between 27d. and 50d. per lb. Therefore, the proposed excise charge is not excessive. These skins are in demand for military purposes overseas, and the price is stable. If it declines, we shall reduce the excise. Bill agreed to and reported without amendment; report adopted. Bill read a third time. {: .page-start } page 1708 {:#debate-78} ### SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1940-41 {:#subdebate-78-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from the 30th May, 1940 (vide page 1611), on motion by **Mr. Spender,** - >That the bill be now read a second time. {: #subdebate-78-0-s0 .speaker-KYI} ##### Mr PROWSE:
Forrest .- On the 27th and the 28th March, the Australian Wool Producers Federation met in conference in Melbourne, and was attended by delegates from all woolgrowing States. At that conference, certain resolutions were carried, and I ask leave to have them incorporated in *Hansard.[Leave granted.]* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. That the smaller wool-growers' representative, **Mr. B.** N. Cole, be asked to attend for the purpose of supplying conference with further information relating to sale averages in each State and oil other matters. 1. This meeting is definitely of the opinion that the price 10.75d. (sterling) at which the 1930-40 Australian wool has been sold to the United Kingdom, is inadequate to meet the needs of the industry at the present time, and urges the necessity for a review of the prices for all future clips to ensure a reasonable margin of profit of the producers after taking into account the rapidly increasing costs of production due to war conditions. It is considered essential that there should be included a clause in the agreement for sale similar to that in the Lead Contract making automatic adjustments, and that such clause be included after the annual discussion in May between the two Governments. 2. This meeting considers it imperative and requests that the average price per pound should be published immediately following the completion of each wool appraisement, and that the average appraised price for each State be also published and this action be made retrospective. 3. This meeting considers that serious anomalies have occurred in connexion with the appraisement of wool, particularly in regard to the early appraisements where serious under-valuations were made, and recommends that a re-examination of such appraisements he made with a view to rectifying any injustice which it may be found to have been done. 4. This meeting objects to the constitution of the bodies set up to handle their wool under the National Security legislation in so far as it does not provide for majority grower representation on the Central Wool Committee and all State wool committees in accordance with the policy unanimously adopted at the British Empire Producers' conference and by the Australian Wool Producers' Federation, and requests the Federal Government to make immediate provision in accordance with this policy. 5. That the Commonwealth Government be asked to arrange for the Tariff Board to inquire as to whether the costs of the various services involved in appraising, handling and shipping of the Australian wool clip are under all the circumstances fair and reasonable, having regard to the fact that the costs of such services are directly and indirectly borne by the wool producers. 6. This meeting is strongly of the opinion that the growers' organizations, namely, the Australian Wool Producers' Federation and the Australian Wool Growers' Council, should be consulted by the Federal Government in any further transactions dealing with the disposal of their wool, either to the British Government or the Australian manufacturers, or with a review of price. 7. That the Central Wool Committee be asked to fix such a price for wool to the Australian manufacturers each year so that the growers shall not suffer any loss in price as compared with the return which would have accrued to them had all the wool been taken by the British Government, and that it be a recommendation to the Commonwealth Government that Regulation 23 (3) of the National Security Wool Regulation be amended by the deletion of the words on line four "at appraised prices ", and that the following words be inserted in lieu thereof, " all such prices as the Central Wool Committee shall from time to time determine ". 8. That in view of the fact that the producer retains an interest in the profits accruing from wool sold by Great Britain for use outside the United Kingdom, and is concerned in maintaining markets from his product in future, this meeting considers it essential that a direct representative of the Commonwealth Government should be appointed in the United Kingdom to safeguard tlie interests of Australian growers. 9. That it bc a recommendation to the Central Wool Committee that wool appraisement centres be established at the port of Townsville, in Queensland, and the ports of Geraldton and Albany, in Western Australia. 10. That the motions carried at this conference be forwarded to the Australian Wool Growers' Council with a view to the two' bodies conferring and taking joint action to bring the request before the Prime Minister. 11. That the Commonwealth Government be requested to appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into the production costs of the woolgrowing industry. 12. That this federation considers that as the Federal Government has taken measures under the National Security legislation to acquire the Australian wool clip during the war and one year after, the Federal Government should be responsible for the purchase and distribution of the necessary wool packs. 13. This meeting considers that sheepskins should be marketed through an Australian Commonwealth Pool. On a previous occasion, I mentioned that the early appraisements under the Imperial purchase scheme were commenced very much below the previous ruling ' price, and that the Central Wool Committee, recognizing the fact part way through the season, raised the standard for subsequent appraisements. Thus, those whose wool was appraised late in the season enjoyed an advantage which others were denied. That was manifestly unjust, and it is hoped that some way will be found to compensate those who were thus treated. These resolutions were presented to the Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** on the 3rd April, and the Minister definitely promised, it is stated, that appraisement centres would be established at Townsville, in Queensland, and at Geraldton and Albany, in Western Australia, as requested. Yesterday he denied that he had ever made that promise. He stated that the Government was considering the matter. I urge the Government to consider seriously the taking of immediate action with respect to next season's wheat crop. Because of the lack of shipping space, portion of the present season's crop is stored in Australia, and the time is approaching for the harvesting of the next crop. The farmers, so far, have received only 2s. 6d. a bushel, which is not a payable price but, on the contrary, shows a loss on their operations. Nothing is more important, apart from the main issue of winning the war, than that this great industry should be given some scheme of stabilization. Those engaged in it should be told that the Government is taking action with respect to the limitation of the areas sown and tho stabilization of the price of future crops. The matter cannot be delayed. Men will continue to work, and crops will continue to grow. The industry is a source of considerable wealth to this country. {: #subdebate-78-0-s1 .speaker-KQB} ##### Mr SCULLY:
Gwydir .- I feel very strongly in respect of the present position of the wheat-growers of Australia. I endorse the remarks of the honorable member for Forrest **(Mr. Prowse).** The wheat-growers throughout Australia are in an almost desperate condition. If is generally conceded that, after deductions have been made for expenses, the 2s. 6d. a bushel they have so far received represents only about 5s. a bag. Any one with an intimate knowledge of wheatgrowing realizes that it is absolutely impossible for the industry to keep going at that price. We impress upon the Government most strongly the need for it to make, as quickly as possible, a further advance of ls. a bushel on last season's wheat. It has acquired the wheat, and exercises control over it. We confidently believe that credits could be advanced by the Commonwealth Bank against the unsold portion of the crop. A large proportion of the crop has been sold, but *1* understand that the whole of the purchase price has not been paid by the United Kingdom and other purchasers. It is anticipated that a good deal of the balance will come to hand early in July. We ask that, when that money is available, the credit be slightly increased with the crop as an asset, so that the desired advance may be made. According to the Honorable R. S. Richards, who I understand is the Leader of the Opposition in the Parliament of South Australia, 104 wheat-farmers in that State have taken advantage of the bankruptcy law during the first quarter of this year. Mention is made in the press of the many hundreds of farmers in South Australia who have passed through the Bankruptcy Court, the total being 1,400 or 1,500 during the last few years. That is appalling. The industry is faced with ruin if a scheme of stabilization be not propounded. Were the farmers to say, "We shall not produce any wheat during the forthcoming season; we shall lay down our tools; we refuse to plant wheat, because we are getting further into debt, and to continue would mean absolute ruin", one could hardly visualize the disaster that would overtake, not only Australia, but also the United Kingdom. The wheat-growers are not getting anything like the basic wage for. their labour. I assert definitely that if £100,000,000 were needed to meet a state of national emergency, it would be raised to-morrow. All that is necessary to make an advance of ls. a bushel is an extension of credit. I hope that the Government will seriously consider the very grave state of the industry. I have discussed the matter with the representatives of the wheat-growers, and it is anticipated that a deputation is to wait on the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** and the Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron).** {: #subdebate-78-0-s2 .speaker-KFE} ##### Mr GREGORY:
Swan .- The wheat industry undoubtedly is in a very deplorable state, and I hope that something will be done immediately to improve the position. The Commonwealth should first call the States into conference, with a view to arriving at some agreement in regard to the next harvest. Some time ago the promise of a stabilization scheme was made. It has been said that something will be done in July. We cannot afford any further delay. I do not care what is the character of the scheme, so long as the farmer knows exactly where he stands. I have always urged that the States should be impressed with the fact that it is part of their duty, their obligation, and their constitutional rights, to join with the Commonwealth in a scheme of stabilization. They have full control of all production within their areas. One can imagine the calamity that would befall the States were the wheat industry to collapse. . The honorable member for Gwydir **(Mr. Scully)** has suggested a further advance of ls. a bushel. I believe that the Government could, with a certain degree of safety, advance another 6d. a bushel, at a cost to the Treasury of nearly £5,000,000. I am aware of the difficulties with which the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** has to contend, but the wheat industry is of such importance to the Commonwealth, and its exports are so vital to national economy, that we cannot afford to allow it to collapse. I have received lately many letters in connexion with the last harvest. Some persons who bought machinery costing £100, on which they paid an instalment of £50, found themselves unable to continue the payments and lost both the machine and their deposit. Everybody is protected except the producer. The Commonwealth has provided a large sum to enable the producers to discharge their commitments, but this has not been sufficient. The Wheat-growers Union, and the farmers generally, are asking for an advance of ls. a bushel. I do not think that they are likely to get that amount as an advance at the present time, in view of the difficulties with which the Wheat Board is confronted ; but I believe that the Government could make an advance representing a total outlay of £5,000,000, on what I regard as a very fair asset. {: #subdebate-78-0-s3 .speaker-KMZ} ##### Mr MARTENS:
Herbert .- Last night the honorable member for Richmond **(Mr. Anthony)** stated that he and some of his colleagues had received letters from various parts of Australia suggesting that certain young people constitute a very dangerous section to be left loose. I interjected that probably they had read the history of the failure to bombard the factories of the basin of Briey, during the 1914-18 war, and the honorable member replied " I am serious ; I am not joking ". Those who have read that account would be quite serious in asking why the Krupp works have not been bombed. It is rather remarkable that neither during the last war, nor sofar during this war, has any attempt been made to bomb such works, with one exception, in which an airman was involved. He was cashiered, not congratulated. I spoke to the honorable member later, and referred .him to the work of Philip Noel-Baker entitled *The Private Manufacture of Armaments.* The honorable member said, " He is one of the worst Leftists in Britain". The honorable member is so obsessed with the idea that everybody is "Red" who does not agree with him, that I want to put on record who Baker is, not for the sake of the honorable member, but for the benefit of those who may read what I am about to quote. Philip Noel-Baker was late Cassel Professor of International Relations in the University of London; late Fellow of King's College, Cambridge; member of the British delegation to the Peace Conference, 1919; Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, 1929-1931 ; and Personal Assistant to the President of the Disarmament Conference, 1932-1933. Writing a prefatory note to this work, Viscount Cecil said - >The subject of this book is one of great importance. At a time when every decent citizen should be striving his utmost to maintain peace, there exists a great industry with branches in every country and having a capital running into hundreds of millions of pounds, whose interest it is to promote war. This book shows that not only is such a state of things in principle indefensible, but in practice it leads to deplorable and dangerous results. The argument is temperately stated and rests on a great accumulation of evidence. Every one who cares for peace should read it, and I cannot doubt that impartial readers will be convinced that private manufacture of armaments should be brought to an end without delay. I wish to make two quotations from the work. M. Albert Thomas, giving evidence to a commission of inquiry, said - >At the end of 1916, during the second Briand Ministry when General Lyautey was Minister of War, I repeatedly intervened to demand the bombardment of Briey, and the Council of Ministers was angered by the inaction of tha aircraft. The Minister of War repeatedly declared that he had given orders for the bombardment of Briey, but that these orders had not in fact been carried out. . . The reasons given by General Lyautey in explanation of the attitude of the General Staff were most often the inadequacy of the number and power of the aircraft ... To which. we replied - it was the moment when the whole question ot reprisals was being discussed - that, if there were enough aeroplanes for the open towns, there were enough for Briey as well. The second quotation is from M. Flandin : >On the 23rd December, 1916, I went to the head-quarters at Souilly, to see General Guillaumat, who was my commanding officer, and who commanded the Second Army. > >I explained to him the importance of tho question and asked him whether it would not be possible to make the aviation of the Second Army intervene. Finally I put into his hands a detailed plan of the basin of Briey, on which the principal factories in full activity were very clearly shown. A few days later, we learnt that a night bombing operation had been made on Joeuf by a squadron of the Second Army. > >But we ascertained afterwards that no further bombardment had followed the first. The weeks passed, and, as soon as I was able to return to the General Staff at Souilly, I went to find out the reasons for the sudden cessation of operations. The head of the General Staff informed me that, shortly after the bombardment of Joeuf, General Guillaumat had received orders to cease operations for the following two reasons: first because Joeuf was not, it appeared, in the sector of the Second Army, and secondly, because General Head-quarters reserved to itself the right to give orders of this kind to bombing squadrons. > >In my opinion, it is clear from this explanation that General Head-quarters had tardily realized the huge interests which were concerned in the peaceful exploitation of the Lorraine basin. For 27' months, the Germans were able, without being disturbed, to extract thousands of tons of iron ore for their armaments factories. > >This declaration is all the more melancholy because the Germans themselves knew that, if their mineral production had been disturbed, the war would have been, for them, practically lost. > >There was, therefore, a method of shortening the war, and this method was neglected for more than two years. The third quotation is from a report adopted by the Army Committee of the French Senate on 29th May, 1916. The report was presented to the Parliamentary Commission of Enquiry in 1919 by **Senator Henri** Berenger, now the president of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Senate. The report declared - >That it followed from an official declaration of the Ministry of Public Works . . . that, If Germany had been deprived of the 30,000,000 tons of iron ore of Lorraine and Luxembourg, the German Umpire would have been incapable of continuing the war and that the conduct of the war did not appear sufficiently inspired by an examination of this situation. The following sentence is taken from a statement made by representatives of German industrial and agricultural associations to tlie Chancellor of the Empire on the 20th May, 1915 : - >If the production of minerals in Lorraine was disturbed, the war would be almost lost. This evidence has been supported by one of France's greatest war-pilots. M. Bossoutrot, now a Deputy in the French Chamber, and chairman of its Aviation Committee, speaking in Paris in April, 1936, said that on one bombing raid he lost his way in a storm and failed to reach his objective. Finding himself over Briey, he bombed the establishments which he found working there. When the General Staff heard of his exploit, they did not decorate him as he expected. He was punished instead. One meets people in every walk of life who are asking the same question : " Why do those places escape all the time ? " With all due deference to other opinions, I contend that the answer is: "Because of the obligations of warring countries to the international armaments ring". In the Parliamentary library there is sufficient material to satisfy anybody of the truth of that. My justification for that assertion is not only Noel-Baker, but also a study of works by Lloyd George and other eminent men. The writers of letters to the press and to members of Parliament are not actuated by any disloyalty when they direct attention to the fact that the munitions factories escape bombardment, whereas defenceless people are machine-gunned and bombed. " Jimmie " Mollison, the British aviator, once told me: "In the last war my instructions were to drop bombs, and not to mind who was in the road. If I had done so I would have been doing what the Germans were accused of doing - killing innocent women and children ". {: #subdebate-78-0-s4 .speaker-KQ8} ##### Mr SCHOLFIELD:
Wannon -- Many anomalies existed last year in the wool appraisement scheme, and I rise to-day to ask that the Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** consult the needs of the wool-growers when the arrangements for future wool clips are undertaken. Although the Government of Victoria is reluctant to enter into any agreement with the Commonwealth and the other States, to stabilize the price of wheat, the Commonwealth Government should forthwith call a conference of the Agricultural Council to decide the question. If the States cannot come to an agreement, the Commonwealth should use its powers under the National Security Act to bring about its own system of stabilization. I am certain that if it did so the States would realize that the wheat industry could be put on a stable basis and that when the war was over, and the National Security Act lapsed, those States would agree to perpetuate the Commonwealth's scheme. I also urge that the Government give serious consideration to a further advance to wheat-growers from the No. 2 Wheat Pool. The doubt which the Minister for Commerce appears to have as to the plight of certain wheat-growers he should Bet at rest, because many growers can no longer pay their way, and are losing machinery to hire-purchase firms through their inability to keep up their payments. It is a short-sighted policy to withhold the money from the farmers, if it can be made available. {: #subdebate-78-0-s5 .speaker-JXL} ##### Mr FROST:
Franklin .- We generally take opportunity on the Supply Bill to state disabilities which exist in our electorates, but in war-time the duty of every honorable member is not to raise selfish matters, but to assist the Government in every way in its war effort. The honorable member for New England **(Mr. Thompson)** yesterday, in referring to the boards appointed to control primary industries, pointed with particular scorn to the Apple and Pear Board, and described it as a failure. It is not a failure. Doubtless it has not done everything we would have wished of it, but it is a new board, entrusted with new operations. Furthermore, last season's fruit crop presented many difficulties. Before the crop was harvested, the board made an assessment of 13,000,000 bushels of apples and pears for all States, but little more than 8,000,000 bushels was harvested, climatic conditions in the States of New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia ruining the crop expectations there. The Tasmanian crop, the bulk of which is grown in my electorate in the south, and the Western Australian crop, were well up to expectations. The growers in the other three States will receive payment for crops that were not harvested at the expense of the Tasmanian and Western Australian growers ; the cost to the Commonwealth will be nothing. The honorable member for New England, therefore, had no cause to say that the operations of the Apple and Pear Board were disastrous to the fruit-growers in New South Wales. The disaster is to the Tasmanian and Western Australian growers, who will lose money. The honorable member also said that he hoped that the Apple and Pear Board would not operate next season. I represent the views of the Tasmanian growers when I say that the Apple and Pear Board must function next season. I understand that a conference of representatives of fruit-growers and fruit organizations has been called by the Minister for Commerce for the 24th June. I trust that the representatives from New South "Wales, Victoria and South Australia will attend that conference with open minds, and do all within their power to assist the industry. The difficulties that occurred last season can be overcome in future, and the growers in New South Wales must not be parochial. They must realize that Tasmania could swamp the Sydney market, upon which the trade in New South Wales depends, with disastrous results to the industry in New South Wales. The objection raised in that State to the apple and pear acquisition scheme is based on the fact that its trade is primarily a home-market trade; it does not depend on export to the same degree as Tasmania and Western Australia, as well as Victoria and South Australia for that matter. No doubt there would also be disaster to the Tasmanian growers. The Minister for Commerce gave a great deal of consideration to the establishment of the apple and ° pear acquisition scheme, which warrants, in the interests of the whole of the Commonwealth, the cooperation of all interests to remedy the disabilities that have been discovered. The honorable member for Denison **(Mr. Mahoney)** referred yesterday to the removal of the Sandy Bay rifle range, which is in my electorate. For years, the removal of that rifle range to another site near Hobart has been projected. 'When war broke out, I was in touch with the Hobart City Council, which has been conducting the negotiations. The council told me that it intended to let the matter drop until after the war. It would not attempt to proceed with the proposal, because its only objective was to assist the Commonwealth Government to win the war. {: #subdebate-78-0-s6 .speaker-KHL} ##### Mr HOLLOWAY:
Melbourne Ports -- I wish to raise a matter which concerns the congestion in the Commonwealth Arbitration Court. That congestion is hindering the activities of the Supply Department and other branches 1W of the war services. At present, the court is more congested than it has been for years, with the result that awards are being held up. This delay is causing a good deal of friction. Some of the cases are applications for variations of awards and some deal with misunderstandings about holidays. The people concerned have been waiting so long for the Arbitration Court's decision that holidays for the year following the year for which the holidays are in dispute, have already come and passed without the matter being straightened out. Eventually, the unions become tired of waiting, and resolutions are carried suggesting other action. The case I am particularly concerned about is that of the Federated Rubber Workers of Australia. That union was granted an award in November, 1938, by Judge Drake-Brockman ; but, unfortunately, there was some misunderstanding in fixing King's Birthday, Australia Day, Christmas Day and certain other dates, as holidays. Ever since that time the union has been asking that the award should be reviewed in order to remove the anomaly. The court could deal with the case in two or three days at the most, but, so far, the matter has not been placed before it. It is only a question of interpretation and would not require lengthy argument.. The court is short-staffed at the present time because Judge Drake-Brockman is in the military forces, and as the result there has been a severe congestion of business. I understand that Judge Drake-Brockman is willing to go straight from the camp to the court in order to deal with cases that have been delayed, and, therefore, I suggest that the Attorney-General **(Mr. Hughes)** should take action to meet the union's wishes. Unless he does so, harmony in carrying out large defence contracts will be impaired. The rubberworkers are doing a great deal of work for the Department of Supply by manufacturing special tyres for the mechanized units of our armed forces and are working overtime in order to meet the rush. They are disgusted that their claims have not met with sympathetic consideration. At almost every meeting of the union, resolutions are passed asking that their complaint be adjusted before the next King's Birthday holiday which will be on the 17 th June next. I ask the Treasurer to bring this matter under the notice of the Attorney-General so that he may communicate with the Registrar of the Arbitration Court and evolve a satisfactory basis of settlement. I believe that the Attorney-General will be sympathetic, because he has taken action along similar lines before. Another serious matter affects the Federation of Textile Workers. Strange to say, the trouble rose among employees of the firm of Davies Coop Limited, which would be expected to carry out the regulations in connexion with defence contracts because it has obtained many important orders from the Department of Supply. Its business has quadrupled during the last two years, largely as the result of orders lodged by the department. It has an almost unlimited order for the supply of khaki cloth and other raw materials to firms which are producing finished articles for the department. In ever' contract issued by the Department of Supply there is a stipulation that award rates and conditions must be observed. That provision is inserted because the department realizes that that is the only way to ensure that work is done properly without interruption by industrial disputes. No other firm has made more progress during the last five or six years than Davies Coop Limited. The federal officers of the Federation of Textile Workers have communicated with myself and other honorable members pointing out that the general manager of Davies Coop Limited will not allow them to enter the firm's premises. He has asked the company's employees to work on Sundays in order to cope with the special rush of war orders. The federation is willing to co-operate with the firm and the Government in order to carry out these contracts expeditiously although its members have never done Sunday work before. The firm undertook that it would give notice when it wanted to carry out work on Sundays, so that conferences could be held to select employees for the special shift. But it later issued an order for employees to assemble on Sunday afternoon, the 2nd June, without calling a preliminary conference. When officials of the federation sought to interview the manager, according to the privilege which they have always had, he refused to see them. Consequently the firm has become suspect; members of the federation believe that it is employing two or three times the legal number of juvenile workers and is not paying award rates. I do not charge the company with doing so, but it is rightly suspected because of its refusal to allow the federation's officers to enter its premises, a right which was accorded to them by the award. Unless these complaints are inquired into there is likely to be interference with the smooth carrying out of contracts which the firm is undertaking on behalf of the Government. I ask the Treasurer to consult with the Attorney-General to see if a message can be sent to the Arbitration Court, and when I go to Melbourne on Monday next I shall do everything in my power to straighten out this trouble and prevent any stoppage of work. {: #subdebate-78-0-s7 .speaker-JPT} ##### Mr BLAIN:
Northern Territory -- I take this opportunity to give a denial of the allegations of the honorable member for Herbert **(Mr. Martens).** I do not doubt the correctness of the statements he read relating to investments in various countries. The financial interests of all countries are interwoven, but Germany took a long-range view and ensured that very little of ite investments were made in the countries which it had planned to swoop down upon in 1940, and at the same time it inveigled British capitalists into investing their money in Germany. But that is no reason why honorable members should try to undermine the faith of the youth of this country by implying that there is no need to fight against this *blitzkrieg* of the Huns, those murderers who are sweeping across Flanders to the Channel ports. It is a disgrace to Australia thai this sort of thing should be allowed. Even our great universities are reeking with this unsavoury influence. Lecturers in those universities - the first I shall name is the University of Melbourne - have poisoned the minds of students. This morning I discussed this subject with a. distinguished Western Australian who said that similar conditions obtained in the University of Western Australia. He said that six lecturers at that university had obtained a large following of students by the dissemination of their pernicious doctrine, which is a menace to the safety of Australia. It is deplorable that our great universities are being used for this purpose by highly-paid servants and it is rime that we examined our educational institutions and dragged out these rats, I make these statements deliberately because I know them to be true and I can produce evidence of the activities to which I have referred. I am more than surprised that the honorable member for Herbert should have made the statement which he uttered to-day, when the fate of the British Empire is at stake. The very seas are running red with the blood of British soldiers who are trying to repel the Huns, who are stalking across Europe leaving red footprints in their wake. I warn the honorable member for Herbert that one of the greatest agitators in this country is a Rhodes Scholar in Queensland," the honorable member's political opponent, who has fallen to this doctrine. I trust that every honorable member of this House will ensure, in future, that this- pernicious doctrine is not spread further. It has even undermined our Public Service here in Canberra. I have evidence that out of 130 enlistments in the Australian Capital Territory last week, only six of the recruits were public servants. That shows that the Public Service in Canberra must have been affected by the doctrine. Every honorable member of this House should decry this "pink" menace - I am not concerned with the " red " menace because, figuratively speaking, we have broken its anklebones and we can recognize it because it limps. It is time that honorable members joined forces to weed out this subversive element in order that the youth of Australia will know that the Empire is fighting for something worth while, not with the ulterior motive suggested by certain honorable members. {: #subdebate-78-0-s8 .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD:
Ballarat .- I address my remarks to the Treasurer **(Mr. Spender)** because of an unfortunate matter relating to the authorizing of loans for city councils. The Ballarat City Council recently applied for authority to raise a loan of £50,000. Later the Perth City Council applied for authority to raise a loan of £75,000. But although the Perth application was granted, the Commonwealth refused to give the Ballarat City Council the authority it sought. There may be some reason why authority was granted in one case and withheld in the other, but the people are entitled to know these reasons, in order that they may judge whether the Commonwealth has been dealing fairly with them. The documents relating to the two matters I have mentioned are not confidential, and at least they should be made available to the public, even if the Treasurer refuses to state the reasons for the action he has taken. The fact that the Treasurer has refused to make these documents available is sufficient justification for me to suggest that everything is not clean and straightforward. I hope that there has not been any unfair discrimination, but it is hard for me to believe otherwise. On the one hand, the city of Perth is permitted to raise a loan; it is a city that has the advantage of being situated practically on the seaboard and is one of the first ports- of call for overseas ships in Australia, and it also benefits from the Government's policy of centralizing industry. On the other hand, the great city of Ballarat, with a population of 37,000, is an inland city. Its mayor and its people are anxious to assist the Empire, but they are suffering from a serious handicap because the Government is not fostering industries outside the capital cities and has refused to grant authority to raise loan, money for badly needed works. I have noticed repeatedly, when other honorable members, as well as myself, have been addressing the House, that Ministers have been exceptionally rude when they should have been listening to speeches dealing with matters affecting their departments. I take very strong exception to that. I have had occasion to draw the attention of the Treasurer to this sort of thing on .previous occasions. To say the least, the attitude of Ministers is a gross display of ignorance. The Treasurer may laugh now, but my constituents may have the last laugh in this matter of raising a loan. The Treasurer aroused my admiration when he entered the Government as a young member and showed considerable promise of being successful. Probably his work is still as promising as it was, but he appears to hold the belief that the authority now rested in him justifies the adoption of a more or less totalitarian attitude to the representatives of the people by refusing to place openly before them the reasons why he has followed a certain course of procedure. In the circumstances, I am justified in believing that all is not fair and above board. I take strong exception to his attitude. The reasons for making these applications are known locally, and there is no reason why the Treasurer should regard them as secret. I understand that an Advisory Committee on Capital Issues advises the Government regarding all applications to raise money. That committee consists of - > **Sir Claude** Reading, who .is **chairman, Sir Walter** Massy-Greene, **Mr. F.** W. Eggleston, **Mr. J.** B. Chifley, **Mr. J.** H. Goss, **Mr. C.** A. NOrris, **Mr. A.** C. Lewis, **Mr. J.** 'N. Hardy, **Sir J.** McCann and **Sir Ernest** Fisk. That is a panel of exceptionally capable gentlemen, but most of them have other business to attend to, and probably they have not the time to devote to these matters. My point is that I have a right to know on what ground the application of the Ballarat City Council was refused. In a democratic community, decisions on such matters should be open <to criticism. If the Treasurer has nothing to hide, why does he not let me have the information for which I have asked? It may be contended that this is not the time to expend money on town halls, but I point out that the circumstances associated with the request of the Ballarat City Council are peculiar. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- -I am aware of the circumstances. The honorable gentleman will remember that he explained them to me. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- I endeavoured on several occasions to see the Treasurer. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- - The honorable gentleman will admit that, except when I have been engaged upon urgent public business, I have never refused to see him. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- -I complain that I have not been supplied with proper answers to questions which I have asked in this House. The Treasurer promised to give further consideration to this matter, although he did not hold out much hope of a change of policy. He has not yet let me know his decision. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I have not received a request from the applicant for the loan to reconsider the decision. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- I am the member for the district and, in this case, the representative of the Ballarat City Council. I am dissatisfied with the treatment which I have received. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I am not concerned about that. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr POLLARD: -- Of course not. The Treasurer is not concerned with the rights Of the people. As I understand the average Australian, he is a person who can be led but not driven. The Australian soldier- likes to know why he is expected to do certain things. When he knows the reason, he is prepared to do anything. My complaint is not confined to the Treasurer, because other Ministers adopt a similar attitude. Two or three weeks ago, when a discussion arose as to the allocation of money from the flour tax to either the relief of wheatgrowers in Victoria or the transfer of settlers from marginal lands, I asked the Minister for Commerce **(Mr. Archie Cameron)** to lay on the table the report of the proceedings of the Australian Agricultural Council, but he refused to do so. His reply was short and curt. Although the Minister for Commerce refused to allow me to peruse those documents I can obtain them by making a request to the Government of Victoria. If the documents are not too secret to be handed to me by the State Government, why is it that the Commonwealth Minister refuses to let me see them? My protest to-day is not so much against the rejection of the application of the Ballarat City Council, as to the refusal of the Minister to lay on the table the correspondence and documents in relation to it. I hope that other honorable members will support me in this protest. 1 do not apologize for raising this matter at this hour, even though it may mean that I am detaining the Parliament. I shall continue to protest and to make myself a nuisance unless courtesy is extended to the representatives of the people in this Parliament. I complain also of the way in which the Commerce_Department and, in a less degree, the Defence Department, engage labour. There is, in Ballarat, an office of the Apple and Pear Control Board. When clerical assistance was required to carry out some comparatively simple clerical work, the board, no doubt with the approval of the Government, appointed to that position a lady who, I understand, is not only of independent means, but also is financially interested in the fruit business in that city. It is not right that an interested party should have access to documents relating to the businesses of competitors. Labour for this work should have .been recruited through the Public Service Board or the employment officer of the Supply and Develop? ment Department. Work of this character should not be given to people of inde- pendent means. I know of two men in Ballarat who had stronger claims to the appointment. One of them is a returned soldier with a first-class record as a soldier, and excellent qualifications as a clerk. This man, who could do the work well, walks the street seeking employment while this affluent lady does the job. I do not object to the lady personally, but I object to the appointment to such positions of persons of independent means when needy people who are capable of doing the work are idle. The other suitable applicant whom I have in mind is a man with considerable clerical experience who, through no fault of his own, is out of work, and does not know where to obtain it. I asked the Minister for Commerce a question on this subject last week but, so far, nothing has been done in the matter. For some .years, both the staff and the public who have business at the Ballarat Post Office have been inconvenienced by the inadequacy of the accommodation. At various times, the Government has had before it proposals for the re-modelling of the building. When the honorable member for Wentworth **(Mr. Harrison)** was Postmaster-General he visited Ballarat, and afterwards he made certain recommendations. I hope that the Treasurer will confer with the present PostmasterGeneral **(Mr. Thorby)** with a view to setting aside a sufficient sum of money to enable this very necessary work to be undertaken this year. I trust that my criticism of the. Treasurer will lead to a reconsideration of the application by the Ballarat City Council for authority to raise a loan, and that the documents referred to, which are in no sense secret or confidential, will be laid on the table. {: #subdebate-78-0-s9 .speaker-KCM} ##### Mr DRAKEFORD:
Maribyrnong -- I urge the Government to take action to overtake the arrears of work in connexion with arbitration cases. Industrial unrest is caused by the delay in hearing cases, and I wish to avoid more serious trouble. Recently, a question was asked as to what steps were being taken to preserve industrial harmony during the period of the war. I understand that 186 cases are awaiting hearing by the Full Court. Of these cases 175 will probably be taken together, as all of them relate to the basic wage, but there are 59 other matters listed in which 70 unions are interested. These unions have a right to know when the cases will be heard. One of the judges of the court, Judge Drake-Brockman, is performing military duties at Seymour. Although Judge Piper has been appointed to assist with this work, the arrears are not being overtaken quickly enough. ' As a union secretary at one time who has been associated with many cases which have come before the court, I know how difficult it is to convince1 men that they must wait for their applications to be dealt with. In my opinion, Judge DrakeBrockman should be brought back to attend to some of these cases or such assistance given as will enable them to be dealt with in a reasonable time. I speak, not for any particular trade union, but in the interests of harmony, in industry generally. We realize just as strongly as do the supporters of the Government that harmonious industrial relations must be preserved if we are to produce munitions and war supplies to our fullest possible capacity. Probably the honorable members of the Opposition who are well acquainted with arbitration procedure feel more keenly on this subject than do other honorable members of the Parliament. I am an honorary officer of a trade union which is awaiting certain decisions from a board of reference. I do not desire to be critical of the chairman of the board. For one thing, I do not imagine that the adoption of that attitude would help my union. All I say is that if the chairman requires assistance in order to perform his work expeditiously and overtake the arrears that have accumulated, it should be provided for him. It is necessary to alter the law to make possible the more expeditious transaction of Arbitration Court business. Such action should be taken without delay, even though it be war-time. The Prime Minister has himself suggested that some action may be necessary to speed up decisions in relation to these matters and he is negotiating with the trade union leaders for that purpose. During the last war arrangements were made in Great Britain for representatives of the employers and employees to come together, without delay and without formality, to deal promptly with any troubles that threatened to affect the capacity of the nation to make its maximum war effort. Something of that kind should be done in this country. I agree with the view that has been expressed, that it is just as important in this war that our engineering shops and other agencies of production shall be fully manned as that our forces on the field, shall be fully staffed. This adds to the earnestness of my desire that vexatious delays in relation to pending arbitration proceedings shall be overcome. On numerous occasions I have directed the attention of members of the Government to the urgent need for an improvement of the housing conditions of the workers on the transAustralian railway. It may be said that this work should be left until after the war; but, as it was frequently brought under the notice of the Government before the war occurred, I feel justified in mentioning it to-day. Members of various governments have intimated, at different times, that action would be taken to remedy conditions which I regard as a disgrace. Full details of the position have been recorded in *Hansard* more than once, but, so far, no pronouncement has been made that the Government intends to take quick and appropriate steps to remedy our com- plaints. I urge that action be taken in this direction as soon as possible, for the housing conditions of many of the unfortunate people who live along this railway are appalling. I hope that the two matters to which I have directed brief and incomplete attention will receive early and favorable consideration. {: #subdebate-78-0-s10 .speaker-KUO} ##### Mr SPURR:
Wilmot -- I support the request of the honorable member for Maribyrnong **(Mr. Drakeford)** that action shall be taken to deal promptly with pending claims before the Arbitration Court. We need the highest possible degree of industrial unity in this country, in view of the tragic circumstances which face us as a nation and an Empire. I believe that if all of our people pull together we can, must and will win the war; but the fullest possible cooperation is essential if we are to provide munitions and equipment to the maximum of our ability, not only for our own soldiers, but also for those of our Empire and our Allies. * The members of the Opposition have displayed great restraint in not criticizing the Government unduly during these sittings of the Parliament. This is not to be taken as an indication that we are satisfied that there is no need for such criticism. We realize that harsh criticism might, by disclosing certain weaknesses to the enemy, be of disservice to the Empire and so, as patriotic Australians, we have refrained from criticism. The Government has admitted that it has received a generous measure of sapport from the Opposition. Speaking at a public gathering in Melbourne recently the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies)** was reported to have paid the following tribute to the Leader of the Opposition **(Mr. Curtin)** :- Menzies' Tribute to Labour Leader. Melbourne, Sunday. " I do not want to make any political capital of this, but it is a tribute I can pay to the Leader of the Labour party **(Mr. Curtin),** that no man could have given more loyal cooperation ", said the Prime Minister **(Mr. Menzies),** to-day. He was speaking at an Empire service in the Balwyn Theatre. " I find **Mr. Curtin** a man of understanding and sympathy", said **Mr. Menzies.** " We have differences, but that does not make us any less honest and sincere Australians. " There is always hope when I can find in the Leader of the Opposition the loyalty and sympathy that I do not always find among those who are supposed to support me ". I suggest that while this tribute was fully merited, the rank and file of Opposition members have also given the Government liberal and helpful support. We have shown a desire to co-operate with honorable gentlemen opposite in every possible way, consistent with our policy and beliefs. I am quite certain that all honorable members are united in their determination that Australia shall make the greatest possible effort to help in winning the war. In these circumstances, it is to be regretted that a lack of co-operation and loyalty is manifest within the ranks of the two government parties. It is a calamity that the Government should be torn asunder and in reality be a thing of shreds and patches at a time like this. Even in the last few days we have had astounding evidence of the lack of unity among supporters of the Government, and even among Ministers. I need only to direct attention to the circumstances surrounding the proposed appointment to an important Commonwealth post, for which he was highly qualified, of **Mr. E.** G. Theodore. The outstanding ability of this gentleman is recognized on all sides, but, owing to dissension within the ranks of the Ministry, his services are not being secured for national purposes. As the fullest industrial co-ordination and co-operation is demanded of us at this time, the Government should leave no doubt whatever in the minds of the trade unionists that it intends to play fair" in respect of them. It must also show, beyond question, that it will not permit the employers to make excessive profits at a time when it is asking the workers to make concessions in relation to their working conditions. Fair play must be the Government's watchword. If it is, there will be no difficulty whatever in securing the fullest possible support by trade unionists for all measures that are necessary to ensure the putting forth of our maximum war effort. To this end all available man-power of the country that is at present unemployed, should be put to work, under decent conditions, in essential services. Provided the proper safeguards are assured, the workers will make every sacrifice that is necessary to win the war. We have among our working community many of our most loyal citizens. I regret that the Government has not seen fit to take prompt action to correct an objectionable state of affairs that has arisen in Tasmania as an aftermath of the recent dispute in the coal-mining industry. I have directed attention to this subject for several days, in the hope that an adjustment would be made. The terms of the agreement under which the miners returned to work included an undertaking that during the war period they would abide by the awards of the Arbitration Court. I noticed, however, that no such stipulation was made in relation to the employers. A few days ago I informed the Attorney-General **(Mr. Hughes)** that two non-unionist labourers had been employed at the Mount Nicholas colliery in Tasmania. As honorable members are aware, it requires a great deal of selfrestraint on the part of loyal unionists to work beside non-unionists. I asked that steps should be taken to rectify this trouble. On the 29th May, the AttorneyGeneral telegraphed to the management of the Mount Nicholas colliery in the following terms. - The Manager, Mount Nicholas Colliery, St. Mary's, Tasmania. Am informed that since settlement coal strike two persons not member's of union have been engaged by you while members of union not employed. Desire remind you that terms of settlement included provision for withdrawal of all free labour. It is important that these should be honorably observed by employers. Awaiting your reply. Attorney-General. That was sent on the 29th, but, as far as I know, there has been no settlement yet. When the men resumed work at Jubilee mine; four of those previously engaged were not taken on. The union recognizes that there has been some alteration of the outside structure, and of the method of working the mine, so that it may not be necessary to employ so many men, but they resent the abandonment of the long-recognized principle of "First on, last off". At the Jubilee mine, men have been discharged who had been employed for eighteen years, while others, who had been working there for only two years, including the son of the manager, were kept on. The following letter on the subject was received from the Attorney-General regarding the position at the Jubilee mine: - >I refer to your letter to me of 23rd May, 1940. I have considered the points which you raised. I am afraid that the men at Jubilee do not come within the terms of the settlement arrived at between representatives of the Commonwealth and State Governments and the combined Mining Unions. There might, however, be a breach of the award, for which the Mining Unions could take some action. I know they can take action, and I have it on the authority of the president of the Miners Federation that officials have had' the greatest difficulty in restraining the men from taking action. He said that it would be almost impossible to keep them in the mine after the end of this week unless their grievances were adjusted. The other day, I asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the assurances the miners had given that they would obey the award, it would not be advisable, in the event of the owners declining to give similar assurances, to issue regulations compelling them to do so. Evidently, it was easy to take action against the miners, but it is a different matter when it comes to taking action against the owners for the purpose of nipping a dispute in the bud. It is only British justice to require the owners to observe the terms of the award, when the miners have given an assurance to observe it loyally. I ask the Attorney-General to take action under the national security powers of the Government to preserve industrial peace. A big strain has been put on the loyalty of these men, first by their having to work with nonunion labour, and then by asking them to abandon a vital principle governing the engagement of labour. They are prepared to observe the terms of the agreement in the letter and in the spirit. There are no more loyal citizens in Australia to-day than the coal-miners. I speak particularly of those in Tasmania, because I know them best. The exsecretary of the union at St. Mary's is at present serving in the Australian Imperial Force. I did my utmost to prevent the miners in Tasmania from going on strike in the first place. I point out, however, that it was not really a strike of coal-miners, though they got the blame for it; it was a strike of engineers. The miners knew that, no matter how they voted in the dispute, the mines would be closed anyway, and, out of a sense of loyalty to their mates - mistaken loyalty, perhaps - they voted in favour of a strike. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender: -- I shall get in touch with the Attorney-General in regard to the matter. {: #subdebate-78-0-s11 .speaker-KUO} ##### Mr SPURR: -- I believe that members of Parliament have a. job to do at this time in promoting co-operation with the Government's war effort. I give an assurance that, in regard to industrial and other matters in my electorate, I will co-operate fully with the Government in prosecuting the war, provided that what I am asked to do is consistent with Labour principles. I believe that honorable members can do much to promote unity and goodwill throughout the Commonwealth. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Nock)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 1720 {:#debate-79} ### SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Motion (by **Mr. Spender)** agreed to - >That the House, at its rising, adjourn until Tuesday, the 2nd July next, at 3 p.m., unless **Mr. Speaker** shall, prior to that date, by telegram addressed to each member of the House, fix an earlier day of meeting. {: .page-start } page 1720 {:#debate-80} ### SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1940-41 {:#subdebate-80-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed. Mr.BLACKBURN (Bourke) [4.41]. - At the beginning of lie war, invalid and old-age pensioners in Victoria hoped that, as a patriotic gesture, they might be able to refrain from asking that their pensions be increased. Unfortunately, increases of the cost of living have made them abandon that decision, and I now ask the Government to give active consideration to the request of the pensioners for an increase. There are two courses which might be followed: One is to grant the prayer of the pensioners, and increase the pension to £1 10s. a week; the other is to vary the pension in accordance with variations in the cost of living, with the proviso that it shall not sink below£1 a week. In my opinion, the second course might be more beneficial to the pensioners. There is no doubt that the cost of living is increasing, particularly against those with small means, who must buy. their necessaries in small quantities. I was informed that the Government proposed to give effect to my representa* tions to simplify and cheapen proceedings before the Fair Rents Court by enabling applicants to dispense with the services of lawyers. However, the necessary regulations have not yet been made. I hope that this will soon be done, because many people are waiting to make applications. The other day I asked the Minister **(Mr. Nock)** representing the Minister for the Interior the following questions : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many full-blooded aborigines are employed on each wolfram-field in tlie Northern Territory? 1. What rate of wages were paid to such employees on each field? I was told that the information was being obtained. I now ask the Minister to amplify the reply, when it is made available, so as to supply the information asked for in respect of all mines in the Northern Territory, and not wolframmines only. I am informed that aborigines are employed there at very low wages, or no wages at all. I desire to bring under the notice of the Government the work of an inventor, **Mr. Charley,** who has invented a device in connexion with the springing of motor cars. Unfortunately, owing to his confidence in other people, he has been deprived of the ability to finance his own invention. He has written to the Minister for Supply and Development **(Sir Frederick Stewart)** on the matter, and I ask that serious consideration be given to his invention. It was brought under the notice of the Defence Department in 1938 by the honorable member for Indi **(Mr. McEwen).** The report on the invention from the Army Head-quarters Inventions Board is as follows : - > **Mr. Charley** produced a model and documents which were of very great interest. The principles incorporated in the invention- are m a way unique and appear to be quite sound. A slightly similar application of independent wheel-springing is actually on the market to-day, but only on the front-wheel assembly. The idea- of each wheel being independently sprung is now gaining ground; for instance, in the German Army a large percentage of (not or transport is so designed to give a better cross-country performance. This principle is also being included in commercial vehicles of the same ' country. It is considered 'that the invention is worthy of further development, especially if applied to four-wheel drive on_ the heavier class of vehicles - three to five tonners. For cross-country work, rough roads and tracks as are experienced in the outlying districts, the board considers that **Mr. Charley** has the basis of a vehicle which could be developed to meet the heavy strains imposed under those conditions. It is realized that further trials will have to be made before a satisfactory design to meet all contingencies has been finally adopted. The letter of the then Minister for Defence **(Mr. Thorby),** which quotes that report, then proceeds - >The board informed **Mr. Charley** of the Government's policy in regard to inventions of this nature, which follows commercial practice, and if the vehicle is adopted in civil use, then the department will consider its adoption for army purposes. I believe that, during the Great War, several inventions which afterwards were of great importance - I am not sure whether the invention of tanks was one - were looked at askance at the beginning, and might have been tried earlier with success. **Mr. Charley** has placed the whole of his case before the Minister for Supply and Development in lengthy correspondence, and I should like that Minister to give consideration to his proposals. I notice that the Minister for Air **(Mr. Fairbairn)** is smiling. I know that he has been interested in the matter, because some of the letters I have seen were written to or by him. {: #subdebate-80-0-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP -- *in reply* - The various matters to which reference has been made will be brought to the notice of the Ministers concerned, and I shall ask that earnest consideration be given to them. With respect to my own department, only one matter remains which calls for reply; it was referred to by the honorable member for Ballarat **(Mr. Pollard).** That honorable member regretted that he had to direct criticism to me. I also regret that he had to do so, not because of the criticism itself but because of tho way in which it was directed. The substance of the matter, as J understand it,, is that I adopted an unreasonable attitude in having refused to lay on the table of the House certain files relating to applications received from Perth and Ballarat for authority to raise loans, the inference to be drawn being that, if it were not an unusual attitude, it was one which revealed something that was not above-board. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- I did not say that. What I said was that it was open to that interpretation. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I am glad that there is not that implication. The second charge was, that I had been discourteous to the honorable member in respect of the subject-matter of his complaint. 1 believe that, upon reflection, the honorable member will be reasonable enough to admit that at no time have I refused to meet any honorable member of thi. House upon any matter, however difficult it might be to fit him in. If it be that on occasions, while he is addressing the House, my mind is distracted or I am not looking at him, it does not follow that I have not heard him. Indeed, I could repeat almost word for word what he said in respect of his complaint. I am sure that he will accept my assurance that no discourtesy was intended. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- I withdraw my strictures in that respect. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- Then I come to the real subject-matter of the complaint, namely, that I adopted an unreasonable and unjustifiable attitude in not having placed these reports on the table of the House. May I deal temperately with that subject-matter. I did indicate, in general terms - because it could only be in general terms - the grounds on which the Ballarat application was rejected. I said that it related to a particular subjectmatter which, under the urgent conditions of war in which we found ourselves, I felt could not be justified. I assured the honorable member that I had personally given consideration to the matter, and had not blindly accepted any recommendation from the Capital Issues Advisory Board. Before coming to the subject-matter of the application, may I deal short lv with the functions of the Treasury and the Capital Issues Advisory Board? The suggestion was, that the board was not equipped, and did not have the time, satisfactorily to deal with these matters, and in particular with the matter in which the honorable member is interested. I assure him that there is a very competent staff of Treasury officials, who first go through these matters in detail and prepare the information, along lines which generally I approve before they are placed before the Capital Issues Advisory Board for its recommendation. When they have been dealt with by the board, they are returned to the Treasury. A large number of them is dealt with by the Treasury. In respect of every application which goes before the Capital Issues Advisory Board, I personally run through the report at every meeting of the board. The matters are dealt with, having regard to the whole of the information. In this particular matter, I had no objection to stating the general ground for refusal. Whether it be right or wrong, I think that the honorable member will concede that some one must exercise the judgment, and that the matter may be one with respect to which there may be an intellectual difference. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- I concede that fully. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- The matter arose first because Perth had been granted an application in respect of work of a different type, whilst an application by Ballarat in respect of a work of a particular type had been refused. It would appear that the suggestion was that, if consent had been given in the one case, it should have been given in the other case. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- Not necessarily. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- The suggestion whs that the cases might be comparable. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- At least I should see the written reason. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I shall come to that. First, it will be conceded that in relation to employment the position in Victoria is entirely different from the position in Western Australia, primarily because the major portion of the defence expenditure has gone to Victoria. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- But not to inland cities. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- When the honorable member spoke to me I indicated to him that, unless urgent grounds could be stated, this obviously was a work of a type which every one would agree should normally be postponed until better times; the only justification for it could be, that it affected very urgently the need to relieve unemployment. In that respect, I have received no further information sinceI spoke to the honorable member than I had previously. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- Does the honorable gentleman say that he mentioned to me the matter of unemployment? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- In this House, yes, {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- I have no recollection of it. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- It does not very much matter. The complaint is that the Government, upon request, should place these reports on the table of the House. I think that a little reflection will reveal that that could not be done. If this application were to be placed on the table of the House, there could be no justification for refusing to act similarly in respect of other applications. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- Quite so; why not? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- These applications frequently contain confidential information, conveyed to us from different sources to which we must look for it. That must be obvious though not necessarily in this case, because I do not suggest that it here applies. They are not public documents, but frequently contain matters that are confidential and which, if revealed, might prejudice those who supply the information. {: .speaker-F4Q} ##### Mr Scullin: -- If theinformation has been supplied by public bodies, it would not be confidential. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- In this case, the honorable gentleman admits that it was not confidential. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I have not conceded that, although I say that there may have been no objection in this case. But because an application is made by a public body, it does not follow that the information on which a decision is reached has been furnished by such a body. Information is obtained from different sources. Indeed, in respect of some matters I have had to ask for information to be supplied by certain departmental officers. If in such cases the report was adverse, those officers might be strictly criticized. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- What nonsense! {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- There are outside persons upon whom we have to call for a report; they are chosen by reason of their special qualifications. {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- Why did the Minister for Supply and Development lay on the table the report referring to boots? {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- I am concerned not with what any other Minister did, but only with my own subject-matter. I say advisedly, that it would be wholly wrong and indefensible to agree to the proposition that there should be laid on the table reports which frequently contain confidential information, the revelation of which might distinctly prejudice those who had furnished it with a view to enabling me or my officers to exercise judgment. To urge that, because it is not done, there is anything unjustifiable in respect of the matter- {: .speaker-KYC} ##### Mr Pollard: -- I did not urge that. {: .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER: -- Then the issue simply is, whether one view or another is right, and upon that I have nothing to add to the view that I have already expressed. I am the person responsible, and I accept the responsibility. 1 say that it could not be justified as a matter of principle. If it were done in one case, it would have to be done in all cases. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate. {: .page-start } page 1723 {:#debate-81} ### PAPUA BILL 1940 Motion (by **Mr. Nock)** - *by leave -* agreed to - >That he have leave to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Papua Act 1905-1934. Bill brought up, and read a first time. {:#subdebate-81-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-81-0-s0 .speaker-K4X} ##### Mr NOCK:
Minister in Charge of External Territories · Riverina · CP *. - by leave* - I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. The Government recently appointed a committee to survey the possibility of establishing a combined administration for the adjoining territories of Papua and New Guinea. Whilst this committee did not report favorably on the establishment of a combined administration, the majority of the members stressed the desirability of obtaining a greater degree of uniformity between the laws and administrative methods of the two territories. With the exception of Papua, the chief executive officer of each of the external territories of the Commonwealth, and also of the Northern Territory, is styled the Administrator, and it is proposed in this bill to amend the designation of the head of the Papuan administration from that of LieutenantGovernor to that of Administrator and so bring the territory of Papua into line with the other territories. At the same time, the opportunity is being taken to effect certain other amendments which experience has shown to be desirable, to correct certain minor errors of drafting, and the bring the Papua Act, which is actually the constitution of the Territory of Papua, still more closely into line with the constitution of the Mandated Territory of New Guinea as expressed in the New Guinea Act. The Papuan Public Service formerly contained an office of Administrator, the occupant of which was responsible for the administration of the territory during the inability or absence from the territory of the Lieutenant-Governor. In 1924 it was decided that the then occupant should continue in office, but that, upon his ceasing to hold that office, the senior official member of the Executive Council present in the territory should carry out such functions under the title of Acting Lieutenant-Governor, and the present provision in the act expresses this intention. The former occupant of the office of Administrator is no longer an officer of the territory, and the office has been permitted to lapse, as intended, so that it is now considered desirable to replace the former provision with one on the lines of that obtaining in New Guinea for the appointment of an Acting Administrator, namely, that the Governor-General may appoint a person to act as Administrator whenever necessary and in default of any such appointment, the senior official member of the Executive Council present in the territory shall exercise and perform all the powers and functions of the Administrator; and that the appointment of an Acting Administrator during the absence of the Administrator from the territory shall not affect the exercise or performance by the Administrator himself of any power or function. At the present time, a person may be appointed as the deputy of the LieutenantGovernor in any part of the territory. It is considered that provision should also be made for the appointment of a Deputy Administrator in respect of the whole territory in order to facilitate administration when the Administrator is still in the territory, but is carrying out tours of inspection and so is absent from the centre of administration. Under section 17 of the present, act, the Lieutenant-Governor has the power to appoint, in the name of the Governor-General, and subject to subsequent confirmation, all necessary officers of the territory, and under section 18 he has the power to suspend officers for disciplinary reasons pending the. Governor-General's pleasure. Experience has shown that the procedure regarding suspensions from the Papuan Public Service could be improved. In relation to appointments it is considered that the initial power of appointment should rest with the Governor-General, as in the case of other territorial services, and it is proposed to provide that the Governor-General may appoint or may' delegate to the Minister or the Administrator the power to appoint all necessary officers. Further provisions relating to the procedure to be followed in regard to the appointment- or suspension of officers are to be inserted in the Public Service legislation of the territory. The date of commencement of sections 7 and 8 of the amending bill are being fixed by proclamation to enable the consequential review of the Public Service Ordinance and Regulations to be effected. The Papua Act at present provides that the Executive Council shall consist of nine members, one of whom must be a non-official member chosen by and from the five non-official members of the Legislative Council. The remaining eight official members are officers of the territory. The population of Papua at present comprises about 1,600 Europeans and 300,000 natives. It is considered that greater elasticity should be permitted in the number of official members on the council and, accordingly, instead of the statutory obligation to have an Execu- tive Council of nine members, it is proposed that this number should be a maxi- mum, the actual number of members fluctuating between five and nine as may be necessary to meet the conditions of the territory. This amendment involves a consequential amendment of sub-section 3 of section 22 of the principal act. Should any official or non-official mem ber of the Executive Council be unable, by reason of illness or absence from the territory, to be present at a council meeting there is no provision now for the appointment of a person to act in place of any such member and it is, therefore, proposed that provision should be made for the appointment of deputies of both the official members and the non-official member of the Executive Council, In view of the improvement of transport facilities and the progress of the territory, it is thought that copies of the minutes of the meetings of both the Executive and Legislative Councils could be supplied to the Minister at more frequent intervals than quarterly. It is proposed that copies of such minutes should be forwarded as soon as practicable after each meeting. The existing term of the non-official members of the Legislative Council of Papua is six years, but it has been decided that this should be reduced to fouryears, Ithas also been thought desirable to provide for the appointment of extraordinary members of the Legislative Council. Such members would be persons who would be able to tender expert advice on any par- ticular matter with which the council might be required to deal, but would not be entitled to vote or to be counted in any quorum of the council. The other amendment that is to be made to section 29 of the principal act is consequential on the proposal to provide for the appointment of deputies of the official members of the Executive Council. The Legislative Council of Papua, purporting to act under the powers given to it by section 34 of the Papua Act 1905- 1934, has made a standing order covering the time and place of meetings. Doubt has, however, been expressed as to whether section 34 of the act confers power upon the Legislative Council to deal with such a matter, and in order to clarify the position it has been decided to insert such a provision in the act. It has also been decided to alter the designation of the chief court of the territory from that of the "Central Court to that of the "Supreme Court". The court is vested with similar jurisdiction in the territory as a Supreme Court in the States of the Commonwealth. The late **Sir Hubert** Murray occupied the office of Judge of the Central Court as well as Lieutenant-Governor. There is another judge in the territory, The salary paid to **Sir Hubert** Murray was at the "rate of £1,800 per annum. It is proposed that the salary to be assigned to the office of Administrator of Papua, who will not be required to perform judicial duties, should be at the rate of £1,50.0 per annum. It is desirable that there should be freedom to vary the salaries of the administrator or a judge to meet conditions that may change from time to time, and it is therefore considered that approval for the fixation of such salaries should be within the power of the Governor-General in Council so that an amendment of the act would not be necessary when changes of such salary are contemplated. Moreover, the salaries are appropriated from the revenue of the territories and not from the revenue of the Commonwealth. Debate (on motion by **Mr. Scullin)** adjourned. {: .page-start } page 1725 {:#debate-82} ### ASSENT TO BILLS Assent to the following bills re ported; - Petroleum Oil Search Bill 1940. Post and Telegraph Bates Bill 1940. Post and Telegraph Rates (Defence Forces) Bill 1940. {: .page-start } page 1725 {:#debate-83} ### SUPPLEMENT ARY ESTIMATES 1938-39 Messages from the GovernorGeneral reported transmitting Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure, and Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for Additions, NewWorks, Buildings, &c, for the year ended the 30th June, 1939, and recommending appropriations accordingly. *In committee* (Consideration of Governor-General's messages) : Motions (by **Mr. Spender)** agreed to - >That the following further sums he granted to His Majesty to defray the charges for the year 1038-39 for the several services hereunder specified, viz.: - > >Part I. - Departments and Services - Other than Business Undertakings and Territories of the Commonwealth. That there be granted to His Majesty to the service of the year 1938-39 for the purposes of Additions, New Works, Buildings, &c, a further sum not exceeding £91,368. Resolutions reported. Standing Orders suspended; resolutions adopted. Resolutions of Ways and Means founded on Resolutions of Supply, reported and adopted. {:#subdebate-83-0} #### Ordered - >That **Mr. Spender** and **Mr. Fadden** do prepare and bring in bills to carry out the foregoing resolutions. {: .page-start } page 1726 {:#debate-84} ### SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL 1938-39 Bill brought up by **Mr. Spender,** and read a first time. {:#subdebate-84-0} #### Second Reading {: #subdebate-84-0-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr SPENDER:
Treasurer · Warringah · UAP -- I move - >That the bill be now read a second time; The Supplementary. Estimates for the year ended the 30th June, 1939, which have been tabled, cover the items of expenditure for which no specific Parliamentary approval has been given, but which were met temporarily out of provision for Treasurer's Advance pending submission to Parliament in the form of these Estimates. As honorable members are aware, it is customary to include each year in the Estimates in Chief a vote under the heading " Advance to Treasurer ". The provision of £2,500,000 for this purpose in 1938-39 enabled the Treasurer to make advances to the various departments in order to meet those urgent and essential services which could not be foreseen and which, therefore, were not included in the Estimates in Chief. Particulars of this unforeseen expenditure, in the form of Supplementary Estimates, are now submitted for the purpose of covering appropriation by Parliament. As copies of these Estimates are being circulated among honorable members, I do not propose, at this stage, to refer to the items in detail. Of the amount of £2,500,000 voted for Treasurer's Advance in 1938-39, £1,193,131 was expended on ordinary departmental services and war services (1914-18) payable from revenue, while £91,368 was used for additions, new works and buildings., for which latter sum Supplementary Estimates will shortly be submitted separately. Although in this bill Parliament if being asked to appropriate £1,193,131, the expenditure for the year was actually £18,314 less than the total provision for ordinary services in the main Estimates and the additional Estimates for defence purposes introduced in December, 1938. This is because in many cases this new expenditure was made contingent on savings of similar amounts in other items. In other votes, straight-out savings were possible. Honorable members will remember that in December, 1938, an additional appropriation of £1,320,950 was granted for defence expenditure in 1938-39. It is usual, where moneys are required to be appropriated for expenditure on salary and pay votes, to submit for parliamentary approval full details in the form of a schedule to the bill, but in this case, the information was not available to enable this to be done. Out of the appropriation already referred to, £173,320 was expended on defence salaries and pay. Although no additional appropriation is now required, the opportunity has been taken to include, on pages 37 to 42 of these Supplementary Estimates, a schedule of salaries for the covering approval of Parliament. Full details of the expenditure which is now submitted for approval have already been furnished to Parliament in the Estimates and Budget Papers for 1939-40. The Estimates compare the amount voted for 1939-40 with the actual expenditure for 1938-39, while the Budget Papers also record the expenditure. Details were also included in the Treasurer's Financial Statement for 1938-39, which was tabled during the last session for the information of honorable members. In order that honorable members will have assurance that these Estimates are based upon properly audited accounts, it is the practice to await the report of the Auditor-General on the accounts of the year under review. The Treasurer's Financial Statement, which contains full particulars of these Supplementary Estimates, was forwarded to the AuditorGeneral on the 29th September, 1939, and the Auditor-General's report was laid on the table of the House on the 6th December, 1939. This did not leave sufficient time for the introduction of this measure in the last session of Parliament. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate. {: .page-start } page 1727 {:#debate-85} ### SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION (WORKS AND BUILDINGS) BILL 1938-1939 Bill brought up by **Mr. Spender,** and read a first time. {:#subdebate-85-0} #### Second Reading **Mr. SPENDER** (Warringah- Treasurer [5.18]. - I move - >That the bill be now read a second time. When I presented the Supplementary Estimates for ordinary services a few moments ago I informed honorable members of the reason for the procedure adopted with bills of this kind. This bill provides for an appropriation of £91,368 for expenditure under additions, new works, buildings, &c, which has been met from the vote " Advance to Treasurer " during the year 1938-39. Although the amount of thisbill is £91,368, this sum does not represent an amount expended on works and buildings in excess of the original estimates. Actually, the total expenditure of £6,565,268 was £476,732 less than the sum of £7,042,000 appropriated for this purpose. Parliament is therefore being asked to approve of new works expenditure which was more than counterbalanced by savings on other works. The amount included in this bill is considerably less than the provision for works in the Supplementary Estimates in each of the last three years. Business undertakings required more than £54,000, of which telegraph and miscellaneous works for the Post Office absorbed over £36,000. I do not propose at this stage to refer in detail to all of the items which are included in the schedule to the bill. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate. *Sitting suspended from 5.22 to 9.30 p.m.* {: .page-start } page 1727 {:#debate-86} ### LEAVE OF ABSENCE TO ALL MEMBERS Motion (by **Mr. Spender)** agreed to - >That leave of absence be given to every member of the House of Representatives from the determination of this sitting of the House to the date of its next meeting. {: .page-start } page 1727 {:#debate-87} ### AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS' REPATRIATION BILL 1940 Bill returned from the Senate with amendments. *In committee* (Consideration of Senate's amendments) : Clause 9 - >Section 45k of the principal act is amended by inserting in paragraph (a) . . . > > *Senate's amendment -* > >Leave out all words after " amended ", insert - "(a) by inserting in paragraph (a) of sub-section (1.), after the word " operations,", the words " or is not directly attributable to his employment as a member,"; and > >by inserting after sub-section (7.) the following sub-section: - "(7a. ) On any submission to an Appeal Tribunal under the proviso to the last preceding sub-section, an appellant may be represented at his own expense in support of his submission by any person other than a legal practitioner.". Clause 11 - >Section 45w of the principal act is amended by omitting . . . > > *Senate's amendment -* > >Leave out all words, after" amended " insert - "by adding at the end thereof the following sub-section: - (4.) For the purposes of sub-section (2.) of this section an appellant shall be deemed to have made out a prima facie case when he avers that the incapacity or death of the member of the Forces resulted from an occurrence happening during the period he was a member of the Forces or from his employment in connexion with naval or military preparations or operations or is directly attributable to his employment as a member of the Forces.'". {: #debate-87-s0 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr STREET:
Minister for Repatriation · Corangamite · UAP -- I move - >That the amendments bo agreed to. The first amendment which has been made by the Senate was that foreshadowed by the honorable member for West Sydney **(Mr. Beasley),** and to which the Government agreed. Its effect will be that when an appeal is made to a tribunal, evidence material to the rehearing of the case may be submitted. Previously that evidence had to be submitted in writing. Now it may be accompanied by an advocate other than a. legal practitioner. The second amendment is a slight variation in drafting of the one indicated by the honorable member for Hindmarsh **(Mr. Makin).** It means that the averment by an appellant that his incapacity is due to his services as a member of the forces will be regarded as prima facie evidence of the fact, and the onus to prove otherwise will be on the Commission. Motion agreed to. Resolutions reported and adopted. {: .page-start } page 1728 {:#debate-88} ### GOLD MINING ENCOURAGEMENT BILL 1940 Bill returned from the Senate with an amendment. In *committee* (Consideration of Senate's amendment) : Clause 11 - >A person shall not . . . > >Penalty: One thousand pounds or imprisonment for two years. > > *Senate's amendment -* > >Leave out " One thousand pounds or imprisonment for two years ", insert " If the offence is prosecuted summarily, One hundred pounds or imprisonment for six months; if the offence is prosecuted upon indictment, One thousand pounds or imprisonment for two years ". Motion (by **Mr. Spender)** agreed to - >That the amendment be agreed to. Resolution reported and adopted. {: .page-start } page 1728 {:#debate-89} ### BILLS RETURNED FROM THE SENATE The following bills were returned from the Senate without amendment or requests : - Loan Bill 1940. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 1939-1940. Trade Agreement (Greece) Bill 1940. Sales Tax Exemptions Bill 1940. Sales Tax Assessment Bill (No. 1) 1940. Motor Vehicles Agreement Bill 1940. Gold Tax Collection Bill 1940. Trading with the Enemy Bill 1940. Patents, Trade Marks, Designs and Copyright (War Powers) Bill 1940. Babbit Skins Export Charges Bill 1940. Rabbit Skins Export Charges Appropriation Bill 1940. Supply Bill (No. 1) 1940-41. Supplementary Appropriation Bill 1938-39. Supplementary Appropriation (Works and Buildings) Bill 1938-39. Income Tax Collection Bill 1940. {: .page-start } page 1728 {:#debate-90} ### PAPERS The following papers were presented : - >Post and Telegraph Act - Regulations amended- Statutory Rules 1940, No. 87. . > >Commonwealth Bank Act - Balance-sheets of Commonwealth Bank and Commonwealth Savings Bank and Statement of the Liabilities and Assets of the Note Issue Department, as at 31st December, 1939 ; together with Auditor-General's Reports thereon. > >Arbitration (Public Service) Act - Determinations by the Arbitrator,&c. - 1940 - No. 9. - Amalgamated Postal Workers' Union of Australia. No. 10;- Amalgamated Postal Workers' Union of Australia. National Security Act - National Security (General) Regulations - Orders - Taking possession of land, &c. (23). Use of land (3). Regulations - Statutory Rules 1940, No. 80. New Guinea Act - Ordinances of 1940 - No. 1 - Appropriation (No. 2) 1939- 1940. No. 2 - Administration and Probate. No. 3 - Copra. No. 5 - Police Force. No. 7- Supply 1940-1941. Papua Act - Ordinance of 1939 - No. 11 - Royal Papuan Constabulary. House adjourned at 9.52 p.m. until Tuesday, the 2nd July, 1940, at 3 p.m., or an earlier date and hour to be fixed by **Mr. Speaker.** {: .page-start } page 1729 {:#debate-91} ### ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS *The following answers to questions were circulated: -* {:#subdebate-91-0} #### Wolfram Production: Employment of Aborigines {: #subdebate-91-0-s0 .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: n asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. How many full-blooded aborigines are employed on each wolfram-field in the Northern Territory? 1. What rate of wages is paid to such employees on each field? {: #subdebate-91-0-s1 .speaker-K4X} ##### Mr Nock:
CP -- The information is being obtained. {:#subdebate-91-1} #### Canberra: Brassey House {: #subdebate-91-1-s0 .speaker-JNX} ##### Mr Barnard: d asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Interior, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What is the nature of the complaints received by the Minister regarding the accommodation at Brassey House, Canberra? 1. What action does he contemplate to remedy the conditions, and to protect the public servants and the press representatives who live there permanently, and the tourists who visit Canberra? 2. When will he be in a position to report the action taken? {: #subdebate-91-1-s1 .speaker-K4X} ##### Mr Nock:
CP -- The Minister for, the Interior has supplied the following answers : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The complaints relate to the inadequacy of heating arrangements; quality of the meals; standard and quality of equipment; laundry facilities; cleanliness of the establishment and inadequacy of staff. 2 and 3. The complaints have been referred to the manageress of Brassey House for comment. It is pointed out, however, that the conditions of lease do not give the Government power to interfere in the management of the establishment. {:#subdebate-91-2} #### Note Issue {: #subdebate-91-2-s0 .speaker-KUG} ##### Mr Spender:
UAP r. - On the 24th May, the honorable member for Wakefield **(Mr. McHugh)** asked, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What is the total number of treasury bills issued in Australia? 1. What amount of treasury bills has been issued since the outbreak of war? 2. Do banks buy treasury bills by paying cash, i.e., legal tender, or do they buy them with their own cheques? The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The treasury bills issued in Australia at the 23rd May, 1940, were as follows: - {: type="1" start="2"} 0. Treasury bills are issued and redeemed from time to time up to arranged limits, in accordance with requirements of governments. The amount on issue at the commencement of the war was £53,688,000, while on the 23rd May the total was £47,488,000. The reduction in the amount of bills now on issue is due to the temporary redemption of treasury bills by State governments from proceeds of the recent Commonwealth Loan, and from taxation and other sources. These bills will be re-issued as required by the governments concerned. 1. The trading banks pay for treasury bills by drawing on their accounts with the Commonwealth Bank, where it is their practice to keep large balances on deposit. This is, of course, equivalent to them paying in legal tender. Flax Industry. {: #subdebate-91-2-s1 .speaker-KV7} ##### Sir Frederick Stewart:
UAP -- Yesterday the honorable member for Bass **(Mr. Barnard)** asked me what progress had been made with the plan to grow and treat flax in the Commonwealth, including Tasmania. I am now able to inform the honorable member that only one tender was received by my department for the supply of flax fibre and tow. A satisfactory contract is now in process of preparation, and a full statement of the terms and conditions will be made as soon as the necessary formalities have been completed. Enlistment of Government Employees. {: #subdebate-91-2-s2 .speaker-KV7} ##### Sir Frederick Stewart:
UAP -- Yesterday the honorable member for Maribyrnong **(Mr. Drakeford)** asked me a question relating to the practice in Commonwealth departments, other than munitions establishments, concerning the services of men who enlist for active service. In reply to a previous question by the honorable member, I stated that as these employees are temporary hands engaged by the day their services necessarily terminate on enlistment. Temporary employees in other branches of the Commonwealth service are treated similarly. In regard to the re-employment of these men after their return from active service, it will he appreciated that this is a matter that can be determined only in the light of the circumstances then existing. I have no doubt, however, that the policy of preference for returned soldiers in Government employment that has been operating since the last war will continue, and former employees in the munitions establishments will, on their return from active service, receive the accustomed measure of preference in employment. {:#subdebate-91-3} #### National Insurance: Expenditure or Approved Societies {: #subdebate-91-3-s0 .speaker-KF9} ##### Mr Green: n asked the Minister for Social Services, *upon notice -* 1.Is it a fact that over a month ago a letter was received by the Prime Minister from the general secretary, Australian Natives Association Approved Society, asking for repayment of the balance of expenditure incurred by the society on the national in durance enrolment campaign? {: type="1" start="2"} 0. Is it a fact that the association was paid a total of £3,954, that there is a balance of £621 4s. 3d. unpaid, and that the association entered into the enrolment scheme at the request of the Government? 1. Will he go into the matter immediately after the adjournment with a view to ensuring that the good faith of the Government in its dealings with this association may not be in doubt? {: #subdebate-91-3-s1 .speaker-KV7} ##### Sir Frederick Stewart:
UAP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Yes. 1. The approved society was paid a sum of £3,954 and now claims a further amount of £621 4s. 3d. No particular society was invited to form an approved society. The conditions under which societies could be formed were published and it was then open to any body of qualified persons to form a society under the scheme. 2. The National Insurance Commission made it clear from the outset that the maximum allowance in the first year was to be 5s. per enrolled member for administration expenses and1s. per enrolled member for enrolment expenses. This society has been paid6s. per member enrolled. All but a very lew societies kept their expenditure within the prescribed limits. The average was about 3s.6d. per member, but many societies incurred less than 2s. per member. The Government does not consider that the taxpayer should be called upon to pay the excessive costs incurred by some approved societies in radio and newspaper advertising and in canvassers' expenses in the search for members. Membership of the national insurance scheme was compulsory and some societies incurred no advertising expenses at all. In many cases the advertising matter served to boost the sponsoring society as much or more than the approved society and the sponsoring body itself benefited from this advertising. Electric Cable. {: #subdebate-91-3-s2 .speaker-KV7} ##### Sir Frederick Stewart:
UAP -- Earlier in this sitting, the right honorable member for Cowper **(Sir Earle Page)** asked me, *without notice,* whether arrangements could be made for electricity undertakings, such as the Clarence River County Council, to obtain sufficient cable and other materials to enable them to carry out their undertakings and maintain services. I am now in a position to inform the right honorable member that my department is assisting local authorities to obtain supplies of electric cable for essential services. I have now received from the right honorable member a letter urging that supplies of copper-conductor cable be made available to the Clarence River County Council, which is receiving attention. Restrictions on Newspapers. {: #subdebate-91-3-s3 .speaker-KXB} ##### Mr Watkins:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES asked the PostmasterGeneral, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. When the newsprint restrictions come into force on the 1st July, will he ensure that the reading public is not exploited by newspapers failing to observe the statutory obligation that the volume of advertising must not be out of proportion to the volume of news in each issue? 1. If newspapers fail to observe this obligation, will he take action under his powers provided by the Post and Telegraph Act to prevent the transmission by post of any newspapers offending in this direction? {: #subdebate-91-3-s4 .speaker-KWC} ##### Mr Thorby:
CP y. - The matter referred to by the honorable member will receive consideration in the light of the circumstances existing after the newsprint restrictions come into force. Lord Hows Island Shipping: Service. {: #subdebate-91-3-s5 .speaker-N76} ##### Mr Menzies:
UAP s. - Earlier in this sitting the honorable member for East Sydney **(Mr. Ward)** asked the following question, *without notice: -* >I ask the Prime Minister whether it is a fact that for a considerable period complaints have been received from Lord Howe Island concerning the shipping service, and asking for an improvement of it; is it not a fact that 1 have received replies to my communications to the Government on the subject, stating that it was receiving attention? When may I expect that a decision will be made in regard to it? I informed the honorable member that I had no personal knowledge of the matter and that I would cause inquiries to be made. I have examined the departmental papers and find that the honorable member has been advised by letter from the department that the matter was being investigated in conjunction with the shipping company and the New South Wales authorities who are responsible for the administration of Lord Howe Island. In a communication dated 12th April last the honorable member was advised that the Premier of New South Wales had arranged for a member of the Lord Howe Island Board of Control to visit the island, and that he would discuss with the local Advisory Committee the question of the adequacy of the shipping service between Sydney and the island. It was stated also that so soon as the report of the investigations made by the member of the board was received, the matter would be considered further. A report was received from the Premier a few days ago to the effect that the Lord Howe Island Board of Control is in a position to confirm the representations that have been made that the present service is inadequate from the point of view of the island residents, and that the reduction of the service since the outbreak of war from a three- weekly to a six-weekly service has practically resulted in a total cessation of the tourist traffic. Whilst recognizing the difficulties associated with the carrying on of the service under existing conditions, the Premier has expressed the hope that favorable consideration might be given to the restoration of the former service as soon as circumstances so allow. As the honorable member is aware, the curtailment of the service was rendered necessary on account of the requisition for war service of one of the units of the fleet that maintains shipping services to certain places in the Pacific, under agreement with the Commonwealth Government, and the services have been re-organized so as to make the best possible use of the available vessels. 'Whilst it has not so far been possible to arrange for a service to Lord Howe Island at intervals of less than six weeks, the matter will be kept under notice with a view to an improvement of the service being effected at the earliest practicable date. Inventions. {: #subdebate-91-3-s6 .speaker-N76} ##### Mr Menzies:
UAP s. - On the 23rd May, the honorable member for Melbourne **(Dr. Maloney)** asked me the following question, *without notice: -* >Will the Prime Minister inform the House as soon as possible of the names and official addresses of officers in each State to whom inventors should communicate invention! which are thought likely to be useful in naval, army or air defence? I am now in a position to inform the honorable member that persons with inventions which are thought likely to be useful to the Army should communicate with the secretary of the District Inventions Board in the State concerned. This body is located at the State Military Head-quarters, viz. : - Queensland - Victoria Barracks, Petrie- terrace, Brisbane; New South Wales - Victoria Barracks, Paddington ; Victoria - Victoria Barracks, St. Kilda-road, Melbourne; South Australia - Keswick Barracks, Keswick, Adelaide ; Western Australia - Swan Barracks, Perth; Tasmania - Anglesea Barracks, Hobart. Inventions likely to be of use to the Navy and the Air Force should be brought to the notice of the secretary, Department of the Navy, Victoria Barracks, Melbourne, and the secretary, Department of Air, Century House, Swanston-street, Melbourne, respectively. {:#subdebate-91-4} #### Air Services {: #subdebate-91-4-s0 .speaker-KF9} ##### Mr Green: n asked the Minister for Civil Aviation, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. What annual subsidy has Guinea Airways been paid for the Adelaide-Darwin weekly mail service each year since the service begun in February, 1927, to date? 1. On what basis is the subsidy allowed? 2. What is the distance of the air-mail route from Adelaide to Darwin? 3. What is the subsidy paid to Australian National Airways for the air-mail service between Melbourne and Perth, thrice weekly? 4. On what basis is the subsidy paid? 5. What is the distance of the air-mail route from Melbourne to Perth? {: #subdebate-91-4-s1 .speaker-KEM} ##### Mr Fairbairn:
UAP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. The Adelaide-Darwin service was inaugurated by Guinea Airways in February, 1937, and was then operated as an unsubsidized service. From the 2nd August, 1938, the service was subsidized and during the remainder of the year the company was paid £19,933 subsidy. The subsidy paid in 1939 was £44,411, and under the present twelve mouths' agreement the annual subsidy is £36,826. 1. The annual amount of subsidy paid tor an air service is the amount by which the estimated operating costs, including the allowance for profit, exceed the estimated net revenue and is determined by negotiation between the airline operator and a committee specially appointed for this purpose. In these negotiations the following factors are taken into account: - {: type="a" start="a"} 0. The amount of capital required by the airline operator. 1. The reasonable operating costs, including a margin for profit of6 per cent. of the value of the assets employed by the company in its subsidized services at the commencement of the contract. Out of this 6 per cent. allowance, the company is required to pay all dividends, taxation and provide also for any general reserves not covered in the operating costs. 2. The estimated net revenue. 2. 1,665 miles. 4 and5. Since the 29th January, 1940, Australian National Airways lias not operated its network of air services, which includes the Perth-Melbourne service, under the subsidy arrangement applying to other subsidized services. It is proposed that the company he paid on alb.mile basis in respect of the gross weight of mail carried over all its services. Pending completion of negotiations with the company, paymentof subsidy at the rate of £30,000 per annum is being made to the company for all of its services operating from Melbourne to Hobart, Sydney, Adelaide and Perth. 3. 1,809 miles. {:#subdebate-91-5} #### Payments to Soldiers' Dependants {: #subdebate-91-5-s0 .speaker-KX7} ##### Mr Ward: d asked the Minister for the Army, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is the fact that the Government recently introduced a different basis for the payment of allowances to dependants of members of the Australian Imperial Force to be taken as an admission that the previous formula had been an inequitable one? 1. If so, will he take action to have such liberalized payments made retrospective to the date of enlistment in each case? {: #subdebate-91-5-s1 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street:
UAP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. In connexion with claims for dependant's allowances, practical experience in cases submitted to the District Finance Officers showed that in many instances the claims could not be satisfactorily dealt with under the conditions approved last November. Modifications were recently approved providing for a basis which it is considered will prove more satisfactory. A full statement on the subject was issued and published in the press on the 23rd May. 1. The new conditions are treated as operating from the 6th October, 1939. Australian Imperial Force in Palestine : Medical Supplies. {: #subdebate-91-5-s2 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street:
UAP t.- On the 28th May the honorable member for Lang **(Mr. Mulcahy)** asked the following question, *without notice* Has the attention of the Minister for the Army been drawn to a statement published in the press that a senior surgeon serving with the Australian Imperial Force in Palestine has requested some people in Sydney to send hospital equipment for use by the Australian Imperial Force in Palestine? If such supplies are needed, will the Minister take steps to despatch them as soon as possible? I am now in a position to inform the honorable member that the 1st Australian General Hospital left Sydney without certain items of its medical equipment which could not be obtained in time. This equipment was forwarded subsequently and there is now no shortage in that unit of medical supplies for present requirements. The 2nd Australian General Hospital, now also abroad, is of double the size of the 1st Australian General Hospital and has complete supplies which will be available to the other unit if required. {:#subdebate-91-6} #### Militia Forces: Medical Treatment {: #subdebate-91-6-s0 .speaker-JPN} ##### Mr Blackburn: n asked the Minister for the Army, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is, (a) vaccination, or (b) inoculation, compulsory for members of the Home Defence Forces of the United Kingdom? 1. If the answer is "No " ineither case, what evil results have followed from . the absence of compulsion? 2. If the answer is " Yes " in either case, why is compulsion deemed to be a military necessity in respect of the Australian Militia, as stated in the Minister's answer to the question of the honorable member for Bourke of the 8th May? {: #subdebate-91-6-s1 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street:
UAP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - 1. (a) Vaccination is compulsory for all recruits for the Regular Army in Great Britain; (b) No information is available as to whether inoculation is compulsory or not at present in the Home Forces. {: type="1" start="2"} 0. Because of the lack of inoculation there was an extensive epidemic of typhoid fever in England in the last four years when inoculation was not compulsory. There were some cases of typhoid fever in the British Army in Home Stations during the year 1938-39, the proportion being 1 per 10,000 men serving. 1. Vaccination is not compulsory for the Militia Forces in Australia. Inoculation is compulsory because typhoid fever is prevalent in the civilian population in the vicinity of camps, and carriers of the disease arc common in any community. When men are congregated together in camps there is an appreciable risk of epidemics of typhoid fever. If one man in a camp is not protected by inoculation he may endanger thelives of others in the camp. **Mr. Essington** Lewis. {: #subdebate-91-6-s2 .speaker-KCF} ##### Mr Dedman: n asked the Minister for the Army, *upon notice -* {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Is the **Mr. Essington** Lewis who has been appointed Director-General of Munitions Supply identical with the **Mr. Essington** Lewis who owns a large property near Tallarook, Victoria ? 1. Is it a fact that, last October, this property was selected by the Defence authorities as the most suitable one for certain military training operations? 2. For what reason was the taking over of this property by the Defence authorities not proceeded with?- 3. Why was an adjoining and less suitable property commandeered? 4. Did **Mr. Lewis** object to a water supply pipefor military purposes traversing his property? 5. If so, is it considered that **Mr. Lewis,** in so objecting, acted in the best interests of the Commonwealth? 6. Is the Government satisfied that **Mr. Lewis,** in his capacity as Director-General of Munitions Supply, will act without promoting the interests of the Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited? {: #subdebate-91-6-s3 .speaker-KVN} ##### Mr Street:
UAP -- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as follows : - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Yes. 1. The property of **Mr. Lewis** was selected as one suitable for use for military purposes. 2. On further consideration it was seen that this property had been highly developed. considerable expenditure having been incurred on pasture improvement and the like. Asa consequence, the compensation payable for military occupation, and the claims for resultant damage, could have been considerably greater. 3. A neighbouring property was then selected on which the pastures' had not been improved to anything like the same extent as those of **Mr. Lewis.** Furthermore, the residence on the property was not habited and military occupation therefore involved no disturbance. 4. **Mr. Lewis** did make representations in this connexion, but subsequently granted permission for the line to be constructed over portion of his property. 5. I am quite sure **Mr. Lewis** would at all times wish to serve the interests of the Commonwealth. 6. Yes.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 30 May 1940, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1940/19400530_reps_15_163/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant